Illegal to Feed Homeless in Parks

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Maggie, why are you so against helping people? If it's the cost, it would be alot cheaper to help these folks than it has been to develop the Osprey. How about we use some of that cash?

You're pretty lose with the word "help", there, Scooter.

You may believe a handout is "help", and you're welcome to hand out all of your stuff that you like if you really beleive it's helpful. But since at least the Johnson administration I've seen way too much welfare state accomplish exactly nothing (other than providing employment to the useless apparatchiks that run the programs), while robbing people of their initiative and self-respect.

You can claim it's "help". I'm not convinced. And you're certainly not entitled to despoil a public park to do it.

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by HappyMonkey

While you're talking about opening soup kitchens in homes, as some sort of analogy to doing it in public parks, just remember that the people closest to being "at home" in the public park are the homeless.

I'd say that the local homeowners are the closest to being at home in the park. They effectively have a soup kitchen being set up in their backyard.

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Maybe provide facilities (oh no! collectivism!) where they can satisfy the base of Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

But that's the whole point, there are facilities provided, just like there are public parks provided. Except the public parks are being usurped for other purposes.

[xoxoxoBruce]

But if you feed them they lose the ability to survive in the wild without handouts. They become dependent on people to survive and when winter comes and the tourists go home, they will suffer horribly. Well, that's why You shouldn't feed the critters in the National Parks, anyway.

Who would choose a lifestyle of homelessness?

Most of the people they kicked out, when they closed the PA State Hospitals, some years ago. These people need help but the courts have ruled you can't help them against their will. They can't be locked up unless they're dangerous to others....being a danger to themselves, doesn't count.

I've no first hand experience, but everything I've read says the shelters are generally hell holes. Your life and possessions are at risk every night you're there. We saw some of that in New Orleans where the people were tossed into the dome without supervision. Of course to make the shelters safe, you would have to run it like a jail or at least a strictly controlled dormitory. That would drive many of the homeless away, just as fast. Catch 22?

The same thing applies to any kind of structured employment, no matter what you pay. Certainly not all, but a large portion of the homeless, don't want a regular job....nothing with rules.

It's much easier to be compassionate when it's not your backyard, and doesn't create problems for you. But, if these homeless people were drawn, by the good samaritan, to the playground your kid uses, it's much tougher,...... much, much tougher. Even if you stand watch over your kid the whole time they play, you don't want Aqualung sitting on the next swing.

Aside ~Public Park, owned by the city. Public property, right?
All the public or just legal residents of that city and their guests? Who owns it, if the residents of the city paid for it? I can remember, as a kid, being shooed out of a park in a town where I wasn't a resident, for that very reason. Of course when you're a kid raised in a climate of respect for authority, legality isn't questioned.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

We saw some of that in New Orleans where the people were tossed into the dome without supervision.

I'm in agreement with most of what you say in this post, but I'd be wary of waving the Superdome around as a scarecrow...most of the wild stories in the press about what supposedly went on there turned out to be urban legend.

That said, in the same situation the cops would find it difficult to confiscate my legally owned weapons, as the NO cops seemed to think they were entitled to. Fortunately we now have some state laws explicitly forbidding that, with federal laws perhaps to follow.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

I'd say that the local homeowners are the closest to being at home in the park. They effectively have a soup kitchen being set up in their backyard.

Whereas the homeless effectively have one being set up in their home.

[wolf]

My old boss, before he went nuts and stopped coming to work, used to talk about the shelter system in Britain.

They had a lot of strict rules, including one that I found very interesting. You were only permitted to spend one night at a shelter within a specified period of time. Shelters were placed about one day's walk apart. You got a bed, a meal, and were sent out.

There are some shelter programs that just house and feed people. I don't think that these are of much value, beyond making people dependent on their services. The successful programs are the ones that focus on transition to permanent residence, Ready-for-Work programs, and so forth ... but those beds are going empty, because people refuse to sign up for them.

Philadelphia has several programs, like Horizon House, that I believe I've discussed before, specifically designed to assist the seriously mentally ill homeless. They have psychiatrists, social workers, nurses, and case managers, provide apartments, life skills training, etc.

