| Author | Message | ||
     ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 4475 Registered: 9-2001  |
JERRYC--You're unrealistic, you continue to go off on people who try to help and understand you. LW, I respectfully have to disagree. Chances are if it wasn't for Jerry C and JB, and some others like Marie, this thread probably wouldn't even exist... And, FWIW, no one goes off on “people who try to help and understand.” Either you understand the problem and want to help, or you’re just a .… well, you get the point. Jerry, please stay with this issue as best you can, you’re a great American, and Maplewood needs you! | ||
| Rick B Citizen Username: Ruck1977 Post Number: 927 Registered: 8-2003  |
kathleen, "You can't arrest people for the way they dress in this country. I'm sorry if you think that empowers the wrong people, but most of us don't want to give the cops power to arrest for clothing violations." Agreed, but again (for about the 5th time), I am not talking about the police arresting you for the way you look or the clothes you wear. I am talking about who is reporting crime/behavior. Lets slow down. If 90% of the crime in Maplewood is called in, or report based, someone has to be reporting it. Most likely, citizens are reporting this crime, particularly suspicous behavior. Once the police are called, they are going to investigate (hopefully) regardless of who is there when they get there (or what they look like). The key is, what triggered the investigation? A citizen thought some guys congregating on the street corner looked suspicious. what about them was suspicious? The fact that they were hanging out on teh street corner? Was it because they looked initimidating? Who knows. The point is, you can go a long way to not look suspicious. If you engage in activity that is going to make anyone look at you funny, they could potentially call the police and report suspicious activity. Suspicous is subjective, and you aren't going to hold those reporting the activity to the same "non-profiling" standards that you can police. | ||
| Ken Scout Citizen Username: Lightningken Post Number: 60 Registered: 11-2005 |
I for one am not a fan of individuals sitting in parked cars on my block. Not sure how I would have handled it, but would certainly have been standing in the doorway the whole time. I probably wouldn't have the guts to approach the car, but I also wouldn't have thought to call the Police. What is the parking law for the sidewalk parking in front of your own home? | ||
| JerryC Citizen Username: Jerryc Post Number: 188 Registered: 12-2002  |
Thanks, AJC. I'm not going anywhere. As long as I know I'm not alone in this battle (and I know I am not) I will keep the fire burning. I'm certain that JB feels the same way. Many's the neighborhood that went into the crapper because people were asleep at the wheel. kathleen, I think you missed the point made by the State Police Officer. He was saying that although many kids don't know what they are doing by emulating these thugs, their desire to do so makes them easy recruits and the next thing they know, they are in a** deep and can't get out. I'm not suggesting that dressing like a thug makes you one but it sure as hell makes it harder for someone to sort you out from those who are. | ||
| Rick B Citizen Username: Ruck1977 Post Number: 928 Registered: 8-2003 |
"I'm not suggesting that dressing like a thug makes you one but it sure as hell makes it harder for someone to sort you out from those who are. " BRAVO! | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 11117 Registered: 1-2003  |
Ken Scout, it's legal to sit in a car after parking it. And it's legal to park in front of anyone's home, as long as there are no parking restrictions that apply to the entire public. For example, my block has no parking restrictions, except for the town-wide one that prohibits parking from 2am to 6am. So anyone can park legally in front of my house and sit in his car. I wouldn't want these laws to change. Of course, there are times when such behavior is suspicious. | ||
| LW Citizen Username: Lrw Post Number: 31 Registered: 10-2005 |
AJC--It is true that this thread would not have been started if it weren't for JERRYC, and others, so I guess that's your way of thanking them for alerting you to this problem. However, I've heard of these "problems" existing well before someone started a thread on it, so not to be rude but, what's your point? Also, I know plenty of young black men who don't dress like "thugs", and have still been subjected to police harassment, so I'll have to disagree there. JERRYC--I still would like to know if you've organized a block association, because I think that that would be a very good start. I don't know if I would be so confident about the surveillance cameras because there are many urban areas that post warnings that the specific region is being monitored, but people still sell and buy drugs, openly. | ||
| steel Citizen Username: Steel Post Number: 890 Registered: 2-2002 |
