Letters for November 16, 2017

Ethics commissioners deserve respect

Re “Paper watchdogs” by Scott Thomas Anderson (News, November 2):

A recent SN&R article suggested the City’s new Ethics Commission, which the Council will soon empanel, is fated to be filled with “paper watchdogs” because the applicant pool is “dominated” by lawyers and lobbyists. This characterization is unfair to the dozens of Sacramentans who have volunteered their time to serve on this important commission.

Let’s get some facts right. The collection of applicants is exceptionally talented, experienced, diverse and qualified. It includes, for example, a policy reformer with a decade of experience working on government ethics; a senior attorney with the Fair Political Practices Commission; a professor who teaches election law and campaign ethics; a well-respected community organizer; and an attorney who represents low-income communities.

Only one of the 42 applicants is a state lobbyist (and, as it so happens, that person, who represents state judges among other clients, would be very well-qualified).

The article neglected to mention that city lobbyists, who would pose the greatest risk of a conflict of interest, are prohibited from serving on the commission.

It is true that over half the applicants are attorneys. By law, three of the five commissioners must have a legal, ethics or local government background. The Commission is a quasi-judicial body, after all, with the duty to interpret the city’s ethics laws and impose fines for violations where appropriate. More importantly, there is no reason to think that any of these attorney applicants—who themselves reflect a diversity of legal experiences, from judging to fighting for healthcare access in immigrant communities—would not take their watchdog role seriously.

Sacramento should be pleased with the number, range and qualifications of the candidates who seek to serve our city and better assure that ethical practices prevail. We certainly are.

Paula Lee

League of Women Voters of Sacramento County

Nicolas Heidorn

California Common Cause

via newsreview.com

Note: Headlines are written by editors, not writers. – ed

Build the wall

Re “What to do when ICE comes knocking” by Jeff vonKaenel (Greenlight, November 9):

There comes a point of saturation when the existing resources can no longer support an endless influx of people who need massive amounts of assistance and offer nothing but crime and poverty in return. We have reached that point, and being on the giving side rather than the receiving side of the equation, I for one no longer want my hard-earned resources dispersed in this manner. So piss off with your entitlement agenda.

Justin Ozeroff

Sacramento

via newsreview.com

Gun-violence prevention begins at home

Re “It’s not just about the guns” by Eric Johnson (Editor’s Note, November 9):

“What is wrong with the American men who are making mass murder a common occurrence? How did the United States become such a hyper-violent nightmare? That’s what I want to know. These, to me, are much more important questions than, ’how did he get the gun?’” Child abuse is one way to produce a violent child. Kelley learned to “take it like a man,” rather than behave like the frightened and sobbing child—and adults—he killed. He was a troubled school kid, news reports say, and spent some time in local jail. He was raised to be an angry man. At what point in his life did his family or community take action to get him help … were there any such resource available that he could turn to?

Linda Hoganson

Sacramento

via sactoletters@newsreview.com

Guns prevent crime

Re “It’s not just about the guns” by Eric Johnson (Editor’s Note, November 9):

The problem is not and has never been guns. I have been around for a while. 71 years to be exact, and [I] don’t remember ever hearing about mass shootings like we’ve experienced in the last ten or fifteen years. It seems like what all the anti-gun people want to latch onto now are the mass shootings and use that as an excuse to punish the millions and millions of law abiding gun owners. Disarming law abiding gun owners is not the answer. By that reasoning we should outlaw cars and vans since that is what was used in the recent terrorists attacks in New York City. Do you realize how many crimes have been prevented by law abiding gun owners? I can’t count the stories I’ve read of crimes being prevented. And let’s not even count the man in Texas that stopped the perpetrator of that shooting. And what did he use to shoot the suspect? The very type of rifle that the anti-gun crowd wants to ban. I could go on about what I think the problem is but that would take a long drawn-out discussion. You said “Fuck the NRA.” Nice language by the way. So to stoop to your level, Fuck you.

David Kellef

Antelope

via sactoletters@newsreview.com

Journalism vs. evil

Re “It’s not just about the guns” by Eric Johnson (Editor’s Note, November 9):

Your article took that horrible scene in my mind to another level. Perhaps because I went to college in Texas and attended many tiny Churches of Christ over the years, I too balked at the photo of the church. I know those people without knowing them personally. I know their hope, their heart, their steadfast faith. Once upon a time, I would have disagreed with them only on baptism methods (immersion only), the fruit of the vine, and musical instruments in the church. Now, I couldn’t agree with them on much anymore; on marriage equality, on women in the church, or even the existence of a god.

But, I know they didn’t deserve what happened to them on Sunday. Although I had been staying away from reading personal accounts because of the horror I didn’t want to accept, I loved your article. I loved your last line mostly.

Keep the good words flowing; as far as I am concerned, reporters and writers are saving this country from totalitarianism.

Patricia Buchanan

Sacramento

(News & Review reader since 1994)

via ericj@newsreview.com

Buster Keaton almost died here

Re “Casting Sacramento” by Raheem Hosseini (Feature sidebar, November 9):

Buster Keaton filmed Steamboat Bill, Jr. in Sacramento. The Sacramento River, though greatly less wide than the Mississippi, was Hollywood’s substitute for America’s mightiest river. Steamboat Bill, Jr. has the most dangerous stunt in movie history. The front of a two story building with a small open window on its second floor suddenly falls in a storm. The Keaton character ends up being just in the right spot such that he’s where the window is and isn’t hit by the obviously huge and heavy store front that would easily have killed him.

TOM ARMSTRONG

Sacramento

via newsreview.com