Sacramento D.U.I. Checkpoints

Isn't it interesting that the Sacramento Police set-up their latest D.U.I. check-point on Franklin Blvd. about a 1/2 mile south of Curtis Park, where the neighborhood income levels drop significantly, and somewhere along Curtis Park where they can snag some of our more wealthy citizens along with the remaining drunken population. Maybe they should put a check-point on Sutterville Road, that way those folks who are returning home to Land Park or Hollywood Park would have a chance at some jail-time, increased insurance rates and less money in their checkbooks. Did I mention that if you turn off the road before the check-point, even if it happens to be one leading to your street, that they can pull you over for possible averting the check-point? I know our streets need to have less drunk drivers on them, but surely we can be a little more fair and balanced in the placement of these inspections locations.

City of Sacramento vs. Liquor Stores

It's time for some real science in regards to crime, poverty and the relationship of corner grocery stores which sell booze. The article in the Sacramento Bee had taken in to account the number of stores in several geographic areas, and the number of crimes permitted within a specific distance from said stores, but why no mention of population density? The maps in the paper seemed to indicated that where there were fewer store locations, the number of crimes in that area was significantly lower. However, the maps also seemed to indicate a decline in population density. I also find it telling that no mention of local major grocery distributors, such as Raleys, Safeway and Albertsons were targeted as trouble makers. Why not just pass loitering legislation and make the local police and sheriff departments enforce it? If our government really wanted to rid our neighborhoods of problem corner-grocery stores, they should have put in to place a system to prevent the change-of-ownership. This would have alleviated at least one store and possibly a couple of others. They could also require owners to post security personnel outside the premises to deter crime. Using eminent domain to quell problems like this doesn't seem fair to new business owners, and the lack of city notification during the exchange process is simply unfair. If the city is going to allow you to buy a business and then immediately attempt to shut you down without ever bothering to tell you that was its intention from the start, there should be a significant grace period allowing you to try to fix the problem they are attempting to solve by shutting you down.

Levees and the Sacramento Bee

Why is that the Sacramento Bee has had several articles regarding the dangers of the Sacramento/California levee system, yet when there is an actual levee breach-like the one that occurred in Sonoma and forced the temporary closure of route 121, it wasn't front-page news?
Certainly, our local paper can do better than this, don't you think?