J. Christopher Haiti
Doug Kouma.
Doug Peters.
Sarah Scalet.
Matt Waite.
Michelle Garner...
Jennifer Mapes....
Nebraskan
Editorial Board
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
. Editor, 472-1766
.Managing Editor
,. Opinion Page Editor
Associate News Editor
Associate News Editor
.Wire Editor
.Columnist
High speed abuse
Police chase issue headed wrong way
Two weeks ago, the life of a Tampa, Fla., woman was saved from
police by an airbag.
Elizabeth Meyers was driving through Tampa when a car being
chased by police struck her auto head on. Police were pursuing the
suspect for erratic driving. He was killed in the accident. The only
thing that saved Meyers was the airbag in her 1995 Pontiac.
Later, it was discovered the car the suspect was driving was stolen,
but police did not know it at the time of the chase.
Unfortunately, this is just one of numerous abuses of this danger
ous police tool—the high speed chase. It also serves as an important
reminder that Nebraska’s strict liability law in police chases needs to
stay in place.
But state lawmakers have taken a step in the wrong direction.
State legislators Wednesday resurrected a bill that would make
accident victims in police chases prove police negligence in order to
collect damages. A 31-14 vote gave new life to Legislative Bill 952.
It was killed two weeks ago in committee.
Sen. Dave Maurstad of Beatrice, who sponsored the bill and has
tagged it as his priority bill, said he doesn’t intend for the bill to
change police chase policies.
Omaha Assistant City Attorney Tom Mumgaard testified in com
mittee that police have learned their lesson regarding unnecessary
police chases. However, relaxing liability may help them forget.
In Tampa, since May of last year when police resumed chases, 39
of 88 chases have resulted in crashes. And where there are car crashes
there are injuries or death not only for suspects or police but for
innocent bystanders.
Sen. Ernie Chambers of Omaha said the bill would “make it almost
impossible” for a victim to recover financially from an accident.
“The vast majority of these chases result from some minor traffic
infraction,” Chambers said. “These chases are irresponsible. They
create a danger to the public.”
Police in Nebraska may disagree with Chambers, but actually, he
sounds very much like a police chief in Gwinnett County, Georgia,
just outside of Atlanta.
“Police pursuits are inherently dangerous, and pose a risk to the
safety of citizens, as well as members of the department,” Gwinnett
Police Chief Carl White told The Atlanta Journal.
White has implemented a policy that allows police chases only
when the suspect is known to have committed murder, aggravated
assault, rape or some other violent crime. Since the policy took effect,
some surrounding counties have followed with similar policies, and
the number of chases has declined dramatically.
“Before, we were often chasing for traffic violations, and it was
not worth risking life and limb,” White said.
Nebraska needs to maintain its strict liability law regarding chases
to prevent police from abusing this tool and to provide innocent
victims some recourse.
If police are given too much rope on police chases, they will not
only hang themselves; they will injure or kill other people.
Editorial policy
Staff editorials represent the official
policy of the Spring 1996 Daily Ne
braskan. Policy is set by the Daily
Nebraskan Editorial Board. Editorials
do not necessarily reflect the views of
the university, its employees, the stu
dents or the NU Board of Regents.
Editorial columns represent the opin
ion of the author. The regents publish
the Daily Nebraskan. They establish
die UNL Publications Board to super
vise the daily production of the paper.
According to policy set by the regents,
responsibility for die editorial content
of the newspaper lies solely in the
hands of its students.
Loiter policy
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes brief letters to the
editor Iran all readers and interested others. Letters
will be selected for publication on the basis of clarity,
originality, timeliness and space available. The Daily
Nebraskan retains the right to edit or reject all material
submitted. Readers also are welcome to submit mate
rial as guest opinions. The editor decides whether
material should run as a guest opinion. Letters and
guest opinions sent to the newspaper become the
property of die Daily Nebraskan and cannot be re
turned. Anonymous submissions will not be pub
lished. Letters should include the author’s name, year
in school, major and group affiliation, if any. Re
quests to withhold names will not be granted. Submit
material to: Daily Nebraskan,-34 Nebraska Union,
1400 R St Lincoln, Neb. 68588-0448.
Ill I I US I () III! I D! I OR
The Incredible
shrinking
student section
I would like to comment on the
current situation that students are in
when they attend a football, volley
ball, or men’s basketball game. In
simple terms, we are getting dumped
on. Thank you Bill Byrne, you have
successfully screwed the students of
this university out of decent seating
at football games, and volleyball and
men’s basketball are not far behind.
