Page 2
The INDEPENDENT, June 18, 2009
The
INDEPENDENT
Published on the first and third Thursdays of each month by
The Independent, LLC, 725 Bridge St., Vernonia, OR 97064.
Phone/Fax: 503-429-9410.
Publisher Clark McGaugh, clark@the-independent.net
Editor Rebecca McGaugh, rebecca@the-independent.net
Mentor Noni Andersen
Printed on recycled paper with vegetable based dyes
Opinion
Wildlife viewers bring $$$
A recent press release from Oregon Department of
Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) gave some startling, but wel-
come, statistics. Of the nearly 2.8 million Oregon resi-
dents and nonresidents who fished, hunted, harvested
shellfish or went wildlife viewing in 2008, the greatest
number (1.7 million) participated in outdoor recreation
where wildlife viewing was the planned activity. The
good news is that wildlife viewing generates almost as
much revenue as the other three activities combined.
ODFW tracked expenditures in three categories; trav-
el-generated, local recreation and equipment. Fishing,
hunting and shellfishing combined generated just over
$1.4 million, while wildlife viewing alone generated just
over $1 million.
How does little old Vernonia get some of that $1 mil-
lion wildlife viewing money? Benign neglect would be
one way. That means don’t cut the grass on the lake
side of the path, leave that area alone for otters, birds,
and deer. Then, look for other ways to provide opportu-
nities for wildlife viewing and sit back and reap the dol-
lar rewards.
Please drive very carefully
Now that school is out and summer seems to have
arrived, expect to see kids and adults where you would
not usually see them, like in roadways. There are also
more bicycles and motorcycles on the road and they
can be hard to see at times. Please be careful as you
go about your summer activities.
VPD fees added at court?
One idea recently brought up at a Vernonia City
Council meeting was that of having the Vernonia Jus-
tice Court tack a fee onto convictions, with the fee to be
used for police training for the Vernonia Police Depart-
ment (VPD). Scappoose is said to have a fee, though
broader in scope, of $25 for traffic convictions and $50
for criminal convictions. The problem is the perception,
if not the reality, that VPD will make unwarranted traffic
stops and arrests to increase revenues. There have
been times, all in the past, hopefully, when it wasn’t un-
usual to be stopped for a burned out license plate light
only to find that the light was working fine. Do you re-
member those days? Let’s not go back there. We ap-
plaud VPD for trying to find ways to reduce their budg-
etary dependence on General Fund monies, but this
doesn’t strike us as the right avenue to pursue.
Guest Opinion
By Edward Johnson
In regards to Scott Laird’s opinion and report,
it appears that I didn’t make myself quite clear.
This matter is not about whether the police de-
partment did anything wrong, it’s about ethics.
It’s common knowledge that cops may legally
TASER an individual; however, this was not the
question. The real question is plain and simple:
Was it necessary? Or was it just plain thuggery?
Are these guys so over-weight and out of shape
that they can’t handle a skinny 135 lb. kid with-
out subjecting him to brutal police tactics? Just
because they can! If this is the case then these
guys are a disgrace to the uniform and shouldn’t
be wearing it. Three guys properly trained and in
good physical condition should have no problem
handling a person of this size. And Scott…we’re
talking about Vernonia here…not LA, Juarez, or
even Hillsboro.
So the answer to Scott’s question: “If Not
Tasers, What?” The high tech industry has de-
veloped some pretty nifty and useful tools; tools
that have made some people lazy and depend-
ent causing them to act in a casual, reckless
manner. They’ve made it quite easy for the cop
to just pull out the Taser and blast somebody be-
cause it’s easy. It is true that every cop will have
a different perspective as to when it’s necessary
to use force and what force will be used, but to a
certain degree, they still need to restrain them-
selves. A current example: A cop in Texas who
Tasered an irate and belligerent elderly woman.
Viewing the video I feel it was unnecessary. She
wasn’t threatening the cop; the cop towered over
her. He was at least three times larger than her.
She was unarmed. But the department found the
cop was in the right and did everything accord-
ing to the book. The woman has a right to exer-
cise her free speech and the cop could have let
her vent but he decided to Taser her instead and
only because he knew he could legally get away
with it; and it was easy. This was all because she
refused to sign the traffic citation. There seems
to be a need to review the rule book on exces-
sive force / Tasering. The cops need to be better
trained; they need to know when and how to
diplomatically diffuse a situation. They also need
to maintain their physical condition so if they do
need to get physical, they can, without injury.
In Scott’s second point he dismisses my claim
as a “silly argument.” However, it appears that
Scott is suggesting that the actions of the VPD
were just and proper; and necessary. Therefore,
his dog and child example would imply that
every parent or dog owner should use a Taser to
control their child or dog instead of an alternative
measure, such as diplomacy. I’m quite sure that
professional dog trainers have ways of coaxing a
dog into a flea treatment without using a Taser.
His mention of being kicked or punched by a thir-
teen-year-old is kind of a ridiculous point that de-
serves no mention here. Therefore, Scotts point
is really rather silly!
Scott pointed out in his article that Mike Kay
said that he was aware of four incidents where a
TASER was used since the department received
them in 2004. I find this rather interesting be-
Please see page 20