Editor, Times-Union: After reading all the articles and letters to the editor in the Times-Union concerning Herschel Rainwater's proposed stray dog ordinance, my conclusion is that he is on a personal crusade to solve a problem that is not as large as he would want us all to believe.
He has stated, "I among others, many others," also "he was asked by several people to make the request." I would like to hear from all these, "many others" and "several people." He seems to be the only one speaking out.
He says he is a lover of dogs, yet at the commissioners meeting he stated, "Do you want me to take care of it vigilante-style? I'll drive down the street with my .22 and I'll put these dogs to sleep without collars and tags." It sounds like he is not the "Dog Lover" he claims to be!
I drive over 60 miles a day, 6 days a week. These miles take me on city streets, state highways and county roads. It is not often that I see any dogs running loose. Yet Mr. Rainwater would like us to believe that stray, untagged dogs have taken over these same roads and are a huge problem.
Mr. Rainwater quoted state laws that cover dogs. I'm sure these laws have their purpose, like any law does. However enforcement officials have to have their priorities. I, and I am sure a lot of other people, would rather see these officers concentrate on the people violating the laws concerning the operation of a motor vehicle. How many lives have been lost because of drunk drivers, speeders, running of stop signs, etc.? I am sure everyone observes more of these laws broken on a daily basis than they see stray, untagged dogs running loose.
Mr. Rainwater, your problem is: "There is no state dog law that covers barking dogs, dog kennels." If there was a state law or county ordinance to this effect it would be impossible to enforce. Just like there is no law or county ordinance that says cows can't moo, roosters can't crow, cats can't meow, birds can't chirp, etc. Do you get the point?
You said you called the sheriff about a problem with your neighbor's dog, also that "I don't know if the sheriff called this person," but since you made the call, "the dog has been quiet." You did not say that the sheriff told you that this neighbor's dog was not in violation of anything. The dog does not run loose, but is confined to its own yard by a Radio Fence. Maybe the reason that you don't hear this dog's occasional bark anymore is because of the letter you received from your neighbor's attorney?
I am sure that if the county commissioners had felt a need for your proposed ordinance, they would have acted on it.
Thomas Ott Warsaw
Meaning Of Freedom
Editor, Times-Union: I first want to thank you for your unbiased editorials. You always provide a balanced commentary that does not follow the usual rhetoric expounded by the national news media.
I wanted to propose some theories that came to mind as I read your article about the seemingly senseless and callous behavior of adolescents in today's society. We could extend this to some adults, as well.
As we read about incidents of murders and other displays of disregard for other people and the norms of society, we wonder at times why these things could happen. I am not intending to take a political stand, but I see so many laws and interpretations of laws from the liberal viewpoint in the last decade or more that have put us where we are today. I have gone through problems with teens and find that the police have their hands tied in so many ways that they cannot properly control and influence the thinking of adolescents without the risk of lawsuits and having their case thrown out on technicalities. The teachers in the schools are very limited on what they can do as well. There is always the risk of lawsuits because of another person's interpretation of an action on their part, or simply the breaking of some law that has been passed that really does not benefit society as a whole.
The concept that we must let people have the rights to freedoms without responsibility to themselves and others is a false interpretation of what freedom means. Traditional American freedom is preserved by citizens that have self-discipline, respect for others, and a dedication to teaching upcoming generations to honor and preserve the traditions and focus of our country.
Too much liberalization has brought us to the problems of today. We cannot discipline our children in the home without fear of legal action. Out teachers and police cannot do it for the same reason. The teaching in the home and school has been liberalized to where a dedication to a deity and country is no longer instilled into children as it used to be. The result is that kids have no standard, no responsibility, no respect for authority or their country and its true freedoms. We then have their responsible actions we see reported in the news; actions which the lawmakers then try to control by making more restrictive laws that still do not address the true problem. Gun control, any type of control of this type does not address it. We all need to get back to the proven basics of instilling proper values in the children in the home, then furthering it with proper teaching in the schools with discipline properly applied when needed. We cannot continue to attack the problem from the "pass more restrictive laws" angle if we wish to preserve our society, our county and our freedoms.
Marti Sacks
Drunk Driving
Editor, Times-Union: As Indiana State Police officers, we are increasingly concerned about the number of drunk drivers on our highways. In the Bremen district, troopers patrol Kosciusko, Marshall, St. Joseph and Elkhart counties. We are proud to say that in these four counties we were able to take several hundred drunk drivers off the road and put them in jail where they belong. This year, in cooperation with Mothers Against Drunk Driving, local sheriff's departments and municipal police agencies, we hope to stop even more.
But what we're concerned about are the ones we don't catch. Even though State Police made nearly 7,000 drunk driving arrests in Indiana last year, according to the Governor's Council on Impaired and Dangerous Driving, in 1996 there were still more than 200 alcohol-related fatal crashes and 239 alcohol-related deaths. And many of those who were killed were innocent victims - some were children.
As individuals and police officers, we are not against people having an occasional beer or social drink. By law anyone in Indiana over 21 is entitled to drink. But what we are absolutely against is people drinking and then getting behind the wheel. A drunk driver propelling a 3,000-pound car down the highway is every bit as deadly as a criminal with a gun. Both are armed and dangerous.
We urge everyone to think before you drink. If you are going out with friends, choose a designated driver. If you've had too much to drink, call a taxi. If you spot a drunk driver on the road, get the car's license number, get on your cell phone and dial 911.
As police officers, we see first hand the devastation and heartbreak caused by drunk drivers. Although Indiana State Police officers and I are out on the highway 365 days a year, we can't be everywhere all the time.
Through public service ads like the one we are sending your newspaper and announcements you will be hearing on your local radio station, the Indiana State Police Alliance is doing what it can to help keep both you and your loved ones safe. But we need your help.
And, it's simple. If you drink, don't drive. If others around you are drinking, offer them a ride home. And if you spot a drunk driver, give us a call.
Together we can make Indiana's highways safe for everybody. If you would like more information about drunk driving, please call the Indiana State Police Alliance, 800-382-1104.
Det. Robert Ruff Indiana State Police Alliance
Bremen District Representative
Local Politics
Editor, Times-Union: Doggone it, there just doesn't seem to be enough time in the day since I retired. I have been thinking about this dog ordinance and haven't paid too much attention to the sheriff's race and that of the prosecutor. I did have time to go to the forums held by the TAN group and given everything I've read, heard and seen, I think it's time for a little fresh air.
Maybe a couple young, highly qualified men for both positions - that's the fresh air I allude to and not in just a casual way. I think the county citizens are owed it! Mr. Hampton only shows up in the county when he wants votes. Again, he is not a resident and it's clear he doesn't want to be. To me, he is the transient candidate and it sounds like he is doing alright in Allen County. This is the second time we have had to hear his rhetoric.
David Kolbe is a very nice man and a good Christian. I have a newspaper clip dated September 1996 that was given to me by a police officer. It was meant, I am sure, to embarrass the prosecutor. It was withheld information that was supposed to go to the defense. Where I come from, that is a set up. "Enough said?"
I read the handbill of Mr. Waggoner, and from what I read and from the conversations I have had with him, he is the fresh air we need to bring peace, teamwork and a true sense of justice back to our much loved county.
Before May 5, I urge all citizens to read and open your minds to what this man is all about. From the FBI letter, from Williams Sessions, to the State Police, to I.U. School of Law, to the protection of presidents - Mr. Hampton, Mr. Kolbe, have you worked and walked on both sides of the fence?
For sheriff, Aaron Rovenstine is a nice young man I'm sure, but does not have the experience of Lt. Knispel. I don't think nepotism should be allowed in a department, even if the elder is retiring. This is saying to the people of the county, experience doesn't matter. This brings us to the other bit of fresh air, Lt. Knispel. He has proven worth - just look at his flawless record and all his achievements.
Oh, and by the way, friends of Fido, my fight for the protection of dogs and cats is still on. Maybe, just maybe, we can find a couple of good animal lovers as well.
