2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

THe argument is given that ordinary citizens like me cannot properly judge police actions because we haven't "been there."

It's true I don't walk around in a blue uniform and carry a gun. I don't confront criminals, risk getting shot. I have great respect for the police for doing so, for standing in for me and the rest of us in dangerous situations.

But I can empathize with these situations to a degree, I can sort out facts from baloney, and I can be told what police are trained to do, what their rules about use of force are, and compare a pattern of facts to them and make a judgment. If you substitute laws for police training and procedure, you realize judging police actions that are on the edge is similar to a criminal trial. I'm not a dope dealer, crackhead, or practice identity theft. Yet no one questions my ability to judge criminals if I'm a juror; why is it different for the police?

The great majority of police do protect and serve. The incidents that are questionable should be investigated without undue interference from the police.

As to the use of the beanbag, as a former child care worker, I restrained many violent youth, including males my size or slightly larger. I always followed procedure, remained aware of where furniture was, where I was taking the kid down, where the kid's head was. Occasionally, two of us participated in a difficult restraint, but no child was ever injured. I can't believe the officer shooting the beanbag used minimal force.

posted 3 years, 5 months ago
view in context

I feel the initiative petition process is misused, nowadays by people I'm likely to disagree with. I want to preserve everyone's right to speak and to advocate for and propose laws in their interest. What I don't like are irresponsible proposals. Legislators are held accontable by their collegues and by the votes for writing good, workable laws; initiative writers are not. So I have two proposals to encourage anyone writing an initiative to focus on the workability and constitutionality of initiatives.

First, amend the state constitution so that all laws or initiatives that require the state to spend money include a funding mechanism. This goes to workability.

Second, amend the state constitution so that the chief petitioners for an iniative found to be unconstitutional are responsible for the state's cost of defending or opposing it in court.

Neither of these requirements would have affected, for example, Measure 5, the property tax limitation, which I opposed. In fact, Measure 5 was the third such iniative; the others were unconstitutional. So those who wanted the measure were perfectly capable of writing a constitutionally sound measure, but they had nothing to lose by writing an unconstitutional measure. Similarly, initiative writers are under no onus to fund their ideas. That's plain irresponsible.

Sizemore and Mannix may rub their hands together and giggle in glee like schoolboys who got a geeky classmate sent to the principal as the state defends their measures in court, but they're forcing the state to waste money. Isn't that one of the great evils they both oppose so self-righteously?

posted 4 years, 6 months ago
view in context

I worked at Pixelworks as a documentation contractor for about a year in 2004. I left when my contract was completed and feel good about the business relationship. No grudge here, but a genuine question.

Pixelworks was in a fast-paced, very competitive arena. When I worked there, Alley was highly respected and spoken of. However, we frequently had shifts in priorities for our work which was at best disconcerting and at worst affected the speed and quality of our work. These shifts of direction came from upper management, many of whom drove sports cars. My question to Mr. Alley is how this type of experience, regardless of the result for Pixelworks, will help him as Treasurer.

posted 4 years, 7 months ago
view in context