If THIS don't put knots in your knickers, then I give up!

[Didereaux]

In a news conference last week the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty and the National Coalition for the Homeless released a report that chided 22 cities for new laws that they say punish individuals and groups who feed the homeless in public areas.

In Dallas, for example, "anyone caught sharing food with a homeless person without a permit may be fined up to $2,000 and/or jailed for up to six months," the report said.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

[Liberty Belle]

1. link, please?

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nonconformist]

11. Lazy asses? It's pretty basic to include a link to a story you're quoting in your post

If you don't, you'll be asked for it.

[donheld]

56. I your too lazy to give a link

How can you call us lazy? :spank:

[pepperbear]

74. uh, sparky, without a link, a story has no veracity....

that's how it works on this planet.

[Name removed]

82. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

84. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Joe Chi Minh]

93. Sorry. Some of us can tell when a poster is bona fide or not. Veracity means truth.

You may not want to lend credence, but others may find your incredulity suspicious. Do you find it unlikely that officials in Dallas or other places in the US would pass such laws? From what I've read in the past, I certainly don't. The veracity or otherwise of the thread header cannot be determined even by a link. It is either is true or it isn't, irrespective of back-up documentation. It's the way our planet works.

[pepperbear]

104. on this board, a link is necessary. sorry.

hey, and thanks for being sarcastic. it really made my day.

[Mutineer]

2. They'll just follow you home if you feed them????

Maybe that's the twisted logic of these places? More than likely though they don't want the homeless congregating in one area to get free food handouts. It just doesn't make any logical sense any way you look at it though does it?

[Chulanowa]

63. Ah yes, I had forgotten the freedom to assemble has been done away with...

[redwitch]

3. I am absolutely sickened by this.

I don't know what else to say.

[yourout]

4. Wow.......that is so wrong.

Some real caring "Christians" must have wrote the laws.

[Ellen Forradalom]

5. Christian charity outlawed in Dallas

Law also covers Jewish tzedakah, Muslim zakah and secular social action. Film at 11.

[Kajsa]

7. This is awful.

People reaching out to help others are punished for it?

What in the hell is this "permit" they refer to?

;(

[proud2BlibKansan]

8. It's all part of the war on the homeless

and the talibornagains are worried about the war on XMas.

[MonkeyFunk]

9. It doesn't knot my knickers

because Iknow that the reasoning behind such laws is not to punish charity, but to have some licensing and/or regulation over people who feed "the public".

As well-intentioned as food give-aways are, wouldn't you agree there's some need to ensure that the food is prepared under sanitary circumstances, and isn't spoiled?

[Iris]

10. sure, but if I want to split half my power bar with a guy standing next to me at a stop light

should I really be fined $2,000?

[Didereaux]

14. uh, actually that applies to YOU if you were to invite a homeless into a Taco Bell for a treat!

[angstlessk]

15. oh, please it has nothing to do with 'sanitary' conditions...they sleep on the

ground already..does the city makes sure they have sanitary sleeping conditions??? NOT FUCKING HARDLY!

[MonkeyFunk]

16. If you're handing out food to dozens or hundreds of people

there is, in fact, a public-health issue that local governments have an interest in overseeing.

Shouldn't a soup kitchen have to follow the same health regulations as the restaurant next door?

[hermetic]

18. Beware of karma.

It's a bitch.

[MonkeyFunk]

20. My karma's good on this issue....

I served as a volunteer and chairman for 7 years of an AIDS agency that delivered food every week to hundreds of clients.

Our kitchen was clean, our food was safely stored, and our clients were never in danger from the food we provided.

Fuck your innuendo.

[angstlessk]

32. honey, if I am starving to death...I would eat e-coli RAW!

sorry, but to stop people who have been feeding the homeless for YEARS without any health concerns..now that the country is being flooded with homeless 'suddenly' they are concerned that the homeless should be considered ONLY if one wants to feed them???

