Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

HIGHWAYS: Warning isn’t message enough

Letter by Charles H. Goodwin, Spanaway on July 3, 2012 at 11:05 am with 2 Comments »
July 5, 2012 10:03 am

Re: “Tale of the tickets” (TNT, 7-2).

Am I missing something here? After Washington State Patrol Trooper Guy Gill stopped Christopher Lee (shown on his cell phone), having paced him for a mile, he only gave the driver a warning.

Are there not consequences for breaking the law? Talking on a cell phone while driving is an infraction of the law, with stiff penalties. What happened? Gill must have seen Lee on the cell phone; the picture is evidence.

I believe a conversation and a warning falls way short of WSP duties. If you break the law, you pay – and that might deter you from doing it again. How can we put an end to people doing as they want and disregarding those laws that are intended to protect us all?

If we assess a monetary consequence when laws are established, then isn’t it the duty of those enforcing those laws to apply the consequence? We might cover the expense of highway repairs with fines levied versus warnings that probably don’t make a point or change behavior.

Leave a comment Comments → 2
  1. slugoxyz says:

    Wow. I thought I was a hard *ss. You have to give the officer the right to take all factors into consideration. He/she is not a robot. If the person committing the infraction had special circumstances or the officer had cause to be compassionate, you shouldn’t take that right away from the officer. A little less caffeine Charles…

  2. surething says:

    No kidding, take it easy. lol

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0