This letter is in regards to Ms. Gehr's letter to the editor ("Ehrhardt is a good man who is taking responsibility," Aug. 21). I appreciate the courage it takes to take such an unpopular stand. However, Thereare a few blatant discrepancies in her letter.
First and foremost, there is a far cry difference between taking responsibility and owning up to responsibility. He left his truck at the scene of the crime. He had no choice in that matter, so it was fairly certain he would eventually be caught. There was nowhere else he could be treated but Sutter Coast, so it was fairly certain he was going to be caught. So he is not taking responsibility.
He's had two golden opportunities to plead guilty, and both times he's pleaded not guilty, so he's not owning up to his responsibilities either.
Secondly, twice Gehr refers to Ehrhardt and his family as "the one(s)" who has to live with what happened every day. That's kind of selfish, don't you think? The mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters, the children of the victims? You don't think they will be living with what happened every day? They will, and at no given time did they ever have a choice in the matter.
Last and certainly not least, you talked of not judging unless we are in that position. UsuallyI take the "judge not that you be not judged" approach, but that doesn't apply here. Everybody everywhere on every day is in that same position. Should I have this drink? No. Should I drink to excess? No. Should I drink to excess and get behind the wheel of a vehicle?No. Should I drink to excess, get behind the wheel of a vehicle, and park that vehicle on top of another vehicle, killing at least 40 percent of the occupants inside, and be too intoxicated to render assistance? Do you see how this works?
The one who takes responsibility is the one who says "No." The one who owns up to his responsibility is the one who pleads guilty and excepts the punishment."Responsibility" should not be used in the same sentence as Ehrhardt, and neither should "a good man."