You might remember Vin Suprynowicz wrote a book, 'Send in the Waco Killers,' on just this subject. Ordinary citizens driven to violence by uncaring (or worse) bureaucracy.
Thank you Walter, and also "The Ballad of Carl Drega" which I liked even better.
Well, let me share something personal since it is relevant: when I discovered the LP over two decades ago, I was stockpiling ammo. The LP gave me a way to resist tyranny without getting myself killed.
In the past year however, I've spent a year begging the City for permission to sell a horse pasture to a neighbor, which I'm required to do even though I live outside the city and can't vote for any city officials. Additionally, I headed a citizen's group which tried to get a grand jury investigation of our county jail after some "suicides" there. I am now the sworn enemy of the jail director and I sincerely beleive if I am ever incarcerated there, I will not get out alive. Better to be shot than tortured to death strapped in a restraint device - so I have decided to resist arrest by any means neccessary if it comes down to it in my home county.
At this point, for the good of the LP, I am declining to hold executive office in my affiliates until the Corky in me no longer aches to get out.
And for what it's worth, I do not beleive he "initiated force" - it was retaliatory. (see my URL above)
Joseph,
You write:
"And for what it's worth, I do not beleive he 'initiated force' - it was retaliatory."
Retaliatory against whom?
Were the two police officers he killed the ones who wrote him those bogus tickets, or is wearing the same uniform enough to make their killings "retaliatory?"
How had the journalist who was wounded initiated force against him?
I don't know -- and I suspect you don't either -- whether the killed and wounded politicians were in all cases the specific ones with whom he had a legitimate grievance.
I rather suspect -- and upon thinking about it think you would also suspect -- that many of the 30 or so individuals present in the room had never done anything to him for which retaliation was due.
Finally, although parity/proportionality is seldom perfect, I do think it incumbent upon a retaliator to seek reasonable, rather than unreasonable, satisfaction. Summary execution over parking tickets is at least prima facie unreasonable.
I have not defended the actions of Kirkwood's city government, because I've seen no reason to believe that those actions were defensible. That indefensibility doesn't magically make Thornton's actions judtified, though. Sometimes both sides are wrong.
Cut to the chase, Tom. You define any mayor as an aggressor. Tell us: what is the maximum amount of retaliatory force you think is justified in the case of, say, the wrongful incarceration of a Steve Kubby? Why isn't Steve justified in hunting down and blowing away the people who locked him up and, by his own account, came close to killing him?
Do you believe this anarchism stuff, or not?
Brian,
Nice try -- but if I really "define any mayor as an aggressor," you should have no problem showing where I've done so.
I guess that answers my closing question. 
Now how about my question about Kubby?
Brian,
I'm not a fan of the death penalty except at the scene of the crime, in self-defense or the defense of others.
Since Kubby didn't die and is now free, I wouldn't support gunning down Placer County deputies in post hoc retaliation for his maltreatment, nor would I support the death penalty as pursued by more formal, state means, for the officials responsible for that maltreatment.
OK, that was the easy question. The hard one was: what is the maximum amount of retaliatory force you think is justified in the case of, say, the wrongful incarceration of a Steve Kubby?
Brian,
"[T]he maximum amount of retaliatory force you think is justified in the case of, say, the wrongful incarceration of a Steve Kubby?"
In a post-hoc situation (e.g. the wrongful incarceration has been ended) and in a perfect world, the appropriate amount of retaliatory force would be in the nature of restitution -- he'd made whole for all legal expenses, for all lost income based on the highest year of his pre-incarceration career, for pain and suffering, etc. and that would be done at the pro rata expense of those responsible for doing it to him.
Since we're in a state environment that focuses on punishment rather than restitution, I'd be satisfied with his principal tormentors being fired and imprisoned for similar amounts of time and under similar circumstances (e.g. denied any medication they rely on to keep them alive, etc.), and possibly barred from the US for the same amount of time as Kubby was forced to spend in exile, at their own expense and without access to any assets they have in US bank acounts, etc.
That's after the fact, of course. When he was actually in their hands, I would have had no moral problem with more extreme measures, such as the summary executions of selected members of the gang detaining him -- maybe one for each day of his confinement until he was released.
Sounds like this guy was a hero-- seems all the people killed were likely involved in the acts of persecuting him, iwth the possible exception of hte reporter.
Notice no random bystanders were shot.
For all the people killed by cops every year with no explanation ever given, this guy seems the model of restraint.
Sir,
Are you from Kirkwood? Have you ever BEEN to Kirkwood? Do you know *anything* about this city, other than what you're reading?
