Dear Editor,

If you have four children who normally enjoy certain privileges, but two of them are caught committing some serious offences against your rules and regulations, what would you do? Take those privileges from the two unruly ones only, or take those privileges from all four children in name of fairness?

This is a similar case with private PPVs and government-operated Jamaica Urban Transit Company buses, regarding the removal of window tints. The JUTC should not be punished for the nasty behaviour never found happening on those buses.

The “party bus” situation and schoolchildren having sex on buses are constantly found on private public passenger vehicles (PPVs) but is yet to be found happening on JUTC buses. Hence, it would be grossly unfair for my favourite tough-talking cop, SSP Radcliffe Lewis, to please the unruly private PPV drivers by also removing the tints from the JUTC buses. However, I am OK if SSP Lewis considers allowing the private PPVs to use a very low-degree tint, just for sun protection.

Now, as it relates to the private PPVs, the fact that the few good ones in the group refuse to push all those bad ones out for the wolves — SSP Lewis and his team — makes them party to the reckless or leud activities within their group. That then clearly justifies those few good private PPVs suffering the same punishment of SSP Lewis. The private PPVs are the ones constantly flashing headlights to their group indicating police is on the road.

If the same issue of nastiness took place on JUTC buses, then SSP Lewis would know about it, and include those buses and drivers in his statistics of unruly PPVs. He said the main problematic PPVs are Coaster buses, minibuses, and taxis.

Garth ‘Sub-Zero’ Allen

excellentsub@hotmail.com