^ that's a pretty tough piece to read.
- 1,364
Michael Brown protesting has been in the news lately since it's the anniversary of the shooting.
Other than that...
Chinese photographers capture St Louis frame of mind
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metr ... 8a9df.html
Pretty cool.
Other than that...
Chinese photographers capture St Louis frame of mind
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metr ... 8a9df.html
Pretty cool.
- 2,419
St. Louis is now once again in the news for violent protests in Ferguson.
The media makes St. Louis sound like Ghetto Land, USA and it makes me so sad.
I really hope the people in charge in St. Louis County can get this fixed.
Municipalities need to be merged, and I'm sure there are a whole host of contributing factors to why this is happening again.
I just want to see this fixed.
The media makes St. Louis sound like Ghetto Land, USA and it makes me so sad.
I really hope the people in charge in St. Louis County can get this fixed.
Municipalities need to be merged, and I'm sure there are a whole host of contributing factors to why this is happening again.
I just want to see this fixed.
- 3,433
Should Ferguson consider permanently closing West Florissant? They could probably purchase the land along it for nothing. UMSL North Campus? Express Scripts campus? Emerson expansion? Boeing bomber plant? If they made that whole area private enterprise, rather than public, access and guns could be controlled constitutionally, as they are at Boeing, Disneyland, etc.
Since gun advocates are clamoring to bring guns onto any property controlled by government, such as the Zoo, I could see the solution moving toward making previously public institutions and public areas private just to be able to put up a fence and control firearm entry. Or even protests -- (such as the Rams outlawing signs at Rams camp practices.) That should satisfy everyone, since the same folks argue that government can't do anything anyway.
Since gun advocates are clamoring to bring guns onto any property controlled by government, such as the Zoo, I could see the solution moving toward making previously public institutions and public areas private just to be able to put up a fence and control firearm entry. Or even protests -- (such as the Rams outlawing signs at Rams camp practices.) That should satisfy everyone, since the same folks argue that government can't do anything anyway.
- 985
I doubt that would work for two reasons. Either said people will just go somewhere else and you'd be back at square one, or the legislature starts saying that private properties can't do such restrictions and considering who they are they might do just that.
- 985
^ That actually isn't a bad idea to have something like that in the region. Since for all the rivers in the area there is very little in terms of any real connections to it. The riverfronts too often are just an afterthought
Not trying to derail this into another gun debate, but figured I'd clarify Missouri law a bit. Public property actually is generally your best bet in Missouri for preventing guns. On private property, "no guns" signs, and even explicitly excluded areas (such as a church or amusement park) do not carry force of law. In other words, there aren't (generally) specific penalties for having your firearm in those areas (assuming you have a valid carry permit). If you are found to be carrying a firearm, you can be asked to leave by the property owner and, if you don't comply, normal trespassing rules will of course be enforced. However, having the gun on the premises is itself not a criminal act and carries no penalties. If you refuse to leave when asked however, then there are some specific consequences that kick in. Here's the relevant part of the statute:gary kreie wrote:Should Ferguson consider permanently closing West Florissant? They could probably purchase the land along it for nothing. UMSL North Campus? Express Scripts campus? Emerson expansion? Boeing bomber plant? If they made that whole area private enterprise, rather than public, access and guns could be controlled constitutionally, as they are at Boeing, Disneyland, etc.
Since gun advocates are clamoring to bring guns onto any property controlled by government, such as the Zoo, I could see the solution moving toward making previously public institutions and public areas private just to be able to put up a fence and control firearm entry. Or even protests -- (such as the Rams outlawing signs at Rams camp practices.) That should satisfy everyone, since the same folks argue that government can't do anything anyway.
