Why is rural life any less secure than elswhere?
To the Editor:
Why is my life and safety worth less in rural Klickitat County than it is in any city?
Why is the life and safety of the lone agent or deputy who interrupts criminal activity in the isolated settings of ranch and timber country less valuable than that of a city cop who would summon SWAT teams under similar circumstances?
Year after lonely year, we defend ourselves—and our rural way of life—against armed intruders with criminal intent who invade our rural lands for poaching, stealing, drug activity, vandalism, and arson. Let’s stop referring to these crimes as mere “trespass.” Some perps arrested at gunpoint on my lands have had long histories of arrest, yet they paid only minimal fines, never served time, never lost their right to bear arms. Dealing down such crimes into misdemeanors may be a cheap, easy way to clear the court calendar, but does it serve a law abiding community holding on to a way of life by its fingernails? Each indignity to any one of us brings an entire community closer to the point of resignation: “I’ve had it! Let the developers cover it with asphalt!”
Whether the present policies are a conscious discrimination against rural landowners or a simple matter of fewer votes per square mile, in my opinion they are twisted interpretations of laws that ought to be consistent, predictable, and equitable, regardless of location. We need a prosecutor who understands the plight and peril of rural landowners.
Patricia Scott Martin
Lacey |