-Why should anyone of us while going about their previously harmless and perfectly legal business now have to think that they are breaking the law with these overly-broad (proposed) ordinances and in knowing that, have to thus constantly mollify themselves with the assurance that: "Yeah this is a violation but it's cool, I'm SURE that no one will bother about little old ME". Who's judgment is that? Are you all always judged as you would wish by strangers? Isn't it a better idea to actually create laws which actually target the intended harmful behavior? -And if that can't be done then what are we talking about? -Are proponents of these ordinances, (as presently crafted), actually saying that harmLESS behavior and harmFUL behavior have patterns so in common that they cannot be parsed and separated in law? Is that really where we are at? Is that the best that we can do? There are many forms of vigilance and they all involve keeping a watchful eye that harm is not done. -Call me crazy but I always thought the ideal direction for our society was that you had to actually being DOING something HARMFUL before you got into some conflict with authority. -I thought that it was at least a worthwhile goal to go in that direction. Now it seems that we are going backwards and fast while on camera. -This is maintaining "quality of life" in America? -What country is this anyway? | ||
| mem Citizen Username: Mem Post Number: 5557 Registered: 5-2001  |
It is hilarious to compare neighbors strolling on Durand to students walking down Parker St. when school lets out - I can't stop laughing! Very funny joke. Have any Durand joggers or strollers completely blocked the street, thrown things under moving cars, SHOUT obsenities, push each other onto the hoods or throw garbage through car windows (My friend had a 1/2 can of soda tossed right through her window once by the little angels.) I can't stop laughing. | ||
| MBJ Citizen Username: Mbj Post Number: 43 Registered: 10-2005 |
Mem...I like your style. | ||
| kathleen Citizen Username: Symbolic Post Number: 367 Registered: 3-2005 |
Rick B, I have no problem with people calling the police about anything. mem, Who said these ordinances are about kids on Parker? Do you know something we don't know? Don't we already have laws that make it a crime to throw objects at cars? Did your friend report the incident? Just about 30 minutes ago, some driver on Durand started laying on their horn for 30 seconds at a time. And again. And again. And again. I saw a black man walking down the street making hand signals. I saw two cars from across the street (where one family with a teenager lives) rapidly do U-turns and head up the hill. The black man got into a truck -- he was a mailman -- and pulled away. Once the road was clear, a fire truck (which had been the one honking and to whom the postman was gesturing) went up the hill, unobstructed. Between snow, leaves and parked vans and SUVs, It's not hard to completely block Durand Road -- and this is the designated emergency vehicle road for this side of town! And I guess some people might be very shocked by the four-letter words you can hear on the west side of town from young and old alike! Steel frequently travels Parker to pick up his kid from school. Maybe he can further drive you into high hilarity about his uneventful trips. Durand seems the more exciing venue, although its true the worst harassers and home invaders confine their activities to the internet. Steel, I'm with you about making distinctions, which is why I want trained Maplewood cops on the beat, making observations, making contacts and using their noggins, instead of surveillance cameras. | ||
| mem Citizen Username: Mem Post Number: 5558 Registered: 5-2001 |
Kathleen, Huh? You are very funny! Apparently you have never driven or walked past CHS when school lets out. Or maybe I'm just jumping into this game a little late. I thought the ordinances about walking in the street would squash the current DANGEROUS fad of walking in the middle of Parker when school lets out. | ||
| kathleen Citizen Username: Symbolic Post Number: 368 Registered: 3-2005 |
JerryC, If that is what the officer was trying to say, I don't think he made himself clear, He talked about kids ignorantly imitating gang hand signals at music concerts, and it's quie a leap from there to an inescapable life of crime. But all of this lacks specifics. What do you or other people consider "dressing like a thug"? And what do these ordinances have to do with that? Surely you are aware that some people in Maplewood have long lamented that CHS doesn't have a dress code and other very restrictive measures. Part of what you are hearing is people asking you: Are you talking about actual harm that is being done somewhere by gang members or are you venting your spleen about kids in baggy jeans and asking the cops to get them out of your sight? I'm asking so that the issues will be clearer. | ||
| kathleen Citizen Username: Symbolic Post Number: 369 Registered: 3-2005 |
