Kaliko
Posts: 3381
Joined: 9/25/2010
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Aneirin
That's it isn't it, who pays the bill, that is always what everything is down to further reinforcing the notion that the countries we live in our in fact crooked companies and we are the employees who work for that company and pay it !
Paying the bill (if there is one) is only part of it. I also mentioned a number of other things, such as safe electrical use, blocking of street traffic, and designating how litter will be handled, that aren't necessarily monetary items.
quote:
but what right do they have to exert authority over so called free individiuals anyway, whos'e country is it anyway,
They have the right because we voted them in and empowered them to make decisions as such. They're not there because they're evil dictators. They're there because it's the local government that the people of the town have voted to run under.
Do you vote locally? Are you involved? I am...on every local level. I'm there to give my opinion or vote on everything so much as whether my town buys a new fire truck or refurbishes headstones in a historic cemetery. And when I wanted to become more involved, I put myself on the ballot and got myself elected. If you have trouble with the way things are run on the level of applying for a permit, then by all means, get up there and speak up and try to change it. There may very well be valid points that you and others may have. At the very least, approach your councilmen/boards/whoever governs locally with a petition and documentation or whatever else you may need to show that it is an important issue to the citizens.
Such is the beauty of our country. And I have found, in my limited experience, that those who complain most about "the system" are the ones that refuse to use it to change it for the better. You may very well be right. Maybe some regulation is unnecessary, overpriced, or could be handled better. Should we offer up our suggestions in a helpful manner? Or should we make accusations until somebody else fixes it?
quote:
But why if permission is sought to hold an event, why should it be denied, does anyone think authority will allow the mass gatherings of people to do whatever without their control, for surely the mass gatherings of people must worry the powers and that is why they need to via policy enforcers ( police officers), maintain control.
I really can't think of a reason why it would be denied unless for one of the logistical reasons I listed above. I would suggest that the permit is for the safety and organization of town people and land, not the heady power of being able to approve or deny an event to feed the homeless. But certainly, a mass gathering of people requires attention as to how emergency services will be handled if necessary. I shouldn't even have to say that. That's general public safety that I would expect any event organizer to be responsible for. An event large enough to warrant being called a mass gathering is an event large enough to warrant an increased staff of emergency personnel ready to handle a crisis, if necessary.
quote:
Note; Officer from etymology online ;
early 14c., from O.Fr. officer, from M.L. officarius, from L. officium (see office). The military sense is first recorded 1560s. Applied to petty officials of justice from 16c.; U.S. use in ref. to policemen is from 1880s.
Office ;
mid-13c., "a post, an employment to which certain duties are attached," from L. officium "service, duty, function, business" (in M.L., "church service"), lit. "work-doing," from ops (gen. opis) "power, might, abundance, means" (related to opus "work") + stem of facere "do, perform" (see factitious). Meaning "place for conducting business" first recorded 1560s. Office hours attested from 1841.
Oops.
Help me, here. I don't understand what this has to do with a permit requirement for a public gathering.
|
RE: People Arrested for Intent to Feed - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread