IS THIS WHAT "RAMSEY3" IS ALL ABOUT? If so, stow the BS, and explain.

Is this what Ramsey3 is about? Possibly, in a sense, more or less; or not at all?

If so, it sounds exactly like consideration of the question, "What did you move here for?"

Profligate growth [sewer/water to the Gun Club being the poster child] has flown in the face of the "rural feel" the politicians have touted, but have honored in the breach all too often.

So, if this IS what the stealth package called "Ramsey3" is about it inspires two comments:

[1] Why package a good idea the same condescending and suspicious way Town Center was foisted off on people?

[2] The devil is in the details, so bypass the propaganda can the BS, this time, and get to the point. Shoot straight and the chance of hitting a target actually is better.

Guest essayist - Noam Chomsky. In honor of James Norman's City Administratorship ending Dec. 31.

And in honor of others, including those having hyphenated last names.

Noam says:

Propaganda By Noam Chomsky

[L]et me begin by counter-posing two different conceptions of democracy. One conception of democracy has it that a democratic society is one in which the public has the means to participate in some meaningful way in the management of their own affairs and the means of information are open and free. If you look up democracy in the dictionary you'll get a definition something like that.

An alternative conception of democracy is that the public must be barred from managing their own affairs and the means of information must be kept narrowly and rigidly controlled. That may sound like an odd conception of democracy, but it's important to understand that it is the prevailing conception.

EARLY HISTORY OF PROPAGANDA

Let's begin with the first modern government propaganda operation. Woodrow Wilson was elected President in 1916 on the platform "Peace Without Victory." That was right in the middle of the First World War. The Wilson Administration was actually commietted to war and had to do something about it. They established a government propaganda commission, called the Creel Commission, which succeeded, within six months, in turning a pacifist population into a hysterical, war-mongering population which wanted to destroy everything German, tear the Germans limb from limb, go to war and save the world.

That was a major achievement, and it led to a further achievement. Right at that time and after the war the same techniques were used to whip up a hysterical Red Scare, as it was called, which succeeded pretty much in destroying unions and eliminating such dangerous problems as freedom of the press and freedom of political thought. There was very strong support from the media, from the business establishment, which in fact organized--pushed much of this work-- and it was in general a great success.

SPECTATOR DEMOCRACY

Another group that was impressed by these successes were liberal Democratic theorists and leading media figures, like, for example, Walter Lippmann, who was the dean of American journalists, a major foreign and domestic policy critic and also a major theorist of liberal democracy. If you take a look at his collected essays, you'll see that they're subtitled something like "A Progressive Theory of Liberal Democratic Thought." Lippmann was involved in these propaganda commissions and recognized their achivements. He argued that what he called a "revolution in the art of democracy," could be used to manufacture consent, that is, to bring about agreement on the part of the public for things that they didn't want by the new techniques of propaganda.

This is a view that goes back hundreds of years. In fact, it has very close resemblance to the Leninist conception that a vanguard of revolutionary intellectuals take state power, using popular revolutions as the force that brings them to state power, and then drive the stupid masses towards a future that they're too dumb and incompetent to envision themselves.

The liberal democratic theory and Marxism-Leninism are very close in their common ideological assumptions. I think that's one reason why people have found it so easy over the years to drift from one position to another without any particular sense of change. It's just a matter of assessing where power is.

Lippmann backed this up by a pretty elaborated theory of progressive democracy. He argued that in a properly-functioning democracy there are classes of citizens. There is first of all the class of citizens who have to take some active role in running general affairs. That's the specialized class.

Those others, who are out of the small group, the big majority of the population, they are what Lippmann called "the bewildered herd." We have to protect ourselves from the trampling and rage of the bewildered herd. Their function in a democracy, he said, is to be spectators, not participants in action. Occasionally they are allowed to lend their weight to one or another member of the specialized class. That's because it's a democracy and not a totalitarian state. That's called an election.

But once they've lent their weight to one or another member of the specialized class they're supposed to sink back and become spectators of action, but not participants.

The compelling moral principle is that the mass of the public is just too stupid to be able to understand things. If they try to participate in managing their own affairs, they're just going to cause trouble. Therefore it would be immoral and improper to permit them to do this.

Just remember, there is an unstated premise here. The unstate premise --and even the responsible men have to disguise this from themselves-- has to do with the question of how they get into the position where they have the authority to make decisions.

