People should be concerned,
I was in attendance at the City Council Meeting May 28th and I am shocked. Most of the meeting was typical until we got to the liquor code revision. I watch and attend out of curiosity more than anything and was beyond surprised at some of the things I heard. I agree some of the wording revisions are good, the codes do need updated. Let me list my concerns, in no particular order:
The chief of police, they are giving a man who from his reactions to the public speaking which I saw as honest and informative too much power. You could watch his face and see his temper coming out yet he had no response or argument to the officers not doing their jobs (the walk-throughs he has spoken of many times). The managers of two bars stated this does not happen and he had no rebuttal but to flick the microphone and turn red in the face and huff, if this wasn't true why didn't he respond rather than having a temper tantrum with body language? And this man who cant even defend the officers not doing walk throughs is given the right to close down a bar for what he believes is a flagrant violation of the code, is he going to be able to defend his actions there?
Secondly councilman John Patrick Rice, I wrote one part of his frustrated rant as an exact quote the rest I will paraphrase as I understood it. "There is no expectation of privacy in 2013" that is a direct quote. This rant came about while discussing video surveillance in establishments open from 1am to 8am, they are asking for 24 hr surveillance available to police and city council at any time. Mr. Rice stated that if your in a public place you have no right to any privacy, that they plan to watch these tapes to prove that the bars are over serving. Okay yeah the bars do over serve I'm sure on occasion, and the violence is scary but to blame it solely on the bar establishments is laughable. What about casino's, drugs or pardon my opinion 21 year olds who were never taught discipline or respect. How dare he flagrantly say we have no right to privacy, if I go into a bar to have a cocktail in the afternoon I don't want to worry they will watch these tapes (either police or city council) and maybe use the fact I was in a bar against me, is this a military state? Thankfully the Mayor and Schmidtlein were logical enough to see the problems with this and voted to remove the surveillance section but they were outvoted. We have a right to go into a public business and enjoy a bit of privacy irregardless of where we are. Privacy is defined in many ways, and this seems unconstitutional.
In my opinion they are pushing the bars for a shutdown using them as a scapegoat for something they don't know how to fix.
Or even better, since they work for the city, shall we go into their office and check to see how loud their telephone conversations are? Perhaps that "rowdy" behavior will stem violent behavior. The city council is open to the public, which shares "no privacy."
The point here is simple. Bars cannot stem violence any more than a gun can kill a person or a fork causes someone to be obese. Lay a gun on a table, all day, in your own home, and chances are, everyone will still be alive. Violence is an act of nature, in all forms, and unfortunately for some, it does fall upon them. For the bars, it is the responsibility of the bartenders to take care of their customers, even if it means cutting them off. Really, it is as simple as that.
Take care dear citizens. You no longer have privacy and you are being watched by Big Brother of Elko.