Sharp County Arkansas Wet Dry Issue Sale of Alcohol SERT for inclusion on ballot 2010

The reason that people who are for a wet county won't admit that there would be an increase in crime if a county became wet is because there is no evidence to support such a claim. In fact, it's just the opposite. The big easy target being DWI is almost always LOWER in wet counties than in dry ones. Here are just a couple of links that support this.



I have yet to see any studies that confirm a higher crime rate in wet counties that were not done by religious groups. I have also never seen a quote from law enforcement where they have shown any concern about a sudden rise in crime due to alcohol sales being made legal.

Hi Baptist,

Thank you for offering your thoughts on this controversial topic.

My view is probably very much in the minority. I agree with those who are unimpressed with over-the-top protests based on religious views on drinking. It also is not the right way to go about raising objections as it feels like religious imposition which nobody likes. The fact that there seems to be liquor money tied up with the dry campaign isn't likely to impress many folks -- religious or otherwise -- as having much integrity. MO liquor money is rumored to be all over this one.

However, I still personally share some serious concerns about going wet. I don't think it will improve quality of life. Any Friday night around CV will make pretty clear why. The police are literally waiting to pick up folks for DWI. Check out the police reports. Drinking IS a problem in the area.

This is the weaker part of the "wet" argument. They won't admit the fact that drinking does affect non-drinkers -- whether by an upswing in crime, drunk driving, domestic violence, or simply obnoxious behavior. Communities do have a right to set their own community standards around drinking -- go dry. But here is a point where I agree 100% with the wets. It is a matter to be voted on up or down. These technical obstructions are only going to make folks madder and ramp up the wet vote. Rightly so. I'd be mad too.

All said and done, Baptist is right. It's going to happen. It's the right of the community to vote on it without further delay. Whether we will be glad on the other side in terms of quality of life is another question altogether.

To the M. Street group, sorry to burst your bubble, but things change and communities needs change and evolve over time. The votes were there and you knew it. The issue WILL be on the ballot one day, and everyone pro and con who is intimately involved with the issue fully acknowledge that fact. The likely votes clearly now have favored going wet and if the election were to be held tomorrow, it looks like a landslide victory for going wet. You clearly did not have the votes to keep the county dry and I'll tell you why it has come to that.

The "anti wet" side and people like you have done yourselves a huge disservice on the way your side has acted in this debate. Rational people, and that includes those practicing and actively participating in their chosen religions, agree that the extreme religious fringes of the "stay dry" side are doing more damage to their cause than good. The way to win elections is not to preach to the choir, you've already got their votes, it is to make a rational and level headed argument to the ones on the fence. In other words, you need to persuade the middle of the roaders in a way that will make them actually go to the polling place on election day and vote the way you would like them to vote. That is hard to do. You are not doing that.

People realize these days that legal substances and activities have the right to exist in one's community if the majority find it ok. Far too long a small faction of a community have for what ever reason, kept the majority view away from the ballot on certain issues and that time is fading away my friend, like it or not. Outdated laws still exist on the books that have not been enforced for years and need to be done away with, and they are over time.

For example, in many communities across the US, and not just in the bible belt, it is still illegal for married couples to practice oral sex. Now, even practicing baptists like me realize that is an outdated view and an even more ridiculous law, is clearly not enforceable, and is a leftover from puritan days that do not exist anymore. Whether you agree with it or not is not the issue, but your view on oral sex should not determine what your neighbors are allowed to do in the privacy of their own home. Quite frankly, they don't care what you think, and that's the way it should be. What I'm getting at is community standards have changed, alcohol is a legal substance and it should be the right of the individual to choose if he or she wants to purchase alcohol in the community where they live. Just because you don't believe in drinking alcohol is of no relevance to your neighbor. It is your right not to participate in purchasing and/or consuming alcohol, but it is not your right to tell your neighbor he or she cannot do as such.

Your statement, "The only ones that want it wet are the alcoholics anyways! Alcoholics need to MOVE if they want to live down the road from their supplies!" is actually driving people on the fence over to the wet side in droves. Why? Because they are coming to realize that the worn out views and arguments, and irrational behavior and beliefs ( like anyone who supports a county being wet must be an alcoholic) are just that, irrational and should be pushed to the ash heap of history.
If you cannot understand that a statement like "anyone who supports a county being wet must be an alcoholic" is completely irrrational and not at all reasonable to believe, then you simply are too far gone and cannot be reasoned with. People on the fence clearly get that now and are swinging their vote opposite of yours simply to counter your irrational beliefs.

If you cannot understand that, you can't too far gone for help. You and your like minded fringes are and will continue to be regarded by the masses as being too ridiculous to reason with, and to that, I say good luck to you and have fun trying to make a happy life for yourself anywhere the United States, because you will find fewer and fewer places that will make you completely happy. Where will you go when Sharp County votes in favor?