I wouldn't recommend it because I feel you should respect the property owner's wishes, but basically you can go anywhere on private property you'd like (no guns sign or not) and as long as you leave if you're asked, you're in the clear legally. You're probably an a**hole, but that's not illegal. On the other hand, bans on public property (government buildings, courthouses, etc) DO carry force of law in Missouri and the act of bringing a firearm on the premises is itself a criminal offense.Carrying of a concealed firearm in a location specified in subdivisions (1) to (17) of subsection 1 of this section by any individual who holds a concealed carry permit issued pursuant to sections 571.101 to 571.121 shall not be a criminal act but may subject the person to denial to the premises or removal from the premises. If such person refuses to leave the premises and a peace officer is summoned, such person may be issued a citation for an amount not to exceed one hundred dollars for the first offense. If a second citation for a similar violation occurs within a six-month period, such person shall be fined an amount not to exceed two hundred dollars and his or her permit to carry concealed firearms shall be suspended for a period of one year. If a third citation for a similar violation is issued within one year of the first citation, such person shall be fined an amount not to exceed five hundred dollars and shall have his or her concealed carry permit revoked and such person shall not be eligible for a concealed carry permit for a period of three years.
- 3,767
I know.... I know... I shouldn't give him the time of day...For some reason I feel compelled to do so.
Yael strikes again.... He might as well finish every article with an "Did I mention that I hate St. Louis". He comes off as almost childish on this one.
http://www.kansascity.com/opinion/opn-c ... 05484.html
Yael strikes again.... He might as well finish every article with an "Did I mention that I hate St. Louis". He comes off as almost childish on this one.
http://www.kansascity.com/opinion/opn-c ... 05484.html
- 3,433
Yeah this is the paid St Louis hater. I guess it helps sell papers there. The good news is that KC won't catch St Louis for a hundred years at this pace. And Oklahoma City may pass them by then. I imagine most of their growth is due to attracting more Hispanics vs St Louis, since it is closer to Denver and OKC which have had big increases in Hispanic populations.
Yael epitomizes the typical chip on the shoulder Kansas City resident. Always the stepchild to St. Louis. We do need to work on attracting new residents though. Our national image isn't helping that. What's funny is that more st louisans feel safer walking in the neighborhoods of the metro area of stl than residents in the metro area of KC.
It's fully worth noting that St. Louis + St. Louis County inside I-270 only would be around 228 square miles (well shy of Kansas City's 314 square miles), yet would contain about 890,000 people. That is compared to Kansas City's most recent estimate of 470,000.
So, if we were to extend that arbitrary new City+County boundary, say, west to Chesterfield, and total the land area up to 314 square miles to match KC, you'd not only have a more populous place but perhaps one that is equal in growth too. I just will never understand how this is lost on Yael and other Kansas City commentators.
So, if we were to extend that arbitrary new City+County boundary, say, west to Chesterfield, and total the land area up to 314 square miles to match KC, you'd not only have a more populous place but perhaps one that is equal in growth too. I just will never understand how this is lost on Yael and other Kansas City commentators.
- 8,155
^ There isn't any doubt that our core region is much denser than KC's... in fact, looking at the 2010 Census data Saint Louis County has about 75% more people per square mile than Jackson County. And that is without Saint Louis City! When including our fair burg, City + County has a land mass slightly less than Jackson County and a population density a bit more than double our friends to the west.
However, there isn't any doubt that the growth -- both Metro wide and in the core region -- is much higher in Kansas City. Sadly, I think you're way off that our growth would be equal if we included Chesterfield, etc.. Again looking at the Census data, I'm pretty certain that we have lost population inside the 270 ring and the only place static Saint Louis County has had any kind of solid estimated population growth is in far-flung places like Eureka.
Unfortunately, what's harder to guage is how we compare on activity and growth in the inner core, but I think it is safe to say that at the end of the day, Kansas City, while our little brother, is beginning to come into its own and accomplishing some pretty impressive things. In particular, I look forward to seeing how far their Greater Downtown explodes and whether they can extend the streetcar to build out an actual network in the core.
However, there isn't any doubt that the growth -- both Metro wide and in the core region -- is much higher in Kansas City. Sadly, I think you're way off that our growth would be equal if we included Chesterfield, etc.. Again looking at the Census data, I'm pretty certain that we have lost population inside the 270 ring and the only place static Saint Louis County has had any kind of solid estimated population growth is in far-flung places like Eureka.
