Owner explains issues with Ruth Compound
Some truth about the Ruth Compound (“Woman, 24, is killed in fire”): The county fails to get scum people from living in the area. I own Dan Ruth’s old property. No one paid a half-million dollars to clean anything over there on my part of the land.
We have every scumbag coming out there dumping trash and the blight office is a joke, failing to remove or arrest or enforce the law. Anyone out there is trespassing if they don’t own property. I cannot use my property because of stealing, illegal dumping and so on.
Let’s all flood (code enforcement office Dave) Mason with complaints, as I have for years.
Who do I sue for allowing this?
Jason Anderson, Crescent City
Honoring public safety workers important event
One of the truly significant events in Del Norte County is the annual celebration held at Crescent City’s Cultural Center and hosted by the Law Enforcement Administrators of Del Norte County to highlight the outstanding services of those who protect the general public (meaning you and me) from evildoers (“Honors for our officers,” March 21).
The organizations involved are the county Sheriff’s Department, the city Police Department, the District Attorney’s Office, local Search and Rescue, Pelican Bay State Prison, the California Highway Patrol and the county Probation Department.
Hundreds of people attended this important presentation March 19, among them the families of our law enforcement community that support and regularly sacrifices to make life safer for the rest of us. The city of Crescent City was well represented by four of the five City Council members — Kelly Shellong was noticeably absent — and also present were Gene Palazzo (city manager) and our superb chief of police, Doug Plack.
Historical perspective on parties
A March 16 letter from Heidi Bauman, “Tired of Dem-bashing; like dog park proposal,” shows that she may be too young for historical perspective.
For over 50 years I learned that both parties are about the same and so I became an Independent.
At 84, I remember they passed Social Security in 1936 and all Republicans were against it. The same happened in 1955 for Medicare; they opposed it also and then they use both benefits after 65.
Congress hates our good economy, when everything was made in the United States and of good quality. In 1980 it began sending factories to China and other countries.
During awards, where were other supervisors?
Tuesday evening, the very best of our community were honored at the Cultural Center as the Law Enforcement Administration of Del Norte County honored those who have gone beyond the point of just doing their jobs.
I was in the audience of several hundred as Pelican Bay, the California Highway Patrol, Probation, Search and Rescue, Sheriff’s Office and Crescent City Police Department were shown the community’s appreciation with the presentation of plaques.
I saw Mayor Rich Enea, City Council members Ron Gastineau, Rick Holley and Kathryn Murray, and City Manager Eugene Palazzo.
I noted there was only one representative from the county in attendance: Supervisor Roger Gitlin. Where were the other supervisors? Is this event so unimportant to them, they don’t even bother to show up?
I am embarrassed by the absence of most of the Board of Supervisors. Supervisors Martha McClure, David Finigan, Gerry Hemmingsen and Mike Sullivan, you ought to be ashamed of yourselves.
Randy Christoffersen, Crescent City
Amazed at hypocrisy of local district attorney
Hypocrisy knows no limits. In these last few days before the Bar decides the fate, career-wise, of our local district attorney, I sit in absolute amazement of his hypocritical outlook.
Regionalization, rural population a lethal mix
I attended the meeting for the proposed regionalization of Sutter Coast hospital. I also read the story of the same meeting (“The doctor makes his case,” March 14). The meeting was hosted by Dr. Greg Duncan chief of medical staff at Sutter Coast Hospital. It was a very good meeting, very informative and well presented.
Nowhere in either venue was the impact on the local community residents mentioned. Del Norte County is composed of many small, isolated communities, 20 or more miles from Sutter Coast Hospital. In the event of a medical emergency, the first responders are the local volunteer fire department or the Yurok tribal emergency response team. If it is determined that further treatment is needed, an ambulance is called or the patient is transported by private auto.
Under regionalization, it’s possible there would fewer beds available for emergencies. If the beds were all in use, then the patient would have to be moved to another hospital. In our remote area, that would mean going east, north or south. All of the choices are 50 to hundreds of miles from Crescent City.
The expense of surface ambulance or air transport will be hundreds of dollars. This expense will fall on the patient or family of the patient. Most of our residents are on a fixed income and the expense will be overwhelming.
What is wrong with affirming gun rights?
In response to Richard Wendt’s March 12 letter, “More important issues than grandstanding vote,” I want to thank Supervisor Roger Gitlin for asking members of the Board of Supervisors to affirm their belief that the 2nd Amendment is important to assure American citizens have the right to own weapons without all the creative ways liberals are trying to impede our rights of ownership.
The question that comes to mind is: Since there is no harm in affirming this Amendment, why the hesitation? This “president” has no qualms in cherry-picking this amendment as the one to destroy.
Remember Fast and Furious? This “president” refuses to allow the investigation to follow a natural course to determine who is responsible for several thousand guns going from Arizona to Mexico, killing a Border Patrol agent and hundreds of Mexicans.
I understand each elected official took the oath to uphold the Constitution but that is a general oath. By specifying the 2nd Amendment the oath becomes specific and personal. Refusing to affirm this right may put into question how strongly Supervisor Martha McClure’s belief in ownership of guns by Americans may be.
