November 21, 2025 • 33 mins
Kersey Chief of Police Jonathan Lange joins Dan to discuss the municipality's city council decision to pause a controversial photo-enforced speed zone, for which tickets as severe as $340 have been issued over a quarter-mile stretch where the speed limit decreases from 65 mph to 45 mph. Critics claim such fines should be capped at $40, per state law.
Kersey pauses $340 photo radar tickets amid questions about town’s law
Kersey pauses $340 photo radar tickets amid questions about town’s law
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is Dan Caplis and welcome to today's online podcast
edition of The Dan Capla Show. Please be sure to
give us a five star rating if you'd be so kind,
and to subscribe, download and listen to the show every
single day on your favorite podcast platform. Happy to be
able to go to the VIP line and talk with
Chief Jonathan Lang. Chief is, of course, chief of the
(00:21):
police department in the town of Cursey. Been very much
in the news because KUSA did a big story talking
about three hundred and forty dollars speeding tickets that were
being issued when people were twenty five miles per hour
or over. Some alleged it was a speed trap and
others have said, no, it's not a speed trap at all.
So appreciate the chance to talk with the chief about that.
Speaker 2 (00:44):
Chief.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
Welcome to the Dan Capla Show.
Speaker 3 (00:47):
Hey, how you doing tonight?
Speaker 1 (00:48):
I am living the dream. My friend and I noticed
you have a fascinating pass because I was looking up
before our conversation today. You were actually studying to be
in medicine and then switch to law enforcement. Is that right?
Speaker 3 (01:03):
Yeah, that's correct. In the early two thousands, I got
my AMT from Thom savellims services and love ones, and
I started working at a local emergency room MC Greeley
as attack and was studying my pre wrecks to be
a physician's assistant. So I was trying to launch my
career in that direction and then found a passion for
law enforcement.
Speaker 1 (01:24):
Yeah, fascinating, not the normal path. But one of the
cool things about law enforcement and Dad was law enforcement
for thirty years is you have so many interesting people
from so many walks of life find their way there.
But appreciate you being with us today. And so my
first question, chief would be tell people about the way
(01:46):
this speed trap. Well, I didn't mean it that way.
That's the allegation that it's a speed trap, you know,
and the way this was set up, because we've had
some people say that it's a case where it drops
very quickly from sixty five to forty five in the
cameras right behind the forty five, and so you know,
there's not really a fair opportunity or warning to slow down.
(02:08):
We let other people say, Hey, I drive through that
area all the time and it is not a speed trap.
It's necessary for safety, So please share your take on that.
Speaker 3 (02:18):
Sure. Yeah, so I've been in law enforcement in Weald
County for about sixteen years. Started at the Evans Police Department,
moved my way through the Well County Sheriff's Office now
it's Curzy. Had a couple of stops along the way
in the private industry in the public safety software company,
But in working at Cerzy and on the streets Weald County,
(02:38):
I've noticed over the years that there's an extreme issue
with traffic related fatalities and accidents and interactions that we
see on a daily basis when we're out there. And
Kurzy is obviously a very small town. We only have
one officer on at a time to cover the streets,
(02:58):
and so implementing a program like this was going to
be a force multiplier for us to be able to
go out and really get the issues with the speeding
and traffic related issues under control. So we launched a
sixteen day earlier this year, sixteen day traffic study with
(03:19):
our vendor services that we're using right now, and what
we found was astonishing. In the sixteen days at County
N forty nine and Highway thirty four, we had about
one hundred and eighty seven thousand cars passed through there,
and at about forty eight percent of them, we're doing
ten plus over the speed limit, and then you start
walking into the thirty percent range of twenty five percent
(03:42):
range of people doing twelve to fifteen miles per hour
over the speed limit. So, in looking at that and
looking at the annexation agreement that we signed with Wealth
Counting back in twenty seventeen, we decided to move forward
with the program and enforce the speed limit signs that
Well County had put out there as far as as
(04:02):
part of that annexation agreement. And I will report to you,
since we put that speed trailer out there, we were
capturing about eighteen hundred citations a day and now we're
down to about four hundred and fifty, which I think
is a huge win for the motors and world County.
Speaker 1 (04:18):
Yeah, and this is in the forty five mile per stretch,
that's correct.
Speaker 3 (04:22):
We decided to put it in the forty five mile
prior stretch just to give people plenty of time to
accelerate from the sixty five down to the fifty five
and then through that forty five zone which then they
passed the trailer. We will capture speeds about one hundred
foot pass the trailer before they get into the thirty
five mile prior zone.
Speaker 1 (04:41):
Chief Countison Lang of Cursy with us this afternoon and chiefs,
so you're saying that, okay, motorists are adapting. They see
that the trailers there, they're slowing their speed, most of them,
and so the public is safer as a result of that.
The controversy over the three hundred and forty dollars tickets,
my understanding is that the position of the department in
(05:05):
the town has been that those tickets are legal and
justified because the people don't enter their three forty zone
until they're twenty five miles per hour over the speed
limit or higher. Is that right?
Speaker 3 (05:19):
Well, we start capturing at eleven miles per hour over
the speed limit, and what the light our equipment does
is it then ups the fine for us in the
cloud services once the speed does get to twenty five
over the posted feel limit. So if you look at
a subsection one A within the AVA Statute forty two
four one ten point five, it says in there that
(05:39):
nothing in the section applies to infractions that are captured
by AVIS a twenty five miles per hour speed limit.
So what then that does is it eliminates the limitations
of the forty dollars or eighty dollars rule. And so
what we decided to do is implement what is already
(06:00):
in our ordinance and adopted in our ordinance with our
fines and p schedule for our model traffic code, and
reduce it to a twenty to twenty four over in fraction,
which is a class A traffic impraction and that carries
a three hundred and forty dollars fine, which aligns with
what is in our ordinance.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
And a question I raised the other day, since when
these are traffic camera citations, my understanding at that point
is there cannot be any points sucsessed, et cetera. Is
that right?
Speaker 3 (06:29):
That is correct? We issue no points with the three
hundred and forty dollars fine.
Speaker 1 (06:34):
And then so my question been, Okay, if this was
really a safety issue rather than a revenue issue, you know,
wouldn't you have an officer out there making these stops
and issuing those citations, those point based citations, so we
could get dangerous drivers off the road. But it sounds
as if from what you've said today, that there's only
one officer available at a time. Normally is that right.
Speaker 3 (06:57):
That's correct. I'm actually a working chief. So I worked
twelve hour shifts and my officers worked twelve hour shifts,
and we split up the day with two shifts nighttime
and daytime. And one of my officers actually recently went
out with you know, calls that were coming in being
able to balance those. He actually went out on forty
(07:18):
nine and was making contacts with people in person for
the excessive speeds. Yeah, so it's not that we just
put the trailer out there and ignore forty nine. We
still go out there and control it. But then also,
you know, people have taken consideration. We can only be
at one place at one time with one officer out
at a.
Speaker 1 (07:37):
Time, right, And the job I do for a living,
which is representing victims of catastrophic injuries and deaths, many
of them in crashes. I have no sympathy for anybody
driving recklessly, particularly including twenty five miles per hour or
more over the limit. My concern would be if it
(07:58):
was a situation where the speed limit drops so fast
that twenty five over really meant sixty five or seventy
and somebody didn't have time to realize that the speed
limit had changed but you're assuring us that's not the
case here.
Speaker 3 (08:12):
It is off the case. I've driven through there many,
many times. And then based on our traffic study, you know,
we have fifty percent of the population that are paying
attention and they you know, as soon as the speed
trailer goes out, we're seeing a significant decrease and those
daily citations that are being captured. So you know, again
with the annexation agreement that that Wealth County and the
(08:34):
Town of Curzy signed back in twenty seventeen, they were
responsible for putting out those traffic control devices and signs
on the road. We just enforced them.
Speaker 1 (08:45):
And you were kind enough this morning to send some
video of one of the reckless drivers tell folks how
fast he or she was going.
Speaker 3 (08:54):
So that was actually a picture that was captured by
GPD on their camera and then captured that individual doing
one hundred thirty three miles an hour on Highway thirty
four and a posted fifty five zone. Now, it is
my understanding for full transparency that that car was being
chased by some law enforcement officers. But again I don't
know the details. I wasn't involved with that.
Speaker 1 (09:12):
Yeah, but just reckless disregard for your own life just insane.
And I know that it's you and other members of
law enforcement. You're the men and women who have to
walk up to that car and see the dead teenager
and see all the catastrophic consequences of reckless driving. So
I know that's a brutal part of your job. But
(09:34):
thank you. Appreciate you joining us today.
Speaker 3 (09:38):
Yeah, no, thank you so much. And you know I
always encourage people to give me a call or email
me that you know I can sit down and educate
them and talk to them about this. We're fully transparent
at the Town of Kurzy. We're just trying to take
some guidance from the lawmakers behind that bill with proceeding
forward with the issues that people are talking about currently.
Speaker 1 (10:00):
And what's the best way for folks to get in
touch with you head?
Speaker 3 (10:03):
Just email me at the letter J at L A. N. G.
E at curly gub dot com.
Speaker 1 (10:10):
Well, Chief, appreciate the time, Thank you much, Thank you,
you take care. Thank you that I appreciate them coming on.
And Ryan, it's interesting I talk to a lot of
friends in state Patrol, and in many ways, I think
for the reasons I was talking with the chief about
I think state patrol is one of the toughest law
enforcement jobs out there, because, you know, how do you
(10:33):
get those images out of your mind? You know, you
walk up to a crash scene there's been reckless driving
by somebody, and as a result, you're looking at this
dead teenager or dead and teenagers, and you just know
that life's going forever. Somebody's life is about to be
destroyed because they've lost their child to a reckless driver.
And I think it has to take a tremendous emotional
(10:55):
toll on law enforcement who do that as part of
their job, and so I support anything that's going to
catch and punish and deter and stop these these reckless drivers.
I just wanted to make sure it wasn't some unfair
speed traps set up. It does not sound like.
Speaker 4 (11:13):
It was my point, and I think he touched on
this Chief Lang would be as a driver in these experiences,
if you've only got a quarter mile to accelerate twenty
miles an hour, there needs to be plenty of notification
of that, and I don't know if there is or
there's not, but there should be a sign way back,
like hey, decreased speed zone ahead heads up rather than
(11:34):
here it is boom, we gotcha, like quarter mile right there.
Speaker 1 (11:37):
Come on, you have to have a fair opportunity. I
have not been up to that particular location. From the
way the Chief describes it to me and some of
our listeners have, it sounds like many people believe there
is fair warning and fair opportunity to stop. But appreciate
them coming on. You're on the Dan Kaplas Show.
Speaker 2 (11:59):
And now back to the Dan Kaplas Show podcast.
Speaker 5 (12:02):
And there is no specific thing out there that made
you decide now was the right time.
Speaker 3 (12:07):
That's right.
Speaker 6 (12:08):
To be clear, we are not calling on folks right
now to debate to disobey any type of unlawful order.
Speaker 1 (12:16):
See what benerdict Crowe now says. You're not supposed to
disobey unlawful orders.
Speaker 4 (12:25):
Do you think somebody, an advisor, a consultant, somebody in
the know got him and said, bro, you better walk
that back. You are walking on very thin legal ice
something like that.
Speaker 1 (12:37):
No, because legally there's no exposure at all. Because, in
my opinion, because they very diabolically protected themselves legally by
inserting the word unlawfully when the overall message was intended
to destabilize the military and to turn the military against
(12:58):
the commander in chief. But that one magic word unlawfully
provides them with the legal protection, so legally no exposure
at all. My guess is that it is backfiring on
them politically, and backfiring on the Democratic Party politically in
a very explosive way is one would expect, including among
(13:20):
many Democrats, because you think of the Democrats in my
own extended family, and they're all patriots, they all love
this country, they're all grateful to our military. And when
their own party now is encouraging the military to turn
against the commander in chief, that's not going to sell
(13:41):
with a lot of Democrats. So I think this is
blowing up in their face politically. I also think that
when President Trump hit back so hard, they're worried about
that because, in my opinion, there's no question they put
(14:02):
President Trump in grave danger by implicitly telling the men
and women of the military that they have to protect
the people from President Trump. I mean, that was the
implicit message, and that I'm not saying it was their
intent to get him killed, but they had to be aware.
(14:26):
I mean, just as smart people, one would think they
were aware that this would dramatically increase the danger to
the president, and President Trump hit back hard. You know,
I hit back with his comments about seditious behavior. What
was the Verbatimryan, seditious behavior punishable by death, something like that.
Speaker 4 (14:48):
But that's the thing, it's always a CounterPunch with him.
He was launching into that, right.
Speaker 1 (14:53):
And that's why my belief is that the President Trump
must believe that Crow was trying to get him killed
for President Trump to have responded the way he did.
I wish that Crow had not put the President in
this danger, and I wish the President had not responded
the way that he did, because this is a very,
very combustible, dangerous situation. And so is that why Crow
(15:18):
is now reversing himself. I mean, I saw Michael Jackson
in concert. I caught Michael Jackson's hat when he threw
it to the crowd. How weird is that I've seen moonwalking.
I've seen moonwalking from the best until today. Until today,
Michael Jackson can't hold a candle to Benedict Crow. When
(15:43):
it comes to moonwalking, you come out, You tell the
men and women of the military, defy on lawful orders,
don't give up the ship. You won't identify a single
unlawful order because you can't. But you tell him to
do that, and then the next day you go and
see an insane No, we're not telling people to disobey
any current unlawful orders. Why because they can't point to
(16:06):
a single unlawful order. I'm telling you, I've had the
privilege of being on air for decades. I've never seen
anything like this. I wish I had subpoena power. I
would love to know if somebody has a cause of
action here, I would do this case for free, just
to take subpoena power and drill down and get to
(16:27):
the bottom of who was behind this, what was their
actual intent. It's one of the most dangerous, reckless, irresponsible,
danger creating bizarre plays I've ever seen inside or outside
of politics. And they had to know. These are men
(16:49):
and women who served the country. Crow served very courageously
and nobly in the military. He had to know this
was a gift to the enemy, a gift to the enemy,
a gift to enemy recruiting. To be able to say,
look at these look at these political leaders in America
who served in the military, and they're asking the military
(17:10):
to turn against their own commander in chief. They had
to know this would be used by the enemy. Everybody
on the line, I'm going to out a courtesy to you,
wait and take you after this break, because I don't
want to bring you on and then have you cut short.
