Breakdown In Civil Order

[Loren Pechtel]

You can decriminalize without abetting drug use. A bit cynical, but seems there’s little concern in actually helping people and instead growing government programs which transfer taxpayer money to special interests.

Taxpayer money to special interests???

Safe injection sites reduce ER and hospital use amongst addicts. They save money!

These drugs cause health problems which will lead the addicts to the hospital, anyway. Meth destroys the heart. Unclear how we save money by keeping addicts on drugs? How is an addict going to hold down a job or pay rent? Yet, taxpayers on hook to pay for all these services; and in some places, housing. If society has a responsibility to take care of these people, then these people have a responsibility to get better.

The drugs will do the damage whether or not they have a safe injection site. Your "solution" of "treatment" is like trying to solve hunger by saying "eat".

I'm having trouble understanding what either you or Oleg are proposing here. It seems to me that he agrees with you in opposing safe needle sites and that both of you seem to go back and forth on what you actually favor. Oleg seems upset with the cost of the social programs to address addiction, but I suppose that is to be expected if he thinks safe needle sites are counterproductive. But you've both endorsed the Portugal model, which, from what I've read, also provides addicts with social services like counseling, medical treatment, and clean needles for injection. So that doesn't seem all that far from what these liberal-backed injection sites that you object to are all about. Do you favor the Portugal model or not? Or am I missing something here? Just saying to "starve" to addicts doesn't seem to work, since that is what the government has been doing for years without making any progress in the "war on drugs".

I'm for full legalization of the drugs--sufficiently addictive stuff may be prescription only, but the law must explicitly state that addiction is a valid reason for a prescription. I believe the drug laws cause far more harm than the drugs. I'm saying Portugal is a step in the right direction.

He's advocating a focus on treatment, I'm saying that unless the person wants to get off drugs and the reasons that drove them to drugs in the first place are dealt with that treatment doesn't work.

 

[Copernicus]

I'm for full legalization of the drugs--sufficiently addictive stuff may be prescription only, but the law must explicitly state that addiction is a valid reason for a prescription. I believe the drug laws cause far more harm than the drugs. I'm saying Portugal is a step in the right direction.

He's advocating a focus on treatment, I'm saying that unless the person wants to get off drugs and the reasons that drove them to drugs in the first place are dealt with that treatment doesn't work.

Fair enough. I have never been an addict and have had some limited experience with addicts. My sense is that most addicts do not want to stay addicted, but they see no way out. So most are open to at least trying to recover from addiction, and they need support from professionals to make an informed decision. That doesn't happen if one approaches them with the attitude that they are addicted because they want to be addicted. The reasons that drove a person to addiction did not include the experience of actually being addicted, so it may be that one is dealing with a completely different attitude, but I'm not in a position to know these things. Professional medical and social workers are. So these programs, whether the Portugal model or the safe injections sites, all focus on working to help addicts recover, not "feed" their drug habit. The addicts will do that themselves, with or without the programs. They stand a better chance of recovery with professional help.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Here in Seattle it gets worse by the day. There has been a homeless camp outside the county court house for may years. At one point an entrance was closed because of risk of assauly.

Murders have occurred in the camp. Recently a person from the camp tried to rape a courthouse worker in a bathroom.

Gun violence is rising. Apparently random shootings of cars on the highway.

The local county and city govt appears helpless and unable to make any hard decisions for fear of being labeled biased in any way.

Our apparent new district attorney elect says she wants to tare down the entire justice system.

Wat is it like where you live?

Do you feel safe looking forward?

Are you for traditional 'law and order' meaning police are there to prevent and pursue crime, or do you favor what is being called community policing or some form of it.

In Seattle community policing means letting communities and neighborhoods taking care of crime and drugs. No courts or criminal jounce except for extreme cases. No police except for special circumstances.

I live in Scandinavia. The way we deal with problems like this is that we give them all apartments, rehab and free education. Then somehow the problem goes away and these people become productive members of society. Perhaps try that?

Commie!

Yes, I'm so busted!

edit: It's also how they deal with it in Germany. And Holland and Switzerland. France. So it's not like this is just a cultural thing. It's a tried and tested method that works everywhere.

Yabbut these countries turn citizens into subjects of tyrannous governments!

The price of freedom is leaving the homeless and millions of other disadvantaged people to wallow in their misery.

