Camp Zoe Seized By The Feds

[jdmidwest]

And what's that difference, exactly?

I find it comical how libertarian everyone pretends to be....until it comes to what someone else is doing, then government intervention is all fine and dandy. Pick a position and stick with it, peeps.

Now why did you have to make it a political issue and drag politics into it?

[eric1978]

Now why did you have to make it a political issue and drag politics into it?

Everything that has to do with the government is political. And my point was that everyone wants government to stay out of their business, but they never seem to mind when they're in someone else's. Just pointing out the hypocrisy, which IMO is the heart of the matter here.

By the way, nice signature. Political? Nah...

[Justin Spencer]

I talked with a convenience store owner on highway 60 the other day weeks before the raid, a local man in his mid 60's and he had nothing but good things to say about how repectful the concert goers were that came through his place. Kind of surprised me to be honest with you. I think we all know how well the "war on drugs" has gone and all the feds do is push the users from place to place. I don't think they were trying to hide what was going on at these concerts, if you ever heard a commercial on the radio I think the narrator was stoned. Not sure what was gained by this raid and now instead of having a camping venue that kept these like minded individuals in a safe setting for the weekend (and brought tax revenue to an area that needs it) we now have thousands of kids (and adults) doing the same thing probably driving around and endangering themselves and others. While I don't condone this behavior it is going to happen until the end of time. Way to go law enforcement real tough case you cracked here! Maybe someday the government will find a way to use the rampant drug use in this country to prop up our now fragile economy. Instead of spending billions of dollars fighting a never ending battle, lets make a little money on a segment of society that otherwise contributes very little.

[ColdWaterFshr]

Way to go law enforcement real tough case you cracked here!

I agree, but you know, this place probably had it coming for a while now. I never personally witnessed the Schwagstock, but I've heard that it was pretty out of control. I'm sure locals like convenience store owners loved the business. The sales of the munchies probably went through the roof . . . but the average Shannon, Carter, Dent County folk? no, I'm sure they knew what was going on and didn't like it one little bit. To them, it might as well been a satan worshipping rally.

These type of festivals aren't going away anytime soon. There will be a new one that pops up somewhere and they will get busted too once they become so big and get a reputation.

I have no doubt that the landowner in this case knew what was going on. The real question is, does the punishment fit the crime? Unless you're a member of the Nazi party, the answer is no.

[Justin Spencer]

I'm sure locals like convenience store owners loved the business. The sales of the munchies probably went through the roof . . . but the average Shannon, Carter, Dent County folk? no, I'm sure they knew what was going on and didn't like it one little bit. To them, it might as well been a satan worshipping rally.

Not sure what county Camp Zoe is in, but for a county without a Wal-Mart such as mine, in Ozark county we rely heavily on community events such as Hootin and Hollerin' in Gainesville to keep our county running. I'm sure this county will take a bit of a revenue hit with the loss of these events. If the community was outraged about this camp then I have no problem with it being shut down, but if there were few problems outside the venue then shutting it down hurts the community (schools, law enforcement, etc.) Very slippery slope because of the legality issue, but how often does the government turn a blind eye to something that helps it. Seems like we pick and choose who to persecute and the little guy usually looses out.

[Trout Commander]

You can tell who the old (or maybe still) hippies are after reading through this thread!

Not commenting on whether it is right or wrong what took place at the festivals. or how they were busted either one: What took place at these festivals was more than passing a bong around a campfire and singing kum ba yah and 'Dead classics. There was acid, lsd, shrooms, speed, coke, all kinds of perscription pill cocktails and even meth at most of the gathering. The real hippies always complained about the tweakers.

This is all knowledge gained from kids I went to school with that frequented the festivals. I have never been myself but have no reason to not believe the kids that did. I have also seen lots of pictures and it looked like a good time. I would have enjoyed going even though drugs weren't really my thing, but I was always too big of a _____ to go along because I just knew the one time I went would be when they got busted and at that point who would believe I wasn't doping. On another note, the owner is a bold face liar if he says he didn't know what was going on, OR never attended a single festival held at his facilities.