The way they do that, of course, is by serving people with real power. The people with real power are the ones who own the society, which is a pretty narrow group. If the specialized class can come along and say, I can serve your interests, then they'll be part of the executive group. Unless they can master that skill, they're not part of the specialized class.

The rest of the bewildered herd just has to be basically distracted. Turn their attention to something else. Keep them out of trouble.

This point of view has been developed by lots of other people. In fact, it's pretty conventional. For example, a leading contemporary theologian and foreign policy critic Reinhold Niebuhr, sometimes called "the theologian of the establishment," the guru of George Kennan and the Kennedy intellectuals and others, put it that "rationality is a very narrowly restricted skill." Most people are guided by just emotion and impulse.

Those of us who have rationality have to create necessary illusions and emotionally potent over-simplifications to keep the naive simpletons more or less on course. In the 1920's and early 1930's, Harold Lasswell, the founder of the modern field of communications and one of the leading American political scientists, explained that we should not succumb to "democratic dogmatisms" about men being the best judges of their own interests.

Therefore you have to turn to the techniques of propaganda. The logic is clear. Propaganda is to a democracy what the bludgeon is to a totalitarian state.

And so we were given a Town Center Task Force, and a Calthorp Study, and the public copy table at the side of the meeting room is ignored while last minute papers are handed around the council table. If one of the herd bellows, an additional copy is grudgingly made - with a lot of show.

And this new Ramsey3 is packaged and presented this way. We have a task force in the works there too, or that is my understanding.

It may be a great idea - much greater than Town Center failures - something that might preserve old Ramsey and the rural "feel," rather than threaten it as the Town Center malignancy and high density gun club housing deals etc. promise to do.

The point is, if Ramsey3 surprisingly turns out good it would be in spite of and not because of the condescending way it has so far been managed. If you package it the same as Town Center it will be more skeptically received than if it is honestly presented without smokescreening and bureauspeak but with simple fair and honest explanations - containing facts and getting to the point.

People who think otherwise would be those who subscribe to the "herd" theory Chomsky described. They should be weeded out to wend away with James Norman.

Try, for instance, to look at recent council agendas and minutes - not the multipage tomes James Norman constructs full of pages as numerous as snowflakes, for meetings, but the shorter items alleged to keep you informed - and tell me where you find, regarding the "Transition Team," who the people on that team are and what they will be doing.

You should feel like a herd animal, coming out of that exercise - and wondering where the "Port of Ramsey" is, for heavan's sake.

Read the entire Chomsky item if you like. The above is an extended excerpt. It is the nub.


Finally, on December 20, when your city's government holds that new Taj Majal open house, don't leave Ben alone across the street and out in the cold without stopping by to say hello.

Go over, visit with Ben, and think of your taxes while there. Moon the new building if that's your heartfelt taxpayer urge, while with Ben.

AGO 59a-30 (July 24, 1996)

By chance I came across AGO 59a-30, and it's worth a sentence or two. In 1996, Attorney General HH Humphrey III told the City of Richfield it could not manipulate council vacancies on its own, but that the Minnesota Constitution and Minnesota law required that council vacancies come about only as specified by law and then be filled by special election.

The citizens cannot be disenfranchised of a right to elect their representatives.

Hence the council in Ramsey cannot take that right away from you, not lawfully at least.

I understand they've law firms they can buy opinions from saying what they ask, but still, the Attorney General's opinions carry special weight - the weight of impartiality - whereas the Ramsey council purchased variety mirror the Ramsey council wishes - more or less.

Sleep a little better, as long as the law, i.e., the AGO, is followed.

For example, under it, Mayor Gamec could not resign mid-term with a sitting council member or other favored person appointed by the council "for" you instead of having a replacement elected in a special election, by you.

It just seems right that way anyway, doesn't it? Otherwise they preempt a ward, or the entire city's citizenry, and that's not the American way.

Two of the "sparkplugs" are gone - causing more uncertainty - plus, campaign spending, conflict of interest, and why that much money?

Sparkplug Troika: One of the last posts in November was on propaganda, suggesting:

Going to meetings or being in city meeting rooms, there always are charts, boards, graphics about Town Center along the walls. Cluttering the room. OFFENSIVELY cluttering the room.

And propagandizing me. And I object strongly.

One request to the new council members, and the holdovers. Get the stuff out. Give it back to Bruce Nedegaard and his architectural toadies, and let them store their stuff in a barn somewhere.

