LETTERS

DWI CHARGES



A LOOK at statistics shows that in terms of misery, human life, and just ordinary dollars DWI is one of the most heinous crimes in America today.

It is only tolerated because many people fail to realize this and articles like yours (“Crossing the Line,” December) encourage their delusion. Stories of funny drunks abound and are told and retold, but the tales of tragedies that these people cause do not make such light entertaining reading. Still, it might be better if research for this type of article was done in hospitals and institutions rather than bars and courtrooms.

A friend of mine from Sweden (who is by no means a teetotaler) tells me that there DWI is looked on by the public as analogous to robbing a liquor store. Both are against the law and both can easily and often lead to some innocent person’s death.

Neal Shields Fort

Worth



I DIDN’T find the tone of “Crossing the Line” quite as amusing as Mike Shropshire must have meant it to be. I felt that I was supposed to view the menace of drunken drivers as just a few good old boys out having a little fun on Saturday night.

Unfortunately, one fact that Shropshire didn’t touch on, since his story was primarily about Dallas, is that in the smaller towns and rural counties throughout Texas, most drunk drivers are merely arrested and charged with “public intoxication” and fined $102 or so. As a matter of fact, I can safely estimate that 85 per cent of these drunks are so charged. Why? Because a DWI is a state charge and the fine goes to the state, while PI is a city charge, with the city picking up the bucks (or county, if handled through a Justice Court).

Here in Sacramento recently, a drunk driver out on bail from a previous DWI killed eight people with his car and is now out again on bail. In California, however, all the bucks go to the jurisdiction making the DWI stop, and PI charges for drivers are almost unheard of. The drunks are still just as dangerous, however.

Rick Manuel

Sacramento, California

CULLEN’S CONVERSION



I FELT cheated by your article on Cullen Davis by Allen Pusey (“The Conversion of Cullen,” December). Innu-endos were tucked neatly within each paragraph. Almost all were implicated as having improper motives. Even God was guilty by association.

As a minister, I welcome critical evaluation of celebrities who claim to be “born-again” Christians and stand to gain something in the process. The Church has often been too naive, allowing men to use it for their own purposes. The press can be of great service by reporting cold hard facts and exposing frauds. No one will be served by pseudo-psychological analysis that claims to reveal selfish motives without giving sufficient verification.

Quite possibly God has changed a life for good – unless Mr. Pusey thinks that He too is a fraud.

Jack K. Arrington,Jr.

Associate Pastor, Country Bible Church

Kaufman



FOOD FIGHT



YOU CAN say what you want about my knowledge of food or lack of same, but shame on you for taking the Long Island duckling statement out of context in your “Best and Worst” story in January.

Surely the village idiot would have understood that my consternation was not at Finding that the duck was from Long Island, but that this was featured on the California-theme menu of Café Pacific.

That, coupled with your using the name Weekend Guide (when it’s been simply Guide for more than three years now), causes me to wonder who should take whom with a grain of salt.

Kim Martin

Editor, Guide