So we'll continue that conversation. Then I want to lighten
it up with some of the most enjoyable sound in
(17:32):
a long time, and that is Michelle Obama talking about how,
in her view, America is not ready for a woman president.
Do you agree with that that America is not ready
for a woman president? Spoiler alert, I think America is
craving a woman president. I think a qualified woman candidate
would have an enormous advantage right out of the gate.
(17:56):
Craving a woman president.
Speaker 2 (18:05):
You're listening to the Dan Kaplis Show podcast.
Speaker 1 (18:08):
It's the room that we've made for a woman to
be president.
Speaker 5 (18:11):
Well, as we saw in this past election, sadly, we
ain't ready. That's why I'm like, don't even look at
me about running, because you all are lying you're not
ready for a woman You are not, so don't waste
my time. You know, we got a lot of growing
up to do, and there's still I'm sadly a lot
(18:33):
of men who do not feel like they can be
led by a woman.
Speaker 1 (18:36):
And we saw it. What was the question, Oh goodness,
oh my goodness, what an elitist, How little she thinks
of almost all of the rest of us. You're not
ready for a woman. Men don't want to be led
(18:59):
by a woman. And I hope she keeps thinking that way.
I hope all of these elitists on the left keep
thinking that way, because almost the entire leadership of the
left are elitist like this, And the more they underestimate us,
the less they understand us, the easier it is to
beat them. It's a remarkable study, remarkable study. Yeah, please
(19:25):
keep thinking that way, Michelle Obama. Wow. The truth is,
and you may disagree with this, and I'd love to
hear from you. Three o three seven one three eight
two five five text dam five seven seven three nine.
The truth is this country is explosively craving a female president,
and if there was a qualified female president with good
(19:50):
ideas appealing to people, she would have and her party
would have such an enormous advantage right out of the gate.
And that the simple fact is that the two candidates,
Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris. What's not to like?
Speaker 3 (20:09):
Right?
Speaker 1 (20:10):
Not even remotely matching that description, but you get yeah,
and Amy Klobachar, you know, And that's that's the point
is the Democratic Party is so toxically far left right now,
and it is so radical and so secular that it
(20:33):
will reject, it will kill in the crib any woman,
any any female candidate qualified for president who does not
bend the need to the most far left radical ideas.
You know, they had Amy klomach Klobachar went when Biden
won during the COVID election, they had Amy Klobachar in
(20:55):
the primaries. Now, Amy Klobachar is a woman who has
a lot of bad ideas. They're far left ideas. She
wouldn't be a good president for that reason. But she's
somebody very intelligent, very competent, very qualified in terms of
those basic skills. That's somebody who the American people would elect.
(21:18):
Hopefully the Republican would defeat her, but that's somebody the
American people might very well elect. But a Hillary Clinton,
a Kamala Harris, I mean, I told you for a
very very long time, and you probably knew it before
I said it. There was no way America was going
to elect Kamala Harris president period, because she's obviously the
furthest thing from qualified Bruce and Sterling. You're on the
(21:42):
dan kaplash, you'll welcome.
Speaker 6 (21:44):
Hey, hey, I'd got one of those tickets in the
mail for one thing. They arrive about a month later,
so you don't know what's going on. I got that
and I said, what the heck? And I went out
there looked at this set up, and it is a
speed trap. I don't care what that chief said.
Speaker 1 (22:06):
Well, laid out for us, my friend, thank you for
calling laid out for us.
Speaker 6 (22:10):
Yeah, you got a nice four lane concrete highway, the
Curzy Road, and it's a sixty five on our speed limit.
You know, people should go that. This thing set up
about a mile off the inner section to Highway thirty four,
but it is right by that that when it changes speeds.
(22:31):
He has a little square yellow sign that is out there,
but it's only about one hundred feet in front of
the trap.
Speaker 1 (22:40):
Oh really, So it goes from sixty five to forty five?
Does it go sixty five fifty five forty five or
just sixty five forty five.
Speaker 3 (22:48):
Sixty five forty five?
Speaker 1 (22:50):
Okay, and then how far is the camera from the
point at which it goes to forty five?
Speaker 6 (22:58):
Right there, right there, pretty much right there.
Speaker 1 (23:02):
So if if you don't go from sixty five to
forty five by the time it terms to forty five,
you're gonna get flashed. Yep, okay, And I don't expect
you have this andy. Do you ever have a picture
of it?
Speaker 3 (23:19):
No?
Speaker 1 (23:20):
Okay, But but if you did, or if anybody does,
please just shoot it to us. We'd love to take
a look at it. And that the chief it sounds
like very accessible. We can definitely follow up with him.
What'd you do about the ticket?
Speaker 6 (23:33):
I'm just doing about this. Maybe I shouldn't say what
I'm going to do on the radio, but I have
a sit in here, and I have all these notes
that I made when I went up there to check
it out, So I'm not I don't know, I'm.
Speaker 1 (23:47):
Gonna do it.
Speaker 6 (23:48):
Well, both go to court on it. But another point
I wanted to say is, or maybe I mentioned he
had he had a little yellow sign. They said there's
a speed trap and it was not even one hundred
feet ahead of it. Well, then the other thing I
wanted to bring up is by state law. I was
(24:13):
reading articles on this thing on the internet that you
can only charge forty dollars for photo radar ticket and
so that you know, and then he claims some sort
of cave carve out that would allow him to charge
this exorbitant amount of three hundred and forty dollars. I mean,
(24:34):
what the what the heck on that? You know, It's
like the town Curzy, according to this article, has made
over three hundred thousand dollars on this thing.
Speaker 1 (24:43):
Right, I think three hundred and forty thousand. My understanding
from the articles is that if somebody going twenty five
miles per hour over or more at that point, that
the larger amount could be charged. But I think that
is being disputed. And my understanding is that Cursey has
put up hold on this right now while they take
a look at it. So it sounds to me, Bruce,
(25:05):
is if it may be a good time for you
to contest it, because it sounds like Cursey, from what
I've read, is setting up a process that will allow
people to do that.
Speaker 6 (25:14):
Ah yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (25:16):
Because three forty is a killer. That's just well, yeah,
that does make sense.
Speaker 6 (25:20):
I mean, yeah, why not?
Speaker 1 (25:22):
Yeah, And you'd agree with me that twenty five miles
an hour over the speed limit is a killer. Also,
if somebody's in endangering safety, that's an extreme amount over
the speed limit. And I have no sympathy for anybody
twenty five miles an hour over the limit unless it's
a situation where there's a quick change in speed. Not
fair warning and not a fair opportunity to slow down there.
Speaker 6 (25:44):
That's what it is.
Speaker 1 (25:45):
Yeah, Man, appreciate the call. Hey, do me a favor
if you do decide to go through whatever process or
setting up and contest it, and I hope you do,
just to sort of flush all this out, just hit
us back and let us know what happened. Okay, okay, Man,
thank you appreciate the call.
Speaker 6 (26:03):
You're welcome.
Speaker 1 (26:03):
You have a good weekend. Yeah. Interesting, And Ryan, I
wish I had time right now. I'm so we're getting
ready for a trial, but I'd love to just drive
up there and see it. Because we hear from Bruce,
who sounds one thousand credible.
