http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/02/26/miami-officials-consider-proposal-restrict-feeding-homeless/?test=latestnews

Not sure if any of the Florida crew have heard about this, but it personally made me pretty sick. This also has a lot of implications for future endeavors in helping them. Just makes me sick.

Well, at first glance it seems bad, until you read the entire article, Jack.

All it would do is prohibit individuals and groups without the proper training from feeding the homeless.
There's no reason this would stop a good Samaritan who genuinely wants to help; he'd just go through the course and continue his work.

I know it is just trying to allow for proper training and less pollution. I just tend to dislike restrictions of any type. And something about the way it is talking about homeless people touches a nerve. Maybe its the way that it feels like its described as being an ordinance against feeding animals.

I do not know, I've just been encountering a lot of stereotypes about homeless people recently in my life, and this just riled me up a bit. I know it is just trying to have a good thing be done, but it is still a limitation. It just feels weird to me I suppose.

Jack, take your personal feelings out of the equation for a minute.

Think in terms of logistics: all that litter that is generated by giving the homeless food in improper containers costs the local governments billions of dollars every year. With the economy in the crapper, this is simply not a viable option anymore.

With this new training, people will learn what is and what is not acceptable packaging for the homeless, along with important nutritional information to ensure that they're doing more good than harm.

This is in NO WAY against the homeless, but rather an effort to ensure that they have good, nutritious food in acceptable, waste-minimal packaging.

I know it's an attempt to clean up acts, but I just see the situation as limiting, and not just due to my personal bias of freedom. I have given out food to homeless people on several occasions, I have even bought meals for them, both while under and not under the mask. Were the public to know that that action was then solely reserved for only people with "proper training and certification," then I think the people who do this just as a good act would decrease.

Sure, it would mean we could have a process of accountability. But the cost is that we lose the public's help. People see a certification process, and most of them don't want to go through it. It's a psychological limitation on who wants to do it. And sure, that weeds out us from the rest and allows us to better help, but it also alienates a helping majority that just does this from time to time.

Do you see what I mean? I don't like limitations like this on a personal basis because I think we should all be responsible and accountable enough to know our limits and what needs to be done. But people are weak, and so they need direction. I'm an idealist, and I realize there is need for some governance. I just think that this could, emphasis on could, be a detriment to the outside help that observers give.

It's hard enough getting bystanders to do anything about a problem, I'm sure that is an awareness especially with a recent anniversary of an event. I just think that this could (and again this is all conjecture really as it hasn't happened yet) be a detriment. Just trying to provide other views.

That, and as much as I like the anthropomorphizing of the homeless as much as the next guy, they are still people. The article is poorly worded, and I'm tired of stereotypes. But whatever. That is another battle really, you are right.

Jack, neither of us know what this certification process will entail. It could easily be a two-hour class at a community college or even something you sign in a box when you do your taxes.

I think you're blowing this up in your mind larger than what it actually is.

Getting bystanders to do anything IS hard, but the fact is, those that really and truly WANT to do this will take the time to do it right.

White Skull, while it will save in clean up, money will have to be spent to train the people how to do this properly.

And the litter isn't only generated by the homeless. It's generated by people way too lazy to walk 3 steps to a trash can or people who don't want trash in their cars so they throw it out the window...

Although I do agree that the training COULD be helpful, it could also slow things down. There are benefits and hindrances with this. In cases like this, I would think that leaving well enough alone would work best.

*puts away sniper rifle*


...Pass me some of that paste.

I don't think this is such a big problem... if you get thrown in jail for feeding the homeless, I think you'll find many more people on your side than against. I don't live anywhere near Miami, but ordinance or not, if I have food and see a hungry homeless person, I'll give it to them. Maybe we could just politely ask that since we gave them the food, could they please throw away the trash in a trash or recycling can and thank them in advanced.

*rimshot*

LOFL

SS you just made me choke on my soda. i thank you.

in all reality when we go by those rules they will find other new rules to prevent helping the starving.don't let anyone tell you otherwise.this has been going on since the very first days of slavery.go out an help people if you can .do you realize what i will do if i find out one of my super hero friends gets in trouble for this? as for trash , its the big rich companys destroying the planet, give me a sandwich wrapper any day i'll throw it away myself.

ML: does this mean WE will not be able to feed them anymore?

I just realized, is there even a RLSH in Miami?