Just when you think the one-eyed monster is finally gone, he goes and writes a letter to the editor. I missed the original publication of the letter by the former WMAY talker known as "One-Eye Jack". But Jim at AbeLog resurects it along with a rebuttal by the Sangamon County Sheriff Department's Chief Deputy, Tony Sacco.
Basically, the argument is over fireworks regulation in the county and the letters contain plenty of incendiary language to go along with it. Mr. Jackson thinks the fireworks laws are overly restrictive and maybe even Stalinistic (at least, I think that's what he's saying) while Sacco calls bullshit and says the laws are only meant to protect the public.
OK fine, I agree with Sacco (go read the letters).
Having said that, I'm a little uncomfortable with Sacco's comments. While I agree with what he is saying and enjoyed his slapping One Eye around a little, I personally think it's inappropriate for him, as Sangamon County's Chief Deputy Sheriff, to be responding in the manner in which he did. I think a law enforcement officer should remain publicly neutral on the issues, much as members of the military should be.
Now, I don't mean they should be silent. No, a correction of facts in a criminal matter, for example, would certainly be in order. But Sacco gets a little nasty in his letter. Mr. Eye certainly deserves it given the ridiculousness of some of his statements but calling him on it the way Sacco did isn't right for someone in his position. I say that respectfully as I have nothing at all against Sacco, not knowing him at all.
Maybe it's just me, but I like thinking police officers are neutral. In my dealings with the police, I have always felt very comfortable thinking they aren't emotionally vested one way or another except to solve crimes and keep the peace (even the jerks who keep writing me speeding tickets, all 600 of you, do so professionally). I know that ideal isn’t' real, but at least outwardly giving that impression I think is important in a free society.
4 comments:
I agree. Sacco could have refuted Jackson's points from a public safety and legal standpoint, without letting the personal stuff enter into it. It does seem inappropriate for a law enforcement officer to vent like that in the press.
Well, Anon10:59, I suspect that inclinations like that are exactly why he isn't on the air anymore.
You would probably call me a liberal and I'm not pissed about Pam being on the air. I give her some (well deserved) crap from time to time but she's good people.
I also agree that Sacco should have kept his remarks on a non-personal level. The way it is, it looks as though he is being vindictive and has a personal vendetta.
Post a Comment