A word on Scripps Ranch NIMBYs

Reader comments on the Reader

Robert Dingeman: "The people who live in apartments are different. They don’t have children.”
  • Robert Dingeman: "The people who live in apartments are different. They don’t have children.”
  • Image by Matthew Suárez

NIMBY = not in my back yard

Re: “Scripps Ranch — cows gone, rattlers remain,” cover story.

 "In the great Cedar Fire, none — repeat, none — of the eucalyptus trees torched."

"In the great Cedar Fire, none — repeat, none — of the eucalyptus trees torched."

1) Be prepared for the onslaught of Scripps Ranch protectionists (they are not just NIMBYs).

2) The article was well intentioned and accurate in some regards but too snarky.

3) The SRCA “Country Living” slogan is comical at this point. It was out of date in the late ’80s / early ’90s...

4) The Meanley house was over by the Scripps Library Branch across from Miramar Lake. The (original) Swim and Racquet Club the author referenced is where the actual Scripps mansion actually was (approximately where the office and large multipurpose room are).

  • Alan Hays
  • Clairemont

The surfer did get pounded

Re: “Get barreled in Popotla,” Waterfront.

Amanda Plesa:  "I got pounded plenty of times.”

Amanda Plesa: "I got pounded plenty of times.”

I’m sure the beautiful woman in the bikini was pleased that when she spoke to the Reader about surfing you captioned her photo with “I got pounded plenty of times.”

  • Pat Wilson
  • University City

Normal teenagers don’t carry guns

Re: “Case of teens swabbed for DNA at impasse,” News Ticker.

Police shouldn't be allowed to take DNA samples from minors without parental consent, says the ACLU.

Police shouldn't be allowed to take DNA samples from minors without parental consent, says the ACLU.

After reading the small article in the November 2 edition, it doesn’t surprise me that the ACLU is involving themselves in something that a couple of teenagers did not understand themselves when it happened.

I feel they themselves are being duped into pulling a race card here, and here is why: After some experience with a teenager myself, and living with the legal problems related to an incident a few years ago, let me inform you, in case the lawyers haven’t, permission from a parent is never required to swab for DNA. As an arrestee of a serious offense, as in this case, a concealed carry, a minor with a concealed carry, no less, strolling through a park that is well known for shootings and killings and gang hangouts, during a gang celebration, where there is drug activity every day for many years, in a neighborhood riddled with many well-known gangs such as LH30, LHRS, WCC, and whomever else strolls through from other areas to cop dope or get something to eat. Seriously?

They are swabbing for drugs and for connection to previous crimes that may have been committed. I mean, they are carrying a gun. What for? Normal everyday teenagers, in the most dangerous neighborhoods, don’t carry guns. I can be almost sure of that. The ones that carry guns are the ones with nothing good on their mind or are involved in seriously bad things.

For many years now, since 2013, it has been taking place, and it will continue to take place. As for an officer saying that they arrested them because they are black? I highly doubt it. An officer would not say that. He probably said, “Don’t think we are doing this because you are black.” and they only hear what they wanna hear and take it out of context, like most teenagers. Telling a tale.

Also, please note, they do not swab them onsite. They swab them after they are booked. Those are the details the ACLU leaves out.

So, let’s see the trial. I can’t wait to see what happens.

  • Anonymous
  • Valencia Park

Share / Tools

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • AddThis
  • Email

More from SDReader

Comments

Log in to comment

Skip Ad