The Current Online

How about a follow-up with a dose of reality?

Last issue (Sep. 12, 2009) you wrote, “Preying on the weak…It is 7:57 a.m., and now I have been pulled over for speeding on View High Drive on my way to class.”

You know that in reality, it is your own fault!  

Accountability is a precious commodity that is taught by every school, and we are introduced to the concept in kindergarten and first grade! We were taught that there is a time and place for each event, and not very much leeway is given. Recess, lunch, and the end of the school day were each at the exact same time, as we breathlessly anticipated the exact moment that the bell would ring.

IN THE REAL WORLD, we are encouraged to be on time. An employer will give you your schedule and you will be expected to be on time each day to work.  I do not expect to be allowed to keep a job if I cannot be on time each day. Let’s all get REAL!  If I desire to be on time every day, then a little planning is in order. I may get stuck in traffic on any given day, so I must allow extra time each day to cover that contingency instead changing into PANIC mode (because the traffic slowed me down today).  The WORST thing that could happen is that I might get a reputation for always being on time.

I have noticed that the odds of getting to class on time is poor if I ARRIVE on campus at 7:55 a.m. for an 8:00 a.m. class … because I expect that I will spend a minimum of

10 minutes finding a parking spot, parking, and I will need an additional 5-10 minutes to walk to my class. It sure seems easy to blame the police … but consider THE IDIOT that attempts (usually successfully) to merge into the right lane at 3rd St. and View High Drive at the last possible moment, swerving brazenly into the right lane and cutting off those that chose to get into the lane to wait their turn.  I place this kind of inconsiderate driver into the very same category as those who ‘speed’ up View High Drive – in both cases, a little consideration and planning goes a long way.  Maybe the police can move to that area and ticket for aggressive driving or WORSE.

REALITY is that we have rules of the road in place for everyone’s safety. “Barely pushing the limits (September 12, 2008, Opinion page) still equates to breaking the rules. Whether or not you like the rules, I personally have never gotten ticketed for obeying the posted speed limit. I don’t have to worry about having points assessed against my license. I do not have to think about hiring a lawyer to help me out in court (at additional personal cost). I note that the “average” driver on View High Drive, regardless of the time of day, exceeds the posted speed limit – that’s why the police set up the speed ‘traps’.

For me (and for most of us), the bottom line is this: If I get ticketed three times for speeding, on the same road, at a minimum cost of $115 per ticket (plus the increase in my insurance rates), I’d certainly consider altering my habit of speeding and my schedule instead of continuing to get fined (and eventually losing my driving privileges) and be late for class or work.
By the way, I have never been ticketed for speeding. Following the speed limit works every time it’s tried.

-Anonymous

As a long-standing resident of Lee’s Summit, remembering View High Drive as a windy, hilly, two-lane country road, I was excited when it was improved into a nice four-lane divided road.  (I also attended LCC in 1970.)  We now had great traffic flow from Lee’s Summit to I-470 and college students/visitors into Lee’s Summit have a great way in.  Roughly, three years ago the Kansas City, Missouri police started these speed traps which are set up during the middle of the day, not during any rush hour.  I have witnessed numerous individuals being flagged to stop at these speeding traps.  The root problem is the “old” View High Drive speed limit of 40 mph was never updated when the road was improved.  As many of you know, you must make a conscious effort to watch your speed to keep your car at 40 when driving this clear, visible, divided road.  I don’t believe speeding at 47-50 mph is intentional. Another speed trap was in place, yesterday, Sept. 25 in the morning.

I decided it was time to get City attention on this problem:

Issue 1:  View High Drive is actually under the jurisdiction of Kansas City, so I called the Public Works Department of Kansas City, Mo., and registered a complaint.  In my opinion, the speed limit needs to be increased. This resulted in a Case number being assigned for a “traffic study” which is to be started within the next 2 weeks. (The original speed of 40 mph was last officially set in 1978.)  