Unfortunately, what's harder to guage is how we compare on activity and growth in the inner core, but I think it is safe to say that at the end of the day, Kansas City, while our little brother, is beginning to come into its own and accomplishing some pretty impressive things. In particular, I look forward to seeing how far their Greater Downtown explodes and whether they can extend the streetcar to build out an actual network in the core.
Perhaps true, though we must remember Kansas City still has legitimately large undeveloped tracts within City limits. With few and far in between exceptions, St. Louis County does not.
- 8,155
^ very true. And I think that points out how tenuous things are for the County.... without better land use planning and a more robust economy it is only going to face increasing challenges. Inner burbs like Brentwood, Clayton, Maplewood, Richmond Heights, Shrewesbury and University City have had population loss since 2010 according to Census estimates, and with a few exceptions it doesn't get much better the further you go out.
- 985
^most of the undeveloped areas of St. Louis County are either natural areas, flood plains, or more rugged terrain that limits development That is something not present in the Kansas City area and the terrain issues is why sprawl went stronger towards St. Charles County and out than South or West.
What also is too early to tell is weather or not the last year or so has changed populations trends and migrations yet and how so.
What also is too early to tell is weather or not the last year or so has changed populations trends and migrations yet and how so.
I predict this failure of St. Louis political leaders and police to better understand how to work with the national press that doesn't throw up softballs like our local media will have negative consequences for years to come in the national and international media portrayals and narratives of St. Louis. I do think it contributed to the offensive way in which the media clamored to proclaim that the Baltimore events were "no Ferguson" and that "Baltimore is not Ferguson". Certainly there are notable differences between the two cities' political systems and leadership which was fair game for comparison and critique, but I do think our leaders' failures to work well with the national press contributed in no small way to the sh*t piling the media gave St. Louis and will continue to give St. Louis.
Criticism of St. Louis County Grows Over Criminal Charges For Reporters: http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/morn ... minal.html
Criticism of St. Louis County Grows Over Criminal Charges For Reporters: http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/morn ... minal.html
- 8,155
^ The way I put it with this stupid decision to charge media with bogus violations is the equivalent of an "own goal".
- 985
My biggest concern is the region will get the same reputation issues that Birmingham got in the 1960s due to the actions of Bull Connor. That has crippled their metro to this day.
I wonder if the way the local politicans and police in reactions to outside media is a product of the provincialism social aspects rearing its ugly head as a distrust of outsiders?
I wonder if the way the local politicans and police in reactions to outside media is a product of the provincialism social aspects rearing its ugly head as a distrust of outsiders?
- 2,419
Don't forget that Kansas City also has Johnson County, Kansas directly beside it.
Johnson County is now approaching 600,000 residents.
Johnson County is now approaching 600,000 residents.
- 8,155
^ That is a good point.... Metro East has a sizable population but is definitely not as dense and definitely not as growing as Johnson County. It also isn't floating huge subsidies for biz... can you imagine if Metro East went on a border war with Saint Louis?
- 985
^ Which is very unlikely to happen. Since in the JOCO case, that is the primary population area for the state of Kansas while the Metro East is an afterthought in Illinois politics which is to the regions detriment and is a reason for the center of gravity in the metro area being distorted to the west.
Also note with KC is that both the flagship university town and the state capital are only about 40 and 60 miles straightline from downtown KC. There may be a number split commutes in a household in JOCO that has one household member working in KC area and another in either Lawrence or Topeka. Distancewise from downtown that would be comparable to having the flagship university in Wentzville and the state capital not far west of Warrenton. There isn't any significant community that is like that in the St. Louis metro where some sprawl could possibly be due to a split commuter issue.
Also note with KC is that both the flagship university town and the state capital are only about 40 and 60 miles straightline from downtown KC. There may be a number split commutes in a household in JOCO that has one household member working in KC area and another in either Lawrence or Topeka. Distancewise from downtown that would be comparable to having the flagship university in Wentzville and the state capital not far west of Warrenton. There isn't any significant community that is like that in the St. Louis metro where some sprawl could possibly be due to a split commuter issue.
