There is a tinge of Upstanding Citizen arrogance in the above post, LET ME EXPLAIN, HOLD ON, HOLD ON...RussellK wrote:Steve for the third time it really comes down to this. If you want to criticize something don't prop up a less than sympathetic example to support your case. Do you honestly think the public cares about a guy who's property is a nuisance?
See how it works?
That is a personal judgment call. The example provided might actually be more stimulating and thought-provoking than a "sympathetic example" that the "public cares about" might be. To criticize a person's example as not being suitable to the discussion because "the public" may not "care", and to pose it with a "do you honestly think?" seems witheringly scornful.
Russell, I have met many hotel proprietors all across this country who are desperately trying to keep their boat afloat. They often do not have the resources to vet their clientele, their dignity is frequently assaulted. I saw a motel owner watch the police beat down a door with a battering ram and just splinter the doorway to kindling, oops, "suspect not found".
While there may be complicit agreements between some motel owners and some unsavory characters, I guarantee you the majority of owners are out of the loop and desperately hope that crazies and drug addicts and prostitutes do not frequent their establishments. The night clerks do not necessarily practice discriminating room rentals.
So let's say that a drug dealer or pimp decides that a particular motel is perfect for them. They infect the property and get arrested and drive away the middle-class customers. What is a motel owner to do? Rock? Meet Hard Place. Mortgage is DUE.
Colin