[MonkeyFunk]

37. starvation is almost non-existent in America

these aren't starving people - they're hungry people. Don't overdramatize.

do you think there should be absolutely no public health oversight for agencies that distribute food to the public?

[angstlessk]

42. public oversight...yes, ...fines and imprisonment.....NO WAY!

[MonkeyFunk]

45. so how do you propose to enforce laws

if there are no threats of fines or imprisonment?

[angstlessk]

57. make permits cheaper than shit..and ask someone if they have one

if not, make them move along...simple as that!...

[Joe Fields]

55. Bullshit. There are lots of starving people in America.

[MonkeyFunk]

86. No there aren't "lots"

of course, one is too much, but starvation is almost non-existent in the US. There's hunger, there's some malnutrition, but almost no starvation.

[Joe Chi Minh]

95. Worried abut catching AIDS? You would be Chairman, wouldn't you.

[Breeze54]

24. What are you smoking?

You think these laws are enacted out of 'caring' for the homeless?

You are naive'.

[MonkeyFunk]

31. I don't know who made them

so I can't say what their motives are.

But is it your opinion that because food is given away instead of sold, that there's no public-health interest in making sure the food is safe?

[Breeze54]

36. These laws are NOT about food safety and the homeless!

:eyes:

[MonkeyFunk]

38. so you say

but in my experience, it's not unreasonable to have at least minimal oversight of those who distribute food to the public.

[Breeze54]

41. Then perhaps you should read about what happened in Vegas!

You are totally missing the deviousness of the people who are writing these laws!

[MonkeyFunk]

46. and I think you're

using some bad examples to make a case for something ridiculous: that there should be no oversight for those who distribute food for the public .

[Breeze54]

48. Really? Vegas is a bad example?

Tell me about it please.

[MonkeyFunk]

51. No

what I'm saying is it's silly to claim that there is no public health concern AT ALL for organizations distributing food to the public.

[Breeze54]

58. That isn't what I said or anybody said at all.

Are you following the topic in the OP? :shrug:

New Las Vegas Law Against Feeding Homeless Underscores City's Real Motivations

http://www.salem-news.com/articles/july212006/vegas_homeless_72106.php

Op-Ed by: Tim King Salem-News.com

The city most efficient at creating homeless people now says they will arrest you if you feed them.

The city council of Las Vegas, Nevada took down the town's typical facade this week, when they
voted to make it illegal to feed homeless people in a park. No glitz, no neon, just the real
heart of America's cruelest city laid open like a book.

snip-->

There just isn't a place that measures up to Vegas when it comes to certain things, like homeless people.
The place is designed to create homeless people, and now the city is legislating the starvation of those who lose it all.

Many are veterans. No wait, let me say that again, MANY ARE VETERANS! Vietnam did things to the healthy
minds of young Americans that are unfathomable to all but the experts, those who served, and those who have
tried to live with them in the wake of their combat service.

I would be willing to bet that the numbers in the homeless population won't dwindle over this law that doesn't
just make feeding hungry people illegal; it demoralizes us as a society to know that our fellow humans could
ever aspire to such levels of legislated mistreatment.

I know plenty of people are not sympathetic toward the homeless, but I'll bet that even they would agree
that this is a sad day in history.

[Karenina]

60. Does your concern extend to the corporatists who are

aided and abetted by your gubmint agencies to POISON your food supply? :shrug:

[MonkeyFunk]

87. Of course... why wouldn't I?

I'm all for food safety, regardless of who's distributing the food.

What an odd question. Do you really think I want non-profits regulated, but not for-profit corporations? How strange.

[Joe Fields]

62. You seem hung up on food distribution, when this report cites

that in Dallas, "any individual or organization caught sharing food with homeless people in a public area can be fined over $2,000.00"

That said, if I went to a McDonalds and bought a Big Mac and gave it to a homeless person, then I could be fined.