- 8,155
^ yeah, I don't think we have to worry too much about a Economic Development Border War, although frankly I wouldn't mind some more activity on the other side over say St. Chuck's to help balance out the region.
Also, with Kansas City, those fools should have been spending all those border war $$ on a bi-state light rail project than shooting a subsidy cannon at local firms; the region really could be moving forward. (I think KCI is out somewhere in Nebraska though, so they might need a third state to be part of the system if they want to reach the airport!)
Also, with Kansas City, those fools should have been spending all those border war $$ on a bi-state light rail project than shooting a subsidy cannon at local firms; the region really could be moving forward. (I think KCI is out somewhere in Nebraska though, so they might need a third state to be part of the system if they want to reach the airport!)
Pet Peeve Alert: To compare "Missouri" metros, you cannot add Metro East numbers to St. Louis' "Missouri" numbers nor can you add the Kansas suburbs to KC's "Missouri" numbers. Overland Park and Olathe are not in Missouri. I think a more appropriate description would be Missouri's large "bi-state" or "border" metros. If you are going to be "reading" and spinning for clicks......tighten it up a bit, Yael. Just saying. 
With that said, the St. Louis region having nearly 740,000 more people than the KC region is greater than the city populations of Tucson, Denver, Sacramento, Atlanta, New Orleans, Baltimore, Boston, Charlotte, Columbus, Memphis, Seattle and others. 740,000 is almost as large as the whole City of San Francisco and couple of small metros such as Little Rock.
I do believe that Latinos have helped population growth in KC. Post-recession job growth is a catalyst as well. St. Louis needs both - and then some. Indianapolis, Chicago and even Memphis have greater Latino populations than St. Louis.
Anyway, remember these numbers are only estimates and will be adjusted over time. Also, I don't understand Yael's figures. Either he messed up or the Census has restructured how it counts St. Louis.
In 2010, the St. Louis MSA had 2.813-million - not including the City of Sullivan - even though it is legally a part of the St. Louis MSA. Now the St. Louis MSA numbers are 2,806,207? What am I missing?
Source
With that said, the St. Louis region having nearly 740,000 more people than the KC region is greater than the city populations of Tucson, Denver, Sacramento, Atlanta, New Orleans, Baltimore, Boston, Charlotte, Columbus, Memphis, Seattle and others. 740,000 is almost as large as the whole City of San Francisco and couple of small metros such as Little Rock.
I do believe that Latinos have helped population growth in KC. Post-recession job growth is a catalyst as well. St. Louis needs both - and then some. Indianapolis, Chicago and even Memphis have greater Latino populations than St. Louis.
Anyway, remember these numbers are only estimates and will be adjusted over time. Also, I don't understand Yael's figures. Either he messed up or the Census has restructured how it counts St. Louis.
In 2010, the St. Louis MSA had 2.813-million - not including the City of Sullivan - even though it is legally a part of the St. Louis MSA. Now the St. Louis MSA numbers are 2,806,207? What am I missing?
Source
- 8,912
arch city wrote:
I do believe that Latinos have helped population growth in KC. Post-recession job growth is a catalyst as well. St. Louis needs both - and then some. Indianapolis, Chicago and even Memphis have greater Latino populations than St. Louis.
Speaking of the Latino population. This came up on my news feed earlier today. I didn't realize we had a "burgeoning" Latino population.
Best Cities for Latinos: St. Louis' Burgeoning, Skilled Latino Population is it's Greatest Attraction
"What makes St. Louis attractive to Latino and non-Latino populations? Jobs," Karlos Ramirez, executive director of the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce of Metropolitan St. Louis, told Latin Post. "People go where there are jobs, and St. Louis is no different. I think we have a love of corporations that are headquartered here, so that's a good thing. Another draw is that it's an extremely family friendly city. Even though it's a big city with a small town feel, it really is one area in the country, it's rated in the top 10, and it's great. When you throw that in there, plus the City Museum, the Science Center, Missouri Botanical Gardens, Outdoor MUNY Theater and all kind of festivals to celebrate everything, I think it's a type of city that people want to be in."
read more
http://www.latinpost.com/articles/71404 ... action.htm