Dear Editor,
It has reached the point that a supporter of the peace officers must chime in as the pot shots are becoming broader and more ridiculous.
For months now I have stood idle to the gossip, rumormongers, coffee shop claims, Internet slandering and most recently an article in the Review.
I now have something say.
Mr. Dave Karroll’s letter to the editor in the May 19 edition started by misinterpreting Sgt. Koller’s letter of May 5 that said “the average when people think we are not in town is 80K.” If read correctly you will find it to say those that are speeding are averaging 80K, however in my opinion, it was taken out of context to fit your vitriolic agenda.
Since your published letter stated the vast majority of law abiding residents are cautious, courteous drivers it seems improbable that all these law-abiding citizens are getting tickets. The majority of drivers in this town are courteous drivers (common place in most mid-size towns), however, there is also a large contingent in Rimbey that want to live by their own rules. Since the peace officers started, I have noticed a change in parking and driving habits. So although you took exception (as if those two words constitute an argument) the law enforcement in this town, RCMP included, has me optimistic, as the town seems a much more inviting and modern community.
On the topic of community; who cares where town employees live? Loads of people work here without residing here. With the vile comments about the peace officers online and in print, why would they want to live here? Their families, homes and automobiles would be targeted by a group that don’t respect living within societal construct. The fact the officers come here, daily, despite the negativity towards them, to do their job in an attempt to make Rimbey a better place to live, work and visit is much more honorable than a resident who bemoans a ticket and creates antic rumors to offset their transgression.
If you don’t want to be disgruntled don’t break the law.
In your critique, you claim knowledge of traffic enforcement issues yet unwittingly deliver two contradictory paragraphs making the letter unintentionally humorous. How does two warnings for you, three for your high profile buddy, a ticket for parking on the wrong side in Gull Lake and a ticket for a 70-year-old speed demon equate to a vast majority observing the 50K speed limit? Did three people somehow get warnings for doing the speed limit? Where are the law-abiding citizens? Furthermore, does the article intend to infer that you have precise knowledge of how fast citizens of this town drive? Have you taken time to man radar?
I also feel your comment regarding protecting and serving was lost in translation. The officers should be thanked for saving us from your farm resident friend while hiding in the bushes.
Imagine what a welcome that would have been had she hit someone’s innocent child while exceeding the speed limit? I find it increasingly disturbing that the officers are outlawed when it is the individual that makes their own decision to break the law while it’s the officer’s job to enforce it. The officers didn’t make her speed, they simply caught her.
In closing my synopsis of your letter is as follows: A moral, ethical person who sat on council and recently sought another elected position in this town attempts to discredit the peace officers and administrators while soliciting the mayor to make a sharp about turn on his vision, effort and integrity as an elected official, to make the blooming town of Rimbey a better place to live; all so you and a select group of citizens can get traffic warnings forever.
These are simply exigent requests to continue a community of endless reminders and cheek turning to broken laws. The same laws that are the foundation our society is built upon and essential to a strong community.
If you want to be a leader in the community then lead by example. Obey the law and show these officers that they would be welcome in this community because they are doing their job.
William Anderson