These aren't zoo animals, for god's sake. They aren't being fed by city zookeepers. They need to eat, same as you and me. Some go to soup kitchens and some don't. Some aren't able, as I'm sure you must be aware. So you must have enough sense to understand that when a person is hungry, they don't really care where the food comes from. And it has absolutely nothing to do with health concerns, from a city's point of view, and I don't need to have my intelligence insulted by being told otherwise. They want the homeless out of sight. It really is that simple.

[Guaranteed]

33. Yes. If you're running a soup kitchen.

But if you just bought a homeless guy a burger at McD's, then one can assume that the restaurant is already complying with those standards, right?

[MonkeyFunk]

39. agreed

[Guaranteed]

28. Good point. nt

[truedelphi]

80. Thank you for the dose of reality.

They are sleeping on the pavement and soemtimes in snow and sleet and rain.

The State can hardly make the claim that they are looking out for their health.

[MonkeyFunk]

89. So because the government

isn't providing their housing, the government can't do anything to protect the food that people give them?

That's crazy logic.

[VP505]

21. I seriously doubt

that "sanitation" is anything other than an EXCUSE to drive the homeless out of the public eye. If they were serious about food safety it could be accomplished without blanket and arbitrary prohibitions.

[MonkeyFunk]

22. Well then

how would YOU go about balancing the desire to give away food with the public health issues that are involved in doing so?

[SOS]

71. If I buy a slice of pizza for a homeless fellow, it's safe.

If NYC ever tries this BS, I will immediately put the law on "ignore".

[AlertLurker]

29. Although there may or may not have been ulterior motives for the legislation...

I believe that MF's point is entirely valid.

Not a public health issue just for organizations, either. There are some decidedly sick fuckers out there that enjoy poisoning homeless people.

And no, I'm not kidding.

[Richard Steele]

30. And just where and when has that ever happened?

:eyes:

[AlertLurker]

44. Heard of it happening in Toronto ('80s)...poison pizza!

I can't find a link, tho...

Did a bit of a google and found one case in Beijing (16 people) and one in Mumbai...don't know whether to trust them, though - the Beijing one mentions "Falun Gong," so it could just be disinfo from Xinhua...

[Richard Steele]

59. Hardly an overwhelming health threat to the homeless, then, is it?

In this HEMISPHERE, you found naught but a 20-year-old rumor
of an incident that may or may not have actually happened.

HARDLY a sane justification for denying them food.

[Breeze54]

23. No! I think getting them all housing should be the goal!

These laws are designed to keep the homeless out of sight and away from the business area's in towns.

It isn't to keep them safe from poisoning! Give me a break!!!!!!

Don't tell me you think these laws are enacted to protect the homeless??! :wtf:

[Guaranteed]

25. Yes. Better to starve than to bear the slight risk of that. nt

[MonkeyFunk]

34. Or get a permit

there are options other than the ones you present.

People seem so vehement about this but I think it's common sense that if a organization is distributing food to the public, that there be some sort of oversight.

But as I said, I oversaw an organization that gave away many tons of food every year, and we were licensed to do so. I saw nothing unreasonable about that.

[Guaranteed]

35. No, not to buy a homeless guy a sandwich. nt

[MonkeyFunk]

43. Obviously

you're taking the most extreme example.

Of course, there's no public health issue involved in that.

But for agencies distributing food to the public, I see nothing wrong with some oversight. I think it's just common sense.

[Breeze54]

47. The laws are about feeding homeless in parks, against people handing out sandwiches!

Not about soup kitchens.

[MonkeyFunk]

49. So what?

If I'm distributing soup from a building or from the back of a van, what's wrong with making sure it was prepared and stored under minimally sanitary conditions?

[Breeze54]

52. These laws are about removing the homeless from parks, not about their health.

If the safety of homeless people was paramount to these cities, then
they'd be doing more to help them have a safe place to stay and sleep.