It does affect the economy negatively. USA is a richer country than European countries for a reason. Its not a question of better or worse. Its a question of priorities. Socialism is expensive. Me personally, I think this is something where the price of socialism is worth it

 

[repoman]

This Las Vegas smoke shop cashier stabbed a doofus who hopped behind the counter.

Putting the video in a spoiler box, because it shows the stabbing.

Spoiler: video

Then he did an AMA on Reddit about it. Really dumb, in my opinion.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm for full legalization of the drugs--sufficiently addictive stuff may be prescription only, but the law must explicitly state that addiction is a valid reason for a prescription. I believe the drug laws cause far more harm than the drugs. I'm saying Portugal is a step in the right direction.

He's advocating a focus on treatment, I'm saying that unless the person wants to get off drugs and the reasons that drove them to drugs in the first place are dealt with that treatment doesn't work.

Fair enough. I have never been an addict and have had some limited experience with addicts. My sense is that most addicts do not want to stay addicted, but they see no way out. So most are open to at least trying to recover from addiction, and they need support from professionals to make an informed decision. That doesn't happen if one approaches them with the attitude that they are addicted because they want to be addicted. The reasons that drove a person to addiction did not include the experience of actually being addicted, so it may be that one is dealing with a completely different attitude, but I'm not in a position to know these things. Professional medical and social workers are. So these programs, whether the Portugal model or the safe injections sites, all focus on working to help addicts recover, not "feed" their drug habit. The addicts will do that themselves, with or without the programs. They stand a better chance of recovery with professional help.

Help should certainly be available. I'm just saying that the focus should be on minimizing the secondary issues as rehab has a low success rate if you don't remove the underlying forces that drove them to it in the first place.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This Las Vegas smoke shop cashier stabbed a doofus who hopped behind the counter.

Putting the video in a spoiler box, because it shows the stabbing.

Spoiler: video

Then he did an AMA on Reddit about it. Really dumb, in my opinion.

Probably going to jail for that--the guy was obviously doing a grab-and-run, the cashier wasn't being threatened.

 

[Copernicus]

I'm for full legalization of the drugs--sufficiently addictive stuff may be prescription only, but the law must explicitly state that addiction is a valid reason for a prescription. I believe the drug laws cause far more harm than the drugs. I'm saying Portugal is a step in the right direction.

He's advocating a focus on treatment, I'm saying that unless the person wants to get off drugs and the reasons that drove them to drugs in the first place are dealt with that treatment doesn't work.

Fair enough. I have never been an addict and have had some limited experience with addicts. My sense is that most addicts do not want to stay addicted, but they see no way out. So most are open to at least trying to recover from addiction, and they need support from professionals to make an informed decision. That doesn't happen if one approaches them with the attitude that they are addicted because they want to be addicted. The reasons that drove a person to addiction did not include the experience of actually being addicted, so it may be that one is dealing with a completely different attitude, but I'm not in a position to know these things. Professional medical and social workers are. So these programs, whether the Portugal model or the safe injections sites, all focus on working to help addicts recover, not "feed" their drug habit. The addicts will do that themselves, with or without the programs. They stand a better chance of recovery with professional help.

Help should certainly be available. I'm just saying that the focus should be on minimizing the secondary issues as rehab has a low success rate if you don't remove the underlying forces that drove them to it in the first place.

That certainly makes sense, but identifying the underlying forces is difficult, and their removal may be even more difficult than these attempts to rehabilitate those who have fallen victim to the forces. It would be nice to wipe out supplies of the drugs that cause the addictions, but that doesn't seem to work very well either. Legalizing marijuana causes problems, but tying up police and court resources to process marijuana users was a worse problem. What we can agree on, I think, is that we get nowhere by treating drug addiction as a crime. That has turned out to be a very expensive way to lose the war on drugs.

 

[ZiprHead]

This Las Vegas smoke shop cashier stabbed a doofus who hopped behind the counter.

Putting the video in a spoiler box, because it shows the stabbing.

Spoiler: video

Then he did an AMA on Reddit about it. Really dumb, in my opinion.

Probably going to jail for that--the guy was obviously doing a grab-and-run, the cashier wasn't being threatened.

Doubtful.

 

[Copernicus]

This Las Vegas smoke shop cashier stabbed a doofus who hopped behind the counter.

Putting the video in a spoiler box, because it shows the stabbing.