Speaker 2 (26:17):
Uh huh.
Speaker 1 (26:17):
We hear from the Chief who sounds very credible as well.
We get a Texter who agrees with the Chief. We
get another Texter who sees it the way Bruce does.
I'd love to just see some pictures of this, So
if anybody has some pictures, please shoot them to us.
We'll share them with listeners.
Speaker 4 (26:33):
I was told real quick my buddy Derek Latchko, who
you're familiar with, the high school baseball teammate, who's the
cattle rancher up in that area, claims that they may
have moved the radar enforcement area from one to another
within I don't know the parameter, but what we heard
in the report from nine news was that they had paused,
(26:54):
at least temporarily, the three hundred and forty dollars amount
for the tickets. If I'm not mistaken, right, Oh no,
I'm actually going to be heading up that way and
I'll do something.
Speaker 1 (27:04):
Are you running for office up there or something? You
got all these speaking gigs, which I think is great.
You'd be very wise to have Ryan speak at your
especially beauty pageants. Well, I would see the controversy over
Miss Universe.
Speaker 2 (27:15):
No, okay, well, no, the rock country is called right?
Speaker 1 (27:18):
Oh that was years ago?
Speaker 2 (27:20):
No, I thought that was just now, wasn't it.
Speaker 3 (27:21):
Okay?
Speaker 2 (27:22):
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (27:22):
Maybe they did it. I know some corruption country. Oh no, yeah, yeah,
do you think beauty pageants have outlived their usefulness or
do we need to maintain that tradition.
Speaker 2 (27:33):
That's a can of worms. So we got a little
zero time before the break.
Speaker 4 (27:36):
I think they I think they could make a comeback, Dan,
because I think there's that pendulum swing against the woke
stuff and people are yearning for what used to have,
and I think maybe there would be a market.
Speaker 1 (27:47):
Does that include beauty pageants for people ever yearning for
beauty pageants?
Speaker 2 (27:51):
I think ladies like watching. It's not even the dudes.
Speaker 1 (27:53):
We'll hear from people on that d A n five
seven seven, three nine. Do we need to get back
to more beauty pass actions and why? Three oh three
seven one three eight two five five. I think for
the guys who are just looking for pretty women, they
just watch the Victoria's Secret Show.
Speaker 2 (28:10):
And stuff like that, all right, But ladies watch that too,
not duds.
Speaker 1 (28:15):
I think it's I think the talent part of it's
always interesting. Yeah, then when you get to the interview,
maybe when we come back, you can play some of
those all time great interview in.
Speaker 2 (28:25):
South Carolina interview.
Speaker 1 (28:26):
I'll find it here on the Dankapla Show.
Speaker 2 (28:35):
And now back to the Dankapless Show podcast.
Speaker 1 (28:39):
South Carolina, a lot of applause. It is true, there
is a map shortage.
Speaker 2 (28:43):
Bring back the answers like that.
Speaker 1 (28:46):
Oh, I feel so bad for it. We've all had
those moments, right, well, we've all had those moments where yeah,
it's just part of being humans.
Speaker 2 (28:54):
Where does South Africa and a Rock come from?
Speaker 3 (28:57):
That?
Speaker 1 (28:57):
Answer?
Speaker 3 (28:58):
Though?
Speaker 1 (28:58):
You know you're up on stage, you got the lights,
you know that. Okay, you didn't quite process this, right, Yeah, tough,
tough moment. I'd love to know where she's at now,
hopefully very very successful.
Speaker 4 (29:10):
On the YouTube, there appears to be an update of
her that was from two thousand and seven, so it's
been quite a while. You figured it's eighteen years later.
She's probably I'm looking at her, i'd say early twenties.
Then she might be forty years old or older now.
Speaker 1 (29:21):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, but you know, you see it happen
in sports. I remember the Orange Bowl, the Orange Bowl.
CU should have had his first national championship and great
field goal kicker, great guy, all of a sudden couldn't
make an extra point. I mean, you know, couldn't kick
the ball straight. It's human. It just happens sometimes everyone
(29:42):
at some point in their life short circuits. But the
reason we play that sound there was because now there's
this scandal at the Miss Universe pageant and leads to
the bigger question of have these pageants kind of gone
the way of the Dodo, just outlive their usefulness or
do we need them now more than ever? Two Miss
Universe judges quit scandal hit pageant as one claims it's rigged,
(30:06):
and I'd get into the story, but you get the
gist of it. What do you think, Ryan, Should there
be more? Should this show sponsor one? Should the station
sponsor one? What's the redeeming value?
Speaker 2 (30:17):
I would be on board with any or all of it.
I think you know, it's a talent showcase.
Speaker 4 (30:21):
Like you said, in some ways, it gives young women
a chance to have a platform to profile themselves and
could catapult them to future success and many endeavors.
Speaker 2 (30:31):
There's a lot of to be said for the whole
pageant world.
Speaker 1 (30:35):
I think you nailed that. That is the A plus argument.
I'm in favor of anything that gives more people an
opportunity to break through. Yeah, for their talents to be
seen in some kind of healthy endeavor in competition along
the way, some kind of magnificent obsession that's you know,
positive because you know you're doing healthy type things to
put yourself in a position to win. And then if
(30:58):
you've got that intersection where people like to watch it,
so there's a demand for it, and then it gives
people a chance to show their time for all that,
you know, American idol. I mean, we would have never
heard of Carrie Underwood or some of these other people
like Clarkson, Kelly Clarkson. It's Carrie Underwood, Kelly Clarkson, and
it's launched a whole bunch of other people in smaller ways.
(31:18):
Those are just example. So I'm for all that stuff.
I don't see any harm whatsoever from these beauty pageants.
And if they're self sustaining, great a texture. Not happy
with them. Why Dan America is not Let me give
the texture for credit here. Dan America is not only
not craving a female president. It is a bit of
(31:39):
a nutty idea. Not sure where this comes from. Just
someone with the right ideas would be nice. I'll contrare
my friend and I would love to find out from
this text. Are they female? Are they male? If if
they're male, do they have a wife, do they have daughters.
We've got to be realistic. You've got half this population,
(32:02):
you know, they female, and you've got many of those
females on one level or another, to one extent or
another thinking, wait a second, that there's never been a
female president. This is crazy. And so obviously the voters
have proven they're not going to elect somebody, and female
voters are not going to elect somebody just because they're female.
They have to be qualified. But yeah, I have to
(32:23):
believe there are many, many, many, many females who who
would want to see the first female president.
Speaker 4 (32:28):
Among the people I know, Dan, some that are the
most against a female president are women.
Speaker 1 (32:34):
Well on principle or just because they're not qualified.
Speaker 2 (32:37):
I don't know. I mean it could be they're like
really adamant about it too well.
Speaker 1 (32:41):
And it speaks so well of the women of this
country that they have not elected unqualified or females to
be president. That speaks extraordinarily well. But you're telling me
that a highly qualified female candidate wouldn't have an enormous edge.
I think they would in this idea of Michelle Obama's.
(33:03):
And you know, of course, you know Kamala Harris trying
to say, you know, blame sexism and men just aren't
ready to support a female. It's just they're wrong. And
it just goes back to that elitism and how they
look down on us. And I hope they keep doing
that right because they're going to keep getting they can
to keep getting defeated that way, Brian, great job, have
(33:24):
a great weekend. Join us Monday on The Dan Kapla
Show
This is Dan Caplis and welcome to today's online podcast
edition of The Dan Capla Show. Please be sure to
give us a five star rating if you'd be so kind,
and to subscribe, download and listen to the show every
single day on your favorite podcast platform. Happy to be
able to go to the VIP line and talk with
Chief Jonathan Lang. Chief is, of course, chief of the
(00:21):
police department in the town of Cursey. Been very much
in the news because KUSA did a big story talking
about three hundred and forty dollars speeding tickets that were
being issued when people were twenty five miles per hour
or over. Some alleged it was a speed trap and
others have said, no, it's not a speed trap at all.
So appreciate the chance to talk with the chief about that.
Speaker 2 (00:44):
Chief.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
Welcome to the Dan Capla Show.
Speaker 3 (00:47):
Hey, how you doing tonight?
Speaker 1 (00:48):
I am living the dream. My friend and I noticed
you have a fascinating pass because I was looking up
before our conversation today. You were actually studying to be
in medicine and then switch to law enforcement. Is that right?
Speaker 3 (01:03):
Yeah, that's correct. In the early two thousands, I got
my AMT from Thom savellims services and love ones, and
I started working at a local emergency room MC Greeley
as attack and was studying my pre wrecks to be
a physician's assistant. So I was trying to launch my
career in that direction and then found a passion for
law enforcement.
Speaker 1 (01:24):
Yeah, fascinating, not the normal path. But one of the
cool things about law enforcement and Dad was law enforcement
for thirty years is you have so many interesting people
from so many walks of life find their way there.
But appreciate you being with us today. And so my
first question, chief would be tell people about the way
(01:46):
this speed trap. Well, I didn't mean it that way.
That's the allegation that it's a speed trap, you know,
and the way this was set up, because we've had
some people say that it's a case where it drops
very quickly from sixty five to forty five in the
cameras right behind the forty five, and so you know,
there's not really a fair opportunity or warning to slow down.
(02:08):
We let other people say, Hey, I drive through that
area all the time and it is not a speed trap.
It's necessary for safety, So please share your take on that.
Speaker 3 (02:18):
Sure. Yeah, so I've been in law enforcement in Weald
County for about sixteen years. Started at the Evans Police Department,
moved my way through the Well County Sheriff's Office now
it's Curzy. Had a couple of stops along the way
in the private industry in the public safety software company,
But in working at Cerzy and on the streets Weald County,
(02:38):
I've noticed over the years that there's an extreme issue
with traffic related fatalities and accidents and interactions that we
see on a daily basis when we're out there. And
Kurzy is obviously a very small town. We only have
one officer on at a time to cover the streets,
(02:58):
and so implementing a program like this was going to
be a force multiplier for us to be able to
go out and really get the issues with the speeding
and traffic related issues under control. So we launched a
sixteen day earlier this year, sixteen day traffic study with
(03:19):
our vendor services that we're using right now, and what
we found was astonishing. In the sixteen days at County
N forty nine and Highway thirty four, we had about
one hundred and eighty seven thousand cars passed through there,
and at about forty eight percent of them, we're doing
ten plus over the speed limit, and then you start
walking into the thirty percent range of twenty five percent
(03:42):
range of people doing twelve to fifteen miles per hour
over the speed limit. So, in looking at that and
looking at the annexation agreement that we signed with Wealth
Counting back in twenty seventeen, we decided to move forward
with the program and enforce the speed limit signs that
Well County had put out there as far as as
(04:02):
part of that annexation agreement. And I will report to you,
since we put that speed trailer out there, we were
capturing about eighteen hundred citations a day and now we're
down to about four hundred and fifty, which I think
is a huge win for the motors and world County.
Speaker 1 (04:18):
Yeah, and this is in the forty five mile per stretch,
that's correct.
Speaker 3 (04:22):
We decided to put it in the forty five mile
prior stretch just to give people plenty of time to
accelerate from the sixty five down to the fifty five
and then through that forty five zone which then they
passed the trailer. We will capture speeds about one hundred
foot pass the trailer before they get into the thirty
five mile prior zone.
Speaker 1 (04:41):
Chief Countison Lang of Cursy with us this afternoon and chiefs,
so you're saying that, okay, motorists are adapting. They see
that the trailers there, they're slowing their speed, most of them,
and so the public is safer as a result of that.
The controversy over the three hundred and forty dollars tickets,
my understanding is that the position of the department in
(05:05):
the town has been that those tickets are legal and
justified because the people don't enter their three forty zone
until they're twenty five miles per hour over the speed
limit or higher. Is that right?
Speaker 3 (05:19):
Well, we start capturing at eleven miles per hour over
the speed limit, and what the light our equipment does
is it then ups the fine for us in the
cloud services once the speed does get to twenty five
over the posted feel limit. So if you look at
a subsection one A within the AVA Statute forty two
four one ten point five, it says in there that
(05:39):
nothing in the section applies to infractions that are captured
by AVIS a twenty five miles per hour speed limit.
So what then that does is it eliminates the limitations
of the forty dollars or eighty dollars rule. And so
what we decided to do is implement what is already
(06:00):
in our ordinance and adopted in our ordinance with our
fines and p schedule for our model traffic code, and
reduce it to a twenty to twenty four over in fraction,
which is a class A traffic impraction and that carries
a three hundred and forty dollars fine, which aligns with
what is in our ordinance.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
And a question I raised the other day, since when
these are traffic camera citations, my understanding at that point
is there cannot be any points sucsessed, et cetera. Is
that right?
Speaker 3 (06:29):
That is correct? We issue no points with the three
hundred and forty dollars fine.
Speaker 1 (06:34):
And then so my question been, Okay, if this was
really a safety issue rather than a revenue issue, you know,
wouldn't you have an officer out there making these stops
and issuing those citations, those point based citations, so we
could get dangerous drivers off the road. But it sounds
as if from what you've said today, that there's only
one officer available at a time. Normally is that right.
Speaker 3 (06:57):
That's correct. I'm actually a working chief. So I worked
twelve hour shifts and my officers worked twelve hour shifts,
and we split up the day with two shifts nighttime
and daytime. And one of my officers actually recently went
out with you know, calls that were coming in being
able to balance those. He actually went out on forty
(07:18):
nine and was making contacts with people in person for
the excessive speeds. Yeah, so it's not that we just
put the trailer out there and ignore forty nine. We
still go out there and control it. But then also,
you know, people have taken consideration. We can only be
at one place at one time with one officer out
at a.
Speaker 1 (07:37):
Time, right, And the job I do for a living,
which is representing victims of catastrophic injuries and deaths, many
of them in crashes. I have no sympathy for anybody
driving recklessly, particularly including twenty five miles per hour or
more over the limit. My concern would be if it
(07:58):
was a situation where the speed limit drops so fast
that twenty five over really meant sixty five or seventy
and somebody didn't have time to realize that the speed
limit had changed but you're assuring us that's not the
case here.
