| Author | Message | ||
     Rick B Citizen Username: Ruck1977 Post Number: 920 Registered: 8-2003  |
Kathleen, I probably wasn't clear, but I did not mean to imply that the police would consider the group a group of hoodlems on the street corner. What I meant was, I or my neighbor, or any citizen might think there is a group of hoodlems on the street and then report some suspicious behavior. Since 90% of police action is taken based on someone calling the police, this is precisely what is going to happen. So, if you are a youth in this community, and you are congregating on a street corner looking like a bunch of hoodlems, you are inviting a potential encounter with the police. At that point, I would not expect Officer Friendly to show up and ask the kids how they are all doing today. I expect Officer Suspicious to show up and wonder what these kids are up to! To further that point, you can't hold citizens responsible for feeling threatened by a group of kids on the street corner that appear to be hoodlems (whether they are or not). They are just going to call the police, not worry about whether they are profiling or being biased based on age/gender/race. | ||
| JerryC Citizen Username: Jerryc Post Number: 163 Registered: 12-2002 |
I get it now. I finally see the light. We should just love the criminals until they stop being criminals. We should error on the side of the person who looks like a hoodlum and acts like a hoodlum because, well, heck, they might not be a hoodlum and until they actually committ a crime, it would be unfair of us to ask what they are up to. There might or might not be a burgeoning gang problem in town but it would be best if we start with the assumtion that there is not because, well, speaking about it might hurt our property values and force us to admit that we might have a gang problem and well, that would make us have to muster up all that extra love to keep them from getting cycled through the prison system and well, all that extra love would take time and heck, we barely have enough time to get our kids to day care and soccor games as it is. Hmmm..we absolutley should keep our eyes open when driving on the NJ Turnpike because all of those troopers are memebrs of their own gang and well, heck, they have nothing to do but harrass every person of color driving on that road. We should NEVER consider arresting kids who are trespassing for trespassing because, well, they're black and black youths should be exempt from trespassing because, well, if we arrrest them, they will just go into the penal system and become bigger criminals. Then...they will require MORE love and lord knows we barely have enough love to go around now. We shouldn't be all that worried about groups of kids walking down the middle of the street even if they won't get out of the way of our cars and even if they begin to shout obscenities because, well, maybe they are just there because the sidewalk is cracked and they are so justifiably angry about it that they need to vent. best not even pay attention to the grafitti, nor the empty crack vials. They are likely the product of some white suburban kids who are tyring to act cool but really just need a couple more after school programs to keep their interest. Funny, my dad's idea of an after school program in the fall, was my raking leaves. But then, heck, that was just my dad who raised me to stay out of trouble, not act like a hoodlum, respect the police, respect the laws, respect other people's property. If my dad were only alive now to help me pound that for sale sign into my front lawn. Good and accurate recap,Steel. Cookies would have been nice. Black and white cookies would have been appropriate. Unfortunately, this discussion about crime in Maplewood has diminished to that. And I now agree, OJ was a simply a victim of racial persecution. | ||
| Meandtheboys Citizen Username: Meandtheboys Post Number: 2191 Registered: 12-2004  |
Oy vey! | ||
| Chuck Berry Supporter Username: Strawberry Post Number: 6339 Registered: 10-2001 |
JerryC, Because Maplewood is a very liberal town chances are nothing will be done.. As a general rule liberals love to discuss problems but in the end they never actually do anything about it.. Eventually someone will get killed as a result of these gangs and that's when the liberals will demand the police take a tough stand. Liberals, a day late and a dollar short.Always have, always will be. | ||
| JerryC Citizen Username: Jerryc Post Number: 164 Registered: 12-2002 |
They will no doubt REALLY get ticked when someone sprays grafitti on their "Be About Peace" signs. | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 11039 Registered: 1-2003  |
Jerry, I think you're inferring stuff from people that we're not even saying. Have fun with that. About a year ago, I reported suspicious activity on my block. Two cars, each with four young adults, stopped in the middle of the block. They got out and moved between the two cars. I don't know of many people that age on my block. I hesitated and then called the police. In doing so, I asked the police if I should be reporting stuff like this. They said absolutely yes. They later called back after checking the situation and said that the folks in the cars were not up to any mischief. So the story ends happily, and one of my lessons is that it's OK to report my suspicions, even though they will be wrong sometimes. | ||
| Ken Scout Citizen Username: Lightningken Post Number: 32 Registered: 11-2005 |
I doubt that this is a Liberal/Conservative thing, nor is it about fear of future gang-warfare to come. Rather, it's about what's going on today, and changing it today, and I'm fairly certain that the direction the town is going in, is in favor of clamping down on crime and QOL issues. The town was accepting for period of time. It's not working and now things are going to change. That was clearly acknowledged last night. As for including students? Keep in mind the following: 1. Students don't own houses/property. 2. Students don't vote. 3. Students don't pay taxes (except for sales tax in town, but even that is limited) 4. Students graduate Columbia and move off to college, at a 94% rate I believe. Parents and town problems stay permanently. 5. And finally, contrary to their own belief, students actually don't have the answers to the worlds problems, and they DO have their own self-interest at heart. Explain to me again why I need to listen to the Students concerns? | ||
| Drew Hearon Citizen Username: Dhearon Post Number: 45 Registered: 2-2005 |
Ditto...If a student has a legit concern, that is why they were granted Parents in this world, to look out for their interests. Parents should be good for something these days :-) | ||
| Duncan Supporter Username: Duncanrogers Post Number: 5203 Registered: 12-2001  |
wow has this degenerated into nothing useful. explain to you why you need to listen to the students concerns??? you must be kidding right? | ||
| JerryC Citizen Username: Jerryc Post Number: 166 Registered: 12-2002  |
Once again, good points, Ken. I agree, that was NOT the forum to have students voice their opinions. | ||
| Chuck Berry Supporter Username: Strawberry Post Number: 6340 Registered: 10-2001 |
children should be seen, not heard. | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 11040 Registered: 1-2003 |
My 11th grader was there, along with several of her peers, because 1. they thought it was in their interest to hear how the proposed ordinances would affect them and 2. they got extra credit from their history teacher just for attending. The extra benefit is that they learned a bit about the civic process. I'm eager to hear what she thought of it. Haven't had a chance to talk about it with her yet. I don't look to kids for answers, but their perspectives can be valuable. To use a cliché, they are our future and deserve some respect. | ||
| LW Citizen Username: Lrw Post Number: 22 Registered: 10-2005 |
I think that it is absolutely absurd to discount student concerns just because they don't pay taxes, or go off to college. It is problematic when "adults" start thinking that way because these students obviouly have valid issues, which would probably do alot of the posters here some good if they just listened. Sometimes, I feel more distant from the community and misinformed about what's really going on here, compared to when I was student at CHS, several years ago. JERRYC and CHUCK BERRY, isn't it so cliche to continue referring to these issues as liberal vs. conservative? KATHLEEN makes some very good points, and seems very knowledgable on the relevant subject matter, you don't have to agree with her to recognize that. RICKB, did you go to school here, or do you have children in the district? I only ask because of your Lean On Me reference. | ||
| ffof Citizen Username: Ffof Post Number: 4194 Registered: 5-2001  |
A coupla of thoughts... If some ordinance gets written and approved about large groups of people walking in the street, it will be added to the many other ordinances that we already have in place that concern the safety of our residents. But I can think of a whole lot of ordinances already out there that are absolutely NEVER enforced, except by me and other loud mouths around town  . For example, when has a cop EVER stopped someone (or caught them in the act) from making that da*ned U-Turn into those angled spots on Maplewood Ave? There are 4 signs posted along the avenue forbidding this U-Turn. It is never enforced, except by me. When I confront a driver and tell them about the ordinance, they get so flying flipped out that I am not going to allow them in the spot that sometimes I am worried for my life. The worst was when a cop's wife told me she'd pay attention to the ordinance "next time". Not. And then there's the little speeding ordinance we have in town. We could raise our town's revenue if a speed trap was set up on Ridgewood Road alone. I find myself being tailed by speeders (who get mighty angry by the way) or I shout out "Slow Down" when I'm hanging out on my street (woops, I mean yard.) How about this ordinance: cross in the crosswalk. Ha! People think the whole darn town is a pedestrian mall. But is this ever enforced? So, I guess I'm saying that we have lots of ordinances, but unless they are enforced, it just encourages bad, unsafe behavior. AND NOW, FOR THE BIGGIE....READY???? I am in 100% complete agreement with kathleen about the stupid drug laws and how they create a vicious cycle of crime and how it brings drugs onto our streets, and the gangs that go with it. (See my many rants about this in the archives, btw.)Unfortunately, dealing with our draconian drug laws must be done on the state level. Perhaps, though, we, as the "model" town that Fred spoke of, can get the attention of the state in this regard. my plug - www.drugpolicyalliance.com | ||
