It was the same way in the early 80s. The town was actively hostile to the university and students.
Why does Starkville hate Mississippi State?
- Thread starter 615dawg
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, they are all saying it, but they are very short on workable details on how to do it. Everyone pretty much agrees it needs to be toned down, including me. Doing it legally without killing it isn't nearly as simple as a few are saying here.
Luscos and Crystal have both shut down unfortunately. Lucsos actually moved to Taylor, MS., right outside of Oxford. Sure miss Crystal Grill, that was our lunch spot every Sunday after church.
I'm 90% sure you are out of compliance, but the city started out lax on the laws which i'm fine with. But as soon as crowds started gathering and lingering they should have shut it down. Police it hard for a few weeks. Ease up. Rinse. Repeat.
Instead it got worse.
they did nothing
It got even worse
they did nothing
then it got so bad people started complaining
they did nothing
THEN SOMEONE GOT SHOT
Now the mayor is saying she'll get to it after her baseball game
Ho so? You still haven't given a viable option to tone it down without killing it. You are just saying get rid of people. Who exactlyand how? Remember, it has to be done legally. I gave you mine in an answer to another poster.
Because 'people that smell like weed' is a protected class? There will likely be some disparities in what types of groups are impacted, but that's a difficult claim to win. You usually need to prove intent to discriminate suits based on policing actions.
So, OK, based on that it sounds like an enforcement issue as opposed to a policy issue.
Regardless of whether the mayor’s tweet was stupid / annoying / out of touch (FWIW, I think it was all three), I’m still not sure how - in a city government with Starkville’s structure - the mayor can actually do anything of substance related to making the police enforce the laws on the books. They should do that on their own, if they are adequately staffed.
The mayor cannot fire the chief of police without the backing or recommendation of the BOA. The mayor CAN push for additional police funding / manpower. But, that costs money. That’s the real issue. Neither taxpayers nor the BOA are going to support a bloated police presence year-round, with pensions and all that, when that presence is only needed for a handful of weekends per year. It’s real easy to say “just increase law enforcement presence”, but more difficult to post up the entire SPD in the Cotton District. And, if your 2000 number is correct, that’s probably what it would take.
And I’m still not sure what any of this has to do with somebody being shot. There’s a whole lot of talk about open containers and loitering, yet nobody really saying anything about a dude walking around in a crowd of allegedly thousands of people and alcohol and drugs while packing heat. I guess that’s not really a problem?
We've been saying its an enforcement issue.
But its gotten so bad you almost have to change the policy for a while. Then go back to the fun policy and actually enforce it.
People keep saying this. AND ITS FALSE.
The police chief reports to the mayor. If the mayor tells the police chief to police harder he will.
IF HE DOESN'T (and i don't think thats the case), the mayor could get him fired b/c i know alderman who don't like what the hell is going on.
I've been told by an alderman that he (poliece chief) is agitated about the situation as well, but apparently alderman and businesses are ramping up pressure. Thank god.
LEOs know the difference, and the good ones can spot these individuals quickly. The real question is whether our mayor and police chief will back them in running them out.
You put a cover on the street on the weekend after certain hours. Metal detectors are coming to Cotton District too. I have heard this first hand from someone in the know. That's how.
How do you determine who smells like weed in a big group? Heck a lot of it is legal now anyway. I can't go to Wal Mart without smelling weed, and I don't live in Starkville.
No, you haven't give a single one that can be acted on in a legal way, except for ending the open container district, which would kill the purpose of it. That is a legit opinion. I don't know why you keep denying that is what you are calling for when it is exactly what you are calling for. For me personally I would actually agree with that, but it isn't about me personally. I just avoid the place after a certain hour on the occasions I'm down there at that time. It ain't there for me. Heck I wouldn't go to any of those spots at that time if it wasn't an entertainment district.
Yes. Probably a third party security company. It's done on Beale Street which experiences similar issues that are happening in the CD.
A cover on a public street for just a normal business weekend? OK, you could try it. If it worked THT would fantastic, and a money source for the city. I wonder what the businesses would say though? You would run some of the bad elements off, but you also might run off other folks as well. What would be the hours? What are the boundaries? Would the District have to be cleared before it starts? The devil might be in the details on that one. It would take a lot of staff to implement it if it’s going to be done every weekend. Even if it’s just game weekends, by the time you throw in the big three sports that’s still a lot of weekends. I still think the guy above had it right. When places get it right, there is usually a pretty heavy foot policing element with the district, and there is a pretty low tolerance for anything disorderly. You would still hve to have that even with a cover and metal detectors. That costs money too.
