Road safety
This is an open letter to District 3 Supervisor Jim Steele. Thanks for your article in the July 30 Record-Bee, “How About A Little Help, CalTrans?” I heartily agree that much could be done to improve the safety of traffic on Highway 20 by painting a few more lines on the pavement, specifically:
1. Left turn lane at the intersection of Highway 20 and Witter Springs Road. For those traveling east on the highway and wanting to turn left onto Witter Springs Road, the preceding long curve around a hill not only blocks a view of oncoming traffic, but also may make it difficult for following traffic to avoid rear-ending a car stopped or slowed to make this turn, which is exactly what happened to my daughter in about 2005. Her car was totaled.
2. Left turn lane at the intersection of Highway 20 and Glenhaven Drive. On Easter Sunday, 2007 my car was hit from behind when my son, who was driving, stopped for a car making a left turn onto Glenhaven Drive from the highway. My car was totaled.
Steve Harness, Witter Springs
Thanks, Gene
I just read Gene Paleno’s article, “Talking Animals,” in the July 22 paper, and I just wanted to say that I absolutely Love your articles. Talking animals really hit home with me because my cat Sassy of 17 years just passed away, and you just described her personality to a tee! I commend you for your writing and for your obvious love of animals.
Thank you Mr. Paleno for making my day and making me smile.
Jeanene Parnell, Kelseyville
Makes you wonder
It’s is hard for any serious voter to not LOL when we see all the clown car republican’s needing to have their picture taken holding an assault rifle or some overkill type weapon when running for dog catcher or any other elected office. I for one am surprised they haven’t stuffed a sock in their jeans to attract those manly gun owners who set up phony trophy kills like the lion the other day. I wonder if our President might have attracted cross over conservative voters if he would have a picture of himself with his finger on THE BUTTON he has had control over for the past 6 years.
Jim Hall, Clearlake Oaks
More responsibility
A while back I wrote two letters that essentially had to do with responsibility. Based on two thoughts: 1, that “authorities” should offer more than subjective information to the public when they announce such things as “There may be mercury contamination in Shasta Lake fish; and two, that we should be a lot more responsible when making decisions. I feel a fellow writer, Kevin Bracken, misunderstood what I was trying to say and I would like to counter that as I really don’t feel there is any disagreement between our views. OK, perhaps the definition of “caveat emptor.”
To me, that phrase simply has to do with the decision makers responsibility for the results of his decision. In normal a situation, I feel one should be able to assume the vendor is honest according to his knowledge. It may be naïve, but I don’t want to live in a world where people purposely try to deceive. On the other hand, I don’t think people have the right to demand perfection — it simply does not exist. I have spent too much of my life with statistics and probability to think that people have no responsibility for accepting other people’s errors/mistakes. The recalls of cars on the basis .002 percent failure really bugs me, particularly when the failure is operator activated.
I agree with Mr. Bracken that regulations are necessary. But it is these regulations that give a basis for caveat emptor simply because they offer a basis for decision making. If television sets are rated (or anything else) on the basis of regulations, I will choose what I think is best. My decision, even though it may not be the best.
And yes, I think those people who moan and groan about things in food, air, water, and such whose levels are far below caution, let alone danger, have no basis for complaint.
Guff Worth, Lakeport
