Ponder this:

Thursday, September 27, 2012

An observation

I know, through my job, a woman who is funny, intelligent, attractive, clean, employed, fit, married. You know . . . normal. I do not do Facebook (is the second syllable supposed to be capitalized?) but over a friend's shoulder I happened to see subject woman's Facebook page, in which she rants about her . . . distaste . . . for a "nanny state." I was surprised by her anger as she is, in person, quite pleasant. This woman lives on a street partly and temporarily populated by students of the local college. The noise, particularly on Thursday nights, well into the wee hours, is making her insane. I know exactly how she feels, having lived across the street from a suburban twenty-four hour supermarket. A few years ago I wrote about those horrors. 

Small Pond has enacted a toothier noise ordinance, and our woman was pleased to hear it. Progress! she felt. She was mightily disappointed when it turned out that the new law does not require public beheadings of suspected noisemakers after one whistle, hiss, holler, etc. In some unrelated correspondence, she asked me if a certain new property owner would be permitted to rent his apartments to college students. I replied that it is illegal to discriminate against any class of people and her response was, verbatim: "blah, blah, blah..."

I conclude that in her eyes, government trying to help other people . . . people who can't support their families on minimum wage jobs, for example . . . is wrong, but government definitely needs to keep college students from waking her up at night. 

Whose line is it and where should it be drawn?
And besides all that, maybe one of those college students will graduate to become a signmaker who can spell. That would be worth a little discomfort in the short run, wouldn't it?


DJan said...

We are living in an increasingly crowded world. Overcrowded animals always get a little... insane. Why would we be any different? The first thing I noticed is the misspelled word and thought THAT would be what the post is about. I don't know what to do about noise. Signs don't seems to help much. :-)

Olga said...

For sure, the sign is not going to help much. There needs to be enforcement. I don't think it would take more than one or two beheadings and the offenders would kind of get the hint.

Rian said...

I agree that 'the situation' would be difficult, but for the life of me, I cannot think of a thing she can do... except move... and I'm sure she doesn't want to do that, nor should she have to. But enforcement? How? Who?

Tom said...

DJan has it right. And then there's also the natural human point of view: It's okay if I make noise; but I don't want to hear YOUR noise.

esbboston said...

I know whats wrong: the word 'prohibitted' has two T's in it instead of one, so therefore it is a different word, so perhaps the noise offenders think it has another meaning?

English Rider said...

Accidental activation of well-aimed sprinkler systems might not remove the problem entirely but the temporary satisfaction would be worth it. Retaliatory classical music might work too. True creativity could venture into collecting some road-kill skunks for strategic placement.....How committed is she?

SmitoniusAndSonata said...

Hissin' and a'hollering would make a nice change from the screeches , howls and "gunfire" coming from the toddlers' playground at the end of our street !
(That extra "t" isn't a spelling mistake ... it's an accurate transcription of the noise tightly clenched jaws make while speaking the word .)

Terra said...

I could imagine that boisterous laughing is prohibited, according to this sign. The rules can be overly severe, IMHO.
Retaliatory classical music, now that might work :)

Vicki Lane said...

Love this post -- especially the last line!