Here's some interesting discussion from 2008 and later that gives some other perspective on Sharp County Wet/Dry

(From the old forum)

http://www.cherokeevillagear.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=39

http://www.cherokeevillagear.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=39&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=50

http://www.cherokeevillagear.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=840

No matter how many unintentional mistakes have been made by the wet side, and there have been many, that it is becoming increasingly difficult to hide, discount, or explain away the extreme hypocrisy from the dry crowd in taking money to finance their efforts from the very institution they loathe and publicly cry out against. I highly suspect the dry side public outcry is not the same as it is when behind closed doors.

The old saying that "your character is defined by what you do when nobody is looking" seems to apply here when discussing some of the vocal people in the group to keep Sharp County dry.

It is simply amazing to witness open and blatant true hypocrisy from some of these people on the dry side of the debate. I seriously question their true motives in their fight against Sharp County going wet. I now do not believe they are fighting against it purely on religious, moral, or any anti-drinking reasons. It doesn't add up.

New article on the lates of the wet/dry issue

http://www.areawidenews.com/story/1657583.html

The obvious question and statement to be made here about SERT not being aware of the deadline and the county not offering the information them to them is...

If you're in a fight and a very adversarial situation like this one obviously is, why would you rely on anybody, including the local governmental agencies to voluntarily provide information like a new deadline? That falls directly on SERT for not crossing all the "t"'s and dotting all the "i"'s and making sure of any deadlines. The current deadline is not new. It was changed in 2009 by the state legislature. The fact remains that SERT should have known this and the blame should stop with them no matter how shady and good ole boy it may appear to them and some other people. The bottom line is it was SERT's responsibility to know the deadlines and they missed it, period, end of story. If they relied on their attorney to provide them with that information, then that's another story and between them and their attorney, and I have no way of knowing that or not, but I will ask that question. The bottom line though is, the blame still lies with SERT.

Having said that, I hope the fight does continue to 2012, and if it does, you better know who you are going up against and take into account how they have played in the past and who is funding and supporting them. Those with the most information will win this fight and the dry side had more information this time and last time, and there was no obligation for them to provide it to their opposition.

Don't trust anyone in a fight such as this. Rely on yourself and your own group to know what needs to be known and how to win the game.

Mike

Here are the two groups currently involved in the Wet/Dry Issue for the sale of alcohol in Sharp County, Arkansas

All of the following information is public record and can easily be found at www.arkansasethics.com and various simple searches on Google.


Save Energy Reap Taxes

http://www.arkansasethics.com/blqc.htm#Save_Energy

http://www.sos.arkansas.gov/corps/search_corps.php?DETAIL=282887&corp_type_id=&corp_name=Save+Energy+Reap+Taxes&agent_search=&agent_city=&agent_state=&filing_number=&cmd=

http://www.saveenergyreaptaxes.com/


Coalition For the Future of Sharp County

http://www.arkansasethics.com/blqc.htm#Coalition

http://www.sos.arkansas.gov/corps/search_corps.php?DETAIL=73577&corp_type_id=&corp_name=COALITION+FOR+THE+FUTURE+OF+SHARP+COUNTY&agent_search=&agent_city=&agent_state=&filing_number=&cmd=

http://futuresharpcounty.org/


For more news articles on this issue and information from the past couple of years, please see:

http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2008/nov/20/sharp-county-funding-lawsuit-called-quest-20081120/

http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2008/nov/13/post-election-review-keeping-bottle-corke-20081113/?threerivers

http://www.villageronline.com/story/1477901.html

http://www.areawidenews.com/story/1548608.html

http://www.kait8.com/Global/story.asp?S=12158557


Postings from our other forum on this ongoing Sharp County wet/dry issue:

http://www.cherokeevillagear.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=39

After two more years, it looks like there are more problems with getting the Sharp County Arkansas 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?

If SERT's attorney did know and advised SERT of the deadline, why didn't SERT file in time? If the attorney for SERT did not know, why not? Was it the attorney for SERT's responsibility to know of this deadline? If it was not, who's responsibility was it to be kept abreast of all deadlines that were needed to be met in order to get the issue on the November 2010 ballot?

Many registered voters and people with interests in Sharp County Arkansas have many questions like these I've just asked and these questions deserve to be answered and answered soon.

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 either.

I simply cannot believe this. The county is potentially losing another two years of positive future economic impact. Making Sharp County wet will indeed have an economic benefit to the community and will help to expand the tourism segment of the local economy, which is a vital part of this area's economy and benefits all citizens.

Mike

Reposted from 8/15/10 http://www.cherokeevillagear.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=840