Issue 2: I am sending my concerns regarding Kansas City, Mo., police doing these regular speed traps to the KCMO officer in charge.  While I do not condone speeding, I do feel that the legal system needs to ensure reasonable and practicable laws are in place.  As coincidence would have it, I was at the college last night to teach a class and picked up “The Current.”  I was so glad to see the student’s frustration vented (“Preying on the Weak,” Sep. 12, 2008) so well – GOOD JOB!  I am enclosing a copy of this article to the office in charge. Hopefully, our combined efforts will achieve needed changes.

-Cindy Taylor

Please forward this to Farhan Zahid the author of, “Republicans assault women’s pro-choice rights.” Although, Farhan, I am sure you have received your share of opposing views on abortion I ask that you would read this argument I received from www.carm.org. Your arguments were pretty weak in your article. What is growing in the womb of the woman is alive. Even one-celled creatures are alive. What is growing in the woman is more than a one-celled creature. The nature of the life in the woman is human. It is a product of human DNA, therefore it’s nature, and its essence is undeniably human baby. Humans are humans not because they have feet, hands, walk vertically, and speak, etc. Not all people have feet, hands, can walk and speak. They are humans because of their nature, their essence, not because of physical abilities or disabilities. A person born without arms and legs is still a human. A person who cannot is still human. A person in a coma, helpless, unaware, unmoving, is still human by nature and it is wrong to murder such a person. What is growing in the womb does not have the nature of an animal, a bird, or a fish. It has human nature. If it is not human in nature, then what nature is it? If it is not human in nature, then does it have a different nature than human? If so, then from where did it get this different nature since the only sources of its nature are human egg and a human sperm? Objection: A cell in the body has human DNA and is alive and it is okay to kill it. So, it doesn’t make any difference with a fetus. Though it is true that a cell in the human body has DNA and is alive, a cell (muscle cell, skin cell, etc.) has the nature of being only what it is – not a human. In other words, a muscle cell is by nature a muscle cell. A skin cell is by nature a skin cell. But, the fertilized egg of a human is by nature that very thing which becomes a fully developed human. Its nature is different than that of a muscle or skin cell because they do not grow into humans. Therefore, they are not the same thing. A fertilized human egg has the nature of human development and it is alive. This is not so with a muscle or skin cell. To abort the life, which is human in nature, is to kill that which is human in nature. Therefore, abortion is killing a life, which is human by nature. Where, then, does the mother get the right to kill the human within her? A question for those who believe in abortion and that the life in the womb is not human. Is it okay to take a fertilized egg between a man and a woman and place it in the womb of a dog? If you say no, then why, if it is not human then it doesn’t matter, right? If you say no because it will become a human then you admit that it has human nature and is alive. If it is human in nature and alive, then you do not have the right to abort it. If you say it is all right, why is okay? -Richard Tuttle via Longview Current online

I would first like to congratulate Shannon Callahan on his ability to put all of his thoughts about our President in an entertaining poem. I think that his skills are definitely improving.
Next, I would like to call attention to the fact that Shannon’s view of President Bush in wartime didn’t seem to go over well in [instructor and class withheld]. The article was being trashed by not only the students in the class, but the teacher [sex withheld]self. I tried to point out that although Shannon is quite controversial most of the time, he is exercising his First Amendment right to freedom of speech. I was shut down quickly and told my opinions on anti-war sentiments were uniformed by the teacher [sex withheld]self. Isn’t that funny, I am a political science major and history buff, not to mention I just did 2 speeches about the pros and cons of going to war with Iraq.
In case you can’t tell, I am a little angry. The first day of class this same teacher complained to our class that corporate America refuses to employ obese[sex withheld], so [sex withheld] is left to teach college. I remember the day the same teacher announced to our class that Americans are lazy. Hmmm?
I understand that [class withheld] is hardly the forum to start a freedom of speech debate, but I walked in on it, I did not start it. I hope that the teacher rethinks how [sex withheld] allows [sex withheld] favorite students to have an opinion, and dismisses the opinions of those students [sex withheld] just tolerates. I left class as soon as [sex withheld] insulted my intelligence and cut me off. Shannon Callahan has a right to be against the war and some people need to lighten up and look at both sides of issues. How can we learn to reach conclusions without first questioning?

-Megan Wheeler