Spoiler: video

Then he did an AMA on Reddit about it. Really dumb, in my opinion.

Probably going to jail for that--the guy was obviously doing a grab-and-run, the cashier wasn't being threatened.

Doubtful.

The problem is that the cashier used a knife to stab the perpetrator. That was uncalled for. If he had shot the thief with a gun, a lot more people would have approved.

 

[bilby]

What we can agree on, I think, is that we get nowhere by treating drug addiction as a crime. That has turned out to be a very expensive way to lose the war on drugs.

We here probably can, because it's obviously and clearly true, with a mountain of strong evidence to support it.

We as a wider society assuredly cannot, because authoritarians don't like the idea, and nor do many religious groups; Both of these sets (which have considerable overlap) of people are completely fine with believing stuff despite mountains of contrary evidence, on the sole basis of whether or not they like the idea.

Drugs are bad, drug users are therefore "bad guys", drug users therefore need to be in prison. It's a very simple argument, beloved by very simple simpletons. Of whom there is no worldwide shortage.

 

[Derec]

That is correct, they haven't. Not at all. Not even a little bit.

LMAO. They absolutely have.

Well for starters, it's not a lurch to the left because as per usual you have absolutely no idea what the word 'socialist' means, so you're just using it as a noise you grunt to indicate that you don't like something.

I do know what it means.
In any case, several members of the House (e.g. AOC) and at least one Senator are self-described socialists and some are even members of Democratic Socialists of America.

You're misusing the term so powerfully that it's completely meaningless. You're not conveying any information or intent when you use the word so utterly without context or relation to its definition. You have completely failed in every meaningful aspect of the very concept of human communication.

What the hell are you talking about? Just because they are not quite as left as you (very difficult to achieve) does not mean that the Democratic Party has not moved left quite a bit in recent years. From spending (idiocy like B³ would not have been proposed by Obama or Clinton) to things like "defund police", "defund Pentagon" and other stupid shit that has become fashionable in the contemporary Democratic Party.

Not one single elected official in the U.S. is within mortaring distance of being a socialist, and none of them are particularly close to being democratic socialists either.

According to whom? You?
That is contradicted by some being card-carrying members.
 List of Democratic Socialists of America members who have held office in the United States

AOC is a politely moderate-right politician, Sanders is is probably soft-left of center, and they're about the most extreme cases we have.
Neither of them are leftists by any stretch.

AOC "moderate-right"? Your political spectrum is so skewed that any further discussion of it is meaningless.

The fact I am the furthest left member of this board is what gives me the needed perspective to see just how right politics are in the U.S.

Actually, it causes your perspective to be horribly skewed. Like those photos of TVs people take standing up and people on TV screen end up looking like giant forehead aliens.

This is what Democrats understand and Republicans don't: throw the proles a small bone to keep them placated and you keep the economic power in the hands of the few where they've always been, and people complain less.

What modern day Democrats do not understand is that money does not grow on trees. The COVID spending was already inflationary, and spending $3.5T in addition to that would have heated up inflation even further.

this is why there's so much unrest in this country,

No, there is unrest because left-wing prosecutors do not go after rioters so they do it again and again. 2014 was bad, 2020 was 10 times worse. Why? Because the 2014 rioters got a slap on the wrist at best. And so did 2020 rioters, so you already know the next series of race riots will be bad.

because Republicans got blinded by their pig-ignorant sister-fucking hillbilly base

Insults is all you have it seems.

Well news flash, when you create civil unrest and social discord as the basis for your political agenda, sooner or later there are consequences.

Unrests started from the rest, due to lies about "gentle giants" and the like.

Democrats doing the absolute barest possible minimum to kind of sort of clean up the mess Republicans have left is one consequence, and the crime you're always flipping the fuck out about is the other one.

Speaking of crime, why do left-wing prosecutors do not want to prosecute crime such as armed robberies? Instead DAs like Alvin Bragg go after shopkeepers who defend themselves from those who attack them.

 

[Derec]

Most stats presented this way are opportunities for spinning or cherry-picking, rather than a quest for knowledge.

Wrong.

Louisiana sends 8 Congresscritters to Washington DC; 7 of the 8 are GOP. The state Senate is 27-12 GOP; the lower House is 64-33 GOP; and the Lieut. Governor is GOP. So yes, Louisiana is rather Red.

If it was that red, it would not have elected a Dem governor. That was my point.

Derec mentions St. Louis, Baltimore and Detroit. Detroit is in Michigan where both legislative houses are controlled by GOP; St. Louis is in Missouri which is completely dominated by GOP; and Baltimore is in Maryland where both Governor and Lieut. Governor are GOP.

Local crime has much more to do with who controls local politics rather than state politics. Police departments are run by cities. Prosecutors work for the county DA office. When you have a DA for example that won't prosecute many crimes for ideological reasons you get more crime. When you have a mayor who says that rioters should be given more room to destroy, you get mayhem.

Uh oh. Derec had better go back to the drawing board.

You are right in that you are very good at cherry-picking.

Let me ask you this. Do you think armed robbers should be charged with misdemeanor shoplifting like Alvin Bragg wanted to do initially? Should workers at a bodega be charged with murder for defending themselves from an attacker like Alvin Bragg did (but later dropped charges due to public outcry)?

 

[Derec]

The problem is that the cashier used a knife to stab the perpetrator. That was uncalled for. If he had shot the thief with a gun, a lot more people would have approved.

Has a charging decision been made yet by the DA?

 

[Swammerdami]

Most stats presented this way are opportunities for spinning or cherry-picking, rather than a quest for knowledge.

Wrong.

"Wrong" he says, as he doubles down on his own cherry-picking.

@ Derec, I noticed you were uninterested in discussing high-crime cities with Republican mayors, e.g.

Jacksonville, Florida
Fort Worth, Texas
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Fresno, California

Those cherries weren't the right flavor? Why not speak to us about Oklahoma or Tennessee — two states dominated by the GOP and with very high crime rates.

The relationship between city and state is complex and varies by state, but it is absurd to think state government has no effect on cities. As my cite, I point to Season 4(?) of The Wire !

It's already been explained to Derec that the high gun violence in Chicago is partly due to guns being imported from bright-red Indiana. The Northwest corner of Indiana may be similar to Chicago, but Indiana's redness is generated by votes from the embittered meth-heads and laid-off coal miners down by the Kentucky border. (Do some embittered meth-heads live in Northern Indiana and/or vote D? Sure. I'm just giving Derec a taste of how inane his stereotypes are.)

Let me ask you this. Do you think armed robbers should be charged with misdemeanor shoplifting like Alvin Bragg wanted to do initially? Should workers at a bodega be charged with murder for defending themselves from an attacker like Alvin Bragg did (but later dropped charges due to public outcry)?

Do you think immature vigilantes like Zimmerman or Kyle Rittenhouse should be allowed guns? Or set free when cowardice compels them to kill?

Do you think sex traffickers should be allowed to serve in Congress? What do you think about Congressmen or Presidents who incite sedition? Or does discussion of serious crimes like murder, treason and multi-million-dollar frauds distract from your focus on vagrancy and misdemeanors?

 

[Derec]

@ Derec, I noticed you were uninterested in discussing high-crime cities with Republican mayors, e.g.

Because mere numbers without context are largely meaningless. If you want to discuss policies or details in Jacksonville or Fresno, we can discuss it.

The relationship between city and state is complex and varies by state, but it is absurd to think state government has no effect on cities. As my cite, I point to Season 4(?) of The Wire !

Obviously state government plays a role. But Maryland is a bad example for you. It is a largely blue state, with governorship changing parties (mostly Dem though over the last few decades). But Maryland also has a Democratic supermajority in both chambers of its legislature. They last voted Republican for president in 1988.
So I do not get your point with Maryland.

It's already been explained to Derec that the high gun violence in Chicago is partly due to guns being imported from bright-red Indiana.

And I have not denied that effect. But policies by the city hall and Cook County DA's office play a major role too.
Chicago/Cook County can't do much for gun laws nationally or in Indiana, but they can do a great deal about their local leadership.

As far as guns though, when Chicago police chased two people with guns and ended up killing them (justified mind you) Lori Lightfoot's response was not to make it easier for police to get illegal guns off the streets but to restrict CPD foot chase policy further. That is not helping matters.

(Do some embittered meth-heads live in Northern Indiana and/or vote D? Sure. I'm just giving Derec a taste of how inane his stereotypes are.)

I am not stereotyping. I am talking about specific cities/counties with specific elected officials and specific

Do you think immature vigilantes like Zimmerman or Kyle Rittenhouse should be allowed guns? Or set free when cowardice compels them to kill?

They were acquitted because they defended themselves. The Z case was more iffy, but I think Ritt's case was a clear cut case of self-defense. I do not think it would have been brought to trial if not for the toxic climate prevalent in 2020.
So yes, they should be allowed guns because they have not been found guilty of a felony.

Do you think sex traffickers should be allowed to serve in Congress?

Who do you have in mind? The guy who had consensual sex with a 17 year old? Ho is that "sex trafficking"?

What do you think about Congressmen or Presidents who incite sedition? Or does discussion of serious crimes like murder, treason and multi-million-dollar frauds distract from your focus on vagrancy and misdemeanors?

There are more than enough threads on January 6th. So yes, it is a distraction here.
And the problem is that in some counties like LA misdemeanors like shoplifting are rarely prosecuted and felonies are often prosecuted as misdemeanors. Even gang murderers are treated with kid gloves as they are under the age of 18.
Gascón stops effort to prosecute juvenile gang murderer as adult; victim’s family outraged

 

[Swammerdami]

Curiously, Derec and I actually see eye-to-eye on several issues. The key difference is how we spin things! For example, I view black-on-black violence as a signal that society needs to be compassionate and seek better opportunities and outcomes. The Ilk uses it to scoff when blacks are killed by cops, or when demonstrations attract looters.

I think MTG, Boebert, Hawley and Gaetz are very despicable and are among the very most disgusting Congresscritters. Derec probably thinks so too, but he never admits it. Instead he directs much misplaced venom against AOC!

I do realize that AOC often comes across as unpolished, extremist, and not particularly intelligent.

I actually think AOC is quite intelligent, but I recognize that she may not come across that way. I have a similar problem: My demeanor and diction often cause people who first encounter me to assume I'm dumb. (I'm sure the Ilk will think "Swammi comes across as stupid because he IS stupid!" but I do have IQ scores and career successes that attest to the opposite.)

The relationship between city and state is complex and varies by state, but it is absurd to think state government has no effect on cities. As my cite, I point to Season 4(?) of The Wire !

Obviously state government plays a role. But Maryland is a bad example for you. . .

I mentioned Maryland because, regardless of party alignment, The Wire showed that the City police was dependent on financing from the State.

Do you think immature vigilantes like Zimmerman or Kyle Rittenhouse should be allowed guns? Or set free when cowardice compels them to kill?

They were acquitted because they defended themselves. The Z case was more iffy, but I think Ritt's case was a clear cut case of self-defense. I do not think it would have been brought to trial if not for the toxic climate prevalent in 2020.
So yes, they should be allowed guns because they have not been found guilty of a felony.

I was NOT asking whether their gun purchases were LEGAL. My question is: In an improved version of the U.S. would it be appropriate that such semi-sociopathic immature and hate-filled wannabes have guns?

Do you think sex traffickers should be allowed to serve in Congress?

Who do you have in mind? The guy who had consensual sex with a 17 year old? Ho is that "sex trafficking"?

Matt Gaetz hired a 17-year old hooker. Is that someone we want in Congress? It's not my fault that transporting her across state lines triggered a "trafficking" statute.

What do you think about Congressmen or Presidents who incite sedition? Or does discussion of serious crimes like murder, treason and multi-million-dollar frauds distract from your focus on vagrancy and misdemeanors?

There are more than enough threads on January 6th. So yes, it is a distraction here.

A "distraction" you spent 16 words on. Would it have been so onerous to type the single word "Disapprove"?
Or can't you bring yourself to condemn sedition when it comes from the Ilk you align yourself with?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Help should certainly be available. I'm just saying that the focus should be on minimizing the secondary issues as rehab has a low success rate if you don't remove the underlying forces that drove them to it in the first place.

That certainly makes sense, but identifying the underlying forces is difficult, and their removal may be even more difficult than these attempts to rehabilitate those who have fallen victim to the forces. It would be nice to wipe out supplies of the drugs that cause the addictions, but that doesn't seem to work very well either. Legalizing marijuana causes problems, but tying up police and court resources to process marijuana users was a worse problem. What we can agree on, I think, is that we get nowhere by treating drug addiction as a crime. That has turned out to be a very expensive way to lose the war on drugs.

I don't have much hope of solving the underlying problems in most cases. That doesn't change the fact that the police only make the problem worse, not better.

