Comments by geauxtigers
Page 1 of 6 | Next
Posted on November 11 at 9:43 a.m.
It's just sad because neighborhood watches generally need to be in place to remedy these problems, but in this area there are so many elderly that they are just ripe for the picking!
Posted on November 5 at 2:07 p.m.
I smoke, but I don't smoke around other people. It's just the world we live in now. Not everyone is that considerate of other people, so they have to find ways to make it fair to everyone. I think its fair to ban smoking in doorways up to 10 feet away. I do however believe that if a place of business makes more than 30% of its profit from liquor sales that that business should be able to set its own rule and let the market handle itself. Those who want to go to that establishment will or won't go. Everyone in the country is doing this its only a matter of time. As for your opinion of smoking and smokers.....shut it!!
Posted on October 30 at 10:11 a.m.
Why are there so many crackheads around here?
Posted on October 30 at 10:02 a.m.
I love this story.
Posted on October 30 at 10 a.m.
This is awesome. Thanks for the laughs guys!!
Posted on October 29 at 12:49 p.m.
Cops are only human beings, they can't be everywhere all at once. And if everyone is so bent out of shape about the roads needing fixing then maybe you can see how the money generated by these cameras can go to fix that in the future.
Posted on October 29 at 12:47 p.m.
Get over it. These cameras are everywhere and they are a huge help to prevent accidents - it was only a matter of time before Natchez got them. If they increase rear end accidents, as stated somewhere above, then that is the stupidest thing I have ever heard and I don't believe it. Plus if an accident does happen at the intersection then the cameras can aid in determining who the guilty party is. Look on the bright side. However...I will say....$120 is very, very steep for a ticket for running a light. Give me a break.
Posted on October 29 at 9:53 a.m.
Good to know. But depressing.
On Concordia Parish sheriff starts sex offender registry Web site
Posted on October 24 at 11 a.m.
The sign needs to go...either the person owning the property or the person leasing the property needs to change it.
If the owner refuses to let the change be made to his property - but the city says it HAS to be made in order for a business to operate there - then the owner is at fault and should not be able to lease out the property.
If the owner instead simply doesn't want to PAY for the sign change, then the tenant should be able to change the sign and possibly get a reduced rental rate for his trouble.
Either way...its Stahlman and Foster holding up the operating of the business, not the city. Anyone with half a brain could see that.
Page 1 of 6 | Next
Posted on November 13 at 3:20 p.m.
Too many crack smokers!
On Natchez loses out on possible military contract