The neighborhood in which this *murderer* lived, is called Meachum Park. Up until this area was annexed in the 90's, Meachum Park had deteriorating sewers, failing power lines, a ridiculous percentage of residential homes without indoor plumbing. The area was one of the worst slums in the St. Louis area.
After Kirkwood's annexation, capital improvements were made. The cost, however, of having repaired streets, upgraded sewers, and all that, is that you have to live with zoning regulations. *Everyone* has to live with zoning regulations. You can't park construction trucks in residential neighborhoods. You can't build room additions, pour driveways, and do other "construction projects," without a permit. Mr. Thornton did ALL of that. And then got bent out of shape when the city ticketed and fined him for it.
On top of that, Kirkwood OFFERED to waive ALL the fees and fines, if only he would agree to stop disregarding the zoning laws. THAT was not good enough.
So, he KILLED two policemen, cold-bloodedly and premeditatedly. He KILLED three people who just had the bad fortune to happen to BE there. And if Mayor Svoboda does not die of this, he's a 69-yr-old man. Being shot in the FACE will probably effect the way he's able to live his remaing years.
AND THERE ARE PEOPLE HERE CALLING HIM A HERO? You people are SICK.
Michelle M. Heitman
Hey, no fair letting Reality intrude into the world of online armchair anarchism.
Oh, Brian....you're right. I'm so sorry. If I'm going to be pefectly logical, HOW can I possibly expect them to hold up their end of the argument?
Michelle
How does telling people what they can do with their own property, including their own bodies, make them richer? In the specific case of zoning laws, how does telling someone they may not use their own land as they see fit make them any better off? It might benefit *you* by ensuring that their land is used as you see fit, but it certainly doesn't help them.
Furthermore, how does parking construction vehicles in "residential" areas make everyone poorer? Did it magically interfere with the functioning of the sewers/roads/etc.? Who the hell is the city council to determine what we may or may not do with what is our own?
But let's get down to brass tacks, because I don't really much feel like doing the utility dance with you.
"The cost, however, of having repaired streets, upgraded sewers, and all that, is that you have to live with zoning regulations."
How so? How does zoning regulations guarantee these things? How is it not possible outside such a situation?
But then, I'm digressing;
Here's the real meat of the issue; who the fuck are you, or anyone else, to tell anyone what the hell they do with what is their own, that does not violate the rights of others? Where do you get that privilege? Did anyone extend it to you? I'm guessing Thornton didn't. All the man did was try to earn a living. He was not, at any point, working to violate the rights of anyone else. The city council, whose membership (and their dogs) were the recipients of his shots, were threatening him, ultimately, with force against his life, for doing something that was not harmful to anyone. That you could call manifest criminality disguised as civil polity 'justice' and an act of self defense 'criminal' is disturbing.
Perfectly happy to "hold a debate with you".
The reason for zoning regulations:
Large construction trucks create traffic congestion on small streets, are visual obstructions (which creates the potential for accidents), have a distinct tendency to leave large dirt clumps lying around, and also tend to "drop" things like bits and chunks of concrete. And that's before I even *mention* the "fragrance" of an asphalt truck.
Laying concrete driveways without a permit runs a terribly high risk that said driveway will lay over the top of a sewer/electric/gas line right of way. That's WHY you get a permit. To make sure that *your* construction doesn't prevent the neighborhood for getting the maintenance it needs.
Building a room addition without a permit opens a whole *vista* of possible problems. Who pays for the emergency crew and/or repairs the damage, when the room addition, created without an electrical contractor, goes up in flames and maybe takes the neighbor with it?
As for "what is our own": The *HOME* is your own. How your maintenance of that home, and your use of that home, effects your neighborhood, is NOT your own. It belongs to the neighborhood. People *used* to be able to throw away refrigerators, deep freezes, and all that, without any change. Until kids climbed into them and died. NOW, if you throw something like that out, you have to remove the door, for the overall safety of the community.
Zoning regulations are absolutely necessary for neighborhood value. If you have a choice between buying a house next to another house, or a house next to a landfill, which are YOU going to buy? Zoning regulations determine where the houses go, where the landfills go. It protects ALL the homeowners. *Including* Mr. Thornton's neighbors.
Finally, in WHAT way were the officials of the City of Kirkwood threatening this murderer's life? They had first "tagged" the vehicles (that means, they come by, and put what amounts to a long post-it note on the vehicle, which says "Please move this vehicle"). THEN they sent letters saying "this is not in according with the law." THEN they gave him a court date to address the zoning board. THEN, they issued tickets. THEN they offered to waive ALL the fees and fines, if he would agree to abide by the regulations in the future.
Based upon WHAT criteria did this ONE MAN feel he had the right to "create his own set of rules"?
Michelle
"Laying concrete driveways without a permit"
How, exactly? Be specific. How does a government piece of paper prevent those things?
"NOW, if you throw something like that out, you have to remove the door, for the overall safety of the community."
If it's legally abandoned, it's not your property anymore, ergo, you're not responsible for it. In that context, if someone's kid crawls into the thing and dies, it isn't your fault. If, however, something leaked, poisoned someone's water and gave them some awful disease, it would be your fault. Do you see the difference?
"Finally, in WHAT way were the officials of the City of Kirkwood threatening this murderer's life?"
It's not immediately apparent, but...
1) Suppose he didn't pay the fines.
2) Suppose he didn't go to court
3) Suppose he went about his business.
4) Keep on supposing. Blue-capped men with guns and nightsticks enter the picture very soon.
"Zoning regulations are absolutely necessary for neighborhood value. If you have a choice between buying a house next to another house, or a house next to a landfill, which are YOU going to buy? Zoning regulations determine where the houses go, where the landfills go. It protects ALL the homeowners. *Including* Mr. Thornton's neighbors."
Read "Lost Rights" By James Bovard, then get back to me. Zoning regs, in addition to being ethically wrong, produce nothing but trouble.
>How, exactly? Be specific. How does >a government piece of paper prevent >those things?
Because the zoning board keeps detailed maps of where the gas/power/sewer lines are located. When you request a permit, the zoning board check the maps, to see if the planned improvement goes across an utility easement. That's how a piece of paper prevents those things.
>If it's legally abandoned, it's not >your property anymore, ergo, you're
If you, for example, throw out a steamer trunk, for the trash collector's to pick up, and it's sitting on your curb until they get there, it's technically "thrown out". That makes it technically "not yours". But if some kid climbs into it, and suffocates...WHO is going to be held liable?
>It's not immediately apparent, >but...
>1) Suppose he didn't pay the fines.
>2) Suppose he didn't go to court
>3) Suppose he went about his business.
And..you see...THAT is precisely where the problem is. He was going on "about his business," in a place where "his business" should not have been located.
>4) Keep on supposing. Blue-capped men with guns and nightsticks enter the picture very soon.
Guns and nightsticks? Over parking and zoning tickets???? WOW! If they're *really* out to get you, you're not paranoid, right???
>Read "Lost Rights" By James Bovard, then get back to me. Zoning regs, in addition to being ethically wrong, produce nothing but trouble.
How do you dare to presume that I have NOT? REQUIRING that a persons *home* does not:
a. Constitute a safety hazard
b. Constitute an eyesore
c. Constitute a "sensory infringement of rights" (asphalt smell)
is not even REMOTELY the same thing as having people's homes seized for (mostly erroneous) reports of drug activities. You're talking apples and basketballs.
Michelle
Michelle,
You write:
"Are you from Kirkwood?"
No.
"Have you ever BEEN to Kirkwood?"
Many, many times -- I live less than 20 minutes away.
Do you know *anything* about this city, other than what you're reading?"
Absolutely. I visit friends and acquaintances there frequently. I drive through several times a month. I used to recycle there before my community went to curbside recycling. My significant other used to work out at the Y there. Love the farmer's market.
What do I know about Kirkwood? It's a pleasant enough community when its gentrification-oriented/yuppie population and its limousine liberal city government aren't getting damnfool notions in their heads about how great it is to run other people's lives.
Unfortunately -- especially unfortunately for them when the other life they decide to run is that of an apparently unstable person like "Cookie" Thornton who reacts with disproportionate force -- they tend to get such notions a lot.
"AND THERE ARE PEOPLE HERE CALLING HIM A HERO?"
I made it very clear that I don't regard him as a hero.
On the other hand, given your subsequent posts, I get the feeling that your real problem with "Cookie" Thornton isn't that he killed people, but that the people he killed were the people you thought you had God-given authority to assign to run your neighbors' lives. If he'd had a shiny badge and had murdered two drug-dealers, you'd probably have thrown him a party.
"Because the zoning board keeps detailed maps of where the gas/power/sewer lines are located."
Must it be a zoning board? Couldn't, I don't know, *anyone* keep such maps? Seems to me someone doing say, urban construction, would be interested in acquiring such maps for their day-to-day business practices.
"That's how a piece of paper prevents those things."
No. Knowledge prevents those things. The piece of paper is at best wholly redundant.
"WHO is going to be held liable?"
So it's about punishing someone? It's not about the dead child at all, is it? That's some freaky old testament morality you got goin' on there, bubby.
"Guns and nightsticks? Over parking and zoning tickets???? WOW! If they're *really* out to get you, you're not paranoid, right???"