My point to all this in this thread is just that it isn’t as simple as it’s being made out to be. The devil in in the details and the legalities of what you can and can’t do when policing. You hve to think about these things when you are the one having to do it.
So, the mayor needs help from the aldermen to hold him accountable. Exactly what I was saying.
I doubt she’s telling the police chief to lool the other way on blatantly illegal shít.
So, taking tens of thousands of dollars out of the hands of actual law-abiding citizens, flowing it out to some sleazy security company instead of to the Starkville businesses in the area that depend on those big weekends to makeup for the lean winter and summer months…..all while deterring general foot traffic in the area for those businesses….THAT’s the solution?
And oh yeah, there’s still that ever so remote possibility that someone who has a $500 Glock in their rear waistband also just might have $5 to pay the cover?
I can’t think of a more inefficient, toxic solution than that for the Cotton District. In my day I saw enough jackassery and shítheadedness of all shapes and sizes at Ricks, Cheers, the Hunt Club, and Cowbells to know that a cover charge isn’t going tobdo anything to address the problem.
I agree that the entire policy needs to be scrapped. Heading into the summer, it’s the perfect time to do it. Be ready in the fall with a new policy and actually enforce it.
This weekends activities cannot continue.
This weekends activities cannot continue.
Give me a break on taking this thousands of dollars crap. The Landing was charging something like a 60 dollar (maybe more) cover after some football games and had a line a block long.
The guy carrying that 500 dollar glock probably didn't go into the store and buy it, and has not taken a safety course.
I don't recall anyone ever getting shot inside of Ricks. Someone did get shot OUTSIDE of the Hunt Club years ago, but they were just loitering out there surprise surprise
This garbage was happening outside the damn stadium in 2023. How did we deal with that? That’s how you deal with it in the Cotton District. It’s quite simple.
You virtue signaling idiots (you know who you are) can get 17ed.
You virtue signaling idiots (you know who you are) can get 17ed.
They are the black people standing in the street. I mean I know that’s what you’re trying to get people to say and they are the issue. There, it’s out in the open. They are the problem, as they were in the junction a couple of years ago and basically are everywhere they gather in large groups without heavy police presence. I’m tired of listening to people tiptoe around the issue. Stats don’t lie. Sorry if it hurts your feelings.
Look. Lynn is who he is a millionaire ex pilot lesbian who wanted to be mayor because she was bored. She still hasn’t gotten over the Covid scam. She was dead wrong on that. Not arguable. Putting up the camera AFTER a shooting is her reactive go to. “Nobody will be killed at this spot again without us knowing who did it”. 17n stupid
The Landing charging a $60 cover is one thing, because that money goes to…..The Landing. And the people paying it are going to be standing inside a building….not be outside in an even more crowded area.
Smart business move for them because it keeps people in there pot-committed to staying, hanging out, and buying drinks (and probably getting some specials).
A neighborhood block with plenty of public hardscape and greenspace charging a cover to just be in the general area, then have those same folks pay ANOTHER cover to get in somewhere like The Landing is preposterous.
And whoever you don’t want to be there will still pay the $5-10 or whatever and proceed to drink all night for just that, or get a wristband passed to them. It solves nothing except for getting some rent-a-cops some more overtime.
Doesn’t hurt my feelings. It’s something you have to think about here though from an enforcement perspective. You can’t do selective enforcement based on appearance of any kind.
I think we solved that problem by hiring Lebby.
Do we need to let him start running a bar in the District?
My truck I had in college has a bullet hole from the shooting that occurred in 2021. Thankfully I wasn't near it, but they sure wouldn't let me grab it or get inside it to grab stuff until they had the crime scene cleared early the next morning.
Im not going to convince you otherwise, but it certainly would. The mere visual of a security check and money paid to walk on the street once you pass through a metal detector would deter a lot of the unwanted people from coming. They would stay in the surrounding areas and do something else.
No she doesn’t.
the GD police chief wanted to do something about it.
Yes hypothetically if the police chief disobeyed direction from the mayor she’d need the board to fire him but that’s not what’s happening.
Are you 17ing dumb? Do you think the students and businesses would rather pay $10 cover or deal with the mess from this past weekend?
And you know what didn’t happen in the landing when they charged $60 cover?
any dumb BS!!
Damn I figured you’d be on the other side of this
“downtown Jackson is perfectly safe!!”
2 things happen when you charge a cover to get in.
they scan your ID
you pay money
guaranteed eliminates 50% of the people who don’t go in bars.
- Status