Aug. 7, 2005, 12:41AM
Dallas law cracks down on feeding the homeless
Mobile units won't be parked outside City Hall or they'll face fine
By THOMAS KOROSEC
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

DALLAS - In the words of millionaire restaurateur Phil Romano, his Hunger Busters charity feeds the homeless "wherever they are."

"I love these people because they love me," said Enrique Martinez, 57, one of about 120 homeless men and women who lined up for the last of four stops the Hunger Busters' van made on its tour of freeway underpasses and glass-strewn back lots.

Starting Sept. 1, Dallas will begin regulating such mobile feedings, setting up a clash between a city policy and those who want to feed the poor. Under a new ordinance, charities, churches and individuals will be allowed to serve food only at approved locations. Violations will be punishable by fines of $200 to $2,000.

"Maybe we'll get arrested for getting tickets and not doing what they want us to do and see what the public says about that," said Romano, founder of several national restaurant chains, including Romano's Macaroni Grill, Cozymel's and Fuddruckers. "It's all a matter of public opinion."

[Just 4 billion would end all homelessness. Taxcuts for the rich were 350 billion.]

Read Article...
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/3299402

Are they going to crack down on those tomain wagons that serve construction sites and factories as well, and also outlaw those vending machines at City Hall and in office buildings all over town? seems fair enough to me to do so, if such food services are a 'hazard', eh? Talk about venal BS; only Republicans would think up crap like this; meanwhile, recently they were debating how much taxpayer money to give away free to billionare Jerry Jones for his Dullest WowBoys, the Cocaine Cowboys.

In agreement Oberon. The unfortunate truth is that most cities want the homeless confined to a certain part of skid row where they won't bother "normal" people. As someone who has volunteered to work at a soap kitchen here in Austin I can confirm that most of these people are homeless for a reason and are not simply down on their luck; the majority had either substance abuse problems or had mental health issues which rendered them unemployable without treatment and they couldn't get treatment because they were unemployed. That means there is at least a thin veneer for why they want the homeless confined to certain areas where they will be out of sight and out of mind.

That said, I can't help but feel that if these people spent as much energy trying to end homelessness that they do attempting to hide the homeless then most of the homeless wouldn't be homeless. Alcohol & drug abuse treatment is what is needed along with free mental health treatment. If the homeless got this then we'd see big drops in the numbers of people on the streets.

Time for some good old fashioned civil disobedience.

That said, I can't help but feel that if these people spent as much energy trying to end homelessness that they do attempting to hide the homeless then most of the homeless wouldn't be homeless. Alcohol & drug abuse treatment is what is needed along with free mental health treatment. If the homeless got this then we'd see big drops in the numbers of people on the streets.

There is no doubt at all about that. but, these people must be kicked while they are down and out, as a 'lesson' to all the other working class drones just what is in store for them if they fail to accept that their employers own them, and they are private property, subject to any petty whim inflicted on them.


And, a big HATs OFF and Salute to Phil Romano. I'm going to start throwing some business his way, and offer to pick up one or two of those fines for him, if he chooses to go against the vermin.

Quick, someone call Bono it's time for a concert, oh wait, he only does gigs in Africa, bummer.

So a Feed the Homeless van should just be able to stop in the middle of a busy street during rush hour and block traffic - just so the homeless can be fed?

This is much ado about nothing. Given that public spaces are being used for the distribution, it makes sense to designate areas that are going to be safe for the homeless to access and not disruptive to other citizens going about their daily business.

Feed the Homeless vans don't stop in the middle of a busy street during rush hour and block traffic. Clearly nonsensical ramblings.
Then again, getting home ten minutes faster versus allowing someone who hasn't eaten all day to eat has the getting home sooner argument losing. If you need to get home that much sooner, then find a new way home.

If street vendors have to have licenses to sell wares on a public sidewalk, it is perfectly reasonable for charities which distribute food to follow guidelines for locations.

I suppose you are one of those people who thinks its okay for The Homeless to take a whiz wherever they feel like it as well.

One is a business, the other is a nonprofit organization. Huge difference. Apples and oranges, one could even argue.