When I was a freshman back in
1989,1 sat on the 40-yard line on the
east side. The worst student seats
were down on about the south 15
yard line. Now since Bill Byrne has
been here, he has crammed us into
the SE comer and wants to push us
farther back! You have taken every
measure in your power to make sure
we have no way to sell our tickets if
we don’t wish to go. The entire
Fiesta Bowl ticket arrangement was
a joke. The general public could buy
up and scalp any amount of tickets,
but if a student wanted to buy some
and sell them, even to another
student, they had to show ID at the
game!
The people who have been
bitching lately about the students in
front of them obviously haven’t
been to games in the last 50 years or
so. They don’t realize that we get
fired up about the games and stand
through them. Simple solution, give
us back the entire middle of the east
side. Of course, you can’t do that
Bill, there is no money in that.
For basketball, we are slowly
being pushed aside as well! At the
Kansas game, about a third of the
south side of the student section was
roped off reserved. Money involved?
Special high priced seats? Each year,
the reserved section of the lower
level grows larger into the student
seating. What is the reasoning? Also,
the rule that says only those with
ID’s will get onto the floor at the
Sports Center is another joke. I can’t
validate a ticket and bring my
brother and a friend because they
have no student ID. They have to sit
clear on top in the nosebleed
section. Oops, I forgot, students
don’t get to sell tickets, only the
Athletic Department. Those of us
who wanted to see the lady
Comhuskers on their quest for the
National Championship in volleyball
also got the shaft, when the tickets
we purchased were nowhere near the
normal ones we had during the
season. We weren’t reminded when
we bought tickets that they were
nosebleed section!
In closing, I would like to ask
Bill Byrne to please either give us,
the students, a little respect or go
back to where you came from. I for
one have never liked you or your
agenda, and I doubt I ever will.
Jon Herrera
senior
secondary education
Teen sex
a deadly plunge
In the editorial “Deserved
Protection” (Feb. 14), you put forth,
with appropriate gravity, the
following analogy in support of
supplying teen-agers with condoms:
“If someone swims out into choppy
water and starts to go under_We
throw them a lifeline.” Wrong
analogy. I’d suggest that a more
appropriate one for the concept of
condoms as a cure-all for teen sex
would be, “If someone wants to
plunge over Niagara Falls, we give
them an inner tube.”
James Freeman
Omaha
“Truth” changes
I want it made clear that John
Osterholm’s comments in the Feb.
14 DN do not apply to me. He says:
“Anything that interferes with the
general public that is not of majority
BretGottschall/DN
consent is purely showmanship that
is completely laughed at by the rest
of us.” Sorry, John, I don’t see the
humor. The use of the words
“anything,” “purely,” and “com
pletely” suggest to me that John has
not thought through this statement
carefully. Aside from the generaliza
tions, I disagree with the statement’s
implication that the “majority” is
always right. I am no expert in
history but it seems to me that
minority opinions have had a
significant impact on the opinions
and values of the “majority.”
Perhaps one of the more notable
(and analogous) is the history of
blacks in America. Majority opinion
(at least the way we chose to define
majority) suggested that it was
appropriate to treat individuals as
property based solely on the color of
their skin. One of the many ways
these attitudes changed was through
the “pure showmanship” of a
concerned minority. When you
think about it, the “majority” has a
pretty poor track record. Consider
what our ancestors accepted as
“gospel truth.” We are fortunate that
in the United States that minority
opinion and belief is protected under
free speech. We are better for it. I
don’t mind Bob Ray, John
Osterholm, and Eric Anderson
espousing opinions with which I
disagree. I don’t mind that they use
rhetorical strategies to sidestep the
issues. I just wish they wouldn’t do
it in public.
James Keim
graduate student
English