That's cute. They issue a summons to go into court over the fines. You don't show up. You just go about your business. So, they find you in contempt of court, and decided to throw you in the pokey. You've done nothing wrong, and even if you had you're none too keen to surrender to the goons. So you resist. They shoot you. The end. Is any of this difficult to understand?
"How do you dare to presume that I have NOT?"
It's bloody obvious, or else you haven't gotten the damn message of the book. Read it again.
"a. Constitute a safety hazard
b. Constitute an eyesore
c. Constitute a "sensory infringement of rights" (asphalt smell)"
a - was this the case?
b - To whom?
c - Again, to whom?
"not even REMOTELY the same thing"
If you are not able to decide how you dispose of your own property, you don't own it. If you cannot understand this basic concept, further discussion will be impossible.
But, once again, who the fuck are you, or anyone else, to decide such a thing? That's the essence of this, or, just to quote an old novel,
"When is it ever moral for a group to do what it is immoral for an individual to do alone?"
"That's a trick question, right?"
Whoops!
Forgot to fill my name in the above post.
Thomas:
You said:
>I made it very clear that I don't >regard him as a hero.
If you go back and read my post, I never said YOU called him a hero. I said there were people *here* calling him a hero. I guess, in the interest of strict accuracy, I should have said "someONE here called him a hero". But I didn't say it was YOU.
>On the other hand, given your subsequent posts, I get the feeling that your real problem with "Cookie" Thornton isn't that he killed people, but that the people he killed were the people you thought you had God-given authority to assign to run your neighbors' lives.
Okay. Anybody out there who thinks that unlimited freedom is possible, raise your hand. Fine. All you people with your hands up, what color is the sky in fantasy-land?
There are countless examples of where you canNOT exhibit "freedom of choice" because of "the general welfare." The classic example is yelling fire in a crowded theater.
What someone does INSIDE their home, not my business. What someone does that effects safety, accessibility, "peaceful enjoyment," and all the rest of the bundle of rights of a resident of a neighborhood....that is the business of the COMMUNITY. The people who were killed were the people whose job it was to protect those rights for everyone. And,yes, I mourn them. I also feel a great deal of sympathy for Mr. Thornton's wife, his nephew....but I do not and cannot feel sorry for the murderer, himself.
Michelle
>Must it be a zoning board? Couldn't, I don't know, *anyone* keep such maps? Seems to me someone doing say, urban construction, would be interested in acquiring such maps for their day-to-day business practices.
I'm certain someone COULD keep those maps. If they were willing to expend the effort and considerable cash to buy those maps, which are updated on a fairly regular basis. And, in the neighborhood in question, a LOT of upgrades, changes, improvements, and construction had been done in the very recent past. Those maps would have to have been very recent. Since they tend to be rather pricey (the last time I was involved in purchasing FLOOD maps, which don't change *nearly* as often, a set was over $500).
>No. Knowledge prevents those things. The piece of paper is at best wholly redundant.
I beg to differ. Look at it from a practical stand point. I'm going to build a sun porch. You're going to extend your driveway. Another neighbor is going to put in a pool. NONE of us bother to get permits. How long is it, before utility workers can't do the maintenance and upkeep they NEED to do in the neighborhood, because all of these changes have been made. And those map-makers we were talking about before? The ones who are going to CREATE all those maps that "an intereested party" can purchase? Where are they going to get their information? Are YOU going to let them on to your property,so they can measure your extended driveway?
>>"WHO is going to be held liable?"
>So it's about punishing someone? It's not about the dead child at all, is it? That's some freaky old testament morality you got goin' on there, bubby.
I could, and would, have said "accountable". But so few people even understand the concept of accountable, anymore. I do, however, notice that fact that, since you could not come up with appropriate answer to "whose trash is it..", you switched over to "boy, you dont' care about anybody, do you?" Nice tactic.
>You've done nothing wrong, and even if you had you're none too keen to surrender to the goons. So you resist. They shoot you. The end. Is any of this difficult to understand?
Just because there ARE places where this happens, does NOT justify assuming that ALL places and/or all situations are the same.
>It's bloody obvious, or else you haven't gotten the damn message of the book. Read it again.
Not "getting the message" and not AGREEING with the message are not the same thing. I "get it." I just disagree
>But, once again, who the fuck are you, or anyone else, to decide such a thing? That's the essence of this, or, just to quote an old novel,
And, once again, I'll say. It has nothting to do with ME. Or YOU. Or Cookie Thornton. Or any one individual. It has to do with a COMMUNITY. With standards set by a community. If the good citizens of the Kirkwood residential community known as Meachum Park are not happy with the zoning as it stand
(hit sent too quick...sorry)
the zoning as it stands, they certainly have the right to CHANGE that, for their neighborhood. There are "neighborhood charters" all over the county.
Until then, the zoning laws are what they are.
