Legalize alcohol in Sharp County?

[Lana]

With all this coming out and in play, is there anything we can do to force a special election? Or take steps to try?

[EMA]

Street says he doesn't want to see liquor stores all over the place. Arkansas law says Sharp County could ony have 4 liquor stores in the whole county. That sure don't sound like stores all over the place. If theres only 4 in the whole county what's the big deal. Thats not many at all matter of fact, Street may have a hard time finding one to picket out in front of. He may need a map and ask directions to it.

[Friend]

Paul,

Have you ever heard the expression, "Where there's smoke there's fire"?

This entire thread is the most "popular" on the Forum. People really feel strongly about the right to drink and to have convenient access to alcohol. Of course, they do now have the right. The issue is easy access. And easy access is a local matter open to voters.

I am personally disappointed that a procedural matter knocked this of the ballot. It should be voted on as soon as possible. I feel personally sorry for Ruth who worked so hard. I'm a big fan of "grass roots" efforts. Now let's move on to the bigger issue.

Making light of folks who have experienced negative impact from alcohol is unfair to them and the issue. It also unfair to make the issue a purely economic one. It is a much, much bigger issue than that and deep down we all know that.

The most responsible governmental data suggests that one out of ten drinkers becomes alcoholic. That one out of ten impacts other family members -- children and spouses -- as well as employers and the medical system -- including those medical services tax dollars support. Violent crime under the influence of alcohol is the major cause of the prison population. We need to speak honestly about the social cost of alcohol use. My understanding of the original cause of Sharp going "dry" was a violent murder outside a bar in Hardy. It is not simply a "religious" issue.

Let's have some honesty in this discussion. People want easy access to alcohol in Sharp County. They know deep down that there will be an increase in some social negative effects but they think it is worth it for their convenience. In promoting this issue "wet" will speak of economic benefit without addressing the overwhelming economic negative impact to our society in health care, domestic issues like child abuse and neglect, spousal abuse, and crime. As long as alcohol is legal anywhere we will have these problems. I'm not into prohibition. But how about some honesty? Alcohol use causes tons of problems in our society and impacts many innocent folks who don't use it at all. Let's end making light of the concerns of those who have had their lives ruined by alcohol whether personally, or by the fist of a drunken father or husband, or by having a son or daughter killed by a drunk driver on the road.

[wellerisok2341]

Friend,

I hear you and you make a valid point. If I offended you, I apologize. I was trying to put one of their arguments back at them by showing them how absurd some of their arguments really are. You are right that alcohol causes problems, and I don't think anyone would have an argument about that. You bring up factual data, but we do live in a free society, and there are always going to be certain percentages of people who abuse rights and freedoms, whether it is recklessly driving an automobile, smoking too much, gambling too much, or abusing alcohol.

Just because some people like Michael Vick (the ex-NFL football player currently in jail) abuse and kill dogs for recreation, do we not allow the citizenry of Sharp County to own domestic dogs on the chance that a small percentage in the county will abuse the privilege and raise dogs for fighting and personal gain? Of course not. Just because there are a few wayward religious leaders abusing their flock like this Tony Alamo nut in Texarkana, do we ban churches in Sharp County on the chance that a small percentage in the county may abuse the privilege and defraud congregations and abuse children? Of course not. Those are all absurd ideas much like banning alcohol sales in a county because of a small percentage that will abuse the privilege. When someone in a free society abuses privileges, let the law handle them. Taking away the privilege altogether is what is bothering the people the most, whether they use the privilege or not.

It may be alcohol that is what's being debated, but the deeper issue that troubles the citizens is the underhandedness of their ways in pushing their agenda. I don't think there's any doubt that the voters want to vote on this issue, and they are angry. As was stated in that news story, some of them don't touch the stuff, but they feel their right to vote was taken away by deceitful means by people who claim to be good, honest people. That's the real issue in all of this.

