Topic: Arrested for feeding homeless people - page 5. (Read 8330 times)
I told you weeks ago how Blocknet is going to sub ICO almost right after launch and all I heard was "stop fudding, go away"
Regardless of your opinion on if the law is just or not, the police officers were only doing their job.
Just doing their jobs.
Nice Godwin! Because discouraging bums from shitting free food all over a neighborhood park is EXACTLY like the Third Reich.
Thanks for derailing this duplicate thread before it took up any more space.
It's not an example of Godwin's law.
Whether or not you agree with his overall point, it actually is EXACTLY an example of Godwin's Law. It is a perfect example that proves the rule.
Godwin's law confimed, which automatically ends the discussion. OP please lock the thread.
Look up the Nuremburg Defense before you make yourself look like an idiot again
I respect your opinions and that, but come on, comparing this incident to the Nazi leaders and the unthinkable horrors they caused was a cheap shot.
Regardless of your opinion on if the law is just or not, the police officers were only doing their job.
Just doing their jobs.
Nice Godwin! Because discouraging bums from shitting free food all over a neighborhood park is EXACTLY like the Third Reich.
Thanks for derailing this duplicate thread before it took up any more space.
It's not an example of Godwin's law.
Whether or not you agree with his overall point, it actually is EXACTLY an example of Godwin's Law. It is a perfect example that proves the rule.
Godwin's law confimed, which automatically ends the discussion. OP please lock the thread.
Look up the Nuremburg Defense before you make yourself look like an idiot again
I don't care where you live you should be able to feed homeless people if you like.
IKR? Why should the people effected by the problems feeding homeless creates have a say in the matter?
If you want to sacrifice their property values for the sake of your altrusim, that's freedom at work.
If they don't want the homeless to shit our your free food all over their park/sidewalk/street/lawns, they should invite the homeless into their houses to use a toilet. And if they don't want them sleeping/shoot up in the park, they should let them stay in a spare bedroom.
People have no right to control their own communities and set standards to ensure safe food distribution, sanitation, etc.
The Anarchist Police should force everyone who works for a living to share their earned resources with those who don't.
Because Freedom!
*hoists Black Flag; rages against the machine*
I don't care where you live you should be able to feed homeless people if you like.
I do on occasion go to a drive thru fast food place that is in a complex with a gas station, a large retailer, etc. Homeless people are always hanging out near one specific entrance/exit location in the complex. So, if I feel like it....I order my meal x2 and when I'm leaving give 1 away to of whichever homeless person happens to be there that day. It's not a daily, scheduled or regular thing. I can spend my money how I wish and as far as I know, it's not illegal in Florida to hand a person a bag of food whether you know them or not.
Not all over Florida apparently. This was an ordinance, which means it was passed by a city. I think it was Fort Lauderdale?
OMG R U SAYING THAT PEOPLE IN DIFFERENT PLACES PREFER TO LIVE BY DIFFERENT RULES?
THAT IS AN ATTACK ON MUH LIBURTEEZ! SEND IN THE ANARCHIST POLICE TO ARREST THESE OPPRESSORS!
DOWN WITH LOCAL CONTROL! WE MUST HAVE THE EXACT SAME LAWS EVERYWHERE OR WE HATE FREEDUMB!
/first world anarchist angst
http://www.boredpanda.com/funny-first-world-anarchists-rebels/
Regardless of your opinion on if the law is just or not, the police officers were only doing their job.
Just doing their jobs.
Nice Godwin! Because discouraging bums from shitting free food all over a neighborhood park is EXACTLY like the Third Reich.
Thanks for derailing this duplicate thread before it took up any more space.
It's not an example of Godwin's law.
Whether or not you agree with his overall point, it actually is EXACTLY an example of Godwin's Law. It is a perfect example that proves the rule.
Godwin's law confimed, which automatically ends the discussion. OP please lock the thread.
I do on occasion go to a drive thru fast food place that is in a complex with a gas station, a large retailer, etc. Homeless people are always hanging out near one specific entrance/exit location in the complex. So, if I feel like it....I order my meal x2 and when I'm leaving give 1 away to of whichever homeless person happens to be there that day. It's not a daily, scheduled or regular thing. I can spend my money how I wish and as far as I know, it's not illegal in Florida to hand a person a bag of food whether you know them or not.
Not all over Florida apparently. This was an ordinance, which means it was passed by a city. I think it was Fort Lauderdale?
Regardless of your opinion on if the law is just or not, the police officers were only doing their job.
Just doing their jobs.
Nice Godwin! Because discouraging bums from shitting free food all over a neighborhood park is EXACTLY like the Third Reich.
Thanks for derailing this duplicate thread before it took up any more space.
It's not an example of Godwin's law.
Whether or not you agree with his overall point, it actually is EXACTLY an example of Godwin's Law. It is a perfect example that proves the rule.
Regardless of your opinion on if the law is just or not, the police officers were only doing their job. If they see someone breaking the law repeatedly then they must take action and arrest the criminal.
That's not accurate though. The police can use discretion, as in making the determination "it's not the best use of my time to arrest someone who is performing a charitable act." Using the term "criminal" is unwarranted. Technically correct, since it's "against the law," but just because something is against the law doesn't mean the law is appropriate. This is a good example of it not being. But back to discretion and cops using it to opt not to enforce bad laws, the way you know police have discretion is that they don't pull over every motorist going 1 or 2 mph over the speed limit. Those guys are breaking the law as well, ("criminals" is the word you used) but it's clearly not a good use of a cop's time to pull over a motorist who is only going 1 or 2 mph over the speed limit. They DO use discretion not to enforce the law in those cases. The cop could have similarly used his discretion not to enforce a dumb law here.
Regardless of your opinion on if the law is just or not, the police officers were only doing their job.
Just doing their jobs.
Nice Godwin! Because discouraging bums from shitting free food all over a neighborhood park is EXACTLY like the Third Reich.
Thanks for derailing this duplicate thread before it took up any more space.
It's not an example of Godwin's law.
There have been several atrocities throughout history which were being justified as people "just doing their jobs"
And yes, refusing someone a basic need, like the right to nutrition, bears striking similarities to the Third Reich, I never said it was exactly like the Third Reich.
The only one derailing the thread by talking about shit is you
Regardless of your opinion on if the law is just or not, the police officers were only doing their job.
Just doing their jobs.
Nice Godwin! Because discouraging bums from shitting free food all over a neighborhood park is EXACTLY like the Third Reich.
Thanks for derailing this duplicate thread before it took up any more space.
Regardless of your opinion on if the law is just or not, the police officers were only doing their job.
Just doing their jobs.
Yeah our justice system is clearly behind in the morals department. I blame the flawed system, Maybe if we had better outlets and funding the homeless would not be a problem. Seems kind of counterproductive to hand out felony's for every small infraction, Felonies that keep people from finding work or homes. Maybe this is the main reason behind our homeless problem?
Not sure why a city thinks they need to regulate this man's charity.
That man is forcing others to support his charity by using an improper venue and not complying with public health regs.
If he feeds the homeless some bad potato salad and they all get food poisoning, the taxpayers are on the hook for the bills.
When his free food is done being digested, the homeless deposit the resulting fecal matter all over the park, streets, and sidewalks.
The taxpayers who built and maintain the park can't enjoy it when it's full of begging, infected, drug-addled, stinking, dangerous crazy people.
He could work with established soup kitchens, food banks, and shelters. But that would make too much sense.
He could invite the homeless into his own home, but that wouldn't create the media circus he's attention whoring for.
Notable quotation from Vod's post:
"I can see their point... if you keep feeding the problem, it will never go away."
"He can see their point" meaning he believes the police's actions were justified in arresting someone for feeding the homeless
"If you keep feeding the problem" notice how he refers to the homeless as "the problem", the context here is obviously feeding the homeless
"It will never go away" the homeless man is referred to by the pronoun "it", as if referring to a different species
Regardless of your opinion on if the law is just or not, the police officers were only doing their job. If they see someone breaking the law repeatedly then they must take action and arrest the criminal. "I can see their point... if you keep feeding the problem, it will never go away."
"He can see their point" meaning he believes the police's actions were justified in arresting someone for feeding the homeless
"If you keep feeding the problem" notice how he refers to the homeless as "the problem", the context here is obviously feeding the homeless
"It will never go away" the homeless man is referred to by the pronoun "it", as if referring to a different species
He was referring to the problem being the fact that people are homeless and are a burden to society. If you feed the homeless then they have zero incentive to work and actually contribute to society.
"If you keep feeding the problem" notice how he refers to the homeless as "the problem", the context here is obviously feeding the homeless
"It will never go away" the homeless man is referred to by the pronoun "it", as if referring to a different species
Depends how you read it."It will never go away" the homeless man is referred to by the pronoun "it", as if referring to a different species
Does "feeding the problem" refer to homelessness or does he mean keep feeding them doesn't really tackle the problem of getting them out of homelessness?
Also he could of been referring to the problem as "it" instead of the man as the "it".
Maybe I read it wrong.
Notable quotation from Vod's post:
"I can see their point... if you keep feeding the problem, it will never go away."
"He can see their point" meaning he believes the police's actions were justified in arresting someone for feeding the homeless
"If you keep feeding the problem" notice how he refers to the homeless as "the problem", the context here is obviously feeding the homeless
"It will never go away" the homeless man is referred to by the pronoun "it", as if referring to a different species
"I can see their point... if you keep feeding the problem, it will never go away."
"He can see their point" meaning he believes the police's actions were justified in arresting someone for feeding the homeless
"If you keep feeding the problem" notice how he refers to the homeless as "the problem", the context here is obviously feeding the homeless
"It will never go away" the homeless man is referred to by the pronoun "it", as if referring to a different species
Not sure why a city thinks they need to regulate this man's charity. There seem to be more homeless now than ever in my lifetime. Keeping them out of site isn't going to make them go away.
If we stop feeding them there will be less homeless than ever in your lifetime. Survival of the least lazy.
More like survival of the greediest.
But even that is an illusion nearing an abrupt end.
You're both greedy and lazy dank. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.
Not sure why a city thinks they need to regulate this man's charity. There seem to be more homeless now than ever in my lifetime. Keeping them out of site isn't going to make them go away.
If we stop feeding them there will be less homeless than ever in your lifetime. Survival of the least lazy.
More like survival of the greediest.
But even that is an illusion nearing an abrupt end.
Jump to: