Re: “Finding beauty, inspiration in walking around the Capitol“ (Forum, May 28): Tom Dresslar is right about Capitol Mall. Why does every flat surface seem to attract stuff? Why does open space in urban areas always need to be filled up with things?
Capitol Mall is one of the few open spaces in downtown Sacramento that has great vistas, and a soothing oasis of greenery. Allowing things to start sprouting on the Mall will bring on a slippery slope. Council members and legislators will find it difficult to say no to every request to fill it with things.
Robert Jones, Sacramento
Never miss a local story.
A lovely walk
What a wonderful walk down memory lane. I still make a point of looking at the Capitol every time I cross the Tower Bridge.
I entered that stunning building every workday for almost 20 years. I have such great memories as a 20-year-old, hired as a typist with the Senate, and, eventually as payroll manager with the Assembly. I will never forget the wonderful people I worked with and the many friendships I made while there. So, thank you, Tom Dresslar, for your wonderful article on the iconic Capitol and its beautiful grounds.
Susan Null, West Sacramento
Trump would win
Re “Trumps budget breaks campaign promises” (Forum, May 28): Susan Sward is from far left San Francisco but that doesn’t excuse blindness and bias. After returning from a trip to Michigan, I saw plenty of middle class, college educated, hardworking people who voted for Donald Trump.
They think he has a monumental job fixing Washington and making the intelligence agencies accountable again. Washington is not working for them and they are the backbone of the nation.
If President Trump were to run again today, he would win by an even larger margin. California and New York are not representative of the nation. The liberal media is telling us a lie, fake news, not the reality. They are spreading fear for the 2020 election but most people in the rest of the nation know that.
Kay Walsh, Sacramento
In denouncing President Donald Trump’s proposed budget, Susan Sward mentions the piles of money he wants to give the rich but provides no evidence for this assertion. Might she be referring to proposed tax cuts? Because the wealthy pay a vastly disproportionate share of taxes, they will naturally benefit more from reductions than those who contribute less. But allowing taxpayers at any level to keep more of their own money hardly equates to giving them money, a fact missed by those denouncing tax cuts as “giveaways.”
Barry Mackintosh, Lincoln
Re “UCD doctor’s research is a danger to the gun industry” (Dan Morain, May 28): There’s already abundant evidence that guns in our homes and communities are much more likely to be used to kill innocent people than to protect them. The rate of gun deaths is 10 times higher in the United States than in other developed countries. The the main reason for this vast difference is our weak gun control laws and the extraordinarily high number of guns in circulation.
In 1968, the late Sen. Thomas Dodd, D-Conn., called for the adoption of stringent gun control laws comparable to laws in place in other democratic countries. Since 1968, more civilians have died of gunshot wounds than all the U.S. soldiers in all the wars in which our country was ever involved. More research, in the absence of definitive gun control laws, will only document more senseless deaths.
Bill Durston, MD, Gold River
Dr. Garen Wintemute is not an unbiased person to head the UC Davis Firearms Violence Research Center. It would be like asking a wolf to give research guidance to the safety of sheep.
Wayne K. Johnson, Sacramento
Guns save lives
It appears that neither Dan Morain nor Dr. Garen Wintemute is familiar with John Lott’s gun study, “More Guns, Less Crime.”
Lott was anti-gun and began his study expecting to prove that higher rates of gun ownership coincided with higher rates of gun crimes.
In fact, he found the opposite and was enough of a scientist to recognize that his original hypothesis was incorrect. He has updated his study several times since the original.
I suspect that Wintemute will spend millions to discover the same results.
Michael J. Sugden, Citrus Heights
The National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade association for the firearms and ammunition industry, is not surprised that California is using taxpayer dollars to fund research by Dr. Garen Wintemute.
However, it is disappointing to see under-informed Dan Morain’s column praising this funding and researcher without presenting the facts.
Wintemute is far from being a “danger to the gun industry,” which does not oppose impartial research. In fact, Congress did not bar Centers for Disease Control research, only for advocacy for gun control, a criminal justice issue.
The problems arise when slanted methodology is used to reach predetermined conclusions that conveniently match the perspective of the researcher.
It has happened and it’s not science. It’s confirmation bias.
It doesn’t take $5 million in taxpayer dollars to determine criminals are to blame for not following local, state and federal firearms laws, the strict enforcement of which is supported by our industry members.
Lawrence G. Keane, Senior Vice-President and General Counsel, National Shooting Sports Foundation, Newtown, Conn.
So long, Dan
Re “Walters leaving Bee after 57 years as a California journalist” (Page 6A, June 1): As a state government flack, I have inevitably gritted my teeth over several Dan Walters columns, even as I admired his resilience and knowledge.
My favorite Dan Walters memory is from my previous life as host of “Insight” on Capital Public Radio.
I interviewed Dan many times and once asked him why he wrote six columns a week when most of his colleagues only wrote two or three. He said it was because the Bee wouldn’t let him write seven.
Best wishes to Dan Walters in his non-retirement.
Jeffrey Callison, Lincoln
EXTRA LETTERS ONLINE
Find them at:
HOW TO SUBMIT
Online form (preferred):
Other: Letters, P.O. Box 15779,
Sacramento, CA 95852
150-word limit. Include name, address and phone number. Letters may be edited for clarity, brevity and content.