| Ken Scout Citizen Username: Lightningken Post Number: 33 Registered: 11-2005 |
There are plenty of mechanisms for Students to raise Concerns, first and foremost being their parents. Second is through the school itself. This, however, is the Town Council, not the Student Council. Please stop confusing the two. I applaud all students (and their parents) who came and observed the TC in action last night; it's terrific to introduce them to the real-world. Caring is good and should be encouraged. Further, I really hope that the students are NOT reading the threads by their MOL parents....most of this thread (I'm equally to blame) has degenerated into meaningless back-and-forth. I'll stop posting in the thread and I appoligize for wasting anyones time with my thoughts and venting. (Although I'll ask the Mayor once again for examples of other NJ towns that have enacted this legislature to any degree of success or failure. Examples of effectiveness would go a long way). | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 11044 Registered: 1-2003 |
There was a speaker who said his name a few times, but I never caught it. He's the assistant prosecutor and also talks to a lot of the kids in the schools. What is his name? I'd like to talk to him. To the guy who thought it is unthinkable that parents should not be responsible for their kids' actions, who, then, should be responsible? Isn't the legal definition of an adult a person who is responsible for his/her actions? Minors are not, to varying degrees. As they get older, they are increasingly responsible. | ||
| Chuck Berry Supporter Username: Strawberry Post Number: 6342 Registered: 10-2001 |
children should be seen, not heard. | ||
| Dave Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 8020 Registered: 4-1997  |
But not seen walking 4 abreast in the street. | ||
| Parkbench87 Citizen Username: Parkbench87 Post Number: 2914 Registered: 7-2001  |
"children should be seen and not heard" Too bad Straw doesn't follow his own rule. | ||
| aquaman Supporter Username: Aquaman Post Number: 587 Registered: 8-2001 |
Thoughts from Aquaman....  While he stated his point ineloquently, the youth with the rubberbanded dreds who spoke early on had a good point. If the MPD set up a speed trap on Wyoming Avenue every day for a year, then plotted the incidents of speeding in Maplewood, Chief Cimino would have you believe that there is a serious "hot spot" in Maplewood for dangerous criminal activity. The yellow circles would be clustered along a straight line on the west side of town only. See the problem with selective enforcement? One speaker chided the MPD for bragging that 90% of the complaints were initiated by citizens. Hear hear!! What do we have here, a passive police department? The camera issue: Scenario 1: Cops arrest youth for being suspicious or loitering at Boyden/Springfield and submit video evidence to prosecutor. Scenario 2: Cops beat youths with nightsticks and somehow the video evidence is inadvertantly destroyed. Scenario 3: Camera in Village captures 235 SUVs turning right from Baker onto Maplewood Avenue (Arturo's corner), despite the incontrovertable video evidence, the MPD chooses to ignore. Scenario 4: Camera in Village captures 235 SUVs turning right from Baker onto Maplewood Avenue (Arturo's corner), and because of the incontrovertable video evidence, the MPD chooses to cite each and every driver captured on the video. Scenario 5: Speeding(?) SUV runs over a (jaywalking?) pedestrian in village. Both parties want video evidence to prove their civil cases. Does Maplewood provide video to private citizens for civil cases? MPD cites person walking through a closed Milo S. Borden Park on the way to Jacoby Street, but fails to cite commuter on the 11:00 pm train walking home through a closed Memorial Park on the way home to Tuscan Road. Dogs off leashes, or on longer-than-6-foot leashes, or bike riders, or foul-mouthing OK in Orchard Park, not OK in Borden Park. These new proposed ordinances should be scrapped. | ||
| Chuck Berry Supporter Username: Strawberry Post Number: 6344 Registered: 10-2001 |
Parkbench, I'm 38. Sorry charlie, I don't qualify as a child. I also make close to 7 figures.. | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 11047 Registered: 1-2003 |
Six is close to seven!  | ||
| Dave Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 8021 Registered: 4-1997 |
We went over this before. You can't include the decimal points.  | ||
| Parkbench87 Citizen Username: Parkbench87 Post Number: 2916 Registered: 7-2001 |
Straw, I'm 41 Son, so to me you are a child, and every time you post you get more juvenille in my eyes. I could care less how much money you make. You're going to end up the same way everyone else does. | ||
| Chuck Berry Supporter Username: Strawberry Post Number: 6345 Registered: 10-2001 |
Please stay on topic, Parkbench. | ||
| Parkbench87 Citizen Username: Parkbench87 Post Number: 2918 Registered: 7-2001 |
Plese stay in the Padded Room, Straw | ||
| tjohn Supporter Username: Tjohn Post Number: 3812 Registered: 12-2001  |
This thread speaks to the death of commonsense in America. It seems we can't have any laws because if the law is taken to its logical extreme, it becomes absurd. How do we distinguish between a commuter walking home through a park late and night versus somebody hanging out in the same park? How do we distinguish between a cluster of kids clearly disrupting traffic flow on major streets or busy sidewalks and people stopping briefly to chat? I know the good old days weren't that good for a lot of reasons, but civility is continuing to disintegrate in this country. | ||
| kathleen Citizen Username: Symbolic Post Number: 359 Registered: 3-2005 |
ffof, Thank you, for posting that and providing the link. You no doubt have more credit than I do with many on the TC as a voice for the protection of the schools and children, and I hope you will find a way to address them directly to ask them to take a stand with the state about the vicious cycle of our wrongheaded "war on drugs." I intend to do that. | ||
| tjohn Supporter Username: Tjohn Post Number: 3813 Registered: 12-2001 |
The only question in my mind is whether a pragmatic approach to drug abuse has more or less chance of succeeding than property tax reform. My guess is less because with drug policy reform, you are asking people to change near-religious opinions whereas with property tax reform, you are only asking people to pay more in income tax. | ||
| ffof Citizen Username: Ffof Post Number: 4198 Registered: 5-2001 |
tjohn- People need to realize that a lot of their taxes go to supporting the ugly underside of the "drug war", namely AIDS. NJ does not even have a clean needle program - this means that we have to spend a ridiculous amount on the treatment of AIDS and the spread of AIDS to babies etc. I wish I had the number at my fingertips - it is astonishingly large. REpublicans and Democrats know this, but are afraid of political death if they support it publicly for the reason you said above, but no one has even tried to educate the public about this in any large way. IT IS SO SIMPLE!!! We could lower taxes if we stopped this idotic "War on Drugs" and stem the flow of drug dealers/gangs into our communities. | ||
| tjohn Supporter Username: Tjohn Post Number: 3814 Registered: 12-2001 |
Ffof, No need to convince me. If we decriminalized drugs, took every dollar spent on fighting drugs and instead spent it on things that need improvement in our cities - schools, for example - a lot of things would start to improve. Best of all, the drug cartels would be taking out full page ads in the NYT and WSJ warning of the dangers of legalizing drugs. | ||
| Joan Supporter Username: Joancrystal Post Number: 6716 Registered: 5-2001 |
Two of the things which impressed me most about the meeting last night were: 1. The large number of people in attendance who likely have never attended a TC meeting before. It's good to see a broader segment of our population getting involved in local issues. Hopefuuly, they will continue to come out to town meetings and get more involved in our community. Hopefully, more of our residents will join them. 2. The large number of young people who attended the meeting not just as an audience but as active participants. It is good to see so many of our young people taking an active interest in a problem which has such a direct impact on their own lives now and in the future. Unlike some of the above posters, I think it is important to get our young people, especially those of middle school and high school age involved in the process of determining how the town should address the growing crime problem, especially the proactive aspects which involve more effective programs directed towards making our youth feel more secure and appreciated in their families, neighborhoods, and the community as a whole. Should these young people have the final say in determining what ordinances are approved, new initatives instituted, and enforcement policies established? Not by themselves, but their input is valuable and must be considered along with everyone elses. By helping them to become part of the solution, we may be going a fair distance towards solving at least some of the problem. | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 11053 Registered: 1-2003 |
Something just occurred to me. We have a crime problem, yes, but the statistics did not convince me that it's on the rise. | ||
| Case Citizen Username: Case Post Number: 832 Registered: 2-2005 |
"I also make close to seven figures" That's either a desperate plea for emotional help, or someone who could be the poster child for microphallus. Then again, I suppose it could be both. | ||
| wendy Supporter Username: Wendy Post Number: 1845 Registered: 5-2001 |
OOOOOOOH, I smell a personal attack even with all the supposes and eithers. Maybe we'll finally get a different type of thread started by our berry haired rich friend. | ||
| Joe R. Citizen Username: Ragnatela Post Number: 227 Registered: 6-2004 |
I attended the meeting last night. I have no doubt that there is "gang presence" to some degree in Town. I will even go so far as to say that I believe the Chief's stats were accurate, however, does anyone here think they made the nexus between the increase in arrests and gangs? Mentioning the fact of increased arrests and the probability of unquantified gang "presence" in the same meeting does not make the case. This is a case that needs to be made, IF THE FACTS BEAR IT OUT. The only thing we know from last night is that lawlessness is on the rise. Obviously we need to crack down on lawlessness in our town whether it takes the form of kids on the east side smoking weed in the park (oh, there's a new one...bet that never happened in the 60's) or an unsupervised teen house party above Wyoming Avenue with designer drug use and underage drinking. The ordinances proposed are either redundant, unconstitutional or unworkable. You can't impose a criminal penalty on a parent for the crimes committed by the kid unless the criminal act is the failure to supervise. Is that really the intent? What do we do, lock the kid's mom and dad up with him in the same cell? Leave him home and just lock them up? Lock up one, but not the other? Which one? Or are we assuming the "kid" has only one parent? Park Curfew? What do people getting home on the late train from work do, walk around the park? Or are they exempt? Some of the other stuff smacks of someone trying to figure out what they think gang members like to do (walk down the middle of the street 4 abreast) and outlaw that conduct. I seem to recall Jersey City outlawing Rock and Roll in the 50's for eerily similar reasons, yet we like to laugh at that example. I can see the headline now "gang guys decide to dissolve Maplewood Chapter because they're no longer allowed to walk in the street". Cameras? Unless we're prepared to put one on every pole and tree and build a Ministry of Discipline, forget it. Can you just picture the bad guys deciding to hang out on the corner with the camera? Block Associations and Watch Groups can be part of the answer but only if they reflect the diversity of the community at large. You can complain all you want about the taxes and how you think for the amount you pay you should have a perfect bubble of security. Get involved in a watch group instead. In the old days we didn't even have a name for it...we called it "Our Neighborhood". We didn't all love one another, but we looked out for one another and the kids. Same concept.In other words, let's be EFFECTIVE. Let's not get hysterical about the gang issue. Let's do something reasonably calculated to address the real problems. Let's do something that will pass legal muster and let's find out if there is a gang problem here and how pervasive it is. Isn't this undercover work? We need informants. Does anyone really think it's fair to put the law abiding kids in our schools in the position of having to finger the gang members? That would be a short career I suspect. We cannot let the spectre of gang violence cause us to enact ill-conceived ordinances in knee-jerk fashion. And I hope never again to attend a meeting where a community leader tell us right out of the box that he is considering a set of new ordinances which will have "a disparate impact on the community of color". We're fond of chanting that old Maplewood Mantra.."We don't want 2 Maplewoods", but our actions and words don't always bear it out. Let's keep talking about this and cut out the "liberal" v "conservative" junk. We live here. We love it here and we're willing to do something to address our problems. Maybe we can still pull something positive out of this, but for me the meeting was divisive and discouraging. | ||
| wendy Supporter Username: Wendy Post Number: 1846 Registered: 5-2001 |
Don't agree with it all but a very good post Joe R. | ||
| JerryC Citizen Username: Jerryc Post Number: 168 Registered: 12-2002 |
I would like to propose that from here out, each person who posts start by indicating which side of Valley St or Prospect they live on. It would provide a better frame of reference. I can't help feeling that those who suggest that the measures are extreme or that this is hysteria just might not be folks who actually find empty crack vials in their gutter or have been verbally abused but these "non-gang" youths. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 4447 Registered: 9-2001  |
I attended the meeting, but felt no need to speak yet. As we were told, there will be plenty of time for dialog and additional input... IMHO, the process is working... and, I was pleased to see that the MOL factor is still very much in play... The township committee, the police, and the all the good people who attended were all given the chance to speak, and speak they did. After over three hours of listening to everyone, I can truthfully say the comments were ALL well worth while. I will say this much, there were a number of people who offered to serve on committee's, and the more people given the chance to serve the better. If this level of interest can be maintained, I see good things happening in the future. You better keep those fires burning JB and Jerry C...  | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 11055 Registered: 1-2003 |
Last night, after buying a newspaper and a map at Quick Chek, I traveled the length of Jacoby St last night at 9pm. No one was there. |
