So, all this RCPD hoopla
Posted: 25 March 2014 08:45 PM   [ Ignore ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  738
Joined  2013-07-13

is the work (and lobby money) of a single paranoid swill-merchant in Aggieville?  I couldn’t find anything in the newspaper that speaks to motivation.  Is this feller saying that the RCPD is out ta git him for no reason?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 March 2014 05:35 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  797
Joined  2012-10-10

When the FPD drunkfest was spilling over into neighborhhods, the citizens rebelled.  There were folks sound asleep, that had drunks break down their front doors.  People would wake up on Sunday morning and find drunks on their front porches or in their back yards.  Quite a discussion ensued between the citizens and the City Commission.  The Commission sided with the “swill merchants”.  However, part of the “deal” was that laws were to be strictly enforced and the drunkfest contained to the AV central area.
RCPD brought in additional forces from surrounding communities.  The past two years, the drunkfest has been contained and there have been an significant number of arrests.  That strict enforcement has angered the swill merchants.  When they were able to coerce the Commission into actually championing the drunkfest, they began to understand their political clout.  The “conservative” commissioners were against shutting down the drunkfest for the typical Tea Party agenda…  1.)  Can’t interfere with “free enterprise”  2.)  The tax revenue generated far outweighs the potential damage to life and property 3.) “Gubmint” is getting too powerful and folks need to be responsible for themselves. 
As crowds have lessened and enforcement increased, the swill merchants have looked for a means through which to return to the “good ol’ days”.  Assuming their ability to weild political power, they decided to get a “good ol’ boy” to head up the local law enforcement.  If they can rid RCPD of professional leadership and install a political croney who will have his officers “look the other way” for votes… and a free drink once in a while… the game is won.  The cannot use that platform to convince the voters.  So…
The swill merchants when to the local Tea Party crowd and convinced them the “Feds are coming to take away your guns”.  “You have no elected law enforcement that will militarize the community to take up arms against the Gubmint”.  “If’n you don’t elect an anti-Obama Sheriff, the Feds will continue to strip you of your freedoms and liberties.”  And, the swill merchants were successful in convincing “that” crowd that the only thing that stands between freedom and the Fed gestapo will be an anti-government Law Enforcement Director.
The group needed to make every attempt to stir up the masses against current law enforcement.  So, now they are “tattling” to the Law Board every time an officer looks sideways at them in AV.  The recent “whine session” included events where officers had every right to issue citations, but gave warnings instead.  This effort by the swill merchants to oust a professional Director in favor of a political croney is vicious and is well funded.  Until RCPD backs off and allows a return to an open saloon environment, they will continue the onslaught.  It’s all about money.  However, bringing the Tea Party crowd on board with the fear government forces are on their way to Manhattan and the only thing that will stop them is a “Boss Hawg” has provided them another voice.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 March 2014 06:19 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  738
Joined  2013-07-13

My favorite complaint was “one of them gave me a mean look”.

Back in the old days, some of the Aggieville bar owners were prone to nose-packing to the point of bankruptcy.  Grand expansion delusions were always followed by paranoid delusions… followed by closures.

I’m aware these things can happen without the powder, but blaming the PD for a lack financial success is pretty damned delusional.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 March 2014 01:10 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  479
Joined  2012-10-10

Larry:  I am all for the Draconian enforcement policy that we have used to dampen the FPD party.  I helped to put that in place.  I believe the end result has been a 30% drop in alcohol sales over past events.  The party has been dampened which was the goal.  The idea that we can or should close the Bars for FPD is out of line, just not possible for the reason you stated free enterprise.  All we can do is deal with it in the most appropriate legal fashion. 

I think the number of arrests will continue to be in the 75 to 90 range, simply because if you put a large number of police into the environment the number of arrests will equal the enforcement effort.  Arrests this year were similar to past years, but the nature of the transgressions was of a less sever nature. 

What do you think would happen if a couple of hundred officers took to the KSU parking lot during the first home football game this year?  Could they achieve 90 arrests for open container in just a few hours?  Basically a drinking party by students in the bars must be shut down, but Alumni drinking against state law in the parking lot of KSU stadium is OK.  I understand that the tail gate events are not as long and do not cause problems in residential areas.  In fact I think the law needs to be adjusted.  It is pretty contradictory - You cannot drink in the stadium, unless you are rich and have a luxury box.  It is OK to drink in the parking lot if you use a cup as this then gives the police the option of non-enforcement of the law, they can wink and look the other way, unless you are holding a Coors Can.  The Bar owners might say we have a precedent of non-enforcement for selected events, so why can that not be applied to them? 
 
How do we move ahead?  Leave the tail gate parties alone.  Stay with the current FPD enforcement plan and work with the merchants to maybe open the bars later?  The 8 AM opening is part of the issue, 

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 March 2014 01:28 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  738
Joined  2013-07-13

But, see, Wynn the stadium is not Aggieville.  It’s, as you said, a GIANT parking lot.  The party does not bleed into the neighborhoods surrounding it.  As far as I can tell, the “severity” of the offense was NOT somehow “less” this year.  Puke-drinking is puke-drinking, no matter how many are doing it.

Sounds to me as if you’ve bought into that “evabody pickin’ on me” stuff that the swill-merchants are selling.  “PROFITS OFF 30%” they (you) say, and suddenly the police chain of command has to be “modified”?

