BRATTLEBORO-It has been reported that our elected leaders are in the midst of addressing the issue of public behavior. Persons who presumably exhibit "good" behavior are attempting to define "bad" behavior.
Once that is completed, various signs are to be produced and posted in key areas around town especially where "bad" behavior often takes place.
As a sort of summary invocation, not categorizing types of said behaviors, would be signs merely urging that one treat others with kindness and respect. It may be safely assumed that these signs will project a pleasant demeanor, possibly designed with soft, pastel colors so as to enhance the friendliness of their message.
At the same time as the sign project moves forward, local ordinances addressing "bad" behavior are being re-examined, and possibly revised, and the town police force is being increased so as to better enforce those ordinances.
Police enforcement is not usually pleasant, nor described using terms such as "soft" and "pastel." This approach seems to be at odds with, even in opposition to, that described above regarding the signs.
Does the list of "bad" behavior contain newly added offenses? Have misdemeanors become felonies? Will there be a rampant increase in criminalizations? Penalties? Will there be changes here also?
Finally, do there exist alternatives to these approaches to reducing "bad" behavior? Some have been suggested; surely, a more in-depth examination of root causes will yield others.
Is now not the time to look more thoroughly into this situation?
Ken McCaffrey
Brattleboro
This letter to the editor was submitted to The Commons.
This piece, published in print in the Voices section or as a column in the news sections, represents the opinion of the writer. In the newspaper and on this website, we strive to ensure that opinions are based on fair expression of established fact. In the spirit of transparency and accountability, The Commons is reviewing and developing more precise policies about editing of opinions and our role and our responsibility and standards in fact-checking our own work and the contributions to the newspaper. In the meantime, we heartily encourage civil and productive responses at voices@commonsnews.org.