Comment history

Statehouse Live: Parents of Jana Mackey urge passage of legislation to reduce domestic violence

A PFA (protection from abuse) order only allows law enforcement to make an immediate arrest if they get to a scene (where the victim has such an order already) quickly enough. It won't stop a crazy person from doing anything. So how is a "tag" on other paperwork going to do anything more?

I truly wish there was some way to prevent such tragedies from happening. But the hard truth is that crazy people do crazy things, with or without oversight by the legal system, and no piece of paper is ever going to prevent that from happening.

December 10, 2009 at 3:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Tweet, tweet: Top Chef has a winner

I am bummed that Kevin didn't win. He was my favorite from the get-go. But at least he took away some cash from all his wins, and will compete for a spot on the American cooking team. The brothers were too impressed with themselves (esp. Michael) for me to get on board their fan club. Kevin just seems like a really nice person, who happens to be an excellent chef as well. He needs to open a restaurant called "Normal"; Normal cooking for normal people.

December 10, 2009 at 2:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

KU declines to release details of Mangino's settlement agreement for now, says deal is not finalized

http://www.ksag.org/files/koraoutline... provides good outline on the rules for the open record law. Note that this law does not apply to private entitites. So it applies to records that KU ( a public agency) has, but will not apply to records that a private entity possesses. Which begs the issue, what entities possesses the requested records, and is that entity a public agency or not?

December 4, 2009 at 4:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Parkinson raises the possibility of a tax hike as revenue comes up another $15 million short of projections

It's not hard to figure out. Just because the numbers are big, and the uses for the money are myriad, doesn't mean it's all that complicated.

We have X number of dollars coming in from taxes etc. And we have Y number of things it's being spent on. When Y exceeds X, then something has to change or we go into debt. Either we have to raise more money or cut spending. The hard parts comes in FIRST deciding which course to follow, tax or cut spending and SECOND deciding (a) who or what to tax more or (b) who or what to cut spending on.

But it's not all that complicated.

October 30, 2009 at 4:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Kansas official to lead Missouri's economic development

David Kerr has worked hard and effectively on behalf of Kansas. He's a decent man with good ideas and will be missed. Good luck David!

October 29, 2009 at 1:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

City vows action on begging problem

I repeat. It is my OPINION that if the panhandlers were not given ANY money, by anyone, they would soon disappear.

October 28, 2009 at 3:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

City vows action on begging problem

Like it or not, the courts have taken a dim view on panhandling restrictions that are too broad. The last thing we need is another law suit that takes time and money to defend.

As was pointed out, even with a perfectly worded and legally sound policy adopted, it won't work if there aren't enough foot patrols around to enforce it! Hiring and retaining more police officers costs money.

Has anyone every thought about banning giving money to beggars in a specific area - why not attack the problem from the other end? The people giving the money might be grateful for an excuse, "Sorry man. Against the law for me to give you money in this area of town." If enough people refuse to give them $$, for any reason, it might move the beggars along to some other town! Negative reinforcement works better than intermittent postive enforcement (which I am told is the BEST way to get someone to keep doing something!).

October 28, 2009 at 9:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Lawrence city commissioner seeks outright ban on panhandling downtown

kansanbygrace (Anonymous) says…

"Like I say, my experience is different from yours. I've been asked for money a couple times and said “No.” I asked a trio of smelly youngsters to go somewhere else when they were hanging in front of my friend's restaurant. They asked for a cup of water and left. That's that."

Grace, I hear you. Because I have a soft heart (some would say head) and believe in being kind to others, I have often volunteered to feed someone who was begging. I didn't want to hand over cash (to be spent on drugs or booze), but was willing to help in other ways. Like taking them to a local place and paying for meals, or getting them in touch with local or state assistance programs who could get them the job, home, health care, transportation etc. they say they are collecting for. Only once, and it was in Washington DC, did the person(s) in question actually take me up on it and eat a full meal. The rest of the time, they say "no thank you" (Only not so politely). It has convinced me that the begging for money folks regard that as their "job." They don't want you to tell them how to spend "their money." Nor do they really intend to spend the money on the thing(s) they tell you. I'd probably be more inclined to give $ to someone who was honest "HEY, I'M A DRUNK AND WANT SOME MORE BEER!" I actually witnessed one guy collecting $ outside Replay, go in, drink it up, then go sit outside to collect more.

October 27, 2009 at 9:50 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Lawrence city commissioner seeks outright ban on panhandling downtown

Better word the ordinance VERY carefully.

Either way, expect any such ban to be challenged in court:

Oregon: http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.... and http://www.kval.com/news/local/440871...

New York;


October 26, 2009 at 4:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal )