John Peabody should learn more about the term editorializing and how it shows up in reporting ("Life after Molski," June 2-9).

He speaks of the Molski lawsuits that plagued the area only in terms of their frivolousness, as if he himself were a store- or restaurant-owner trying to assuage his own fears about a decade-long failure to do anything mandated by law to accommodate those who are not ambulatory. He even goes so far as to say that county residents who are disabled face "public suspicion," as if they might be plotting to break Mom and Pop still whining that they can't afford $3,000-$4,000 without being run out of business.

Sure, Molski could have been more righteous if he had picked on the numerous franchised businesses along the interstate whose compliance is so marginal it is dangerous for those who rely on the assurances of the disabled logo.

I too have spent over three decades in a wheelchair, and have two broken legs as testimony to the lack of rigorousness in the enforcement of standards for the disabled in pavement and hotel bathroom design. I was amazed at how quickly spaces were made at bars for the handicapped once Molski started his rapine. Frivolous? I don't think so.

The whining of the insouciant has gone on too long. Don Shear doesn't want to make money? He just wants to get the pavement fixed outside his abode? What a wimp. He only cares about himself.

Gregory O'Kelly

San Luis Obispo