Stopping for school buses, NYC stabbings suspect

Stop for kids or change law

The article “Tickets where kids don’t cross” [News, Nov. 17] states that 70% of bus camera tickets in 2023 were for passing a stopped school bus on a road where kids don’t cross. That means that 30% were for passing a stopped school bus where kids do cross. That alone warrants the program.

Suffolk County Legis. Steven Englebright asks if the program has become “a game of ‘gotcha’ in order to raise revenues.” Reducing revenue streams is counterintuitive to government officials, but it must be done.

Most states do not require oncoming traffic to stop for a school bus on the opposite side of the highway on a multi-lane road or on a divided highway with a median or barrier. New York State should do the same. The three major citation areas also can be addressed by exempting the oncoming side of two-lane roads where buses routinely stop only in front of homes.

A National Highway Traffic Safety Administration report stated, “From 2011 to 2020 there were 218 school-age children who died in school-transportation-related crashes . . . 85 were pedestrians.” That’s an average of about eight children dying per year. Doesn’t seem like much . . . unless one of those children killed was yours. Keep the cameras on the buses, but make the changes to state law.

— Christopher D. Reilly, Manorville

Why is a long-standing law that protects children being questioned? And why defend those who knowingly broke the law?

Every driver knows that it’s illegal to pass a school bus with lights flashing. If they don’t, there’s a large sign on every bus to remind them.

The destination of the student getting off the bus is irrelevant, but it’s the focus of the article. A stopped school bus discharging passengers means young children are present and sometimes excitedly running to get home.

It’s possible that some could cross the street, which is why drivers are obligated to stop in both directions. It’s also possible that they could cross behind the bus or simply run after something that has blown away. This is why drivers are obligated to exercise caution and wait until the bus driver indicates that the coast is clear.

The article would have us believe that stopping on a road presents a danger to the driver, which is ludicrous. Using that flawed logic, drivers shouldn’t stop at red lights.

Our children’s safety is more important than complaints of drivers caught breaking the law.

— Rich Parlini, Cutchogue

If you don’t like the law about stopping for school buses, do something to change it. In the meantime, it is the law. One’s logic is flawed if one is thinking it’s OK to go 100 mph on a road where there is no traffic.

The school bus law is intended to protect children, not make drivers late for work. If someone want to get to work on time, leave earlier. This is Long Island, not some small Midwest city with little traffic. Traffic accidents and roadwork can detour school buses.

Yes, a private company may be making money from school bus cameras, but some does go to fund governments. Stop complaining! If drivers obeyed the law, there would be no bus cameras.

— Bill Olson, Westhampton

I am troubled by articles and opinions that decry any summons and monetary fine as a “cash grab.” Whether red-light cameras or school bus cameras, there is no shortage of violators who have received a legitimate fine yet wail about the unfairness of it.

If such comments are relegated to letters to the editor, that is one thing, but why insert these complaints into news articles? If it is illegal to pass a red light or to pass a stopped school bus with flashers on, where is the injustice in receiving a summons and a fine for engaging in the illegal activity?

— John Blakeney, East Meadow

While I am not a fan of the cameras, I am glad the buses have them. Many people are distracted with cellphones and other things. Whether kids cross should not matter. It is a good practice to always stop behind a school bus so you stop when a kid is crossing. We are taught to stop when we get our licenses. Even before bus cameras, if a police officer saw you violate the law, you got a ticket. But, more important, why would anyone want to risk hitting a kid and having to live with that for the rest of his life?

— Karl Wilhelm, West Babylon

Stabbings editorial was inflammatory

The language used by the editorial board to describe the homeless man with mental illness accused of multiple random stabbings was regressive and inflammatory [“NYC stabbings expose failures,” Editorial, Nov. 20].

While I don’t deny the pain and fear that these incidents cause, using words like “deranged” and “dastardly” pull focus from the larger point that systemic change is needed and, instead, dehumanize and stigmatize all people with serious mental illnesses. As a clinical social worker, I think many readers would have appreciated a more thoughtful look at how cities can achieve the “better balance of personal freedom and public order” that the board suggests at the end of the editorial.

— Rebecca Bonanno, Huntington