I was making light of some of Street's assertions, I acknowledge that, and the reason I did that is I find his numbers hard to believe and if he is going to make such statements, he needs to please back them up. I am asking him to prove what he claims. I don't think he will or can. I believe them to be made up numbers pulled out of a hat.

Good debate Friend. You bring your facts and make your case like a gentleman. If I do not do the same, I do apologize.

Paul

[Friend]

Hi Paul,

I think we all here want to look at this issue as fairly as possible, and the issues that you advance are all quite important. As with all "hot" issues, we will tend to push our most personal investment in the issue and make our best case. We all do that -- I certainly do! But I think we all now want to bring all the strands of the discussion together in our hearts and heads and then head into that voting booth. We will all come out of this vote "winners" as we try our best to respect the investment of one another. The thing about this issue is that real lives have been touched by it sometimes quite negatively. I know that you understand and appreciate that on your side as well. Thanks for your post.

[jimmy]

read this big story in the gazette outlining the funding of the lawsuits by street and shaw. http://www2.arkansasonline.com/news/200 ... hreerivers reading this does not put shaw in good light. she looks like a pawn and seems like she's hiding something. you be the judge.

then you've got the local churches and how they have helped to fund it http://www.villageronline.com/story/1479804.html the only good thing i can say about street is that he didn't take any missouri money like shaw did. but i am questioning how these local churches gave money to the cause from the general funds when it could go to better use instead of paying lawyer fees. no hungry kid in sharp county got fed with those donations but some attorney got fed in the bank account that's for sure. the church i attend did give some money but i did not. i am on the fence with the churches giving money to the cause because they give some money for other causes too so they should have the right to give to this i suppose.

and this is the letter to the editor in the journal by jerry adams who posts on this board. i am giving jerry my support and thank him for his efforts. http://www.villageronline.com/story/1479770.html

[sbgrace]

Yota Shaw of Strawberry, Arkansas is quoted in the Nov. 20th Arkansas Democrat
Gazette stating "I know that the wet/dry issue was a pretty heated issue for a lot of people.
I did it ( filed a law suit contesting the signatures on a petition in Sharp County , Ar. to
get the wet/dry issue on the general election ballot this past November ) for the kids. I
told my kids that you're not supposed to do drugs and you're not supposed to drink. I cant
expect them to say no if Momma's not willing to keep the county dry."

Well , its not up to "Momma" to keep the county dry. Its up to the people of Sharp
County. The people have the right to vote on this issue. She might also want to explain to
her kids the meaning of ethical and honest behavior. When she made a deal with "demon"
alcohol (in her opinion) to except money from liquor distributors in Missouri , it was the
height of hypocrisy.

May I suggest the next lesson she gives her kids ,she might pick up a dictionary and look
up the following words, hypocrite, stooge, flunky, dupe, phony, sham and deception.
When and if this issue finally gets on the 2010 ballot she can also give her kids a lesson
in freedom and democracy ,when the people of Sharp County finally get to decide this is
issue, no thanks to Yota Shaw , Morris Street and their lawyers.

The amount of money these people took in donations is going to exceed $30,000.00. This
disgusts me. All this money went to usurp the rights of the people of Sharp County. And
to fill attorneys pockets. How many families in our area could have used just a little bit of
this money to feed their children, put propane in their tanks, put Thanksgiving dinner on
the table and put Christmas presents under their trees? I was speaking with the principal
at the grade school and it breaks my heart to hear stories of little boys coming to school in
their sisters pink hand me down coats, wearing no socks on there feet and other such tales
of need. In Streets case he is proud that he took no liquor money, he took CHURCHES
money!! How many poor people in his church could have used a little help. His pride ,
ego and arrogance are outrageous.

We have approved the new petitions and we will be back on the streets collecting
signatures soon. We can use all the help we can get, whether it is financial, time or ideas,
give me a call 870-847-2150 Thanks for your support and we shall succeed. All we ask is
to let us VOTE!! Let the People decide!!

Jerry Adams

[mike]

Ruth Reynolds is getting ready for the 2010 ballot.