Michelle
""whose trash is it..""
I already answered that question. I won't answer it twice.
"It has nothting to do with ME. Or YOU. Or Cookie Thornton. Or any one individual. It has to do with a COMMUNITY."
That's rather ridiculous. Who's this alleged community *but* the individuals who comprise it?
"With standards set by a community."
So the desires, whims and ends of an abstraction are to be put ahead of the real interests of real people? It's a particular iteration of the conceptual realism fallacy. Your argument, fundamentally, is illogical.
Michelle,
It's "Meacham" Park. Please spell it correctly in
order to justify every fine point you alone are so aware of.
A couple of questions, based on the following from Michelle:
-----
The neighborhood in which this *murderer* lived, is called Meachum Park. Up until this area was annexed in the 90's, Meachum Park had deteriorating sewers, failing power lines, a ridiculous percentage of residential homes without indoor plumbing. The area was one of the worst slums in the St. Louis area.
After Kirkwood's annexation, capital improvements were made. The cost, however, of having repaired streets, upgraded sewers, and all that, is that you have to live with zoning regulations. *Everyone* has to live with zoning regulations. You can't park construction trucks in residential neighborhoods. You can't build room additions, pour driveways, and do other "construction projects," without a permit. Mr. Thornton did ALL of that. And then got bent out of shape when the city ticketed and fined him for it.
-----
Did Thornton live in Meacham Park before the annexation?
If so, did he consent to that annexation, or to be bound by new regulations imposed upon him pursuant to that annexation?
I could see your point -- partially -- if he moved into the area after those regulations were in place, knowing they were in place. That still wouldn't justify the regulations per se, but at least it could be said that he knew what he was getting into.
If, on the other hand, he was already there and his neighbors just up and decided to vote away his property rights in order to get some things they wanted and he didn't necessarily want, then that's a different kettle of fish entirely. Did they offer to buy him out so he could move out of Pyongyang the "new" Meacham Park? Or did they just start ordering him around?
Kirkwood is a suburb of St. Louis. Its demographics are nearly all-white, and generally middle to upper middle class white collar, business-management types. The historical reason for that is that Kirkwood grew up around the first train stop on the train tracks that were being built west from St. Louis city way back when. As a result, it was typical for middle management white-collar workers of the time to work in St. Louis, and hike the train for the commute and live in the area around the train stop, which came to be known as Kirkwood. Back in those days, Kirkwood was rural, or more correctly, exurban in contrast, today, it is merely another inner suburb, but it still has that justified demographic reputation.
To the southwest of Kirkwood, in what was for a long time, unincorporated St. Louis County, were rows of streets highlighting a black neighborhood, called Meacham Park (though it never was its own incorporated city). Its approximate boundaries are modern day I-44 to the south and east, Kirkwood Road to the west, and Big Bend Boulevard to the north.
In 1991, for what was then some unknown, bizarre reason, the figures of municipal erudition in Kirkwood got the bright idea that they should annex Meacham Park. And as it turns out, both Kirkwood’s voters and Meacham Park’s voters approved the measure, and Voila! Meacham Park becomes just a black section of Kirkwood.
A few years later it became apparent why the Kirkwood geniuses wanted it. They declared eminent domain on the western one-third of Meacham Park to give to a private developer. It is exactly the kind of eminent domain use that the Supreme Court decision of a few weeks ago have people incensed. That is now the Kirkwood Commons shopping center, anchored by Wal-Mart, Lowe’s and Target, the one on the northeast junction of I-44 at Lindbergh. Kirkwood also took out a small slither on the east end, and it is now the smaller Sam’s Club-anchored strip mall on the southwest corner of I-44 at Big Bend.
Still, about half of Meacham Park remains but now they’re under the jurisdiction of Kirkwood’s Police Department, whereas when Meacham Park was unincorporated, St. Louis County’s Department had jurisdiction.
Yes, Cookie grew up and lived in Meacham Park, before and after the annexation. The list of abuses the city of Kirkwood has measured out toward the citizens of Meacham Park is long. Patching holes in city hall and painting over blood stains will not heal the wounds that run deep in the Meacham Park community. I hope Michelle and others will wake up to that fact before another tragedy occurs.
Anne
Kirkwood declared eminent domain only AFTER the residents of MeachAm Park turned down the offer presented by Sansone Group.
Sansone wanted to develop the area. In return for the right to develop it, they were offering to buy out all the residents in the proposed buy out area for residential value plus 10%. They were offering *substantial* "moving expense" packages (in the thousands of dollars per resident, in most cases). They were offering first choice options in any housing built in the redevelopment. AND they offered to broker a deal with the businesses going in to the development whereby the "displaced" would get preferential treatment in hiring for any of those businesses (something similar to a Vet's advantage, kind of thing). All of this was above and beyond street repairs, electric upgrades, and sewer upgrades, that were being done as well.