[stlfisher]

And what's that difference, exactly?

I find it comical how libertarian everyone pretends to be....until it comes to what someone else is doing, then government intervention is all fine and dandy. Pick a position and stick with it, peeps.

The difference, IMO, is this was a venue that allowed people in large numbers to both purchase and use drugs. The attraction wasn't the concert it was the drugs and it was good for business. Otherwise, the owners would have cracked down. My position is not compromised because I differentiate between a large scale operation that offers a venue for purchasing and using drugs and a couple floaters sitting around a campfire. Like it or not the law enforcement agencies are bound by the same contraints we are and they use their resources in a manner that is most effective. What is more effective trying to chase down every floater or shutting down a venue that was operating on a larger scale.

[Al Agnew]

The difference, IMO, is this was a venue that allowed people in large numbers to both purchase and use drugs. The attraction wasn't the concert it was the drugs and it was good for business. Otherwise, the owners would have cracked down. My position is not compromised because I differentiate between a large scale operation that offers a venue for purchasing and using drugs and a couple floaters sitting around a campfire. Like it or not the law enforcement agencies are bound by the same contraints we are and they use their resources in a manner that is most effective. What is more effective trying to chase down every floater or shutting down a venue that was operating on a larger scale.

Depends upon your definition of "effective". If effective means getting the most arrests for the least amount of effort and shutting down a place where drug use and drug selling was rampant, sure, it was the most effective thing they could do. But...if "effective" means actually protecting the public--and that is what laws are for, essentially--was it more effective to shut down a place where all the use was contained in a single venue and not spilling out into the countryside all that much and causing major problems for the public, or would it be more effective to actually do some serious law enforcement on drug abuse and alcohol abuse out on the float streams where the obnoxious party-heads ARE impacting a lot of people who want no part of it?

All too often, in my opinion, law enforcement takes the easy way out. Having a problem with parties at an access? Don't bother to go and arrest a bunch of party heads a few weekends in a row, just shut down the access and ruin it for everybody. Want to make a big splash in the local newspapers and show how on top of things you are when it comes to drug enforcement? Shut down this campground and keep ignoring the rampant drug and alcohol abuse on the float streams.

Not saying the place didn't deserve to be shut down...nor that it shouldn't have been done the way it was, because I don't know much at all about the place or the facts. Just wanted to point out that "effectiveness" may be in the eye of the beholder.

[ness]

I don't know much about the place, but I think the argument that has been expressed a couple times now that somehow this 'contained' drug use is better needs to be tempered somewhat. While it would certainly be better to have all impaired folks corralled for the weekend, it seems like the place was a safe haven for the use and sale of drugs, and therefore encouraged and likely increased their use. There's nothing preventing these folks from driving out the gate. And drug dealers aren't always nice guys, from what I've heard, so who knows what could have happened? Maybe the big hammer was necessary.

Nothing's been taken away from this guy yet. A seizure just means he can't access the money, and the property is still his. This things gotta work its way through the system before we know the outcome.

I'm waiting to see the arrests come down. They did say they bought drugs -- those guys gotta go to jail.

Al -- you make a good point about law enforcement taking the easy way out at times. I've often thought just a little pressure on an area could turn things around a little. Make a few appearances, or even a few busts and word will get around. On the other hand, I can see how a handful of cops trying to roust a dozen drunks at an access could get pretty ugly too.

[Flysmallie]

It's all fine and good what they are doing then? Is everybody agreeing to that? Good, then let's move on to the next target. When are they going to do the same thing on Lake of the Ozarks. I'm pretty sure that the drugs are pretty bad up there, but even worse are the people that are killed every year by some drunk boater. I haven't heard of anyone being killed at this camp, so LOZ must be in really bad shape. When are they planning to shut that down?