 

[TSwizzle]

This is what we are up against in Los Angeles;

The Los Angeles City Council on Tuesday approved a ban homeless encampments within 500 feet of schools and daycare centers during a meeting that was disrupted by protesters who said it criminalizes homelessness. The council voted 11-3 to expand an existing ban on sitting, sleeping or camping that currently only applies to daycare centers and schools specified by the council. The meeting was recessed before the vote when dozens of demonstrators began shouting and police cleared the council chamber.

CH7 News

Of course, banning encampments is no solution at all but these unhinged lunatics (or paid professionals) also show up whenever a park or public land is being cleared of the "homeless".

And what the actual fuck?;

As the Los Angeles City Council prepares to vote on a controversial ordinance on homelessness on Friday, hotel owners are going public with their concerns. The council’s vote concerns a voucher program that would house the homeless in hotels alongside guests and workers. According to documents from the city, every hotel in Los Angeles would have to notify the city every day by 2 p.m. how many vacant rooms are available. Councilman Joe Buscaino called the plan “the dumbest measure I’ve seen in my 10 year tenure as a City Council member.”

KTLA

Forbes covers the proposal in more detail as the council vote to put the initiative on the ballot for March 2024;

Forbes

 

[lpetrich]

A Town’s Housing Crisis Exposes a ‘House of Cards’ - The New York Times - "In the Idaho resort area of Sun Valley, there are so few housing options that many workers are resorting to garages, campers and tents."

Near the private jets that shuttle billionaires to their opulent Sun Valley getaways, Ana Ramon Bartolome and her family have spent this summer living in the only place available to them: behind a blue tarp in a sweltering two-car garage.

With no refrigerator, the extended family of four adults and two young children keeps produce on plywood shelves. With no sink, they wash dishes and themselves at the nearby park. With no bedrooms, the six of them sleep on three single mattresses on the floor.

“I’m very anxious, depressed and scared,” said Ms. Bartolome, who makes her living tending to the homes of wealthy residents but cannot afford even the cheapest housing in the famous ski-and-golf playground.

Resort towns have long grappled with how to house their workers, but in places like Sun Valley those challenges have become a crisis as the chasm widens between those who have two homes and those who have two jobs. Fueled in part by a pandemic migration that has gobbled up the region’s limited housing supply, rents have soared over the last two years, leaving priced-out workers living in trucks, trailers or tents.

It is not just service workers struggling to hold on. A program director at the Y.M.C.A. is living in a camper on a slice of land in Hailey. A high school principal in Carey was living in a camper but then upgraded to a tiny apartment in an industrial building. A City Council member in Ketchum is bouncing between the homes of friends and family, unable to afford a place of his own. A small-business owner in Sun Valley spends each night driving dirt roads into the wilderness, parking his box truck under the trees and settling down for the night.

The housing shortfall is now threatening to paralyze what had been a thriving economy and cherished sense of community. The hospital, school district and sheriff’s office have each seen prospective employees bail on job offers after realizing the cost of living was untenable. The Fire Department that covers Sun Valley has started a $2.75 million fund-raising campaign to build housing for their firefighters.

Already, restaurants unable to hire enough service workers are closing or shortening hours. And the problems are starting to spread to other businesses, said Michael David, a Ketchum council member who has been working on housing issues for the past two decades.

Notice the labor shortages that are resulting. If all these homeless people were expelled from that town, it would make those labor shortages MUCH worse.

Similar things are happening in other resort towns in the Mountain West, like Jackson Hole WY, Aspen CO, and Whitefish MT.

About a food bank in Bellevue ID,

The food bank has experienced a surge in demand in the past two years, serving about 200 families each week to nearly 500 with the number still climbing, said Brooke Pace McKenna, a leader at the Hunger Coalition, which runs the food bank.

“More and more, we are seeing the teachers, the policemen, the Fire Department,” Ms. McKenna said.

The cops also?

With some job applicants unwilling to make the move, the region’s school district now has 26 job openings, some that have gone unfilled for months. The district is working on plans to develop seven affordable housing units for employees.

Not nearly enough.

 

[steve_bank]

In the local news.

A 14 year old girl and a 15 ye\ar old boy arrested for armed robbery. They car jacked somebody but had trouble with the car. They stole anoher car and ran it into a business temporarily holding a kid hostage.