I suggest to you, Wynn,  that anyone who tries to compare a game-day parking lot with a two-block long puke-fest surrounded by residential area, MIGHT be more upset with the fact that they’re not profiting from it, than they are about the liquor being consumed.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 March 2014 02:28 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  479
Joined  2012-10-10

Randall:  I think I made clear that I do not have a problem with the KSU tail gating events.  I see those first hand each week as I walk the parking lot selling game day programs for Special Olympics.  The game drinking is not as severe as during FPD - something I also spent about 12-15 hours at each year walking the area with RCPD and the MFD.  The FPD party needs constraint and we have worked toward that.  I do not favor FPD over a tail gate party.  But I do think that others tend to make comparisons on selective enforcement.  It would be interesting to get at the truth of the matter.  FPD is a free enterprise operation and the government has no grounds for shutting it down.  That being said we need to do what we can to restrain things.  I would like to see bars open later.  I have not bought into everyone is picking on me - I have bought into investigation of all allegations to ascertain the truth.  I believe I also made clear at the Law Board that I was not interested in seeing any reorganization of the RCPD.  If the County has a referendum and the majority wants change, then the concept should proceed.  But short of that leave it alone.  Severity of offenses was less this year at FPD.  Puke Drinking is not (maybe unfortunately, something that you can write a ticket for)an offense.  So the severity of ticketed offenses and those arrested was less than last year.  You are 100% correct that a number of folks were still puke drinking, but even that was lower - based on my observations with RCPD.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 March 2014 02:45 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  738
Joined  2013-07-13

Wynn, you were the one who trotted out this comparison of the parking lot and Moro St.  Why would you do that if you believe there is no comparison?

So you believe that an “investigation for the “truth” MIGHT find that the RCPD… or, rather, the Director of Ops… has it in for a single bar owner in Aggieville?

How, by the way, do you investigate that claim of the “mean look”?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 March 2014 02:57 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  479
Joined  2012-10-10

No, that would not be a correct inference.  I do not currently believe that RCPD has it in for a single bar owner.  But other folks in the community do believe that inference.  The trick here is how to quantify the data.  A review of records might indicated if more or less citations are issued at one location as opposed to another.  That data would have to be matched with the location and activity of officers.  Does RCPD go to all locations or just certain ones?  So my point is we need to get to the truth of the matter.  Inference tells us nothing.  We have to base any determination on data.  The seven member Law Board has the challenge of determine the true facts and taking appropriate action.

I thing selective enforcement of alcohol regulations on game day and draconian alcohol enforcement on FPD is an interesting and valid comparison.  It is a fact that different standards are used (maybe rightly so).  I for one support the Draconian FPD enforcement methodology. 

I am not concerned about a mean look.  For sure we do not need ordinances on facial expressions, that would tend to get us all in trouble.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 March 2014 02:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  738
Joined  2013-07-13

“Valid Comparison”? Sure.  Except it’s apples and oranges, oil and water, dumb and dumber.

What other folks?  The newspaper did not mention “other folks” or any “other” claims of “harassment”.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 March 2014 03:10 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  479
Joined  2012-10-10

I am not gong to post names of those folks in the forum, they are at liberty to take part if they desire.  Based on conversation and emails with other citizens besides the one Bar Owner (Rusty Wilson - published in the paper), it is safe to say that not everyone agrees with the current organization of RCPD or the actions of the department.  If you are interested in learning more you might consider attending the April Law Board meeting as this will be one of the prime items on the agenda.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 March 2014 03:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  738
Joined  2013-07-13

So there were no “other folks” at the meeting in question?  Will we hear from these “other folks”?  Or just po paranoid Rusty? 

Because a back-door campaign by “other folks” who aren’t willing to bring it to the public meeting shouldn’t count, should it?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 March 2014 07:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  797
Joined  2012-10-10

I would imagine the “other folks” Wynn is referring to is the local Tea Party group.  That group has been energized and wants a “Sherriff Arpaio” here, just like in Arizona.  We gotta get someone prepared to fight off the Feds when they come to take away our guns.  They fear the current RCPD Director isn’t “Tea Party” enough and will allow the gestapo to march door to door and seize our arms.  If we have a local elected to the office, he’ll carry big enough a stick to fight off anything the Feds send our way.
Sound far fetched??  You’d be surprised at the number who will probably turn out and demand we have an elected “Boss Hawg” that they can depend on to hold the Feds at bay.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 March 2014 07:27 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  289
Joined  2012-10-10
Wynn Butler - 28 March 2014 02:57 PM

The trick here is how to quantify the data.  A review of records might indicated if more or less citations are issued at one location as opposed to another.  That data would have to be matched with the location and activity of officers.  Does RCPD go to all locations or just certain ones?  So my point is we need to get to the truth of the matter.

If more citations are given to Wilson’s bars, does that really mean the RCPD is singling him out unfairly? It could also mean that his bars have bartenders who aren’t cutting people off when they should, or people who go their due to their *clears throat* long-standing reputation. Let’s not forget that some things Wilson claimed were citations in that “Citizens Assuring Transparency” meeting were later confirmed by Brad Schoen to have been warnings, not tickets.

And unless I’m mistaken, LC was the bar with the free-flowing sewage a few years back, right? And Wilson has complained that he was being unfairly persecuted by the town and the police before, correct?

I’d have a big, big problem with the RCPD being accused of anything just because “the data” showed Wilson’s bars received more citations.

Profile
 
 
   
 

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | The Manhattan Mercury, 318 North 5th Street, Manhattan, Kansas, 66502

Reproduction of any kind is prohibited without written consent.