Sound Off for Jan. 28, 2007

Batch Data Processor | Saturday, Jan 27 2007 10:55 PM

Last Updated: Saturday, Jan 27 2007 10:58 PM

Reader: I would like to ask you about the crime report map and data that appears in the paper weekly.

I think it is excellent. It gives homeowners an idea of what, if any, criminal activity is in their area. However, it leaves out all areas that are not in the actual city limits. As you are well aware, metropolitan Bakersfield and its "sphere of influence" goes way beyond these borders.

In November and December there were MANY home and auto thefts in the county areas of Rosedale that apparently were linked together. It would have been great to know ahead of time that there was a problem.

Some of my neighbors in the surrounding area still are not aware that these crimes were going on around them. They were just lucky.

Is there any way that your crime report feature could expand its borders? My neighborhood (west of Allen Road) is listed on your map, but there is no data for it. Perhaps the Sheriff's Department could get in on this report -- at least for these heavily populated areas bordering the city proper?

I look forward to your response.

Best regards,

-- Carol Bender

Jenner: Thanks for your note. Your question is an excellent one, and I'm happy to answer it.

We work with the Bakersfield Police Department to produce those maps. The department collects the data and delivers it to us, and we prepare the maps so they'll reproduce better.

We'd love to provide maps showing crimes throughout metro Bakersfield. Unfortunately, the Sheriff's Department isn't yet capable of delivering this data, so our crime maps are limited.

I asked reporter Jason Kotowski to ask if and when the Sheriff's Department might be able to share this data. Here is Sheriff's Sgt. Richard Wood's answer:

"It's something we want to do. We don't have the technology to do it right now, but we're looking at the software to do it. It's not something we're going to be able to implement in the short term, but it's something we plan on doing in the future."

Reader: I cannot believe the small space allocated to President Bush's State of the Union address in Monday's Californian and that THE TIME OF THE SPEECH WAS NOT LISTED IN THAT DAY'S PAPER!

These are very troubled times and the president's ratings are low. We should be listening to both his speech and the Democratic Rebuttal. Maybe I am wrong (I hope not), but it seems the following articles, "Juries back in control," "Roe v. Wade anniversary" and "Were local pair wiretapped?" are deemed by The Californian as being more important than the war, terror and the national economy.

Your reply would be appreciated.

-- Bob Munro

Jenner: Thanks for your note.

First, we absolutely should have included the time of Tuesday's address and told readers how they could view and/or listen to it. That omission was indeed a shortcoming, and I regret it. But I must disagree that we've given the speech short shrift, or that we don't consider the war, terror and the national economy critically important topics.

In addition to the prominent position on Monday morning's front page, we devoted more than half of Page A4 to the speech and these issues on that day. We also devoted nearly a full page to the State of the Union last Sunday. We listed the time of the speech, which stations were broadcasting it and information about the rebuttal speaker. The story was an analysis of the very items you speak of: "troubled times and Bush's low ratings."

We also included a large graphic on what Bush said last year and what became of his promises. We had a separate story in the first part of the A section on what he would propose and referred back to the State of the Union page.

Thank you for writing, and for your readership of The Californian.

Reader: This comment concerns the recent and extremely insulting "political cartoon" showing several sage-appearing scientists representing agencies that get most if not all of their funding from the federal government and firm believers that man is creating "global warming." They are opposite a "crazy" who believes otherwise.

One of those "crazies" is the American Association of Petroleum Geologists with more than 30,000 members. This organization has a select committee composed of renowned geologic scientists, including experts in past climate changes. These experts have been studying global warming issues for several years and they have found no direct evidence that man is creating this warming. This research is financed by members to understand the truth and not to perpetuate "grant funding."

So, don't believe the hype that "most" scientists believe in man-made global warming because it just isn't true.

-- Conrad Howard

Editorial Page Editor Dianne Hardisty responds: Our goal is to present a variety of views on the Opinion page.

As with most controversial issues, there are two sides -- maybe more -- to the global warming debate. While you may believe the recent cartoon depicted global warming theory opponents as being crazy, you probably laughed at the ones published recently that have poked fun at global warming theory advocates, especially in the wake of recent freezing temperatures. Several cartoons already published -- and more likely to be published in the future -- ask for some global warming in these bitter cold days.

Reader: Thanks so much for the wonderful article about my husband, Dick Graves. He was a kind wonderful man, great husband and fabulous father.

I just did not know his influence was as wide as it seems to be. I had 40-plus years with him and I am blessed to have known and grown with him. Your article really embodied his true caring and loving spirit. Thanks for remembering all his marvelous attributes.

Sincerely,

-- Jan Graves

Jenner: For those who didn't know him or who missed the obituary on Wednesday's Sports cover, Dick Graves was beloved by many in the community. He touched the lives of many as a longtime CSUB professor, faculty athletic representative and promoter and supporter of swimming.