Proud day for America: Homeless only exist if you can see them.

[iamwhatiseem]

How embarrassing.......
90-year-old among first charged under Fort Lauderdale s strict rules against feeding homeless Fox News

 

[SteadyMercury]

What is embarrassing? The city passed ordinances, he violated them.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

What is embarrassing? The city passed ordinances, he violated them.

You didn't read the article fully.
He has tried to abide by the laws over and over so the city keeps passing new ordinances to make it basically impossible for him to do it.
This time they passed an ordinance that says he must also supply a bathroom.
The context/back story is this guy wants to feed them where they are - which just happens to be be in populated areas (imagine that)...and the city does not want him to feed them outdoors - better to feed them where people can't see it.
It is ridiculous.

 

[blastoff]

Let 'em eat cake.

 

[SteadyMercury]

I read it. That is how things work, if the community you live in has rules you have to abide by them.

The regulations enacted in Fort Lauderdale state that no two indoor feeding sites can be within 500 feet of one another or on the same block; outdoor feeding programs require a permit or permission of the property owner and must provide portable toilets; and outdoor stations cannot be within 500 feet of residential properties.

None of that seems unreasonable.

 

[aaronleland]

I read it. That is how things work, if the community you live in has rules you have to abide by them.

The regulations enacted in Fort Lauderdale state that no two indoor feeding sites can be within 500 feet of one another or on the same block; outdoor feeding programs require a permit or permission of the property owner and must provide portable toilets; and outdoor stations cannot be within 500 feet of residential properties.

None of that seems unreasonable.

It's still a stupid rule.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Why? One of the most common complaints about the homeless is sanitation issues, if one is creating a location for them to congregate and serve meals why wouldn't they need to also supply bathroom facilities?

 

[depotoo]

This has happened in West Palm Beach as well, and Dallas. I know there are cities in Ca and Wa doing the same.

it angers me.

What is embarrassing? The city passed ordinances, he violated them.

You didn't read the article fully.
He has tried to abide by the laws over and over so the city keeps passing new ordinances to make it basically impossible for him to do it.
This time they passed an ordinance that says he must also supply a bathroom.
The context/back story is this guy wants to feed them where they are - which just happens to be be in populated areas (imagine that)...and the city does not want him to feed them outdoors - better to feed them where people can't see it.
It is ridiculous.

 

[depotoo]

Here in West Palm, a gentleman missionary had a church, let them sleep there and fed them. They closed it down, because he gave them a place to lay their head. These cities work to rid themselves of, rather than care for the truly homeless. Real charitable, isn't it?

Why? One of the most common complaints about the homeless is sanitation issues, if one is creating a location for them to congregate and serve meals why wouldn't they need to also supply bathroom facilities?

 

[thereisnospoon]

I read it. That is how things work, if the community you live in has rules you have to abide by them.

The regulations enacted in Fort Lauderdale state that no two indoor feeding sites can be within 500 feet of one another or on the same block; outdoor feeding programs require a permit or permission of the property owner and must provide portable toilets; and outdoor stations cannot be within 500 feet of residential properties.

None of that seems unreasonable.

Not when the rules are stupid.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Why? One of the most common complaints about the homeless is sanitation issues, if one is creating a location for them to congregate and serve meals why wouldn't they need to also supply bathroom facilities?

Hardly the issue.
I think if common citizens want to give food which would be otherwise going to waste to the homeless, I hardly think where these people go to use the toilet is a major issue.
Now look, I am not one of these people who thinks homeless people should have the run of public areas to annoy harangue or in the extreme terrorize others, but for crying out loud, if private citizens using private resources want to help out of pure humanity, no one should stop them.

 

[depotoo]

And they change the rules as they discover they didn't take them far enough the first time to rid themselves of the homeless.

I read it. That is how things work, if the community you live in has rules you have to abide by them.

The regulations enacted in Fort Lauderdale state that no two indoor feeding sites can be within 500 feet of one another or on the same block; outdoor feeding programs require a permit or permission of the property owner and must provide portable toilets; and outdoor stations cannot be within 500 feet of residential properties.

None of that seems unreasonable.

Not when the rules are stupid.

 

[Iceweasel]

They need to step it up and make loitering illegal too. If you enable bums you will get more bums. I don't blame them for wanting the pee soaked bums somewhere else.

 

[depotoo]

I didn't expect that from you...

They need to step it up and make loitering illegal too. If you enable bums you will get more bums. I don't blame them for wanting the pee soaked bums somewhere else.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

if the community you live in has rules you have to abide by them.

I see, so what you are saying is that officials should be able to make any rule they want - and everyone should simply obey.
There is a lot of cities in the Middle East like this. Perhaps you would like it there.

 

[depotoo]

Sadly, we don't have proper help for the mentally ill here in the US anymore, and that is what many of the homeless suffer from.

if the community you live in has rules you have to abide by them.

I see, so what you are saying is that officials should be able to make any rule they want - and everyone should simply obey.
There is a lot of cities in the Middle East like this. Perhaps you would like it there.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Hardly the issue.
I think if common citizens want to give food which would be otherwise going to waste to the homeless, I hardly think where these people go to use the toilet is a major issue.
Now look, I am not one of these people who thinks homeless people should have the run of public areas to annoy harangue or in the extreme terrorize others, but for crying out loud, if private citizens using private resources want to help out of pure humanity, no one should stop them.

Depends on the scale. If giving out freebies draws big enough crowds then you will indeed attract/concentrate the associated problems to that area.

 

[Iceweasel]

Sadly, we don't have proper help for the mentally ill here in the US anymore, and that is what many of the homeless suffer from.

Mostly druggies and hard core alkies. They aren't victims, they made bad choices in life. enabling them is the worst thing you can do. For those too insane for the street, the street is the last place they need to be. States need to step up but we need to get over the idea that it's wrong to institutionalize people.

 

[SteadyMercury]

I see, so what you are saying is that officials should be able to make any rule they want - and everyone should simply obey.
There is a lot of cities in the Middle East like this. Perhaps you would like it there.

Yeah, pretty much.

Different cities have different forms of city government, but the idea is we vote elect people to represent the people and the best interests of our city. A city ordinance gets proposed, and the city council, or commissioners, or country supervisors, or whatever the structure it is vote. If it passes, voila you have a new city ordinance. It doesn't take a Middle Eastern city to have this process, it is quite common.

The solution to an ordinance that was passed you don't agree with isn't to just break the rules because your opinon runs counter, it is to get it overturned or vote the bastards out.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Mostly druggies and hard core alkies. They aren't victims, they made bad choices in life.

Many are mentally ill, so wise choices don't always come easy.