Why was this offer turned down? Because the residents wanted COMMERCIAL-value-plus-10 paid for their property. Neat idea, since commercial land is FAR more expensive than residential. But the land was not commercial. It was a residential neighborhood. And was going to stay that way until someone *developed* it into commercial.
So..this is tantamount to saying...I'm going to go into a seed store, and they're going to require that I pay for the going price of the fully grown tomato plant, instead of the price of the SEEDS.
Sansone Group, for all practical purposes, said..."mmmm...thanks but no thanks...." I honestly don't recall who did the development after that, but it had already become apparent that the retailers were interested in the location. So, since repairs and upgrades and fire protection and city services aren't FREE, ....
Oh....and if this little "neighborhood" had *nothing* to do with Kirkwood before the annexation....answer me this....
Where do the kids who LIVE in the area go to school?
Yeah...sooooo badly abused, pooooor citizens.....
Michelle
Michelle,
You write:
"Kirkwood declared eminent domain only AFTER the residents of MeachAm Park turned down the offer presented by Sansone Group."
The residents turning down the offer should have been the end of the matter. Stealing is wrong, even if the thieves have shiny badges.
The Meacham Park Redevelopment Plan was originally created by the OPUS Corporation. OPUS pulled out of the project in the Spring of 1995, but the DESCO Group completed the plan. Out of the total land area of 106 acres, a total of 55 acres were commercially developed, the core of which includes a 522,500 square-foot retail mall with four major retailer: Lowe’s, Wal-Mart, Target and T.J. Maxx.
There is a misconception that the annexation added Meacham to the Kirkwood school district. The Meacham Park neighborhood was already part of the Kirkwood school district. J. Milton Turner School had it origins as the Meacham Park School. It opened in 1924 as a direct response to the pressure black parents had been directing to the Kirkwood Board of Education since the end of World War I because of the obviously inadequate educational opportunities for black students in the district.
Michelle, are you suggesting not educating the children of Meacham Park is your goal, today?
To Michelle:
Your presumption is that zoning, permits, and whatnot are essential for people to live harmoniously in a community. If this is the case, why is it that most of the land area of MO is VERY sparse on such things. Strangely enough, rural areas (even in very populous counties--Franklin, for instance) and small towns seem to do just fine with little in the way of zoning nonsense or permit requirements. It is only MO's big city areas that suffer from this need to boss their neighbors around.
When I lived in Franklin County, we needed a permit & inspection before the new electrical service that my husband (NOT an electrician) installed could be hooked up. We did NOT need a permit for any of the other extensive remodelling--interior or exterior--that we did. Even when it meant jacking the entire house off of its foundation.
When I lived in Maries County (between Rolla & Jeff City), permits were unheard of, with the exception of the state requirement for wellhead permits.
When I live in the town of Willow Springs (about 2000 people), we remodelled, opened, and operated a tavern. We were required to have a county health inspection (made sure the refrigerators were the right temp), a state liquor board inspection (also checked the fridges), and get liquor licenses from state, county, and city (fee collections, basically), as well as a $25 city business license. No actual building inspections. In other parts of the state, people seem to be perfectly able to tend their own properties without constant government meddling, but, in St. Louis city, St. Louis county, and the various municipalites therein, it seems they cannot do home repair chores simple for anyone with an IQ above 80 without permits, inspections, & licensed union contractors. Why is it that MO's urban population is so much more inept than its and small town population?
Or is all this nannying maybe not so necessary as you seem to think?
(fyi: I, too, know where Kirkwood is, have been there many times--both when I lived a few blocks off the McKinley bridge & when I lived in Franklin County. I now live in Silicon Valley, because my husband is a computer programmer & most St. Louis tech jobs in his field have been outsourced)
First, to Anne:
You said: "J. Milton Turner School had it origins as the Meacham Park School. It opened in 1924 as a direct response to the pressure black parents had been directing to the Kirkwood Board of Education since the end of World War I because of the obviously inadequate educational opportunities for black students in the district."
So, let me see if I'm understanding this correctly. Meacham Park was a part of unicorporated St. Louis County, and therefore had a ...what?...St. Louis County school before Meacham Park School (as part of the Kirkwood School District) opened? So, as far back as the 1920's, this border neighborhood was looking to the City of Kirkwood to fix their problems, but HEAVEN FORBID that Kirkwood get anything out of it, right?
And not education the students of MP was NEVER my, or anyone else's goal. That's not what I said. I said, in response to the comment that "all of a sudden, out of the blue" Kirkwood was interested in Meacham Park. Except, it was NOT "out of the blue". Kirkwood has had an interested in Meacham Park, by your own statement, since AT LEAST the 1920's.
