Police Chief Seeks End to Public Urination
An amendment to prohibit public urination and defecation will be up for consideration at next Tuesday’s University Park City Council meeting. Apparently, the issue has increased in the last few years, according to Chief of Police Gary Adams.
Should the new amendment pass, UP police will have the authority to issue a citation or arrest anyone caught urinating in public. Unsurprisingly, the staff recommends approval.
If you’re shocked that this is not already illegal, you are not alone. The agenda memo states that UP “may be the only city in the state not to have such an ordinance.”
It’s a shame we had to go there. I read an article recently lamenting the fact that the last congress had been so disfunctional that they only managed to pass about 200 laws, whereas the one before that had been able to pass over 1000. To me that’s a 80% reduction in bureaucratic red tape for which congress should be applauded! I say let’s send our most stridently partisan hacks up there to undermine each other as often as they can while in session, then send them all on paid vacations. The price would be a drop in the bucket to what it costs everytime they pass another law.
My favorite aspect of this is that the item is on the main agenda and not the consent agenda. Is the city staff expecting the council to debate the merits of the proposal? “Now, hold on, Chief. Our citizens have the inalienable right to pee in public.”
Its called disorderly conduct- urinating in public.
Dan you can poop in public just not pee!
Is this really a problem? Can’t wait to see upcoming issues of ‘Skulduggery”.
Speaking of “seeks to end,” why is SMU seeking to end its Law School Dean’s tenure?
@TB,
Somehow you turned this into a political discussion? Wow. I guess it begs the question, what WOULDN’T you turn into a political discussion?
XT-Who proposed this law? The bureaucrats. Who will decide to pass it or not? The politicians. It’s on the main agenda instead of the consent agenda, which means the politicians will have a political discussion about this law before they decide to pass it or not. Passage of any law is an inherently political process. Except, of course, when it is done by reconciliation or executive order. But who makes decisions without political discourse? Oh yeah, I forgot. Nevermind.
for pete’s sake, has no
one heard of “marking your
territory?”.
if you want to make sure
your property isn’t robbed
or vandalized, discretely
“mark” its perimeter.
preferably late at night.
its better than an alarm
system.
and cheaper too.