[Vision2020] Noise Ordinance Amendment Update

[Garrett Clevenger]

You caught me, Sunil (Sun-Ill, Sue-Nil, Sun-Eyl,
Soon-Eyl? (whoa, the nazi sounding similarity is
frightening!))

I thought I could get away with it, with this whole
noise ordinance opposition distraction thing.  Did J :
{ clue you in?

I won't stop, though, 'til you take me away is cuffs,
you freedom hater!

Love it or leave, bub!

Promise not to tell anyone, and if you're in my
neighborhood, I'll warn YOU to wear earplugs.  And
watch where you step ; }

gclev

ps  I'm joking, here, for those who may be frightened
by my sarcasm.  Soon Eyl is NOT a nazi anymore.  So no
more Seig Heils from him, thank the lord!

And I do use a toilet for number 2...



Yeah, Garrett, if that's your real name, when did you
stop defecating on 
your neighbor's lawn, banging your head to Sabbath?

Sunil


>From: J Ford <privatejf32 at hotmail.com>
>To: Garrett Clevenger <garrettmc at verizon.net>,
<vision2020 at moscow.com>
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Noise Ordinance Amendment
Update
>Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:38:18 -0700
>
>
>Mr, Clevenger -whomever you may be:
>
>You state:
>
>"Duke's analogy was police ticketing drivers if they
break the law.
>Driving is not a guaranteed constitutional right. 
You need to get a
>drivers license in order to legally drive.  There are
set rules and
>speed limits you must follow and there is a potential
for physically
>hurting or killing someone if you are reckless.
>
>Free
>speech and the right to assembly, on the other hand,
are guaranteed by
>the First Amendment to our Constitution.  This is a
civil liberty that
>as Americans we should be proud of and defend against
those who wish to
>limit it."
>
>My response:
>
>B U N K!
>
>Blasting your music at 3am, fighting on the streets
at the same hour, 
>ripping your car through neighborhoods at the same
hour, peeing and 
>defecating on neighbor's property, "partying" are NOT
- that's NOT!!!!! - 
>guaranteed rights.  These "parties" and attendees are
NOT practicing "free 
>speech" (last I heard "Prince" and "Black Sabbath" do
not live in Moscow) 
>by blasting the so-called-music and waking everyone
up in the area.  Being 
>at a "party" is not assembly; it is what it is - a
PARTY!  Those people are 
>not gathered there for any political or
social-affecting reason - they are 
>there to get drunk, be loud, and they do a bang-up
job of disturbing the 
>entire area.
>
>It MAY be only 17% of the population that is doing
this "partying" - but it 
>affects a whole lot more than 17% of the population
when they are this 
>disruptive and unruly.
>
>
>
>J  :]
>
>
>Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:32:11 -0700
>From: garrettmc at verizon.net
>To: vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: [Vision2020] Noise Ordinance Amendment
Update
>
>I attended the administrative meeting last Monday to
talk with some city 
>council members, the city attorney and assistant
chief of police David Duke 
>about the proposal.
>
>The city council will be voting on this on November 5
at 7pm at city 
>council chambers.
>
>The noise ordinance as amended will allow police
officers to issue a 
>citation on the spot to anyone anywhere in Moscow at
anytime for making 
>noise the officer deems offensive.  There is no set
noise limit.  This 
>potentially will lead to violation of our First
Amendment rights.
>
>According to the police department, 17% of noise
violations are repeat 
>offenders (party houses), the supposed target of this
amendment.  It is 
>offensive that this council will violate our First
Amendment rights to 
>target these 17%.  Why should everybody in Moscow be
subject to this 
>draconian law?
>
>If they really wanted to target these 17%, the
modification would expand 
>the 48 hour time period between
>  warnings to one month and be within the times of 10
pm to 7am.  To me, 
>that seems like the most logical and at least worth a
try to see if it 
>works, rather than changing the law so extremely.  It
will also reduce the 
>likelihood of a lawsuit and penalty against the city
if the court finds it 
>unconstitutional.
>
>The proposal before the city council is not
responsible legislation.
>
>It is also counter intuitive to building community
through neighborly 
>relations.  To rely on the police to solve an issue
that is best resolved 
>through citizens rather than law enforcement will
lead to the dissolution 
>of community responsibility.  The police should
approach noisy people after 
>neighbor complaints, rather than proactively seeking
out these noisy 
>people.  That would be a waste of their time.
>
>Duke's analogy was police ticketing drivers if they
break the law.  Driving 
>is not a guaranteed constitutional right.  You need
to get a
>  drivers license in order to legally drive.  There
are set rules and speed 
>limits you must follow and there is a potential for
physically hurting or 
>killing someone if you are reckless.
>
>Free speech and the right to assembly, on the other
hand, are guaranteed by 
>the First Amendment to our Constitution.  This is a
civil liberty that as 
>Americans we should be proud of and defend against
those who wish to limit 
>it.
>
>They also argued that you can fight this charge in
court.  That is also 
>bogus, because by that time you have already paid a
penalty of time, hassle 
>and potentially fees.
>
>This is a bad law and will potentially be abused.  It
also psychologically 
>suppresses people's freedom of expression by fearing
they will be ticketed 
>for a misdemeanor, which is also an extreme charge
and penalty (ranging 
>from $159 to $359) for making a little bit of noise.
>
>This law, the way I see it, is another attempt to
water down our rights.
>  The Bush administration has seen fit to violate our
4th Amendment rights 
>of unreasonable search and seizure through
warrantless wiretaps, among 
>other things.
>
>The city council needs to hear from you.  Please take
a moment to tell them 
>to reject the amendment or to modify it to expand the
time between warnings 
>to one month, between the hours of 10 pm and 7 am
(and complaints should be 
>citizen driven, not police driven) rather than voting
on it as is.
>
>Aaron Ament  aaronament at moscow.com
>Bill Lambert  blambert at ci.moscow.id.us
>Linda Pall  lpall at moscow.com;
>John Weber  jweber at moscow.com
>Tom Lamar  tlamar at moscow.com
>Kit Crane  kcraine at moscow.id.usMayor Nancy Chaney 
nchaney at ci.moscow.id.us
>
>Thank you,
>
>Garrett Clevenger