Michelle
Now, to Heather.
I agree. When you have rural communities, zoning, permits, etal, are FAR less necessary. The farther apart from each other human beings live, the fewer rules there need to be to keep them from being at odds with each other.
But we're not dicussing a "low-density rural area". We're discussing a "HIGH density, suburban area" with (I belive) 7,500-10,000 square foot lots. That's very little space between you and your neighbor.
That's where rules become necessary.
Michelle
Finally, to Thomas:
Stealing? Okay. Again, let me make sure I understand.
The City of Kirkwood is supposed to build/maintain schools, pay for staff, teachers, janitorial service, books, computers, and everything that is required to run schools for all the school-aged residents of Meacham Park.
The City of Kirkwood is supposed to maintain electric equipment, sewer lines, water lines, fire protection, and all the other appropriate services.
The City of Kirkwood is supposed to maintain the streets of Meacham Park.
But if the City of Kirkwood tries to cover ANY of those costs with tax-generating commercial development, we're "thieves".
Okay....got it. So, when you go in and order a hamburger, and the server gives it to you, the server is then a thief for expecting you to actually PAY for that hamburger.
Michelle
Michelle,
First of all, let's address the school discussion: School districts are not operated by city governments. They are themselves subdivisions of the state government. So all this stuff about kids going to schools labeled "Kirkwood" is irrelevant to any discussion of Kirkwood's city council /city government. You're barking up the wrong tree there.
As far as the provision of services is concerned, remember -- I'm an anarchist. So no, I don't think that "the City of Kirkwood" (i.e. the government claiming jurisdiction over the territory that city covers) is "supposed" to do the things it does.
However, even stipulating for the sake of argument to the legitimacy of city government, and to the notion that the city is "supposed" to do A, B and C, there is a material difference between:
- The city government saying "we are doing A, B and C. Here's the bill for it;" and
- The city government saying "we are doing A, B and C, and we don't think that you would pay the bill that we'd have to present for doing A, B and C, so get the fuck out -- we're taking your property, whether you want to sell it or not, at a price set by the government rather than by the market, and giving it to someone who wants us to do A, B and C and will pay us the amount we're demanding for doing A, B and C."
You're also assuming that A, B and C were "ordered" like a hamburger. According to the factual claims now in the record in these comments, "Cookie" Thornton lived in Meacham Park before Kirkwood invaded ... er, annexed ... it. I don't know whether he "ordered" the services the city government of Kirkwood provided or not, because I don't know whether he supported or opposed the invasi ... annexation.
So far as I can tell, we're still at the point where you believe that if someone has a shiny badge, they magically sprout new rights that trump everyone else's. I believe that that's a claim which requires evidence.
Thomas,
I'm going to say this in SMALL words, maybe it will be more understandable, then.
A *badge* does NOT convey rights...oh...wait...convey has two syllables...um....let's say a badge does not GRANT "extra rights." Does the phrase "deriving their just power from the consent of the governed" mean *anything* to you? The MAJORITY of the people in the area HAD agreed to the annexation, and to the rules that went along with it. If Mr. Thornton did not agree with those rules, that's just too damned bad. A majority of his neighbors did. Nobody was forcing him to stick around.
Um...Michelle, one of the places I discussed was NOT a rural area. It was a town. Right downtown, in fact, in a town bigger than quite a few of St. Louis's suburban municipalities. Check the actual populations of such places as Black Jack.
Another was one of the more populous non-urban counties in MO...much of which is essentially St. Louis suburbs these days.
The 3rd was, indeed, a very rural area. The county had a population of 8500 when I moved away in 2000.
Oh, and btw, saying that having been part of Kirkwood's school district gives the Meacham Park folks an obligation to the city of Kirkwood for other things is simply nonsense. Schools are not run by city gov't, & the Meacham Park people would have been paying for the services rendered in the form of school taxes.
Some places in St. Louis County have gotten so ridiculous that you must have a permit & a UNION, COUNTY-APPROVED electrician to change out a $10 light fixture. Now, this is a nice revenue stream for the municipality and a nice work program for union electricians...especially politically connected ones, but any 12-year-old of normal intelligence can be taught how to safely change a light fixture. When I was a kid, we were taught the basics of the chore in science class, when studying the properties of electricity.
The truth...In larger municipalities, being a part of the gov't is more likely to be a full-time job with a decent wage. That being the case, the gov't has to make enough work for itself to justify the taxes eaten up as wages and benefits. Combine this with people's all-too-normal, but distressing, urge to boss their neighbors around and mind other people's business, and you get zoning laws, building permits, etc.