Speaker 3 (08:12):
It is off the case. I've driven through there many,
many times. And then based on our traffic study, you know,
we have fifty percent of the population that are paying
attention and they you know, as soon as the speed
trailer goes out, we're seeing a significant decrease and those
daily citations that are being captured. So you know, again
with the annexation agreement that that Wealth County and the
(08:34):
Town of Curzy signed back in twenty seventeen, they were
responsible for putting out those traffic control devices and signs
on the road. We just enforced them.
Speaker 1 (08:45):
And you were kind enough this morning to send some
video of one of the reckless drivers tell folks how
fast he or she was going.
Speaker 3 (08:54):
So that was actually a picture that was captured by
GPD on their camera and then captured that individual doing
one hundred thirty three miles an hour on Highway thirty
four and a posted fifty five zone. Now, it is
my understanding for full transparency that that car was being
chased by some law enforcement officers. But again I don't
know the details. I wasn't involved with that.
Speaker 1 (09:12):
Yeah, but just reckless disregard for your own life just insane.
And I know that it's you and other members of
law enforcement. You're the men and women who have to
walk up to that car and see the dead teenager
and see all the catastrophic consequences of reckless driving. So
I know that's a brutal part of your job. But
(09:34):
thank you. Appreciate you joining us today.
Speaker 3 (09:38):
Yeah, no, thank you so much. And you know I
always encourage people to give me a call or email
me that you know I can sit down and educate
them and talk to them about this. We're fully transparent
at the Town of Kurzy. We're just trying to take
some guidance from the lawmakers behind that bill with proceeding
forward with the issues that people are talking about currently.
Speaker 1 (10:00):
And what's the best way for folks to get in
touch with you head?
Speaker 3 (10:03):
Just email me at the letter J at L A. N. G.
E at curly gub dot com.
Speaker 1 (10:10):
Well, Chief, appreciate the time, Thank you much, Thank you,
you take care. Thank you that I appreciate them coming on.
And Ryan, it's interesting I talk to a lot of
friends in state Patrol, and in many ways, I think
for the reasons I was talking with the chief about
I think state patrol is one of the toughest law
enforcement jobs out there, because, you know, how do you
(10:33):
get those images out of your mind? You know, you
walk up to a crash scene there's been reckless driving
by somebody, and as a result, you're looking at this
dead teenager or dead and teenagers, and you just know
that life's going forever. Somebody's life is about to be
destroyed because they've lost their child to a reckless driver.
And I think it has to take a tremendous emotional
(10:55):
toll on law enforcement who do that as part of
their job, and so I support anything that's going to
catch and punish and deter and stop these these reckless drivers.
I just wanted to make sure it wasn't some unfair
speed traps set up. It does not sound like.
Speaker 4 (11:13):
It was my point, and I think he touched on
this Chief Lang would be as a driver in these experiences,
if you've only got a quarter mile to accelerate twenty
miles an hour, there needs to be plenty of notification
of that, and I don't know if there is or
there's not, but there should be a sign way back,
like hey, decreased speed zone ahead heads up rather than
(11:34):
here it is boom, we gotcha, like quarter mile right there.
Speaker 1 (11:37):
Come on, you have to have a fair opportunity. I
have not been up to that particular location. From the
way the Chief describes it to me and some of
our listeners have, it sounds like many people believe there
is fair warning and fair opportunity to stop. But appreciate
them coming on. You're on the Dan Kaplas Show.
Speaker 2 (11:59):
And now back to the Dan Kaplas Show podcast.
Speaker 5 (12:02):
And there is no specific thing out there that made
you decide now was the right time.
Speaker 3 (12:07):
That's right.
Speaker 6 (12:08):
To be clear, we are not calling on folks right
now to debate to disobey any type of unlawful order.
Speaker 1 (12:16):
See what benerdict Crowe now says. You're not supposed to
disobey unlawful orders.
Speaker 4 (12:25):
Do you think somebody, an advisor, a consultant, somebody in
the know got him and said, bro, you better walk
that back. You are walking on very thin legal ice
something like that.
Speaker 1 (12:37):
No, because legally there's no exposure at all. Because, in
my opinion, because they very diabolically protected themselves legally by
inserting the word unlawfully when the overall message was intended
to destabilize the military and to turn the military against
(12:58):
the commander in chief. But that one magic word unlawfully
provides them with the legal protection, so legally no exposure
at all. My guess is that it is backfiring on
them politically, and backfiring on the Democratic Party politically in
a very explosive way is one would expect, including among
(13:20):
many Democrats, because you think of the Democrats in my
own extended family, and they're all patriots, they all love
this country, they're all grateful to our military. And when
their own party now is encouraging the military to turn
against the commander in chief, that's not going to sell
(13:41):
with a lot of Democrats. So I think this is
blowing up in their face politically. I also think that
when President Trump hit back so hard, they're worried about
that because, in my opinion, there's no question they put
(14:02):
President Trump in grave danger by implicitly telling the men
and women of the military that they have to protect
the people from President Trump. I mean, that was the
implicit message, and that I'm not saying it was their
intent to get him killed, but they had to be aware.
(14:26):
I mean, just as smart people, one would think they
were aware that this would dramatically increase the danger to
the president, and President Trump hit back hard. You know,
I hit back with his comments about seditious behavior. What
was the Verbatimryan, seditious behavior punishable by death, something like that.
Speaker 4 (14:48):
But that's the thing, it's always a CounterPunch with him.
He was launching into that, right.
Speaker 1 (14:53):
And that's why my belief is that the President Trump
must believe that Crow was trying to get him killed
for President Trump to have responded the way he did.
I wish that Crow had not put the President in
this danger, and I wish the President had not responded
the way that he did, because this is a very,
very combustible, dangerous situation. And so is that why Crow
(15:18):
is now reversing himself. I mean, I saw Michael Jackson
in concert. I caught Michael Jackson's hat when he threw
it to the crowd. How weird is that I've seen moonwalking.
I've seen moonwalking from the best until today. Until today,
Michael Jackson can't hold a candle to Benedict Crow. When
(15:43):
it comes to moonwalking, you come out, You tell the
men and women of the military, defy on lawful orders,
don't give up the ship. You won't identify a single
unlawful order because you can't. But you tell him to
do that, and then the next day you go and
see an insane No, we're not telling people to disobey
any current unlawful orders. Why because they can't point to
(16:06):
a single unlawful order. I'm telling you, I've had the
privilege of being on air for decades. I've never seen
anything like this. I wish I had subpoena power. I
would love to know if somebody has a cause of
action here, I would do this case for free, just
to take subpoena power and drill down and get to
(16:27):
the bottom of who was behind this, what was their
actual intent. It's one of the most dangerous, reckless, irresponsible,
danger creating bizarre plays I've ever seen inside or outside
of politics. And they had to know. These are men
(16:49):
and women who served the country. Crow served very courageously
and nobly in the military. He had to know this
was a gift to the enemy, a gift to the enemy,
a gift to enemy recruiting. To be able to say,
look at these look at these political leaders in America
who served in the military, and they're asking the military
(17:10):
to turn against their own commander in chief. They had
to know this would be used by the enemy. Everybody
on the line, I'm going to out a courtesy to you,
wait and take you after this break, because I don't
want to bring you on and then have you cut short.
So we'll continue that conversation. Then I want to lighten
it up with some of the most enjoyable sound in
(17:32):
a long time, and that is Michelle Obama talking about how,
in her view, America is not ready for a woman president.
Do you agree with that that America is not ready
for a woman president? Spoiler alert, I think America is
craving a woman president. I think a qualified woman candidate
would have an enormous advantage right out of the gate.
(17:56):
Craving a woman president.
Speaker 2 (18:05):
You're listening to the Dan Kaplis Show podcast.
Speaker 1 (18:08):
It's the room that we've made for a woman to
be president.
Speaker 5 (18:11):
Well, as we saw in this past election, sadly, we
ain't ready. That's why I'm like, don't even look at
me about running, because you all are lying you're not
ready for a woman You are not, so don't waste
my time. You know, we got a lot of growing
up to do, and there's still I'm sadly a lot
(18:33):
of men who do not feel like they can be
led by a woman.
Speaker 1 (18:36):
And we saw it. What was the question, Oh goodness,
oh my goodness, what an elitist, How little she thinks
of almost all of the rest of us. You're not
ready for a woman. Men don't want to be led
(18:59):
by a woman. And I hope she keeps thinking that way.
I hope all of these elitists on the left keep
thinking that way, because almost the entire leadership of the
left are elitist like this, And the more they underestimate us,
the less they understand us, the easier it is to
beat them. It's a remarkable study, remarkable study. Yeah, please
(19:25):
keep thinking that way, Michelle Obama. Wow. The truth is,
and you may disagree with this, and I'd love to
hear from you. Three o three seven one three eight
two five five text dam five seven seven three nine.
The truth is this country is explosively craving a female president,
and if there was a qualified female president with good
(19:50):
ideas appealing to people, she would have and her party
would have such an enormous advantage right out of the gate.
And that the simple fact is that the two candidates,
Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris. What's not to like?
Speaker 3 (20:09):
Right?
Speaker 1 (20:10):
Not even remotely matching that description, but you get yeah,
and Amy Klobachar, you know, And that's that's the point
is the Democratic Party is so toxically far left right now,
and it is so radical and so secular that it
(20:33):
will reject, it will kill in the crib any woman,
any any female candidate qualified for president who does not
bend the need to the most far left radical ideas.
You know, they had Amy klomach Klobachar went when Biden
won during the COVID election, they had Amy Klobachar in
(20:55):
the primaries. Now, Amy Klobachar is a woman who has
a lot of bad ideas. They're far left ideas. She
wouldn't be a good president for that reason. But she's
somebody very intelligent, very competent, very qualified in terms of
those basic skills. That's somebody who the American people would elect.
(21:18):
Hopefully the Republican would defeat her, but that's somebody the
American people might very well elect. But a Hillary Clinton,
a Kamala Harris, I mean, I told you for a
very very long time, and you probably knew it before
I said it. There was no way America was going
to elect Kamala Harris president period, because she's obviously the
furthest thing from qualified Bruce and Sterling. You're on the
(21:42):
dan kaplash, you'll welcome.
Speaker 6 (21:44):
Hey, hey, I'd got one of those tickets in the
mail for one thing. They arrive about a month later,
so you don't know what's going on. I got that
and I said, what the heck? And I went out
there looked at this set up, and it is a
speed trap. I don't care what that chief said.
Speaker 1 (22:06):
Well, laid out for us, my friend, thank you for
calling laid out for us.
Speaker 6 (22:10):
Yeah, you got a nice four lane concrete highway, the
Curzy Road, and it's a sixty five on our speed limit.
You know, people should go that. This thing set up
about a mile off the inner section to Highway thirty four,
but it is right by that that when it changes speeds.
(22:31):
He has a little square yellow sign that is out there,
but it's only about one hundred feet in front of
the trap.
Speaker 1 (22:40):
Oh really, So it goes from sixty five to forty five?
Does it go sixty five fifty five forty five or
just sixty five forty five.
Speaker 3 (22:48):
Sixty five forty five?
Speaker 1 (22:50):
Okay, and then how far is the camera from the
point at which it goes to forty five?
Speaker 6 (22:58):
Right there, right there, pretty much right there.
Speaker 1 (23:02):
So if if you don't go from sixty five to
forty five by the time it terms to forty five,
you're gonna get flashed. Yep, okay, And I don't expect
you have this andy. Do you ever have a picture
of it?
Speaker 3 (23:19):
No?
Speaker 1 (23:20):
Okay, But but if you did, or if anybody does,
please just shoot it to us. We'd love to take
a look at it. And that the chief it sounds
like very accessible. We can definitely follow up with him.
What'd you do about the ticket?
Speaker 6 (23:33):
I'm just doing about this. Maybe I shouldn't say what
I'm going to do on the radio, but I have
a sit in here, and I have all these notes
that I made when I went up there to check
it out, So I'm not I don't know, I'm.
Speaker 1 (23:47):
Gonna do it.
Speaker 6 (23:48):
Well, both go to court on it. But another point
I wanted to say is, or maybe I mentioned he
had he had a little yellow sign. They said there's
a speed trap and it was not even one hundred
feet ahead of it. Well, then the other thing I
wanted to bring up is by state law. I was
(24:13):
reading articles on this thing on the internet that you
can only charge forty dollars for photo radar ticket and
so that you know, and then he claims some sort
of cave carve out that would allow him to charge
this exorbitant amount of three hundred and forty dollars. I mean,
(24:34):
what the what the heck on that? You know, It's
like the town Curzy, according to this article, has made
over three hundred thousand dollars on this thing.
Speaker 1 (24:43):
Right, I think three hundred and forty thousand. My understanding
from the articles is that if somebody going twenty five
miles per hour over or more at that point, that
the larger amount could be charged. But I think that
is being disputed. And my understanding is that Cursey has
put up hold on this right now while they take
a look at it. So it sounds to me, Bruce,
(25:05):
is if it may be a good time for you
to contest it, because it sounds like Cursey, from what
I've read, is setting up a process that will allow
people to do that.
Speaker 6 (25:14):
Ah yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (25:16):
Because three forty is a killer. That's just well, yeah,
that does make sense.
Speaker 6 (25:20):
I mean, yeah, why not?
Speaker 1 (25:22):
Yeah, And you'd agree with me that twenty five miles
an hour over the speed limit is a killer. Also,
if somebody's in endangering safety, that's an extreme amount over
the speed limit. And I have no sympathy for anybody
twenty five miles an hour over the limit unless it's
a situation where there's a quick change in speed. Not
fair warning and not a fair opportunity to slow down there.
Speaker 6 (25:44):
That's what it is.
Speaker 1 (25:45):
Yeah, Man, appreciate the call. Hey, do me a favor
if you do decide to go through whatever process or
setting up and contest it, and I hope you do,
just to sort of flush all this out, just hit
us back and let us know what happened. Okay, okay, Man,
thank you appreciate the call.
Speaker 6 (26:03):
You're welcome.
Speaker 1 (26:03):
You have a good weekend. Yeah. Interesting, And Ryan, I
wish I had time right now. I'm so we're getting
ready for a trial, but I'd love to just drive
up there and see it. Because we hear from Bruce,
who sounds one thousand credible.
Speaker 2 (26:17):
Uh huh.
Speaker 1 (26:17):
We hear from the Chief who sounds very credible as well.
