Greensburg Laurels & Lances
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Thursday, March 7, 2013, 8:55 p.m.
On the “Watch List”: Police patrols in Unity. Negotiations between Latrobe and St. Vincent College for city police patrols on the Unity campus bring up an unrealized proposal from last year: the possibility of Unity and Latrobe coming to terms on the provision of police services in some areas of the township, which has no police force. But the idea went nowhere. As Latrobe likely will need Unity supervisors' permission to enforce local ordinances on the college campus, this provides a good opportunity to revisit the larger issue of police patrols in Unity.
Lance: To limiting warrants. A Fayette County plan to more effectively serve arrest warrants should have been enacted long before the county's backlog reached 7,000 cases. A court official says warrants for minor offenses weren't served after regular business hours because district courts were closed and the jail wouldn't accept these individuals after hours. Since when is the pursuit of suspected lawbreakers a 9-to-5 job?
Lance: To Andrew M. Slywczuk. The North Huntingdon man, 28, faces drug charges after crashing his vehicle nearly head-on into a school bus in Penn Township. Police say he was under the influence of a controlled substance at the time and that he tossed 50 stamp bags of heroin over a hillside after the crash. This young man should consider himself fortunate: By sheer happenstance, the school bus wasn't loaded with kids and the driver and lone student aboard weren't injured.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Junk nutrition
- The secret ballot: Protect it
- The big sting: To what end?
- Liquor privatization: Now’s the time
- Lever A-1: Pot-infused brownies