More Tickets for Stoop Drinkers

I for one support this, and wish the cops would be more active about it.

I know im swimming against the tide, but i have people who hang out semi-regularly in front of my building drinking and being loud. calling 311 continuously (every day) barely works to help them get the idea...

Most of you will say i should confront them... in the first 4 years (out of 10) of living here i and my neighbors did, and in a polite but firm manner, but all that did was bring grief to everyone, and hostility.

we started calling 311 instead, and half the problem went away.

Now were left with the guys who think that since theyve been in the area for 20 years (or have a friend who was).. they can do what they damn well please just like back in the days when the cops didnt care if the place burnt to the ground.

The cops dont ticket the guys, so they basicly disperse them maybe for that night, but the next night... theyll be back again. If they ticketed them, the guys would get the hint, do your drinking and partying INSIDE YOUR HOME.... like everyone else. Or at least in your backyard. Stop disturbing other people who have to work the next morning and who dont want to have your loud drunk party in their bedroom (even if YOURE not loud and drunk, it creates an environment indicating accepatable behavior for those who ARE loud and drunk).

I know everyone gets uptight about cops, and socialist like laws... and this certainly IS one of them. But in the long run, the overall Quality of Life issues are what this adress's. Making the distinction of a small gate doesnt help... if the guys who hang out in front of my place knew they just have to sit on my stoop (gate closed) to avoid a ticket... id have an even worse problem (they tried that and got screamed at by my less than pleased neighbors - everyone has limits).

This is the sort of law that is appropriate for high density areas, and would become increasingly less appropriate the larger the space between homes. One of the few things i like about bloomberg/guliani was the QOL focus.

--LionBalls

Posted by: lionballs at September 16, 2008 10:50 AM

dave you are correct in saying that my problem is different, however as also pointed out by itsages this whole thing brings up class issues, in that it will be percieved as unfair (and to a certain degree would be) if we ticket only the "degenerates" who abuse the lee-way given to those considerably less disturbing (your couple drinking wine).

It's a thin line between penalizing those who are a nuisance and racial profiling.

And i kid you not, all it takes is two half-deaf (machine shop workers) guys drinking to make it near impossible to get to sleep.

Apartments over restraunts/bars tend to have greatly reduced rents as compensation for the distrubance, and those premises CAN and HAVE been ticketed when they dont adequately control their clientelle.

My point is, it does suck we cant all be drinking on our stoops (quietly) without being harassed, but in a mega condensed area like NY, your behavior has an effect on others when in plain view (as a stoop clearly is), it creates an atmosphere that such behavior is acceptable (and it may be), which then lets the next guy take it one step further... and so forth... until you have a problem (not to mention when people openly drink outside, teen-agers will inevitably THINK they can do the same).

It just accelerates.

--LionBalls

Posted by: lionballs at September 16, 2008 11:46 AM

lol, hillarious.

Theres no question the situation is a sticky one, and we can all come up with scenarios to test what is and isnt ok...

end of the day, there is some degree of public order involved. And the problem of WHO to apply a ticket to is where class does come into affect. Of course you feel entitled to drink on your stoop.. i mean omg its your stoop. hell, you shuold be able to have sex there too right? full on doggystyle maybe? and heck, since you can drink, may as well have the whole liquer cabinet out.. put a keg on the stoop, whats it matter? its your right isnt it?

Or maybe we should have the law tailored... its ok to have a glass of wine, but not a case, its ok to have a stella, but not a 40, its ok to have missionary, but not cowgirl. Cause these sorts of tailored laws wouldnt be elitist/classist, nor abused by the cops... like... ever.

and lets totally ignore escalation, because that never happens right?

Maybe we should allow people to do whatever they want (short of murder) on their stoops... sex, drinking, drums, pooping (with a proper toilet), etc...

At some point you have to understand that your stoop 5 feet off the street is not analgamous to a front yard with 20 feet, a picket fence, a hedge and a tree (and even then there are some rules).

i mean, i get it... your ticked off cause some cop didnt make a good judgement call and not harass someone who was being totally chill and not disturbing anyone, but should that make it ok? i dont think so. Its like getting a speed ticket for going 1 mph over the limit... totally BS, but a rule that does exist for the greater good.

--LionBalls

Posted by: lionballs at September 16, 2008 2:35 PM

:)

no doubt there was dramtic flair there, but the point remains, drafting a law to actually specify what types of drinking (or other activities) are and arent exceptable is ludicrous at best, and would be incredibly contentious. Because guess what, class issues would be all over the legislation, everyone would get up in arms over what would almost certainly be a law that at the minimum (looks) to be terribly elitist, when the simplest thing is, just dont be obviously drinking on your stoop (put it in a glass... i mean you do LIVE there, so its not like you dont have access to a mug).

And no, i DONT drink on my stoop, i drink in my apartment or in my backyard. I have an issue with people drinking in front of my place as it is (who arent "hurting" anybody), and i prefer not to encourage it or give it any degree of legitimacy... indeed i'd be a total hippocrite if i did.

and while it may be your property, its not terribly private is it? if it were, there wouldnt be an issue to talk about. this is NY, where the abutment of private and public is a real continuous problem (first floor apt bedroom & no drapes?), no need to exacerbate the issue by believing you have some god-given right to act entirely as you please where you are openly and completely viewable to every man woman AND child, expecially when there are several easy, no-cost, amenable solutions.

There simply ARE limits, and i think its entirly reasonable to say to people.. please keep the drinking inside (or at least dont look like your drinking so some degree of decorum is preserved for the neighborhood).

--LionBalls

Posted by: lionballs at September 16, 2008 3:17 PM

omg, you guys shuold get a room. ;)

Posted by: lionballs at September 16, 2008 3:39 PM

but only pinot noir!!! dare you bring boons and straight to jail you miscreants!!

Posted by: lionballs at September 16, 2008 3:54 PM

with one boob or two?

Posted by: lionballs at September 16, 2008 4:08 PM

Is that a good thing?

no idea who he is.

Posted by: lionballs at September 17, 2008 11:07 AM