mem, I posted earlier that I was recently driving on Parker when school lets out and the daughter of a friend of mine walked in front of my car because she wasnt' paying attention to traffic, she was looking at a boy who was flirting with her. Maybe you should read the thread from the beginning. During the presentation of the ordinances at the TC, neither the police nor anyone on the TC mentioned Parker Street or talked about when school lets out to the best of my recollection. Did anyone else hear that? | ||
| kathleen Citizen Username: Symbolic Post Number: 370 Registered: 3-2005 |
Just to be clear: Don't we already have ordinances about people not throwing objects at cars? (Again, mem, did your friend report the incident? If not, why not?) | ||
| mem Citizen Username: Mem Post Number: 5559 Registered: 5-2001 |
Kathleen, You must of driven past during a holiday. Otherwise, how could you miss the mobs of kids that walk down the middle of Academy and Parker Sts? You ARE joking? Are you also joking about these ordinances NOT applying to students? Funny! | ||
| mem Citizen Username: Mem Post Number: 5560 Registered: 5-2001 |
Kathleen, Yes my friend did report it. Actually, her boyfriend took the call - it happened on Valley St. by Pathmark. You probably don't know where that is, but perhaps you've heard of the area? | ||
| kathleen Citizen Username: Symbolic Post Number: 371 Registered: 3-2005 |
So what was done? We're talking about law enforcement here. Hello? This will no doubt drive you into hysteria, but people up here have been known to call the police when they see lawn grass they think it too high. | ||
| mem Citizen Username: Mem Post Number: 5561 Registered: 5-2001 |
Kathleen, Why don't you call the SO police and ask them? I'm sure they can't wait to hear from you. | ||
| kathleen Citizen Username: Symbolic Post Number: 372 Registered: 3-2005 |
Mem, are you reading what I'm writing? I wrote I drove on Parker WHEN SCHOOL LET OUT. It wasn't a holiday. And yes, there were mobs of kids there. Only one walked in front of my car -- the daughter of a friend. Nobody is saying the ordinances wouldn't apply to students. How could that be if they are the law? Did you watch or attend the TC meeting? | ||
| Lydia Supporter Username: Lydial Post Number: 1471 Registered: 5-2001 |
Gee whiz - piles of leaves on Durand? Still? The big leaf piles on Durand were picked up this morning around 8:00 am and hauled away in trucks Kathleen. The firetruck went up and down all the streets check they were clear were clear and the hydrants weren't blocked following the snowfall. I see Ellen Davenport walking her dog often, on the sidewalk. Can't say that I've ever seen her or Don walking in the street - and I've walked up and down Durand Monday-Friday twice a day for 6 years running during the school year. The black man waving his arms? I give up. Was the firetruck racist or the teenager? | ||
| mem Citizen Username: Mem Post Number: 5562 Registered: 5-2001 |
No Kathleen, I didn't attend the TC meeting. I was in Russia. I sure thought about it though. | ||
| JerryC Citizen Username: Jerryc Post Number: 189 Registered: 12-2002 |
kathleen, why are you afraid of an ordinance that our PD feels will help them prevent these large herds of kid from blocking roads and intimidating drivers? If they felt that there were already ordinances that coverd this, why would they have endorsed these new ones??? Do you think that they have some dark underlying reason????? Are they doing this so that they can just haphazardly harrass nice, polite, law abiding children?????? Is this their big opportunity to go berzerk and start racially profiling???? I'll bet they just can't wait for this opportunity to selectively enforce the law at the expense of these wonderful, well meaning teens. If adding a new law even remotely helps, why are you so against it? Do you really think that it will be enforced soooo selectively and unfairly? There are lots of laws on the books now that if enforced literally would be ridiculous. However, they are available for our law enforcement to utilize when the situation demands it. I suspect that overgrown lawns and an occasional rude jogger are the most serious crimes you have to deal with. | ||
| kathleen Citizen Username: Symbolic Post Number: 373 Registered: 3-2005 |
I live in Maplewood. Parker Street is in Maplewood. The ordinances would be about Maplewood. Funny, the South Orange police aren't asking for these ordinances, yet all the reports of garbage throwing at cars seems to be happening in their town, if you believe what you read on MOL | ||
| JerryC Citizen Username: Jerryc Post Number: 190 Registered: 12-2002 |
funny, the Irvington police didn't ask for help from the State Police until just recently...but then they have only had the highest stolen crime rate in the country for about the last 10 years. | ||
| MBJ Citizen Username: Mbj Post Number: 45 Registered: 10-2005 |
I'm with Kathleen. I'm shocked and very concerned to hear about these dangerous white female joggers on Wyoming avenue. We can't keep our eyes closed to this situation any longer. | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 11123 Registered: 1-2003 |
kathleen, you and mem have a way of talking around each other so as to misunderstand each other as deeply as possible. As far as I can tell, mem and others say that often, on Parker Ave and Academy St, the kids block the roadway entirely and become beligerent when drivers wish to pass. And as far as I can tell, you have not experienced this and you have been blocked in a much milder way. And it isn't clear to me if you're saying that this is the worst anyone ever experiences. But it seems (notice how I'm using indefinite language in all of my sentences?) that mem takes you to say that, and you haven't stated clearly whether you believe that things often get worse than your own experience. People here seem to be looking for validation that 1. this does in fact happen and 2. they should not have to tolerate it. Your sideways comments come across as a denial that it happens at all, though that may not be your intention. | ||
| kathleen Citizen Username: Symbolic Post Number: 374 Registered: 3-2005 |
JerryC, Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the police did not mention large herds of kids blocking the roads and intimidating drivers at the TC meeting, did they? Did I miss that part of the presentation? Did they have circles on the map where it is happening? I only saw circles where armed robbery had taken place. Were those crimes committed by children under 18? Is there some reason why the chief can't be asked more questions? The mayor indicated that there would be several more meetings before any laws were enacted. If I heard correctly, Ian Grodman had many concerns about the proposed ordinances. Is he on your insult list too? | ||
| kathleen Citizen Username: Symbolic Post Number: 375 Registered: 3-2005 |
Tom, My personal experiences and mem's friends' personal experiences are irrelevant. Did you hear the police or the TC mention anything at the meeting about the need for these ordninaces to change anything about whatever goes on near CHS when school lets out? | ||
| kathleen Citizen Username: Symbolic Post Number: 376 Registered: 3-2005 |
JerryC, Just out of curiosity: Are we asking for help from the State Police? (And is that what the state officer was referring to when he said that "pro-active" measures in Irvington had pushed gang activity into Maplewood -- right after saying he didn't know any of the details about Maplewood -- ?) | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 11124 Registered: 1-2003 |
kathleen, are you saying that if the police didn't mention it that evening that it therefore never happens? I don't remember if the police mentioned it, and I find that irrelevant. A friend of mine who never reads MOL tells me that teenagers have blocked her car. I didn't even tell her that I've been reading about it on MOL. Enough people have reported it here for me to believe it happens. Here's a direct question, and I hope you can provide a simple yes or no answer: Are you denying that it happens? If you're feeling generous, you could also answer my first question in this message which is about logic. | ||
| JerryC Citizen Username: Jerryc Post Number: 192 Registered: 12-2002 |
kathleen, the issue of kids walking in packs and blocking the streets has been a fact for a LONG time now. It almost frightens me that you are asking whether the police mentioned it at the meeting as a way of trying to validate it. The whole reson FP proposed the walking in the street ordinance is that we all know it is a problem. Please, wake up. Next, my insult list? Where did that come from? I don't really have a list, I just hurl insults whenever I feel they are earned. You, my dear, are working overtime at that. I'm not sure what real input Mr. Grodman has given the fact that he will be gone from the TC shortly. Did you know that? Do they talk about those things up there? I'm thinking that maybe the air gets thinner the closer you get to South Mountain. I wasn't suggesting that we are asking for help from the state police. I was making a sarcastic remark about your comment about the SO Police not asking for the same new ordinances as Maplewood. It loses a little something when I have to explain it. | ||
| kathleen Citizen Username: Symbolic Post Number: 377 Registered: 3-2005 |