Only if nobody lets him in to use the facilities. Wanna be an *******? Then you better be prepared reap the whirlwind.

One is a business, the other is a nonprofit organization. Huge difference. Apples and oranges, one could even argue.

Why? Why is it that non-profits should be allowed to misuse and abuse the commons? Please explain why this makes good public policy?

Only if nobody lets him in to use the facilities. Wanna be an *******? Then you better be prepared reap the whirlwind.

Oh I see. You believe in Revenge Whizzing.

Why? Why is it that non-profits should be allowed to misuse and abuse the commons? Please explain why this makes good public policy?
Misuse and abuse the commons? Well, that's where we differ. You hate the homeless and disadvantaged. I don't, wench.

Oh I see. You believe in Revenge Whizzing.
Sure. I remember this one guy wasn't allowed in to use a restroom at a store, so he peed on the building. I was getting ready to join him when I was pulled away by my friends. Bunch of wussies.

Misuse and abuse the commons? Well, that's where we differ. You hate the homeless and disadvantaged. I don't, wench.

No, I don't hate them. I feel sorry for them - but compassion doesn't mean that the charities which help them shouldn't have to be respectful of other people's rights to also use the commons. The Homeless Are Not Sacred Cows.

Sure. I remember this one guy wasn't allowed in to use a restroom at a store, so he peed on the building. I was getting ready to join him when I was pulled away by my friends. Bunch of wussies.

Charming.

I think the reasons outlined by the proponents of the restrictions are pretty reasonable, including the trespassing and sanitation issues. If the article is any indication, the people who are distributing the food seem to be unwilling to take responsibility for the trash that they and their clients are producing.
About 100 people had moved in with cardboard structures, portable toilets, shopping carts and TVs powered by electricity stolen from a nearby billboard. It had become a regular stop of charity feeders.
If I were homeless, I certainly wouldn't be sitting on my ass watching TV all day.

No, I don't hate them. I feel sorry for them - but compassion doesn't mean that the charities which help them shouldn't have to be respectful of other people's rights to also use the commons. The Homeless Are Not Sacred Cows.
That is not compassion. If you were compassionate, then you would know that such organizations do what they do when they do it because that's when they can help the most people. Helping people who need help is an act of compassion. Walking the walk vs. talking the talk. If you ever, and I doubt you ever will, bother to work at a soup kitchen, homeless shelter, etc. like I have, you'll discover something on the very first day: people are turned away.

Charming.
I thought so.

I've gone totally liberal on this issue. I think the homeless should get a job or a brain, but nevertheless, I don't see what biz it is of the governments to tell them where they can or can't get a free handout because when it comes right down to it the elitist politicans are embarassed and they sure as hell can't allow pan handlers on the court house steps.

Some of the homeless are disabled. They cannot get jobs and should not have to walk long distances to get food. Most do not have cars/transportation...it is not like they can drive places like we can to go get something to eat.

Some of the homeless are disabled. They cannot get jobs and should not have to walk long distances to get food. Most do not have cars/transportation...it is not like they can drive places like we can to go get something to eat.

It doesn't necessarily follow that locations for food distribution cannot be placed in convenient areas for the homeless.

Problem is, they won't be: they'll be placed in the areas least visible to the public.

Problem is, they won't be: they'll be placed in the areas least visible to the public.

Then let the homeless advocates negotiate with the city for appropriate locations. All citizens have rights to the public space, not just The Homeless.

I waited on a crackhead today.I'm sorry if people don't understand whya lot of people don't want their kids exposed to people like this.
For me,it's no big deal,I've been a lot of weird places,seen a lot of strange things,but when you start realizing how big and bad the problems of the homeless are,you start feeling like maybe they don't want to be seen either.
So make some rules,already...

Then let the homeless advocates negotiate with the city for appropriate locations. All citizens have rights to the public space, not just The Homeless.
Nobody is advocating for the denial of access to anything public, except for you.

Nobody is advocating for the denial of access to anything public, except for you.

Au contraire, young virgin. All I am advocating for is that the Homeless not become Sacred Cows. Allowing food distributors to interfere with the free flow of traffic is unacceptable. How would you like to be in an ambulance stopped because The Homeless were surrounding a food cart on the main drag?

Nonsense - they aren't interfering with the free flow of traffic any more than any public use vehicle is.

Ambulances DO have the capacity to drive around parked vehicles, you know.

I waited on a crackhead today.I'm sorry if people don't understand whya lot of people don't want their kids exposed to people like this.
For me,it's no big deal,I've been a lot of weird places,seen a lot of strange things,but when you start realizing how big and bad the problems of the homeless are,you start feeling like maybe they don't want to be seen either.
So make some rules,already...What about crackheads that have a bunch of kids that are homeless and need food?

Nonsense - they aren't interfering with the free flow of traffic any more than any public use vehicle is.

Ambulances DO have the capacity to drive around parked vehicles, you know.


But but but...What about all of The Drugged Out And Drunk Homeless People wandering across the roads?

Cities already regulate parking, no parking, and car pool pick-up zones. Why can't they also designate places where people can park to hand out food to the homeless so that others are not inconvenienced?

The Homeless Are Not Sacred Cows.

Au contraire, young virgin. All I am advocating for is that the Homeless not become Sacred Cows. Allowing food distributors to interfere with the free flow of traffic is unacceptable. How would you like to be in an ambulance stopped because The Homeless were surrounding a food cart on the main drag?
What is the relevancy of my sexual history? Bring it up again, and I'm reporting you, wench.
I point you to CP's post on this matter.

But but but...What about all of The Drugged Out And Drunk Homeless People wandering across the roads?

Cities already regulate parking, no parking, and car pool pick-up zones. Why can't they also designate places where people can park to hand out food to the homeless so that others are not inconvenienced?

The Homeless Are Not Sacred Cows.
It's simple. Go where the homeless are. They do not pose a significant impact to traffic. If you think they do, then find an alternate route. If you truly believe that there is only way to get to your house, please send your soul to me when I show you an alternate route to get home.

What is the relevancy of my sexual history? Bring it up again, and I'm reporting you, wench.
I point you to CP's post on this matter.

If you are going to persist in calling me wench, I reserve the right to call you by whatever self-descriptor you have previously used on the board.

It's simple. Go where the homeless are. They do not pose a significant impact to traffic. If you think they do, then find an alternate route. If you truly believe that there is only way to get to your house, please send your soul to me when I show you an alternate route to get home.

:rolleyes: Who is saying that the city will not designate distribution points where The Homeless are?

This is really Much Ado About Nothing.

If you are going to persist in calling me wench, I reserve the right to call you by whatever self-descriptor you have previously used on the board.
Virginity is not a state of being. Being a wench is a state of being. They're totally different. Do it again, wench, and I shall report you. You have already stated that you have no problems being called a wench, wench. Do not begin to threaten me with such BS claims as this is retaliation, wench. This is not a level playing field. I have not given permission for such a term to be used the way you have given permission for wench to be used, wench.

:rolleyes: Who is saying that the city will not designate distribution points where The Homeless are?

This is really Much Ado About Nothing.
No, you're not getting it. Homeless people congregate in specific areas, and many of these include where it is busy. If it's busy in this spot or that spot, you don't want it to be designated. So what's really going on here, and this is why it's a very big deal, is that you're saying that getting home five minutes earlier is more important to you than having an individual get his first and only meal of the day. Remember that the next time you eat. Remember that your compassion extends only so far as your own convenience. At least you don't pretend to be a Christian, I give you credit for that.

Virginity is not a state of being. Being a wench is a state of being. They're totally different. Do it again, wench, and I shall report you. You have already stated that you have no problems being called a wench, wench. Do not begin to threaten me with such BS claims as this is retaliation, wench. This is not a level playing field. I have not given permission for such a term to be used the way you have given permission for wench to be used, wench.



I withdraw my permission for you to call me a wench as you are using the term in a derogatory fashion full of ill will.

Call me it again, and I will report you.

(BTW, virginity is a state of being, as long as one is a virgin.)

I withdraw my permission for you to call me a wench as you are using the term in a derogatory fashion full of ill will.

