Editorials
Tuesday, July 13, 1999Errant hikers must
pay rescue costsPEOPLE who intrude onto closed-off areas to obtain closer looks at accident or crime scenes should consider the consequences. Five men who ignored signs against hiking into a Hauula valley days after a landslide caused death and injury now know better. They face fines and community service in amounts that hopefully will deter other curiosity seekers.The issue: A state judge will decide how much restitution should be paid by five hikers who intruded into the Maakua Gulch area, which was closed following the Sacred Falls landslide.
Two Oahu men and three friends from the mainland ignored a sign at Maakua Gulch trail in May and hiked into the Sacred Falls area, where rescuers were responding to a Mother's Day landslide that killed eight people and injured 50. The trail had been closed to the public -- and still is -- because of unsafe conditions.
One of the visiting hikers, a 30-year-old Phoenix man, had to be airlifted out of the valley by a Honolulu Fire Department helicopter after breaking his leg. He and his two brothers, both of Salt Lake City, have been mailed summons to appear in court in Honolulu. If they fail to show up, city Deputy Prosecutor Guy Matsunaga said bench warrants could be issued for their arrests.
State District Judge Christopher P. McKenzie fined the two local men $75 each, allowing them to perform 15 hours of community service in lieu of the fines. The judge has yet to determine the amount the hikers must pay in restitution to the state. Matsunaga says the government's cost in coping with the group's mischief exceeded $8,000.
McKenzie agreed to defer the two men's deferred acceptance of no-contest pleas, which means the convictions will be erased from their records after six months of good behavior. That is appropriate, given the lack of criminal intent in their escapade. However, a requirement that the five men pay the full amount of what they cost the state would send a needed message to those unable to control their morbid curiosity.
Reinventing NATO
THE presence of Russian troops serving alongside American and Western European soldiers under NATO command is difficult for many Kosovars -- along with numerous others -- to fathom. With the Soviet threat gone, NATO seems to be trying to redefine itself as the U.S.-led keeper of order throughout Europe. It remains to be seen whether its new mission is manageable or desirable.
NATO was formed 50 years ago by the United States, Canada and 10 Western European nations. Four other European nations were included in the next few years. For the next 40 years, the organization saw the Soviet Union and its satellites as its primary threat, and prevailed with the opening of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the fall of the Soviet Union two years later.
Having accomplished its goal, NATO has been groping for a purpose, entering into a Partnership for Peace with former Warsaw Pact members -- Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic are now members of NATO, and Romania is next in line -- and establishing diplomatic relations with Russia and Ukraine in 1997. NATO remains a military alliance but without opposition.
Instead, NATO seems to have evolved into a policing organization ready to repel civil strife wherever it might occur in Europe, within countries or crossing borders. Defense Secretary William Cohen this week is visiting areas of Eastern Europe to find out more about where stability is no guarantee.
"I don't have the prophetic powers to look beyond the horizon to see which other nations might be in a state of collapse, or so-called failed state," Cohen said on the eve of his trip. Regarding NATO's future goal, Cohen said, "With NATO membership, we promote stability, democracy and the prospect of prosperity. Those become self-enforcing."
That was not the case in Yugoslavia, so NATO intervened on behalf of the Kosovars. The question is whether NATO will feel compelled to use military force to enforce those qualities in other areas where they are not being "self-enforced." It is unclear why American soldiers should shoulder the responsibility of that enforcement.
Mentally ill inmates
HOSPITALIZATION of the mentally ill has plummeted drastically in the past 40 years, after medication in the community was determined to be more humane. That assumed they would take their medication. Unfortunately, many have been in and out of prison with little psychiatric treatment.
Mentally ill inmates had many more previous incarcerations and spent an average of 15 months longer behind bars than other prisoners, according to a Justice Department report. They also were more likely than others to have committed violent crimes and to have had altercations in prison.
Of the 1.8 million Americans now in prison -- quadruple the number of inmates 25 years ago -- 283,800 have severe mental illness, about seven times the number of patients in state hospitals. Their lack of treatment assures that they will be back in prison again and again.
Published by Liberty Newspapers Limited PartnershipRupert E. Phillips, CEO
John M. Flanagan, Editor & Publisher
David Shapiro, Managing Editor
Diane Yukihiro Chang, Senior Editor & Editorial Page Editor
Frank Bridgewater & Michael Rovner, Assistant Managing Editors
A.A. Smyser, Contributing Editor