Only about 15% of homeless people are identified as mentally ill. Off the top of my head, I think the rate for the rest of the population is about 10%. Based on my own personal experience, that five percent difference is probably attributable to two things ... classifying substance abuse as mental illness (which it isn't) and getting a psych diagnosis by manipulating the system into calling you crazy for three hots and a cot and some nice cozy medications.

Trust me, I know a lot of homeless crazy people, but I also know a lot of homeless manipulators. Talked to one tonight, in fact. By a careful combination of talking about suicide interspersed with requests to go to rehab, this person has been hospitalized since early May. Not all at the same place, but the individual has gone from facility to facility this way. The most recent place was too demanding. They actually wanted the patient to participate in treatment, and so, on cue, the suicide card is played, including a refusal to contract for safety, and a threat to "flip out" and throw a computer off a shrink's desk to add flavoring. Even managed to sob on the phone, blaming the facility before last's changing of medication, for today's "instability."

Yeah. Sure.

My hospital is closer to the client's significant other, and unlike a rehab, we allow visiting.

But you know what? The insurance company agrees to pay, and the person will be brought in.

Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

This is your tax dollars at work, people. Aren't you proud?

We can't have them fed then. That is the reason for the law. Back to square one.

I wonder how many taking part in this discussion know what it is to be truly hungry?

[Ibby]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

I wonder how many taking part in this discussion know what it is to be truly hungry?

Man, I havent had anthing to eat in fifteen minutes! Of COURSE I know!

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

We can't have them fed then. That is the reason for the law. Back to square one.

I wonder how many taking part in this discussion know what it is to be truly hungry?

No, no, no. That is not true. The question is where?

The city says at the shelter/kitchen. The park dwellers want room service.

But, either way, they will be fed, if they wish, so leave out starvation, compassion and all the things that don't apply.

As an aside, here is a link to The 12 Myths About Hunger.

[Undertoad]

In America there is hunger, but not one single sign of starvation.

http://cellar.org/showpost.php?p=243852&postcount=14

[Undertoad]

In most grocery stores you can get a dozen eggs for $1. Good luck with the project rk

[Kitsune]

If I go to the park and hand out free balloons to children, do you think they would consider passing a law to prohibit it?
If I push a cart to the park and pass out free samples of ice cream, would the current law apply? (another might -- soliciting)
Why does this law specifically cite the homeless?

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by Kitsune

If I go to the park and hand out free balloons to children, do you think they would consider passing a law to prohibit it?
...
Why does this law specifically cite the homeless?

Because after they get their balloons the children will go home. Is the concept of "creating a nuisance" that foreign to you?

[Kitsune]

Originally Posted by MaggieL

Is the concept of "creating a nuisance" that foreign to you?

Not in the least. Is there not already a law that prohibits "creating a nuisance" or "loitering" or "trespassing" or whatever problems people think are being created? What, exactly, do city officials think such a specific law is going to stop?

Las Vegas Makes It Illegal to Feed Homeless in Parks

Gail Succo is simply going to go across the street and pass out sandwiches on the sidewalk. Will they then make it illegal to feed the homeless (and only the homeless, of course) on public property or in Las Vegas proper? How can you write a law like that? You can't distribute free things to people? You can only give out food to people that have a permanent address?

City officials and law makers need to stick to writing laws that actually prohibit crime. The problem of homeless people sleeping in the park is a bigger issue than someone handing out food and it isn't going to be remedied by banning the distribution of food in a public area to a specific class of people.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by Kitsune

Not in the least. Is there not already a law that prohibits "creating a nuisance" or "loitering" or "trespassing" or whatever problems people think are being created?

The law removes the burden of proving that operating a food kitchen in the park in a specific instance created a nuisance, just as having a speed limit law creates a presumption of reckless driving. If you're stopped for speeding, try complaining to the cop that he should instead be enforcing "laws that actually prohibit crime"; that always works.

The law isn't intended to "remedy the larger issue of homelessness"...and neither is handing out sandwiches.