[tnlefty]

76. Chattanooga, TN's restrictons have nothing to do with food

safety and everything to do with getting the homeless out of sight in Miller Park and keeping them out of sight. The local Food Not Bombs guy and his family had fed them for over 7 years with no problems. Chattanoogans for Peace and Justice held a couple of candlelight vigils and we helped to serve them and actually ate with the homeless - gasp!

I used to take him 4 to 5 boxes of food and he only accepted canned goods, rice, beans, donations of bread from Panera Bread and he was very careful. Our peace marches used to end in Miller Park where there would be speakers, etc. The last one ended at the county courthouse because if a group of 15 or more is in Miller Park now a permit is required and the price of the permit has been raised to $1500.00 (from what I was told).

[Breeze54]

77. Your group is awesome and that is so sad.

These anti-homeless assholes are despicable!

Thanks for sharing that heart warming story!

:hi:

[Chulanowa]

67. You're deliberately missing the point

This is not about soup kitchens. Of COURSE soup kitchens have to follow standards.

This is about getting fined for tossing some dude a granola bar.

Do you call neighborhood houses "food distribution centers" on Halloween and call the cops to make sure the peanut butter kisses are up to code?

[Guaranteed]

50. No, that's the most common example, in my mind.

I've done that for people quite a bit- they ask for money, and if we're near a place I'll ask them if they want some food. Just go in and buy it for them.

I think that soup kitchens WOULD comply with regulations, for the most part. In any case, that law already exists. This law doesn't demand compliance with those laws- it just bans feeding the homeless entirely.

I think you've managed to twist the issue a bit, here.

[MonkeyFunk]

53. And are people being prosecuted for that?

My point is a simple one: it's not unreasonable for local governments to ensure that food distributed to the public is safe.

That's the extent of my argument.

[Guaranteed]

54. OK, but that doesn't seem to be the effect of this law. nt

[LanternWaste]

98. Are you aware of any major cases

Are you aware of any major cases of numbers of homeless people getting ill from badly prepared food prior to these types of laws being passed?

[Le Taz Hot]

68. I don't see the difference between

me serving 15 people at Thanksgiving with food made in my own kitchen and packing up fresh, hot food and taking a 5-10 minute drive and giving it away to the homeless. Really, I've been cooking for 40+ years and I've not killed anyone yet. Never even made anybody sick. These assholes want food to come from a "commercial kitchen." I take it these guys have never actually BEEN in a commercial kitchen. Trust me, my home kitchen is MUCH more sanitary than some of the ones I've seen.

[rosesaylavee]

81. Your rationale would then cover all groups

serving any food to any group ... VFWs Friday Fish Fries, Church picnics/potlucks, Boyscout pancake breakfasts, etc.

Sorry, your theory doesn't hold water that these groups would be denied their fundraisers, their community events. These are laws unconcerned about food safety.

[WinkyDink]

88. There are no such assurances for bake-sales, are there? Or goodies at a yard sale?

[Guaranteed]

90. Well, there AREN'T any assurances that that food won't go to the homeless.

So maybe they ought to be looked into, as well.

[Joe Chi Minh]

94. What a sick thought! You think the health and safety people are concerned for the

wellbeing of the recipients. You're beyond belief. Why do post on here? What Democrat ideal do you believe in?

[LanternWaste]

96. I imagine that were I truly hungry...

I imagine that were I truly hungry, I wouldn't really give a tinker's dime if the preparer had washed his hands in anti-microbial soap or not.

[upi402]

12. Seattle; NO sitting on the sidewalk

Yes, "liberal" Seattle passed that law.
It's intent is to not impede paying customers from doing business downtown.

"On yer feet ya bumb"
"No rest for the wicked"

[Breeze54]

13. We have to get all those asshats OUT OF OFFICE that approved this!

.

