Major cities killing the homeless?

raps · 06-14-2012, 08:14 AM

Is it a form of weeding out the undesirables or imprisoning the religious charities or both?

Feed the homeless, go to jail? - latimes.com

Numerous major cities have enacted bans on charitable food giving for the homeless. Oddly enough the champions of the poor are being used as the reason for these bans in some cases. The Occupy Movement. Them giving food to the homeless.

A fantastic quote here. Gotta love the rationality.

has said it’s too hard to figure out what might be in donated food — fat, salt, calories – that might do more harm to the homeless than good.

And another incredible display of rationality and understanding.

that city’s ban is about "dignity," because people deserve "something more than getting a ham sandwich out on the side of the street."

So, which is it? Killing off the undesirable homeless or putting charitable good religious people in jail? I'm going with both.

Donkey® · 06-14-2012, 10:27 AM

If you want to feed the homeless, follow the regulations set up to protect them for various reasons. Not really a bad concept. Homeless don't like it, homeless can go to designated areas where they are given food at approved establishments.

raps · 06-14-2012, 10:51 AM

How many homeless people have died from a free sandwich? The new regs are unnecessary. Government is trying to kill private charity.

Donkey® · 06-14-2012, 11:05 AM

Originally Posted by raps

How many homeless people have died from a free sandwich? The new regs are unnecessary. Government is trying to kill private charity.

I love the whole "just because it hasn't happened doesn't mean it couldn't" scenario. Just because people are giving out food for free doesn't mean it should be any less scrutinized than food we purchase. Just because they are homeless doesn't mean they deserve any less protections.

raps · 06-14-2012, 11:45 AM

Anything could happen. Maybe we need regulations that force us all to wear helmets when leaving our homes just because something could happen.

I'm pretty sure most homeless people appreciate a free meal wherever it may come from. What's better? Possibly unsafe food from nice people trying to help or no food because of government regulation?

raps · 06-14-2012, 11:45 AM

I've actually been thinking about doing the helmet thing voluntarily. It's pretty scary out there.

Donkey® · 06-14-2012, 12:16 PM

Originally Posted by raps

Anything could happen. Maybe we need regulations that force us all to wear helmets when leaving our homes just because something could happen.

I'm pretty sure most homeless people appreciate a free meal wherever it may come from. What's better? Possibly unsafe food from nice people trying to help or no food because of government regulation?

Invalid argument. There is no "choice" of "no food". They could go to properly regulated places to get their food.

raps · 06-14-2012, 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Invalid argument. There is no "choice" of "no food". They could go to properly regulated places to get their food.

Like a government run homeless shelter?

Did you know that you cannot donate professionally prepared food to a homeless shelter in NYC? It might contain too much salt. The food prepared at the NYC shelters are also required to meet strict dietary guidelines or else it cannot be served. Cause homeless people love bland tasteless food.

Donkey® · 06-14-2012, 12:56 PM

Originally Posted by raps

Like a government run homeless shelter?

Did you know that you cannot donate professionally prepared food to a homeless shelter in NYC? It might contain too much salt. The food prepared at the NYC shelters are also required to meet strict dietary guidelines or else it cannot be served. Cause homeless people love bland tasteless food.

Another invalid choice. There are plenty of PRIVATELY run shelters and food banks as well. If the homeless want to put salt on their food, they can. They can't suck the salt out of it after it's made.

raps · 06-14-2012, 01:05 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Another invalid choice. There are plenty of PRIVATELY run shelters and food banks as well. If the homeless want to put salt on their food, they can. They can't suck the salt out of it after it's made.

Most of the privately run shelters rely on government grants to supplement the private donations in order to remain open. Accepting government grants subjects them to government regulations concerning the acceptance of those grants.

CharlieK · 06-14-2012, 01:29 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

If you want to feed the homeless, follow the regulations set up to protect them for various reasons. Not really a bad concept. Homeless don't like it, homeless can go to designated areas where they are given food at approved establishments.

Here is what is really important to Jackasses.

In other words, its all about control, and how to exercise power over others. Everything else is just rhetoric.

raps · 06-14-2012, 01:45 PM

Tellmewhattodobots love regulations.

Donkey® · 06-14-2012, 02:07 PM

Originally Posted by raps

Most of the privately run shelters rely on government grants to supplement the private donations in order to remain open. Accepting government grants subjects them to government regulations concerning the acceptance of those grants.

Another "hey look over there" moment. Not all privately run shelters are run with government grants. On top of that, the government has all the right in the world to regulate food.

Donkey® · 06-14-2012, 02:09 PM

Originally Posted by CharlieK

Here is what is really important to Jackasses.

In other words, its all about control, and how to exercise power over others. Everything else is just rhetoric.

It's the government's job to keep it's citizens safe against all threats...foreign or domestic. Homeless people are still citizens.

raps · 06-14-2012, 02:13 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Another "hey look over there" moment. Not all privately run shelters are run with government grants. On top of that, the government has all the right in the world to regulate food.

I didn't say all, I said most. On top of that, the government can't tell me what I can and can't eat. Where does it have the right to do that? If I want to melt a stick of butter in the Dr. Pepper I'm heating on the stove and drink it with a bacon garnish I can.

I understand some regulation concerning safety but they are going way overboard and it is preventing charities from being able to provide as much or as high a quality service because of the additional expenses associated with complying with the excessively burdensome regulations.

raps · 06-14-2012, 02:14 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

It's the government's job to keep it's citizens safe against all threats...foreign or domestic. Homeless people are still citizens.

Post your address. I'll send you a helmet for free and make sure it's DOT approved cause we have to make sure the government has said it's ok.

illavbill · 06-14-2012, 04:05 PM

There is a hobo hunting season in Tacoma where I live. It's a short season, only a few hours but man it cleans the place up!

But for real Major cities ain't killing the homeless they shelter and feed them. Thank (fake

) god that most of them have left Tacoma. I've heard but don't know if it's true but in the renovated part of downtown Tacoma, WA ... if the police catch you sleeping outside or being a nuisance they'll bring you to a homeless shelter a few times, then arrest you. Then send you on a bus w/ some cash not to come back and annoy the shit out of us asking for money for booze or dope.

I barely see homeless people any more. Now, Seattle, those aggressive bastards are everywhere

I may be a liberal but I love my guns and don't like homeless people bugging me but I'm all for rehabilitation and shelters / help for them. Stupid states slashing mental health services then sending crazy bastards out on the streets ... see Florida for example lol

Donkey® · 06-14-2012, 04:13 PM

Originally Posted by raps

Post your address. I'll send you a helmet for free and make sure it's DOT approved cause we have to make sure the government has said it's ok.

How about you send me a less sensational (lie) title for a thread first?

stolz25 · 06-14-2012, 06:31 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

It's the government's job to keep it's citizens safe against all threats...foreign or domestic. Homeless people are still citizens.

Which is more threatening, unhealthy food or no food?

Dying of starvation is rare in the US, but it happens much more often than being poisoned from donated food.

Donkey® · 06-14-2012, 08:16 PM

Originally Posted by stolz25

Which is more threatening, unhealthy food or no food?

Another of those false choices...I am sure you'll whip out the fancy debate term for it at some point. Tu quoque...Circulus in demonstrando...strawman...whatever you want...

The homeless have many options for food. But I love the "hey, they can eat the shit off the floor...it's still food" attitude.

Originally Posted by stolz25

Dying of starvation is rare in the US, but it happens much more often than being poisoned from donated food.

Really? Any hope of stats appearing to back these contentions up...and again...claiming we should have a problem before trying to protect anyone is an idiotic stance to take.