Right now, ground zero in the debate about policies affecting the homeless isn’t a large, bustling metropolis like New York or Chicago, but Fort Lauderdale, Florida, a small beach city of about 170,000.
On the one hand, there’s Arnold Abbott, a 90-year-old World War II vet and chef who has been feeding the homeless in the city’s parks and beaches for decades—and who says he has no intention of stopping, despite a new ordinance passed last month restricting feeding in public places. Efforts to stop him, including three citations in the past couple weeks, have drawn a national spotlight.
On the other hand, there is the very exasperated Mayor Jack Seiler, who says the city’s new outdoor feeding law is a part of a series of “very compassionate” ordinances addressing the plight of the homeless. He doesn’t want to ban public feedings that take place in the parks, he says. He just wants to move them indoors.
Thrown into the fray: Abbott’s request for an injunction against the city, citing a 2000 court ruling allowing food sharing in the city; a hunger strike by a member of the local chapter ofFood Not Bombs to protest the new law; an online protest; a protest outside the mayor’s house and a bevy of activists lining up to be cited for what they call “rogue beach sharing.” Even Stephen Colbert weighed in.
More
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
3 comments:
We don't need any new laws., covering anything., period. There is a GD law, already written into existing legal codes and statutes, that covers any rutting thing that could possibly occur illegally. Personally I feel that the only reason a legislator sponsors or cosponsors a bill is for media coverage and a "look what I did".
Instead of writing new laws a revisit of existing laws is what is needed., desperately needed.
An example is the conspiracy charge that cops are attaching to most every other charge these days. It carries a different legal aura and, I assume, is harder to defend yet, to my observation, it's use had been overlooked as an 'existing law' an existing tool.
Clink 1¢ Clink 1¢
Ah yes the good ole conspiracy charge. If you are standing next to someone who robs a store you can be charged with conspiracy, arrested, jailed and forced to prove you weren't apart of the crime.
The Mayor says he doesn't want to ban public feedings, he just wants to move them indoors. In other words, he doesn't want the poor and the homeless to be seen out in public. They are easier to put out of mind if they aren't seen. I know that some bring on homelessness by addictions, but I would bet the majority of homeless nowadays did not become homeless because of any addiction.
But that is why they are passing these no feeding in public laws. They don't want to have to see the homeless.
Post a Comment