It can happen here

To the Editor,

Like many, I am shocked and appalled by the recent needless violence in Bend. However, I wanted to remind everyone that this is exactly why we need to drop the attitude of “This is Sisters, that would never happen here.”

What says that the shooter of the Safeway couldn’t’ve decided to come here instead, and shoot up our Ray’s, or Bi-Mart? Nothing! Nothing says that! And our tiny little sheriff’s outpost is ill-equipped to handle a mass shooting, meaning that extra response would be needed from Bend, which would take far too long!

“This is Sisters, that would never happen here,” you say? Try telling that to the gentleman who worked at (a local business) and had his valuable motorcycle helmet stolen when someone ransacked his car. Try telling that to the gentleman who had a bunch of cash stolen from his car. Try telling that to myself. I had my bike stolen while working one shift. We all fell victim to that mentality of “This is Sisters, that would never happen here.”

I am not saying a shooting will happen in Sisters. But this mentality makes it a lot easier for some fed-up 20-something-year-old dude to shoot up something of ours, and cause damage. Please remember that crimes like this can absolutely happen here. Nowhere is safe, so please be cautious out there.

Craig Wessel

Don’t dismiss electric vehicles

To the Editor:

I’m dismayed by Bill Bartlett’s letter of August 31 about the future of EV cars being tenuous due to high cost and unavailability. Indeed, on two recent public radio programs I heard that e-cars constitute less than four percent of American vehicles on the roads currently and are the province of only the wealthy.

These negative outlooks are unnecessary and self-fulfilling. It’s so important that we not identify challenges as complete barriers to progress. A little creative and positive thinking coupled with action go a long way toward achieving goals. Please don’t dismiss these important efforts.

Although full EVs are indeed expensive, hybrids may be a good stepping stone toward the ultimate goal of eliminating petroleum-fueled cars. The newer hybrids spend much more time in electric mode now. The new Corolla hybrid is priced at $20,000, as is the Ford hybrid pickup truck. More used hybrids will become available before long. To my knowledge the federal rebate applies to hybrids still, not just EVs — but please confirm that when you go looking at them.

Mr. Bartlett is concerned that visitors are using Sisters’ precious electricity to charge their EVs; why couldn’t there be a charging fee to offset the expense to our community?

Sharon Booth

Editorial standards

Editor’s note: As part of its coverage of the August 28 shooting at the Forum Safeway, The Bulletin published a story on the background of Safeway employee Donald Surrett, who was killed as he engaged the shooter, and is credited by police as having potentially saved other lives. The story was controversial, and Bulletin editor Gerry O’Brien published an editorial on Sunday, September 4, explaining why the paper published the story. This is the piece to which Ross Flavel’s letter, below, refers.

To the Editor:

Regarding The Bulletin’s “Editor’s View: Why we published more details about Surrett’s background:”

Whether or not reporting on the deceased’s convictions gives an editor pleasure or not is of no concern to me nor should it be to reporters! A superfluous report of circumstances occurring decades ago and damaging to one’s reputation certainly does take away from that person’s current standing in the community and the memory of him!

Newspapers pick and choose what to report every single day. It is their job to do so and fundamental to the profession. We get it. If the a person involved in a piece is a celebrity or public figure? Well, if it happened yesterday, it’s news! If it is ancient history and not pertinent to the story, then it’s not. No one is even suggesting that a story be buried so none are offended. But neither should a newspaper go out of its way to be offensive. Does the public also deserve to have a full and fair picture of this person? If you’re doing a biography, then, yes. The story generally is, first and foremost, the primary goal.

As far as comments regarding difficult truths, the editor’s remarks were self-serving. Newspapers censor their content every day just with the sources they choose to republish alone. Editors should be ever mindful of the following: Is it news? Is it true? Is is accurate? Is it complete? Is there a compelling reason for or against publication?

Regarding the newspaper to which I refer not being “in the business of concealing”: Really? I won’t address the rest of the editor’s journalistic back-patting other than to say that I am curious as to exactly what “decisions” we readers are to make in light of this nugget of information provided.

Nugget, don’t be them!

Ross Flavel