Call me it again, and I will report you. Your permission? You gave general permission for all to identify you as such because you yourself believe that you are a wench. If you now regret this decision to pridefully proclaim yourself to be a wench, then please, announce that you cease to consider yourself a wench. Until then, consider wench to be a term that you have decided to allow anyone to use. Karma's a bitch, ain't it?
So there you have it. I have never identified myself as being a virgin in the same way that you have identified yourself as being a wench. Adjective vs. noun.

Your permission? You gave general permission for all to identify you as such because you yourself believe that you are a wench. If you now regret this decision to pridefully proclaim yourself to be a wench, then please, announce that you cease to consider yourself a wench. Until then, consider wench to be a term that you have decided to allow anyone to use. Karma's a bitch, ain't it?

^ Personal Attack.

And you are back on ignore. Don't bother trying to get someone to plead your case again.

Personal attack? How?
Oh, you mean like calling me a deadbeat?
Or how about we talk about your continued baiting of myself and other members in your journal?
Or how about we talk about your blind accusations of pedophilia against members of this board?
You do not want to go down this route with me. Get back to the thread topic. If you can't respond to my arguing points, then please do not continue your wont of attacking the poster, and then claiming that you are the victim. This isn't divorce court. Those tactics don't work here.

And sugar, nobody pleaded my case. I simply used an intermediary.

Personal attack? How?
Oh, you mean like calling me a deadbeat?
Or how about we talk about your continued baiting of myself and other members in your journal?
Or how about we talk about your blind accusations of pedophilia against members of this board?
You do not want to go down this route with me. Get back to the thread topic. If you can't respond to my arguing points, then please do not continue your wont of attacking the poster, and then claiming that you are the victim. This isn't divorce court. Those tactics don't work here.

And sugar, nobody pleaded my case. I simply used an intermediary.jesus h ****ing christ. grow the **** up.
:nonono:

I like Romano's gig, but he's got to cooperate. They're trying to run a city there.

I'm reminded of a story of this city councilman who wanted to ban cats from city hall. The cat he had in mind was the city mascot, a homeless kitty with only three legs, named "Tripod". He didn't have any teeth either. I mean Tripod was having a tough time, and the city hall workers had adopted him.

So trying to ban him seemed heartless and outrageous - until you considered that the councilman was terribly allergic to cats. They had the guy on camera in the same room with Tripod and he was a mess. Skin breaking out, face swelling, tears running like a faucet.

He couldn't go into city hall and do his job. That was a problem.

They worked it out.

So, regulating the operation of the Hunger Busters is not so heartless. They just want a little responsibility and cooperation with other people using the same facilities.

So, regulating the operation of the Hunger Busters is not so heartless. They just want a little responsibility and cooperation with other people using the same facilities.No, they want to put the homeless where "normal" and "nice" citizens don't have to look at them...

That means there is at least a thin veneer for why they want the homeless confined to certain areas where they will be out of sight and out of mind.

Isn't the quality of life of normal, law abiding people more important than that of alcoholics and drug addicts?

Alcohol & drug abuse treatment is what is needed along with free mental health treatment.

Jail time is probably the only way to force them to keep away from alcohol and drugs and the criminal behavior they engage in.

If the homeless got this then we'd see big drops in the
numbers of people on the streets.

Would you support jail time for the bums since in the long run it would be to their benefit and at worst it would prevent crime and keep the streets tidy?

Jail time is probably the only way to force them to keep away from alcohol and drugs and the criminal behavior they engage in.
- I can tell you from unfortunate family experience that this is not true: it's easier to get drugs IN prison than outside of it.

Would you support jail time for the bums since in the long run it would be to their benefit and at worst it would prevent crime and keep the streets tidy?
- You're supposing without foundation that jail time would "benefit" them

Isn't the quality of life of normal, law abiding people more important than that of alcoholics and drug addicts?

From working in a food pantry I can tell these suppositions are just incorrect. Most of the people there were either disabled or illegal aliens or out of work people, not drug addicts. I saw maybe one or two out of the whole bunch that seemed like druggies or alcholics.