Bruce Nedegaard died a few days after I wrote that, at age 58. It is a sobering thing to me as I am four years older. But there remain others to take custody of the offending "stuff".

However, Nedegaard's death substantially worsens uncertainty about Town Center.

The uncertainty contagion before his dying involved the general tanked housing market, shared-wall market oversaturation in Ramsey, higher mortgage rates, and the sheer unadulterated ugliness of lego-land stuff put across the road from Connexus. It worsened substantially from that with Nedegaard's death, and that's saying a lot.

In my view, three people - a troika - are most responsible for Town Center being in the predicament it is.

Neither of the Kuraks and neither of the Steffens are in that troika, although the Steffen-Met Council "Dream Team" has a role in the play.

Bruce Nedegaard bought and was the promoter. He was key. James Norman already has been noted as declaring himself last summer to the business press as responsible for putting our city hall in there (and shamelessly overbuilding it into a palace for bureaucracy in the process). That was key. He'll be riding into the sunset at year's end, God bless, so he is the second departure.

That leaves David Elvig yet to depart. He is the remaining "sparkplug for what it is" figure. He was head of the Town Center Task Force. He headed the Finance Committee when the Town Center development contract was haggled over and inked. Ditto, when infrastructure and related bonding was being done (at a rate that would astound a drunken sailor and dwarf his spending). The Taj Majal has to be paid for after all. The PACT school bond-play counted against bonding limits. There was doing and redoing Ramsey Blvd. -- a snafu, as if it were not done right the first time and needed to be dug up after being paved, to be redone.

Somehow, however, things were jiggered and juggled with all that other Town Center spending so sewer-water could be gotten to the gun club. It was forced there despite the "Message from David Elvig, Ramsey Town Center Task Force Chairman" saying "A master planned, properly balanced Town Center answers nearly every one of Ramsey's future growth needs." [emphasis added to weasel-word, "nearly"]. Apparently feeling the "need to be in front of and to help mentor" that routing, an effort started before he even was sworn into office as a council member.

David Elvig first abstained; then to break a 3-3 deadlock against the idea of pushing for sewer and water to the gun club a change of title to the gun club land was arranged and he cast the tie breaking vote setting the row of dominos falling [recall Pattiann Kurak drawing criticism for a comparable step]. Presumably Jerry Bauer and David Elvig discussed that outside of anything reported in council minutes. Jerry Bauer, after all, had been reported in past council minutes as "owner" of the gun club. David Elvig married his daughter many years ago. It would be a surprising situation if they had not had private planning discussions.

Conflict of interest is a question of opinion over how law fits facts. Your view of conflicts of interest might differ from mine.

Each of us probably differs to some degree in our thinking and from David Elvig's or Jerry Bauer's view of things (whatever the legal-&-ethical perspective might be that they share and/or differ on, among themselves).

To me there's conflict of interest misconduct. An appearance of impropriety in the gun club events and sequencing seems present. But form your own opinions. Watch and think.

Certainly the two of them, Bauer and Elvig, came less close to the wrong side of Minn. Stat. Sect. 471.87 than Pattiann Kurak did in her promoting city infrastructure investment in Town Center land from the council table. Cf. AGO 90e (Aug. 25, 1997). How "personal" is an intimate family interest in chain of title as a flawed "personal financial interest in a contract" and how "personal" would a financial benefit arising from a sewer-water routing contract need to be to fit the gross misdemeanor statute [MS Sect. 471.87]? Can an intervening [possibly only technical] change in land title between the time a contract is first proposed (or a first step is taken) and a contract's reduction from conditional bargaining to a done deal with pipe in the ground cleanse a conflict of interest taint? And, what standard of bona fides would govern such an intervening title-transfer event, and, factually, did gun club sewer-water dealings fit that bona fides measure or have unique factors weighing against the measure fitting? There may be no clearcut precedent for an answer.

Then there is election campaign spending. In November I posted here and here about Ramsey 2006 election results.

For that election, I spent a total of $370 as a Ward 1 candidate, and it looks as if my oponent, the successful candidate, incumbent David Elvig, may have spent 14 - 15 times as much. His disclosure was that $5335 was raised for his campaign; but he's disclosed, so far, only $479 in itemized expenditure. That leaves $4856 unaccounted for to balance income and expenditure. Either his campaign holds a substantial cash surplus or he spent more than reported as of Nov. 28, per city records as of that date. I have yet to see his final campaign disclosure affidavit.