Reynolds can be found, most days, sitting at the court house collecting signatures. She said several other canvassers have started as well.

Before preparing the petitions this time, they sought, thier appeal attorney Lowery's legal advice. Reynolds said she hopes they have covered all of their bases this time.

Reynolds invites all registered voters who support the petition to come to the courthouse and sign it. The next election will be in 2010, so there is time for those who are not registered to do so.

http://www.villageronline.com/story/1525247.html

Thanks to The Villager Journal for the article.

Mike

[EMA]

She's a feisty one. She's a thorn in them dry folks side and I'm glad this gal stands up for what's right. Put it on the ballot and be done with it, pass or fail.

[mike]

Here's a few links on the repealing of Arkansas' Blue Laws that are worth reading.

http://nwahomepage.com/content/fulltext_news/?cid=74462

http://www.examiner.com/x-4290-Little-R ... n-Arkansas

http://arkansasnews.com/2009/03/04/new- ... hol-sales/

http://arkansasnews.com/2009/04/20/exte ... confusion/

http://arkansasnews.com/2009/05/18/grou ... ohol-bias/

This link is a question that will be answered sometime in the near future
http://twitter.com/ARScuttlebutt/status/1285845486

Mike

[mike]

Morris Street forms Coalition for the Future of Sharp County to oppose Sharp County from becoming wet.

Street also said the only ones who will get rich from the sale of alcohol will be the distributors. This was evident by the Newport area alcohol distributors donating money during the last election to help keep Sharp County dry. Street said they are the only ones who would benefit, not the citizens or small businesses that would sell alcohol.

I have a couple of questions that I believe should be asked. Mr. Street, did your friend Yota Shaw accept contributions from groups and individuals who have an interest in Missouri beer and liquor sales? Do you not think those groups in Missouri, who Yota Shaw gladly accepted money from, would benefit greatly if Sharp County stayed dry? Please reference the following Villager Journal article http://www.villageronline.com/story/1477901.html for the contribution reporting.

Mr. Street, do you not see the hypocrisy in your recent statement?

This issue is continuing and will until election day in November 2010....

The latest article is at http://www.villageronline.com/story/1548573.html

Thanks to The Villager Journal for the article.

Mike

[Friend]

Hi All,

I sometimes get myself in trouble for my views on this subject. People like to drink and they don't like either government or moral zealots trying to control their lives. I get that. But what you don't get much honesty about in this discussion is the actual cost to the community in crime and tax costs policing. Social problems are numerous around alcohol and substance abuse. Before anyone jumps on the bandwagon of "Let's Go Wet" at least take a look at the CV Wanted Page. Look at the number of alcohol related arrests. It will sober anyone right up!

http://cherokeevillage.org/mostwanted/wanted.htm

[mike]

After two years, it looks like there are more problems with getting the wet/dry issue on the November 2010 ballot.

I am at a loss of understanding what happened here if this measure does not make it to the ballot due to missing a simple deadline. I have applauded the efforts of Ruth Reynolds publicly and privately in the past, and still do, but to miss a deadline as important as this is unbelievable and unexcusable. As controversial as this issue has been, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that the group pushing for the issue to get on the ballot be completely knowledgeable as to every single rule and regulation pertaining to gettting it on the ballot? Someone in the group should have known the regs, but I guess not.

I'm asking the basic and very obvious question. Shouldn't the attorney for SERT have known these regs and deadlines and advised SERT on when and how to file?

Dropping the ball like this is a shame and obviously not intentional, but is still hard to swallow. For or against the issue, I believe it would be good to have this issue on the ballot once and for all and for the voters to decide it up or down. Now it looks like 2012 and there's no guarantee for that.

I simply cannot believe this.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s ... clnk&gl=us

Mike

[Friend]

Hi Forum,

Just an observation: It is curious that this topic of alcohol has generated more views than any other in the Forum. Almost 1000 views! Does anyone have an idea why? Even more views than the hospital!!!