No, tom, I am not saying that. I am saying that this is a thread entitled "TUESDAY"S SPECIAL TC MEETING" and that meeting was set up so that the there could be a dialogue between the police and the community about public safety, especially with regard to being "pro-active" about a rise in serious crime and a "gang presence" in Maplewood -- the recommendation being we pass a new set of ordinances. I am saying that despite that meeting, there still exists a lot of public confusion about what problems these ordinances are designed to solve, whether these ordinances are necessary even after we all agree which problems we are trying to solve, and whether even if passed they will solve the problems they are supposed to solve or create new ones. It's not irrelevant to this discussion that these questions are still pending despite Tuesday's meeting. And as experience with accusations of illegal students should tell you, at some point responsible officials have to step up to the plate and separate fact from fiction when it comes to what people perceive is going on in and around CHS. Not that everybody will listen to fact, mind you, but you can't make sound policy without facts. By the way, one of the ordinances is about prohibiting vehicles from parking or stopping on Parker Ave between 2 and 4pm. I have heard very little discussion, pro or con, about this ordinance. | ||
| kathleen Citizen Username: Symbolic Post Number: 378 Registered: 3-2005 |
JerryC, Your last post makes me wonder if you watched or attended the TC meeting or listen to anything except the noise between your ears. Ian Grodman said that once he left the TC he intended to take an active role in asking sharp questions about these ordinances because he had many concerns about them. Up here in the rarefied air of the hills, we still think Maplewood is a democracy where a citizen's voice carries a lot of weight. I'm not going to fault the chief for failing to explain the need for these ordinances at the last meeting. He volunteered to explain but Mayor Profeta said he would summarize the ordinances in order to leave more time for people to speak. I see the mayor's logic, and don't fault the procedure, because I thoght the public's comments were highly instructive. But I hope the chief and the TC will come prepared with explanations of what problems these ordinances are meant to solve. On MOL, the rationale for these ordinances constantly switches: Raise a question whether the ordinances are draconian when it comes to dealing with teenage mindlessness, and we are told the real purpose is eliminate criminal gangs, not target kids, and we're horrible people if we aren't ready to sign onto anything to fight this dire threat. Raise a question about what these laws have to do with effectively fighting gangs, and the rationale switches to the DANGEROUS problem of kids on Parker Ave. after school, and we're horrible people if we aren't staying up nights worrying about this oh-so-obvious problem that somehow everybody forgot to mention after sending us all postcards to discuss public safety in Mapelwood. Perhaps a few more meetings will get us to what steel proposed above: Writing area-specific laws to deal with area-specific problems that are actually enforceable and have appropriate sentences. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 4477 Registered: 9-2001 |
“Why should anyone of us while going about their previously harmless and perfectly legal business now have to think that they are breaking the law…” ? I’ll give you this much, it’s getting harder and harder not to break some law, somewhere, somehow. However, ignorance of our laws is no excuse Steel! FWIW, these new laws were created to target the intentional harmful behavior of residents who don’t respect the rights and feelings of their neighbors. This is where we’re at, finally! IMHO, the tougher we make our laws, the easier they will be to enforce, and to get these hooligans and any uncooperative parents off the streets and out of our face. The message has to get out that Maplewood has Zero Tolerance. Do the crime; pay the fine and the time. The state police confirmed that when they crack down, the criminals move out. Zero Tolerance will insure criminals won’t move into our community, and any here will get the hell out. The benefit of our communities open public meetings is that no one can say they weren’t for warned. Shape up or ship out!!! I’m afraid this is the way things have to be. Some within our community have to give up all this racial nonsense. Maplewood is a model of diversity and community activism for the nation. Residents who respect our laws and the rights and feelings of their neighbors have nothing to fear but fear itself. BTW, I will call you crazy Steel, if you think breaking the law is not HARMFUL, cameras are not HELPFUL, and this is NOT America... | ||
| aquaman Supporter Username: Aquaman Post Number: 597 Registered: 8-2001 |
I love you Dude. FYI - no one finishes reading your BIG,small, italicized and bold posts. You know who you are.  | ||
| sbenois Supporter Username: Sbenois Post Number: 14267 Registered: 10-2001  |
         | ||
| sbenois Supporter Username: Sbenois Post Number: 14268 Registered: 10-2001 |
        | ||
| sbenois Supporter Username: Sbenois Post Number: 14269 Registered: 10-2001 |
         | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 11131 Registered: 1-2003 |
Thank you, sbenois! Take a look. According to the graphs, crime is going down. But that does not negate the fact that some areas are having trouble which needs addressing. |