$479 seems an appropriate amount, for only a ward seat. Fifteen times what I spent seems somehow excessive - spending $5335 would be staggering, if that indeed was what Elvig spent.

Why would anyone collect and/or spend that much for a Ramsey Council Ward 1 seat? Who would contribute that much? And why?

Does it possibly relate to land interests in the general Town Center neighborhood, and who owns what on the west side of Armstrong Blvd north of the tracks and might want or view it as desirable to have an intimately related friendly person remain on council, for any such reason? Is Ramsey Crossings and other neighboring planning something for which strong feelings cause large cash outlays, for a ward seat?

Somebody has to give me the answer.

I was not sitting at any table where my opponent discussed such things, and I could only presume who the contributors might be and what discussions they might have had with him.

What is uncertain is the future of Town Center - and most importantly - the future of public spending of taxpayer money there (and on the nether side of Armstrong). I would say "public subsidies," but that's a dimension of opinion where "public spending of taxpayer money" is a clear and adequate term, for now.

Time will tell a "subsidies" story on the west side of Armstrong, or lack of one.

We can only guess now. So keep your eyes and ears open, and stay duly skeptical. Some are quite extravagent with their own money. It is easier to be extravagant with other people's money. Wasting taxpayer money - throwing good money after bad for whatever motives or causes there may be of bad judgment, should be avoided if at all still feasible, in relation to Ramsey's Town Center as it so far stands and as it may yet be shoehorned around.

Ben the Ramsey taxpayer.

Yes, it is hard to miss seeing the palace and ramp. They are so large and dominate the open space around them. But have you seen the less conspicuous taxpayer statue across the street? That ever smiling happy-face Ramsey taxpayer, left out there in the cold, who bought the overly fancy stuff across the street. Or will be buying it with increasing property tax payments years into the future, over time.


I call the statue "Ben Dover, the Ramsey Taxpayer" and I wonder whether James Norman and Bonnie Balach commissioned it, while planning between them for legislation; or whether it was our council's message to us. Three false stone facade faces, a plain blank poured concrete facing on the back, and the prepetual happy face -- at least until rust sets in and the debt service is all paid and the principal bond amounts are amortized and the bonds retired.

I find it interesting the pictures of the Taj Majal being built (that had been prominently featured) now are all hard to find these days on the Ramsey website, after having been highlighted there for such a length of time. That was before the election, I recall. And mention of the $16 million + price tag or info about who's making money off the old convenient city campus at Hwy 5 and Alpine, that's also hard to find on the city's web pages these days. If you've links, post them as comments.

Until I posted these there were no pics online at all, of Ben.

When you drive by, everytime you drive by, keep your eye out for Ben. You are Ben. And have a nice holiday.

Plus this, online at the city website:

Please join us to celebrate the new Municipal Center at the Open House and Dedication Ceremony on December 20th from 3:00 pm to 7:00 pm. Tours of the new facility will be given and refreshments and cake will be provided.

Yes. Let them eat cake. Please go to the Open House. You can take simple cardboard hand lettered signs with you, saying "Wretched Excess" or "Lavish Beyond Need" or "Why a Taj Majal?" You can use the sports metaphor, and wear a paper bag on your head, labled "Ben," or just show up for the tour. The oppulence will enthrall you. And -- hope for good weather, to go outside, cross the street, and commune with the statue of Ben. Or if really busy, stay home and look in the mirror. But put on a happy face. That's what the Kuraks and Jerry Bauer and John Peterson over at the gun club will be doing - so why not you?

What wool are they intending to pull over our eyes this time?

Below is a whois excerpt for a website that I bet few citizens - if any - have any knowledge of, but which is aiming to "educate" us about OUR city. Go figure.

It's put up on the web by outsiders - it's slow as molassas in January [as with Laserfiche], and it's full of puffery that fails to get to the point. Pure bureau-speak.

That unpins my bullshit meter from zero immediately and into the "caution-what's-up" scale area.

Why don't these planner people talk plain English and get to the point?

A lot of distrust and hostility could be defused that way. It might even build credibility for a change.

Yet the meter's not pinned yet fully on the far side, and I reserve final judgment until an inquiry I have to Patrick Trudgeon is responded to. But the meter certainly is unpegged from zero and that's something I cannot undo; it's how it is; it's how this sort of thing works with someone simply wondering, "What's up, what's the point?"

The stealthy way things like this percolate to the public surface as complete and intact things like Athena from Zeus's forehead surely is a putoff, yet it's done that way time after time.