Why this is grandstanding is beyond me. I have yet to see Supervisor Gitlin do any grandstanding. He has asked honest questions and is a breath of fresh air on the Board of Supervisors.
Marlowe Thompson, Crescent City
Tired of Dem-bashing; like dog park proposal
Since Americans do have the right to voice their opinions, here’s mine: I’m tired of Democrat-bashing.
Just because things aren’t changing quickly enough for some folks, and just because Edward Kennedy isn’t alive anymore, doesn’t mean that President Obama isn’t an intelligent, thoughtful human being doing much better than “Mitt” would’ve.
It’s awfully hard to change eight years of damage caused by that dolt, G.W. Bush.
People could succeed at overthrowing government
Supervisors, thanks for supporting our Second Amendment! (Board backs gun rights,” Feb. 28.) Supervisor Martha McClure apparently abstained, stating that it made no sense “cherry-picking amendments.”
Under normal circumstances I could agree with her, but looking at page A7 of the same newspaper reveals why it really does make sense: over a third of the entire page was filled with proposed California bills limiting guns and ammunition.
Additionally, many more similar bills have been introduced in the U.S. Congress and the United Nations and the president has threatened to use executive orders to achieve similar goals. Never before has the Second Amendment been under such intense attack.
Our freedoms, which limit governmental overreach, are based on four boxes.
First is the soapbox: Our freedom of speech, which enables us to influence the second box, the ballot box. If unjust laws are nonetheless enacted, the citizens may still prevail via the jury box, but if even that fails, our final line of defense against tyranny is the cartridge box.
Our Second Amendment makes us unique in the world. It’s the right that secures all other rights. Tyrannical governments often display the trappings of freedom such as constitutions and elections without actually being free since rights there are not secured. For obvious reasons, not a single tyrannical government allows its subjects to “keep and bear arms.”
Who decides when the government has gotten tyrannical enough to justify shooting its agents? The answer is clearly “we the people.” There is no way we can divest ourselves of this responsibility if indeed we are to have a government of the people, by the people and for the people.
Build over ocean to solve Last Chance Grade issue
After reading the recent article about Caltrans finishing the latest round of repairs for the Last Chance Grade (“Highway’s trouble spot is costly,” March 5), I dug into my box of uncompleted letters to the editor and found one related to a similar Triplicate article from Feb. 14, 2009.
That article stated, “Officials are resigned to the fact that Last Chance Grade will fall into the ocean. They say it’s not a question of if it will happen, but when.”
Since moving here in 1985, I have made friends with many people that grew up here in the 1930s and ’40s. Several of these folks lost family members on both the old highway and the current one.
There were plans researched at one time for going deeper inland: What happened? Geology? Opposition Groups? My point, or question, is this: Please, will someone at Caltrans tell me if the obvious (to me) third option for dealing with the problems associated with the construction and maintenance of a highway through the unstable terrain between Crescent City and the Klamath area has been studied in the past and found to be unworkable or cost prohibitive.
If you can let your imagination run wild long enough, imagine a structure similar to the harbor breakwater, running between the south end of South Beach and the lagoon area just north of Trees of Mystery. Yes, out in the ocean. Imagine that this structure is more than 50 feet above sea level (30 feet higher than the harbor breakwater), running roughly parallel to the beach (500-1,000 feet off shore, making maybe a thousand acres of salt marsh/wetlands) and wide enough for two lanes in each direction, a center median, and utility right-of-ways.
If your mind is still open, the material needed for this project might be found either close by (bluffs) or from straightening out Highway 199 (literally move the mountain, in pieces of course).
Aim is to make country safer, not take rights
I watched the Feb. 26 supervisors meeting where our Board chose to pass a resolution supporting and upholding the Second Amendment. I am unclear what this resolution accomplished because no one has taken away your Second Amendment rights nor will anyone take them away. It seemed redundant to me to even bring up a resolution like this.
The folks who spoke at the meeting, except for the first gentleman and Supervisor Martha McClure, are missing the point of what the government is trying to do with the new gun control laws. It is not trying to take away your Second Amendment rights; it is trying to make this country safer and possibly prevent more horrific mass killings.
Mrs. McClure’s example of the banning of tommy guns was excellent. These guns were being used by the mafia to kill citizens instead of using them to kill rodents, which was their original intent when they were given to farmers after the war. Thus, when they were repurposed to kill citizens, they were banned by the federal government. Who could be against banning the use of these guns in our civilized society?
That is what our government is attempting to do: Remove the dangerous, unnecessary weapons from society and keep them out of the hands of unbalanced individuals who should not have access to firearms of any kind.
Another individual at the meeting brought up drunk driving and how successful the campaign to stop drunk driving has been. He said one individual changed the laws for this heinous crime. Now look how many lives have been saved!
Maybe, by having universal background checks or changing the availability of rifles only necessary during war, we could save lives, too. The purpose of such actions is not to take away your Second Amendment rights, but to protect the right of all citizens to remain unharmed in public places. That is the goal here.