We get a Texter who agrees with the Chief. We
get another Texter who sees it the way Bruce does.
I'd love to just see some pictures of this, So
if anybody has some pictures, please shoot them to us.
We'll share them with listeners.
Speaker 4 (26:33):
I was told real quick my buddy Derek Latchko, who
you're familiar with, the high school baseball teammate, who's the
cattle rancher up in that area, claims that they may
have moved the radar enforcement area from one to another
within I don't know the parameter, but what we heard
in the report from nine news was that they had paused,
(26:54):
at least temporarily, the three hundred and forty dollars amount
for the tickets. If I'm not mistaken, right, Oh no,
I'm actually going to be heading up that way and
I'll do something.
Speaker 1 (27:04):
Are you running for office up there or something? You
got all these speaking gigs, which I think is great.
You'd be very wise to have Ryan speak at your
especially beauty pageants. Well, I would see the controversy over
Miss Universe.
Speaker 2 (27:15):
No, okay, well, no, the rock country is called right?
Speaker 1 (27:18):
Oh that was years ago?
Speaker 2 (27:20):
No, I thought that was just now, wasn't it.
Speaker 3 (27:21):
Okay?
Speaker 2 (27:22):
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (27:22):
Maybe they did it. I know some corruption country. Oh no, yeah, yeah,
do you think beauty pageants have outlived their usefulness or
do we need to maintain that tradition.
Speaker 2 (27:33):
That's a can of worms. So we got a little
zero time before the break.
Speaker 4 (27:36):
I think they I think they could make a comeback, Dan,
because I think there's that pendulum swing against the woke
stuff and people are yearning for what used to have,
and I think maybe there would be a market.
Speaker 1 (27:47):
Does that include beauty pageants for people ever yearning for
beauty pageants?
Speaker 2 (27:51):
I think ladies like watching. It's not even the dudes.
Speaker 1 (27:53):
We'll hear from people on that d A n five
seven seven, three nine. Do we need to get back
to more beauty pass actions and why? Three oh three
seven one three eight two five five. I think for
the guys who are just looking for pretty women, they
just watch the Victoria's Secret Show.
Speaker 2 (28:10):
And stuff like that, all right, But ladies watch that too,
not duds.
Speaker 1 (28:15):
I think it's I think the talent part of it's
always interesting. Yeah, then when you get to the interview,
maybe when we come back, you can play some of
those all time great interview in.
Speaker 2 (28:25):
South Carolina interview.
Speaker 1 (28:26):
I'll find it here on the Dankapla Show.
Speaker 2 (28:35):
And now back to the Dankapless Show podcast.
Speaker 1 (28:39):
South Carolina, a lot of applause. It is true, there
is a map shortage.
Speaker 2 (28:43):
Bring back the answers like that.
Speaker 1 (28:46):
Oh, I feel so bad for it. We've all had
those moments, right, well, we've all had those moments where yeah,
it's just part of being humans.
Speaker 2 (28:54):
Where does South Africa and a Rock come from?
Speaker 3 (28:57):
That?
Speaker 1 (28:57):
Answer?
Speaker 3 (28:58):
Though?
Speaker 1 (28:58):
You know you're up on stage, you got the lights,
you know that. Okay, you didn't quite process this, right, Yeah, tough,
tough moment. I'd love to know where she's at now,
hopefully very very successful.
Speaker 4 (29:10):
On the YouTube, there appears to be an update of
her that was from two thousand and seven, so it's
been quite a while. You figured it's eighteen years later.
She's probably I'm looking at her, i'd say early twenties.
Then she might be forty years old or older now.
Speaker 1 (29:21):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, but you know, you see it happen
in sports. I remember the Orange Bowl, the Orange Bowl.
CU should have had his first national championship and great
field goal kicker, great guy, all of a sudden couldn't
make an extra point. I mean, you know, couldn't kick
the ball straight. It's human. It just happens sometimes everyone
(29:42):
at some point in their life short circuits. But the
reason we play that sound there was because now there's
this scandal at the Miss Universe pageant and leads to
the bigger question of have these pageants kind of gone
the way of the Dodo, just outlive their usefulness or
do we need them now more than ever? Two Miss
Universe judges quit scandal hit pageant as one claims it's rigged,
(30:06):
and I'd get into the story, but you get the
gist of it. What do you think, Ryan, Should there
be more? Should this show sponsor one? Should the station
sponsor one? What's the redeeming value?
Speaker 2 (30:17):
I would be on board with any or all of it.
I think you know, it's a talent showcase.
Speaker 4 (30:21):
Like you said, in some ways, it gives young women
a chance to have a platform to profile themselves and
could catapult them to future success and many endeavors.
Speaker 2 (30:31):
There's a lot of to be said for the whole
pageant world.
Speaker 1 (30:35):
I think you nailed that. That is the A plus argument.
I'm in favor of anything that gives more people an
opportunity to break through. Yeah, for their talents to be
seen in some kind of healthy endeavor in competition along
the way, some kind of magnificent obsession that's you know,
positive because you know you're doing healthy type things to
put yourself in a position to win. And then if
(30:58):
you've got that intersection where people like to watch it,
so there's a demand for it, and then it gives
people a chance to show their time for all that,
you know, American idol. I mean, we would have never
heard of Carrie Underwood or some of these other people
like Clarkson, Kelly Clarkson. It's Carrie Underwood, Kelly Clarkson, and
it's launched a whole bunch of other people in smaller ways.
(31:18):
Those are just example. So I'm for all that stuff.
I don't see any harm whatsoever from these beauty pageants.
And if they're self sustaining, great a texture. Not happy
with them. Why Dan America is not Let me give
the texture for credit here. Dan America is not only
not craving a female president. It is a bit of
(31:39):
a nutty idea. Not sure where this comes from. Just
someone with the right ideas would be nice. I'll contrare
my friend and I would love to find out from
this text. Are they female? Are they male? If if
they're male, do they have a wife, do they have daughters.
We've got to be realistic. You've got half this population,
(32:02):
you know, they female, and you've got many of those
females on one level or another, to one extent or
another thinking, wait a second, that there's never been a
female president. This is crazy. And so obviously the voters
have proven they're not going to elect somebody, and female
voters are not going to elect somebody just because they're female.
They have to be qualified. But yeah, I have to
(32:23):
believe there are many, many, many, many females who who
would want to see the first female president.
Speaker 4 (32:28):
Among the people I know, Dan, some that are the
most against a female president are women.
Speaker 1 (32:34):
Well on principle or just because they're not qualified.
Speaker 2 (32:37):
I don't know. I mean it could be they're like
really adamant about it too well.
Speaker 1 (32:41):
And it speaks so well of the women of this
country that they have not elected unqualified or females to
be president. That speaks extraordinarily well. But you're telling me
that a highly qualified female candidate wouldn't have an enormous edge.
I think they would in this idea of Michelle Obama's.
(33:03):
And you know, of course, you know Kamala Harris trying
to say, you know, blame sexism and men just aren't
ready to support a female. It's just they're wrong. And
it just goes back to that elitism and how they
look down on us. And I hope they keep doing
that right because they're going to keep getting they can
to keep getting defeated that way, Brian, great job, have
(33:24):
a great weekend. Join us Monday on The Dan Kapla
Show
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.