Oh, also...where in the constitution, either of the US or of MO, does it say that people are responsible to maintain their property in such a way as to maximize their neighbors' property value? Do you pay your neighbors for such a service? Of course not. Instead, you use the force of government to enslave them to the point of being forced to act in a way that benefits you, whether they want to or not.
And, frankly, these laws only work to the extent that people are too afraid to not obey them--and well-enough endowed with cash to 1.have something to lose if the Law comes after them, and 2.have the financial ability to obey them consistently. Take a ride up North 20th St. from downtown St. Louis sometime. Ride it all the way up to Grand. Keep in mind that all--every one--of those naggy little laws of which you are so fond is applicable there, too. But so many people don't simply don't meet the criteria I listed above that there is no sense in even trying to enforce such laws. But, there, it's mostly a passive thing. In some of the rural areas of MO, people still have a decent understanding of individual property rights, & attempts to enforce such regulations would be all too likely to be met with a shotgun.
Michelle,
Turn that phrase over in your mind a little. It says "the consent of the governed," not "the consent of 50%+1 of the governed" -- and that's especially applicable when the question is not one of procedure within a group whose members have already so consented, but of the consent itself.
You seem to be under the misimpression that zoning and such automatically become necessary with urbanization and population growth. I know of no actual evidence to substantiate that idea.
Last time I checked (2006), the fourth largest city in the US -- Houston, Texas -- was still getting along just fine without it.
For that matter, look at the relative difference in attitudes toward overbearing local government between the city of St. Louis and the county over the last 50 years, and you'll notice a strong correlation between those attitudes and the prevailing population and prosperity trends.
Michelle,
Perhaps the only thing you might do is walk a mile in the shoes of someone who isn't entitled for you to ever have an iota of understanding for those you detest so vehemently.
I will no longer waste my precious energy trying in vain to help you open your very limited mind. God help you if you ever find poverty and prejudice as part of your path, or the path of someone you love, because you are solely lacking any resource in dealing with these very real, very painful issues.
Not a defense either, prayers to all that were involved in this incident whether living or dead.
Mr. Thornton actions and life were not the person Feb 7th anyone had known in his previous years.
But we need to do better in our society in the 21st century. How, or why, I do not know, but to let something go on like this for all these years without some intervention and/or investigation was a serious error.
http://www.ksdk.com/news/news_ar...07&
provider=top
http://www.myfoxstl.com/myfox/pa...TY&
pageId=3.1.1
Here Mr. Thorton's side in live audio interview above.
http://
blogs.riverfronttimes.com...nton_meacha.php
Note: Thornton moved with his wife to Florida around 2003-05, only coming back and splitting his time for the trials and to try to clear his name. His wife a school principle also quoted she felt threatened.
Excerpt from Kirkwood Webster times: August 15th
“Business Owner, Role Model & Community Volunteer
What makes this tough cookie's one-man crusade against the city so confounding is that Thornton was once regarded as one of the community's top leaders. The Meacham Park resident and native was heralded for his volunteer work -- particularly on behalf of young people. Once touted as a role model, Thornton has become a pariah -- a persistent thorn in the city's side.
A 1974 graduate of Kirkwood High, Thornton was one of five brothers reared in the predominantly black community of Meacham Park. He attended Northeast Missouri State University at Kirksville on a track scholarship, where he earned a B.S. in business administration.
After college, Cookie returned to his Meacham Park community. In 1986 he started his own demolition, construction, asphalt and paving company -- Cookco Construction.
The enthusiastic, high-energy Thornton poured himself into community service. He volunteered his time to Project 2000, working once a week with third and fourth grade students at Tillman School.
"His enthusiasm is contagious," Tillman teacher Amy Palmer told the Times in 1995. "From the time he started here, Cookie has always been up, positive and full of energy. The kids just love him. They literally tackle him when he comes in on Friday afternoons."
In 1995, Thornton was named president of the youth department of Club 44, a YMCA organization that has been helping Kirkwood area youth, many from the Meacham Park area, for decades. As a youngster, Thornton went on camping and field trips sponsored by Club 44, and was involved in many of the club's community service work projects.
Among other volunteer efforts, Thornton has served on the Kirkwood-Webster YMCA Board of Directors; the Kirkwood Historical Society Board of Directors; the EduCare Board of Directors; the board of the Kirkwood Housing Authority; and a city steering committee for the study of the Meacham Park area.
Hi, y'all ... This comment thread eventually died down, but I expect that it may kick up again.
Why? Because I'm running for Congress in the 2nd District, which includes Kirkwood and Meacham Park. As a matter of fact, I'll be attending my first community event as a candidate tonight ... in Meacham Park.
Commenting by HaloScan