[Brigid]

17. Excuse me?

You need a permit to be homeless? Or to feed your fellow human beings? Now I've heard everything. :banghead:

[GreenPartyVoter]

19. Pathetic

[nadinbrzezinski]

26. You know it is getting to the point

where something will happen, and it will get all these asshats by suriprise

There is just so much you can push in any country before the people get annoyed

But this targettting is a step in targetting all of us... this is planned and part of a process

[Guaranteed]

27. These "don't feed the homeless" laws are just about the most mean-spirited, disgusting

laws I've ever heard of.

[Didereaux]

40. Sacramento and Fresno are 'warring' on them and smug yuppies in the SF Bay area I hear

[donheld]

61. Jesus would be arrested for feeding the multitudes

:crazy::grr:

[Didereaux]

64. ..and he had better have 2000 pieces of silver, to boot!

[Breeze54]

70. Great point!

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[allalone]

73. yeah, no permit

[Kajsa]

83. Obviously these heretics( waging war on the homeless) may call themselves

" Christians", but they do not follow his example.

;(

[riqster]

65. I'm all for food safety, and like MF I work at a food pantry

The problem is: there aren't enough licensed food outlets for the need. That's why churches and the like are serving the homeless in the first place.

If Dallas already had enough capacity, I'd be OK with it; but they don't. Cleveland and Columbus both take a collaborative approach to the problem, sending out the board of health to ensure safety. Neither city has enough capacity either, so the government works to educate first, rather than to punish first.

The focus on punitive action over ensuring safety is indicative of an attitude. It is true that we cannot divine from externals what peoples' internal motivations are:but bottom line, if your first instinct is to attack, you probably view the target with antipathy. If your first instinct is to take concrete steps to ensure safety, you are probably interested in being helpful.

[alfredo]

66. How can they prove that you knew they were homeless?

You were having a picnic and nobody showed so you call over people around you so the food doesn't go to waste.

[Breeze54]

69. because the cops are watching

and taking pics in some cases.

The cities know who the homeless are that are hanging around in the parks.

Don't forget, there are camera's everywhere these days.

[alfredo]

85. That sucks. I thought helping the poor is the Christian thing to do.

[allalone]

72. are there no prisons? are there no workhouses?

if they're going to die, let them and decrease the surplus population.
(apologies to Dickens.)

[Breeze54]

78. You are a despicable facsimile of a human being

[riqster]

91. I thought he was being ironic nt

[Ezlivin]

75. So if I buy prepackaged food that's still in its original "tamper-proof" wrapping

...and feed it to some homeless in Dallas (30 miles east of me), I should be fined?

All this bullshit about "sanitary serving conditions" is ridiculous. I can walk into any grocery and purchase good food. What the hell is wrong with taking the food out of my shopping cart and giving to a homeless person? Or putting it in several bags, then driving it down in my van to feed some hungry folks?

It seems the same people who are aghast at excessive governmental regulation of, say, heavy industries, have no problem with calling for more governmental regulation over a benign and helpful practice.

[vanboggie]

79. Don't feed the ducks!

Before you know it they'll be chitting on your patio!

For Chrissake, just when you think Bushworld can't get any worse.

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[killbotfactory]

97. Why don't we just shoot them?

Put them down like the animals we treat them as.

[silverweb]

99. **WORKING LINK**

Rather than read more about the arguments re providing a link, I went and found it _here_.

[flvegan]

103. Thank you. My city is one of them.

Food Not Bombs had serious, serious problems in Tampa not too long ago.

Ugly. Very ugly.

[Rex]

100. 'So what ya in fer?' 'I jacked a car.'

'Oh, well, I shared a snickers bar with a homeless fellas. And the cops saw me and booked me for being compassionate er breaking the law.'

Fined my ass 2000 dollars, I lost my house because I lost my job and now am homeless once I get out of jail.

[dysfunctional press]

101. they'll have to put up some "do not feed the homeless" signs...

like they do with pigeons- otherwise how will people even know that the law exists?

[rockybelt]

102. I don't know

if this is where some of these laws came from but there is a web site, www.bored.com that has a list of silly laws under their Humor section. If it is or is not where they came from, it's a good place to get a laugh or two.