"Done deal" is another way to describe the impresssion this approach creates, with "sell to us" instead of "consult with us" coming to mind also.

However, with that first impression set by how its been presented and packaged so far, I await being proven wrong or whatever, and withhold final judgment - but I cannot help going in with "an attitude" when you treat me like a town fool, upfront, and everyone else is treated no differently. We voted the town fool out, or has that not yet registered in city hall?

See also, p.4 of 7 pages, Nov. 21, 2006 Council worksession agenda.

This new website lists the fine convenient old city hall address still, i.e., without updating it since last August to fit the move to the Taj Majal at Town Center; and then it blows such double-speak smoke at us, as this:

Open Space Technology, a highly successful method of engaging citizens in discussions concerning the most critical issues facing our city, will be used during the second phase of R3. Under the direction of an internationally recognized Open Space facilitator, participants will be able to raise issues that are most important to them and break out into smaller groups to envisage solutions. The findings and recommendations of these groups will be compiled into a single report, which will be available to all residents. Ultimately, these sessions will result in a broad community vision and working document that will address Ramsey’s growth until 2030.

In the final phase of R3, the city council, staff and commission members will use the vision created by the residents during the Open Space sessions to create a workable framework for the city’s future development. Ordinances and policies developed from this vision will ensure future development fosters a sense of community by emphasizing neighborhoods. The city will also continue to encourage resident input through OST sessions and surveys will measure the city’s success at implementing the vision.

"Engaging citizens" is "the second phase?" What in the world came first, the planning of the propaganda barrage? I don't know about you, but I don't want "an internationally recognized Open Space facilitator" as much as I want honest facts, getting to the point.

My vision is to not go behind peoples' backs to the legislature for stuff like this:

Minnesota Session Laws 2006 - Chapter 259

ARTICLE 9 PUBLIC FINANCE

[...]

Sec. 12. CITY OF RAMSEY; GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS.
The governing body of the city of Ramsey or a development authority established by the city may issue general obligation bonds to pay for costs related to a project in an area within the city consisting of the property defined as outlot L, Ramsey Town Center Addition and lot 2, block 1, Ramsey Town Center Addition. Bonds issued under this section are not subject to the net debt limit of the city under Minnesota Statutes, section 475.53, or any other law or charter provision.

I'm sorry, but I see nothing wrong with objecting to this having been done, wondering how exactly it was done, and not knowing who did it to us and with what purposes other than to use the quoted authority which means TAXES ARE GOING TO ESCALATE BECAUSE SOMEONE SOMEHOW GOT THE LEGISLATURE TO GIVE THE RAMSEY CITY COUNCIL A BLANK CHECK. It's like having a loaded gun pointed at your head, and being able to say, only, "Huh?"

And be ready to do a browser "search" for the wording "city of ramsey" because it's long text, and hard to find that part of it dealing with the Ramsey Citizen's Blank Check to the council, by scrolling [if you download the Adobe pdf version of that legislation from the linked page, it is on p. 85 of 128 pages, if that helps you envision the needle-haystack dimensions of this mischief].

Then on top of that having happened, now we get: Ramsey3

Whatever that propaganda device is in detail, it's an insult to us. If it is not that, puffing as it does and telling us nothing of substance, what is it other than an insult? It sure sounds as if we'd better get the helmets ready to protect our heads from what's coming down.

Anyway, think for yourself. Check the website and form your opinion going in. Here's the whois info, indicating outside fingerprints of some kind:

