Couple fined and threatened with jail for feeding the homeless

[tkotom]

On one end of the spectrum I understand where they're coming from, on the other hand I'd be surprised if there wasn't something in it for these agencies that people are supposed to coordinate with.

I've helped with disadvantaged people in the past and some of them ARE dangerous and belligerent.

Obviously the one off feeding or dropping some cash is fine but people should coordinate with non profit organizations if they're going to make a habit of dealing with disadvantaged people in society. It is safer and more constructive.

 

[emax]

On one end of the spectrum I understand where they're coming from, on the other hand I'd be surprised if there wasn't something in it for these agencies that people are supposed to coordinate with.

I've helped with disadvantaged people in the past and some of them ARE dangerous and belligerent.

Obviously the one off feeding or dropping some cash is fine but people should coordinate with non profit organizations if they're going to make a habit of dealing with disadvantaged people in society. It is safer and more constructive.

Thanks for the balanced feedback. I do not dispute the notion that some of them are dangerous and it would be unwise to trivialize the damage they can do in a public area. I do completely dispute the idea that the local gov't in this case even remotely has what it takes to do it fairly and properly. I am of the mind that non profit organizations and private charities should all coordinate their efforts. I do not necessarily think the charitable couple here really conducted themselves correctly here but I do maintain that the other side also showed malicious intentions as well.

 

[j98]

Now you need permission to perform acts of kindness or be locked in a cage away from society.

 

[tkotom]

Thanks for the balanced feedback. I do not dispute the notion that some of them are dangerous and it would be unwise to trivialize the damage they can do in a public area. I do completely dispute the idea that the local gov't in this case even remotely has what it takes to do it fairly and properly. I am of the mind that non profit organizations and private charities should all coordinate their efforts. I do not necessarily think the charitable couple here really conducted themselves correctly here but I do maintain that the other side also showed malicious intentions as well.

Yeah I would agree about the government. Most of the places I have worked were not run by the government but rather private organizations giving their time fir no cost. Kind of endearing.

 

[LucasWithLidOff]

Obama's America.

 

[oldshadow]

If you hold an organized event in a public park I believe you are required to get a permit and met the requirements like providing security, at least that

 

[Devout Pessimist]

If there was a Don't Feed the Homeless sign and they disobeyed that sign then I can understand the punishment.

 

[glennrod]

Obama's America.

how did his name get brought in this?

 

[Ayin]

Obama's America.

This is a joke, like those "Thanks Obama!" infomercial gifs, right?

 

[panamaican]

Sad. As noted elsewhere...the homeless are still citizens and the park is a public park.

But if they need a permit, they should just get the permit.

 

[Uchi Mata]

I see both sides. My question is, how hard is it to work with the city? If it's easy and they just didn't do it, bad on them. If it's really hard (perhaps as a way of discouraging private charity for some reason) then I can understand not doing it. I get local residents not wanting tons of homeless people showing up en masse in front of their houses once a week, but it is a public space. Probably not the best reactions all around.

 

[jackietreehorn8]

I understand if they don't want these gatherings in that particular park if it's meant for kids and tourists. Scary homeless people are scary, especially in mass quantities.

But maybe the police could suggest a better area for it and help them find one? There has to be a skid row or something somewhere.

Likewise, if they're just asking these people to get a permit or something, maybe they could just do that and carry on with their weekly event.

Kinda shitty all the way around. The people's hearts are in the right place but I understand why the police don't want a park in their jurisdiction to be the light that every moth in the neighborhood flocks to.

 

[Big Nasty Edison]

LOL Homeless bank robbers. And if they are offenders, then the State isn't doing a very good job of keeping tabs on them like they are supposed to now are they?

 

[MMAgirlie]

Giving people food = get arrested. Seems legit.

Yeah, no kidding, right? Some nice man would set up outside of the local playground in his van and give candy to anyone who wanted it and got in hell for it. Seriously, what gives?

 

[speakhandsforme]

Sad. As noted elsewhere...the homeless are still citizens and the park is a public park.

But if they need a permit, they should just get the permit.

Seeing as you have been opposed to bureaucratic overreach in your previous posts, I would figured you to be opposed to such obviously needless red tape.

 

[panamaican]

Seeing as you have been opposed to bureaucratic overreach in your previous posts, I would figured you to be opposed to such obviously needless red tape.

I would if it was unusually unnecessary but permits for large gatherings on public property isn't overreach, it's fairly common. Those spaces are for all of the public and if people are using them for private endeavors then sometimes permits are acceptable if that usage will impact other people's quiet use of the public space.

Additionally, these people are preparing and serving food on public grounds. Most cities require some sort of permit process before that can take place.

So, I don't see it as overreach to require a permit. It's just unfortunate that enough people complained that the cops had to step in.

 

[emax]

I would if it was unusually unnecessary but permits for large gatherings on public property isn't overreach, it's fairly common. Those spaces are for all of the public and if people are using them for private endeavors then sometimes permits are acceptable if that usage will impact other people's quiet use of the public space.

Additionally, these people are preparing and serving food on public grounds. Most cities require some sort of permit process before that can take place.

So, I don't see it as overreach to require a permit. It's just unfortunate that enough people complained that the cops had to step in.

Normally i would agree that requiring a permit is not an overreach. But earlier in the thread I posted a series of links that show that this particular Floridian city is known for being in a class of its own in terms of corruption and unfair regulations so this could also have been a special case where getting a permit was WAY easier said that done. I still see all sides of the argument as valid but there is also an issue of perhaps having to deal with one of many cities that is simply very badly run.

I agree that many of the homeless can pose serious problems though. I guess it is sort of opposing the local gov't torching down a house to get rid of infestations; I don't think opposing that necessarily is an endorsement to do absolutely nothing about the infestations.

 

[IDL]

Four Reasons Not to Feed Wildlife

1.

 

[panamaican]

Normally i would agree that requiring a permit is not an overreach. But earlier in the thread I posted a series of links that show that this particular Floridian city is known for being in a class of its own in terms of corruption and unfair regulations so this could also have been a special case where getting a permit was WAY easier said that done. I still see all sides of the argument as valid but there is also an issue of perhaps having to deal with one of many cities that is simply very badly run.

I agree that many of the homeless can pose serious problems though. I guess it is sort of opposing the local gov't torching down a house to get rid of infestations; I don't think opposing that necessarily is an endorsement to do absolutely nothing about the infestations.

That's all well and good but until there's something that says they at least tried to get the permit, there's no reason to speculate that they ran into unreasonable hurdles.

 

[PainIsLIfe]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/florida-couple-fined-threatened-jail-feeding-homeless-n103786

The police justified it by stating



I think this is an example of how unfree we are becoming. Am I the only one or does anyone concur?

Am I missing something? Sex offenders, substance abusers and bank robbers don't need food? While I'm not fond of any of the 3, sex offender has become a pretty broad term and the bank robber already served a sentence.