Stockton Lake Night Noise

[ramman123]

I guess u think that the Seasonal Jobs this brings to the Area isnt worth it.

Well I dont See MOCARP Providing Jobs in the Area

Just because u pay ur 35-40$ fee doesnt mean u can TRUMP around Acting like u own the County or the Lake itself

[MoCarp]

19 minutes ago, ramman123 said:

Well I dont See MOCARP Providing Jobs in the Area

 

wanna bet.....

[fishinwrench]

1 hour ago, Flysmallie said:

 

I'm so tired of the perpetually offended twits in society. Get over it already. 

Ha!  

Pot/kettle !

[SpoonDog]

7 hours ago, MoCarp said:

 

I am FAR from a social justice warrior, I am a card carrying, gun toting, church going, voting conservative..

 

Maybe, sometimes, when the negative consequences don't directly impact you.  But in this particular circumstance you've hung up the free-market, laissez-faire, invisible hand economic policies which characterize traditional conservatism for increased regulations to maintain the status quo.  It's a start.

There's a lot of fear to unpack in your other statements, and as I said earlier, I still don't understand how you intentionally being an a-hole to a bunch of people who are unintentionally being a-holes somehow makes you a representative or guardian of morality.  But more important is the fact I'm a liberal resident of an urban county and I've never been asked to weigh in on Zoning for Miller, Morgan, or any of the other counties embracing LOZ, Taneycomo, Stockton or Table Rock.  As a non-resident I've never been asked to vote for mayor of Osage Beach or Cape Fair, I've never been asked to vote for county council members, I've never been asked to participate in area chambers of commerce or regional development boards.  

Blaming "urban liberals" is just scapegoating, it's local residents who vote for the politicians which ultimately green-light development.  If rural residents keep electing politicians who advocate unfettered development, easing restrictions on private markets, and allowing private property owners to develop their land as they wish, then rural residents will keep getting politicians who implement unfettered development, eased restrictions on private markets, and private property owners who develop their land as they wish.  It only sounds like Yogi Berra because it should be intuitively obvious.

 

Y'all were so terrified about who might be peeing in the stall next to you that you didn't pay attention to the fine print.  Sorry Phil, I had to.  

[MoCarp]

18 minutes ago, SpoonDog said:

I still don't understand how you intentionally being an a-hole to a bunch of people who are unintentionally being a-holes somehow makes you a representative or guardian of morality.  

True.... but it makes me feel better

 

20 minutes ago, SpoonDog said:

But more important is the fact I'm a liberal resident of an urban county 

Blaming "urban liberals" is just scapegoating,

 

Perhaps, but the days of politicians getting rich off special interests with out consequences iis changing regardless of what party

Most Liberals still just don''t get it... in the drive by media or otherwise, the reason we have a new President (who is an A-HOLE) is because we NEEDED someone to be an A-HOLE for the bulk of Americans, tired of the entrenched "royalty" be it the uber rich, Hollywood elitists and deep state politicians, who are out of touch with what the bulk of what Americans want....

[Al Agnew]

In the whole scheme of things, this really doesn't bother me that much...I don't go to reservoirs, in the rare times I go to them, to get peace and quiet.  But as I tried to say before...the question is at what point does one user group's activities have enough of a negative effect on other user groups that it should not be allowed?  You can say that everybody has an equal right to use the resource, but what happens if one user's activities make it difficult for other users to enjoy it?  And there is also the fact that it's not just the people hanging around the bar, it's an owner making money off it.

Having said all that, I will say that I don't think this rises to the level of something that should be banned.  It's a reservoir, not some completely unspoiled place.  There are lots of noisy activities.  

There is one other criterion for something like this to be stopped, and that's if it's harming the resource itself.  It probably isn't.

[SpoonDog]

22 minutes ago, MoCarp said:

True.... but it makes me feel better

 

Perhaps, but the days of politicians getting rich off special interests with out consequences iis changing regardless of what party

Most Liberals still just don''t get it... in the drive by media or otherwise, the reason we have a new President (who is an A-HOLE) is because we NEEDED someone to be an A-HOLE for the bulk of Americans, tired of the entrenched "royalty" be it the uber rich, Hollywood elitists and deep state politicians, who are out of touch with what the bulk of what Americans want....

No, I completely get that.  But if doing something because it makes you feel better is justification you've abandoned any moral high ground, because I think most of us here can agree a buxom coed in a skimpy bikini makes us feel pretty darn good.  

Beyond that I'm not sure you understood my point: if your goal is to reduce growth, electing a pro-growth local politician who greenlights whatever massive condo/bar/boat slip outfit that slides across his desk is a categorically awful way of achieving your goal.  I understand it feels good to stick it to the uber rich, Hollywood elitists, and "deep state politicians," but none of those people have anything to do with development on LOZ, Taneycomo, Table Rock, or Stockton.  It's tilting at windmills. Just explain to me how, exactly, putting the folks who want to develop these areas in power prevents these areas from being developed.  

I'm genuinely curious.  

[fishinwrench]

Well, anytime you have a group of people that once enjoyed the atmosphere of a place, and then another group of people move in to that place and change the atmosphere, there's gonna be hard feelings.    There's not always a right and a wrong, but the us vs. them thing is inevitable.   

People that enjoy calm quiet places never go to loud crowded places and start forcing everyone to quiet down or leave........but it almost always happens that rowdy hell raisers come to calm quiet places and force their atmospheric wishes, forcing the other team to either DEAL WITH IT OR LEAVE.   And that is bull anyway you try to justify it.

 

[MoCarp]

24 minutes ago, SpoonDog said:

I think most of us here can agree a buxom coed in a skimpy bikini makes us feel pretty darn good.  

 

got me there

[Al Agnew]

1 hour ago, fishinwrench said:

Well, anytime you have a group of people that once enjoyed the atmosphere of a place, and then another group of people move in to that place and change the atmosphere, there's gonna be hard feelings.    There's not always a right and a wrong, but the us vs. them thing is inevitable.   

People that enjoy calm quiet places never go to loud crowded places and start forcing everyone to quiet down or leave........but it almost always happens that rowdy hell raisers come to calm quiet places and force their atmospheric wishes, forcing the other team to either DEAL WITH IT OR LEAVE.   And that is bull anyway you try to justify it.

 

Bingo!  That second paragraph is pretty much what I wanted to say, but you said it better.