The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.
What gets your comment posted?
• Staying on topic
• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less
• Avoiding name-calling
• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger
What gets your comment deleted?
• Personal attacks
• Derogatory remarks
• Name-calling of any sort
• Going off-topic
• Hate speech
• Racially-insensitive comments
• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict
• Posting e-mail addresses
• Posting comments of a commercial nature
• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.
The fine print
- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.
- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.
- Comments may take several hours to be posted.
- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.
- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our
virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.
- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact
online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.
skiph wrote on May 30, 2008 3:30 PM:
MP wrote on May 30, 2008 4:17 PM:
mypoint wrote on May 30, 2008 4:26 PM:
LifeLongNapan wrote on May 30, 2008 4:55 PM:
nola wrote on May 30, 2008 6:24 PM:
mypoint wrote on May 30, 2008 9:32 PM:
crusherfan wrote on May 30, 2008 10:24 PM:
funnyme wrote on May 31, 2008 9:08 AM:
Cadence wrote on May 31, 2008 12:11 PM:
You weren't supposed to notice. And if you DO notice, it's correct to murmur, if you can murmur in print, something vague and sweet about cultural differences. "
conscious wrote on May 31, 2008 1:34 PM:
funnyme wrote on May 31, 2008 3:03 PM:
Thanks God we are not all the same, it would be pretty boring, and that is exactly what makes the Napa Valley so "perfect"...56% obviously share different backgrounds so I can't put them all in one whole group. But, 100% of the convictions share ONE thing in common: They were ALL intoxicated!
Wouldn't you say? "
crusherfan wrote on May 31, 2008 3:39 PM:
chunk wrote on Jun 1, 2008 1:00 PM:
funnyme wrote on Jun 1, 2008 1:22 PM:
chunk wrote on Jun 1, 2008 4:26 PM:
funnyme wrote on Jun 1, 2008 6:13 PM:
2) 59% (35 of 59) of the arrests have hispanic/latino names and last names in common.
3) 27% of the population in Napa are hispanic/latino.
Statistics are fascinating...That's all.
Cadence, I was whispering but I guess I got loud...Ooops! "
funnyme wrote on Jun 1, 2008 7:28 PM:
27% of the population in Napa are hispanic/latino.
Cadence, I guess my whisper got louder, it disturbed the NVR moderator's ears with my earlier attempt at answering Chunk's question. Ooops! "
pharper wrote on Jun 3, 2008 10:52 AM:
injoy wrote on Jun 4, 2008 4:28 PM:
funnyme wrote on Jun 4, 2008 6:41 PM:
I attempted to answer you earlier but it seems NVR moderator got nervous about crossing some PC line, anyway...
It only took me three minutes over my morning coffee to pick out hispanic/latino names out of the list.
injoy,
You made an even more remarkable observation...
As fascinating as statistics are, I wonder if we could get the monthly DIU reports in more detail, like age, previous arrests and convictions, sentence and/or fine.
I truly believe it would serve as a deterrant. "
napatreeworker wrote on Jun 9, 2008 8:27 PM:
steph wrote on Jun 13, 2008 1:58 PM:
But they never get credit for that. "
funnyme wrote on Jun 13, 2008 5:02 PM:
I am glad to see your outrage. Not that many are willing to show it when it comes to recognition of our veterans and their job well done.
I entirely support the BRAVE men and women who put their lives on the line to protect our freedoms. A 100% of them.
I don't care for drunks or drug addicts. A 100% of them. "
steph wrote on Jun 13, 2008 5:35 PM:
napan007 wrote on Jun 16, 2008 11:00 AM:
og2009 wrote on Jun 16, 2008 11:56 PM:
og2009 wrote on Jun 17, 2008 12:03 AM:
Jane Doe--23yrsold----Napa-3rd time. "
funnyme wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:14 AM:
You are absolutely right. It should come from either NVR reporters or CHP, or NPD, the specific details (gender, age, nationality, etc.) of each one of these drunks/drug addicts who have no regards for anybody else in the universe but themselves...They decided to get in a car and drive while intoxicated, shame should be at least the least of the punishments...but maybe that would be "cruel and unusual punishment" in the eyes of many out there. "
Dirty Napkin wrote on Jun 20, 2008 7:25 AM:
napakitten wrote on Jun 20, 2008 8:23 AM:
NVR Moderator wrote on Jun 20, 2008 9:06 AM:
The published list of names is convictions in May 2008.
It takes months, sometimes, for a conviction, so your crash on 5/26 would not be in this liist. "
cathyodom wrote on Jun 20, 2008 2:14 PM:
Burts wrote on Jun 20, 2008 3:00 PM:
kdbk wrote on Jun 22, 2008 10:18 PM:
reason-ator wrote on Jun 24, 2008 9:33 AM:
It just starts to seem tabloid-ish to me after awhile. But if the Register is publishing this sensational list every month to encourage debate about immigration, then obviously they're satisfying their noble cause. "
reason-ator wrote on Jun 24, 2008 11:02 AM:
It just starts to seem tabloid-ish to me after awhile. But if the Register is publishing this sensational list every month to encourage debate about immigration, then obviously they're satisfying their noble cause. "
Dwayne wrote on Jun 24, 2008 11:11 AM:
funnyme wrote on Jun 24, 2008 11:17 AM:
Thank you for make it VERY CLEAR. "
enapa wrote on Jun 24, 2008 3:24 PM:
Hear Ye wrote on Jun 26, 2008 2:35 AM:
What comment(s) are you referring to? "
napadad wrote on Jun 28, 2008 1:58 PM:
funnyme wrote on Jun 28, 2008 8:18 PM:
Thank you napadad! "
reason-ator wrote on Jun 30, 2008 3:06 PM:
I don't understand how 3/4 of the 80 convictions are for BACs of twice the legal limit ( which would be 0.16%, correct ? ). I only see 22 cases of the 80 total ( .20 and above ) which could be definitely be assumed to be above 0.16 from the data in the article. Are you talking about this info, or the study you cited ("the average person arrested for DUI has driven while impaired 200 or more times prior to the arrest.") ?
Did I misunderstand something ? "
CLRAE wrote on Jul 1, 2008 12:22 PM:
psychochik wrote on Jul 2, 2008 9:34 AM:
Mods, if I'm wrong feel free to not post this !! "
Paisano wrote on Jul 2, 2008 9:46 AM:
funnyme wrote on Jul 2, 2008 10:15 AM:
The subject is drunks and drug addicts being convicted of thet crime of DUI...and so it happens that a lot of them "resemble" (is that pc enough) a hispanic/latino name and/or last name. It could all just be coincidence, what do I know?
We'll see what the June 2008 DUI report brings. "
mypoint wrote on Jul 2, 2008 11:51 AM:
Paisano wrote on Jul 2, 2008 1:05 PM:
funnyme wrote on Jul 2, 2008 2:21 PM:
You are absolutely right, it doesn't, and EVERYBODY knows that.
However, in the event that the convicted drunk or drug addict with the hispanic name and last name turns out to be an illegal alien, it will make him a "double criminal". "
funnyme wrote on Jul 2, 2008 2:25 PM:
You bring a good point too.
I wonder if the "same names" appear because they are repeat offenders (Yikes!) or is it because they don't carry ID's and it's easy to "invent" a common and popular name (A famous boxer for example)...I don't know. "
Paisano wrote on Jul 2, 2008 4:23 PM:
reason-ator wrote on Jul 2, 2008 7:59 PM:
Please stick to the subject. "
funnyme wrote on Jul 3, 2008 1:19 AM:
I never said the people with hispanic/latino names in the DUI Report were illegals. There's no way for us to know that. Yet. Sorry.
However, your assumption on illegals is a bit dramatic...You know what happens when you assume things, don't you? "
napatude wrote on Jul 3, 2008 2:31 AM:
crusherfan wrote on Jul 3, 2008 7:48 AM:
Paisano wrote on Jul 3, 2008 8:21 AM:
funnyme wrote on Jul 3, 2008 11:13 AM:
Here's a second attempt, I guess the first one was too explicit and NVR didn't like it.
When people assume things, like YOU DID when you wrote the comment on Jul 2, 2008 4:23 PM, people would make a fool out of themselves while the others laugh...
Thanks for the laugh! "