Domain ID:D126906152-LROR
Domain Name:RAMSEY3.ORG
Created On:07-Aug-2006 18:01:50 UTC
Last Updated On:07-Oct-2006 03:47:42 UTC
Expiration Date:07-Aug-2009 18:01:50 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar:Domain People Inc. (R30-LROR)
Status:CLIENT TRANSFER PROHIBITED
Registrant ID:DP-5105515
Registrant Name:m Rice
Registrant Organization:m Rice
Registrant Street1:Box 583612
Registrant Street2:NA
Registrant Street3:
Registrant City:Minneapolis
Registrant State/Province:MN
Registrant Postal Code:55458
Registrant Country:US
Registrant Phone:+1.6126550035
Registrant Phone Ext.:
Registrant FAX:
Registrant FAX Ext.:
Registrant Email:domainadmin@thinkus.net
Admin ID:DP-5105516
Admin Name:m Rice
Admin Organization:m Rice
Admin Street1:Box 583612
Admin Street2:NA
Admin Street3:
Admin City:Minneapolis
Admin State/Province:MN
Admin Postal Code:55458
Admin Country:US
Admin Phone:+1.6126550035
Admin Phone Ext.:
Admin FAX:
Admin FAX Ext.:
Admin Email:domainadmin@thinkus.net
Tech ID:DP-5105518
Tech Name:Administrator DNS
Tech Organization:Administrator DNS
Tech Street1:1 N State Street
Tech Street2:NA
Tech Street3:
Tech City:Chicago
Tech State/Province:IL
Tech Postal Code:60602
Tech Country:US
Tech Phone:+1.3122362132
Tech Phone Ext.:
Tech FAX:
Tech FAX Ext.:
Tech Email:administrator@siteprotect.com
Name Server:NS2.THINKUS.NET
Name Server:NS1.THINKUS.NET

Who's that? What's up? Downloads offered, then a screen saying, "You do not have the correct permissions to download this file." I'm a citizen for Chirstsakes, what do you mean? We're the sovereign. Why cannot these bureaucrats get that straight???? Something about a "PPS Scoring Guidelines - Maple Grove Scoring Methodology for New Developments." What's that got to do with Ramsey? You tell me, I cannot download it.

If you drink, don't drive.

Your City Police force IS watching. And they should be. Don't drive drunk, or carelessly or recklessly. I say so. The cops say so. Your councilmembers probably all say so, do as I say, etc.

Indeed, here's Notice - It's on the city website so don't say you were not warned:

SAFE AND SOBER ENFORCEMENT BULLETIN
The Ramsey Police Department will be putting extra officers on the streets during the month of December in order to snare the impaired. Please do not drink and drive. Have a safe and happy holiday season.

And the sobering facts about unsober drivers is they risk not only their own lives, but yours and mine when sharing the road with us - something a good family man would not do to the families of others. It simply sets a bad example for the city official, school teacher, pastor or scoutmaster to be doing wrong, that way. Young people can see such things and conclude it's "okay."

Look at the facts:

Minnesota Impaired Driving Fact Sheet
Source Minnesota Department of Public Safety Office ofTraffic Safety

The legal alcohol limit for drivers in Minnesota is 0.08. It is always illegal to drive while impaired. If a motorist's alcohol concentration is at 0.08 percent or higher it is a criminal offense with penalties ranging from misdemeanor to felony. It is also a violation of civil law that triggers automatic driver license revocation for a minimum of 90 days for a first time offense.

From 2001 to 2005 Minnesota averaged 601 traffic deaths per year 216 [36 percent per year] were impaired driving related.

Over the same five years there was an average of 34,000 impaired driving incidents each year that resulted from a DWI arrest translating to almost 100 DWI arrests a day.

In 2005 the Twin Cities metro area had 48 percent ofthe impaired driving incidents and the 80 county non metro area 52 percent.

In 2005 males accounted for 76 percent of impaired driving incidents.

Of all Minnesota residents 471,760 have aDWI on record. One in every eight persons in Minnesota with a driving record including those with a license and those with a license revoked, cancelled, etc. has aDWI. 201,424 [one in 19] have two or more incidents. 94,306 [one in 41] have three or more and 1,075 have 10 or more.

Most impaired driving offenders are first time offenders. Still many offenses are committed by persons with prior incidents on their record. In 2005 14,420 [39 percent ofviolators] had prior DWIs on record.

So, that's why I say no family man would do it. There is a gender pattern and women are less a problem. We all probably have been behind the wheel after a drink or more, but many of us so infrequently we have not been caught. To get caught you do it frequently. Or you couple it with other dangerous driving characteristics - road rage aggressiveness, reckless testing the envelope, or inattentiveness to the roadway and where police are upon it. Any way you gain an arrest and conviction, even by blind bad luck, it is a risk to the rest of us - and more a risk if an incident or two is due to frequent offending or driving wickedly when you get your snoot full.

You should no more tank up and drive than take alcohol with you while hunting. It's dangerous.

To get caught twice, the one in 19, you've a problem. And if you've had a careless-reckless ticket too - you are a clear and present menace to others. Period. End of story. Some, for several reasons, clean up their act or appear to - either changing behavior or ceasing to get caught or avoiding getting charged and convicted.

And even if you've beaten a conviction on a technicality - you did the crime.