• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Feed the homeless... get arrested. Only in America.

I read that story and was floored. I like to help the homeless when I can and feel as if I would be compelled to disobey such an ignorant law.
 
I can't even think of a reason for such law but whatever the reason is, it's probably some stupid political BS. Either something to do with money, or something to do with lawsuits.

Similar stupidity as to how grocery stores and restaurants can't feed "expired" stuff to homeless, in case of lawsuit. There needs to be a clause somewhere that makes it so you cannot sue someone over something you got for free. Then these companies would be able to give away food "at your own risk" to homeless.

Another stupidity is how some clothes stores are demanded to destroy clothes due to insurance purposes or w/e. I forget the whole situation but it's something that happens regularly.

so must stupidity and waste in this world.
 
I've heard of similar laws before. The reasoning is almost always along the lines of "feeding them attracts more and/or gives them an incentive to be homeless; take away the food and the homeless people go away." It's flawed, to say the least, but since when have we let reality get in the way of our favorite philosophies?
 
Ruptga said:
I've heard of similar laws before. The reasoning is almost always along the lines of "feeding them attracts more and/or gives them an incentive to be homeless; take away the food and the homeless people go away." It's flawed, to say the least, but since when have we let reality get in the way of our favorite philosophies?
Click to expand...
Sounds like Amsterdam.
 
The mayor of the city, Jack Seiler, told Local 10, “Mr. Abbott has decided that he doesn’t think these individuals should have to have any interaction with government, that they should be fed in the parks. We disagree.”
Click to expand...

That says it all, doesn't it.
 
Red Squirrel said:
Feed the homeless... get arrested.
Click to expand...

2AnmEhI.gif
 
Florida has a lot of ridiculous laws.

We have panhandlers on almost every corner down in S. Florida, they even fight with each other for the good spots.
 
Ruptga said:
I've heard of similar laws before. The reasoning is almost always along the lines of "feeding them attracts more and/or gives them an incentive to be homeless; take away the food and the homeless people go away." It's flawed, to say the least, but since when have we let reality get in the way of our favorite philosophies?
Click to expand...

Yeah pretty crappy reasoning but it "makes sense" if I look at it from a government's point of view.

What the government does not seem to realize or care about is that they are part of the problem. Stop making it easy for companies to outsource jobs and there wont be as many homeless. Of course there are people who are complete leeches and or drunks and just refuse to get a job but that's not everyone. Regulate companies instead of regulating people.
 
Red Squirrel said:
Yeah pretty crappy reasoning but it "makes sense" if I look at it from a government's point of view.

What the government does not seem to realize or care about is that they are part of the problem. Stop making it easy for companies to outsource jobs and there wont be as many homeless. Of course there are people who are complete leeches and or drunks and just refuse to get a job but that's not everyone. Regulate companies instead of regulating people.
Click to expand...
I think you just jumped the shark.
 
Read this on Facebook. bunch of shit really. You can't even have a police scanner without a ham radio licensee in Florida. I always thought Florida would be a nice state to live in because I hate the cold, but maybe Texas is where I belong. After all, I'm a staunch Conservative so I should fit right in. :awe:
 
Red Squirrel said:
Yeah pretty crappy reasoning but it "makes sense" if I look at it from a government's point of view.

What the government does not seem to realize or care about is that they are part of the problem. Stop making it easy for companies to outsource jobs and there wont be as many homeless. Of course there are people who are complete leeches and or drunks and just refuse to get a job but that's not everyone. Regulate companies instead of regulating people.
Click to expand...
From what I've read, the justifications are more to do with food safety standards and public health concerns. There's nothing really protecting the public from having to deal with 100's of homeless people with anthrax poisoning if some dickhead decides he's gonna single-handedly attempt to "solve" the homeless problem, or even if a well-intended person distributes a bunch of salmonella-ridden food items.

It's entirely possible that these reasons are just a smokescreen for the underlying motives more along the lines of what you describe, but to me -- and on social issues I'm about the libby-est lib that ever libbed all the lib long day -- the one's I've described could be somewhat legitimate.
 
Ruptga said:
I've heard of similar laws before. The reasoning is almost always along the lines of "feeding them attracts more and/or gives them an incentive to be homeless; take away the food and the homeless people go away." It's flawed, to say the least, but since when have we let reality get in the way of our favorite philosophies?
Click to expand...

Lol, that's insanely warped reasoning.

So if you dont feed the homeless they will become suddenly have homes and become functioning members of society?
I never knew that starvation could improve a person's lot so well.
 
Cerpin Taxt said:
From what I've read, the justifications are more to do with food safety standards and public health concerns. There's nothing really protecting the public from having to deal with 100's of homeless people with anthrax poisoning if some dickhead decides he's gonna single-handedly attempt to "solve" the homeless problem, or even if a well-intended person distributes a bunch of salmonella-ridden food items.

It's entirely possible that these reasons are just a smokescreen for the underlying motives more along the lines of what you describe, but to me -- and on social issues I'm about the libby-est lib that ever libbed all the lib long day -- the one's I've described could be somewhat legitimate.
Click to expand...

You can say exactly the same thing about family parties. What's preventing cousin Dipshit from getting food poisoning at the summer get together? The law's blatantly unconstitutional.
 
lxskllr said:
You can say exactly the same thing about family parties. What's preventing cousin Dipshit from getting food poisoning at the summer get together? The law's blatantly unconstitutional.
Click to expand...
I am curious as to what part of the Constitution is being violated?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top