I know exactly what you mean, but unfortunately some of the hobos have begging down to an art, and they have all day to practice it.dweebe wrote:Trust me, I've got the whole walking in the city thing down to an art
- 264
As the population DT increases, I expect more of this happenning. The worst part is that the residents may eventually get used to it, but when we have visitors, etc. bothered by them, the negative impact is hard to estimate.dweebe wrote:Jesus bleeping Christ, I must have had a target painted on me yesterday. I was panhandled while:
-walking to the Forest Park Metrolink station
-on the train (the first time this has happened in a long while)
-walking along Pine to lunch at Union Station
-after work by Side Bar while going to meet a friend for a drink
-waiting for the train at the 8th/Pine station
-filling up with gas at the Shell station at Delmar/Skinker
Trust me, I've got the whole walking in the city thing down to an art and are always aware of my surroundings while rarely making eye contact. Two of the above panhandlers actually crossed the street to bug me.
- 2,093
I guess the homeless don't mind the "uppity dippity dop" or whatever if they are handing them spare change 
Somehow, Stlgasm needs to incorporate "uppity doopity dop" into a snazzy t-shirt. Turn that baby into a meme!southsidepride wrote:I guess the homeless don't mind the "uppity dippity dop" or whatever if they are handing them spare change
I'm thinking my leather briefcase makes me a target. I'm going to get a backpack and use that to carry my stuff.
I challenge you all to use "uppity doopity dop" in a meeting at work: I have.
Kind of like the beginning of the movie "Super Troopers" when the one cop challenges another to pull someone over and say "meow" 10 times in the conversation.
innov8ion wrote:Somehow, Stlgasm needs to incorporate "uppity doopity dop" into a snazzy t-shirt. Turn that baby into a meme!southsidepride wrote:I guess the homeless don't mind the "uppity dippity dop" or whatever if they are handing them spare change
I challenge you all to use "uppity doopity dop" in a meeting at work: I have.
Kind of like the beginning of the movie "Super Troopers" when the one cop challenges another to pull someone over and say "meow" 10 times in the conversation.
Resurrectus wrote:I had a feeling that he's one of those people who thinks that the rich are responsible for the poor.
Nope. It was just a totally random comment. Someone had mentioned India, and it made me think of the NPR report I had just heard. I wasn't making any statement other than the one I explicitly made. I just thought it was an interesting "fact" (if it's indeed true). I would have guessed China or Japan would have had the most Asian millionaires. Back (again) to your local news.
- 2,772
I watched a TV show about "runaways" in San Francisco last night. The demographics were probably different than many homeless cases in St Louis, but their attitude is probably echoed with many St Louis homeless. Basically, large groups of them gathered in different places; one popular spot was the Haight-Ashbury neighborhood, and the Golden Gate Park. Many of them were not only happy being homeless, but planned to stay that way. One 17 year old who was arrested twice during the taping (one for having nunchuks, another for, I believe, driving drunk, somehow) said that he couldn't imagine settling down. He likes being on the street. His mom, who was clearly a drunk, stayed on the streets with him for a night or two because her involvement is part of being a parent, even though, admittedly, she is a bad parent (he's 17, and first thing she did when she got in to town was buy some vodka for them to drink in the park/on the street).
One guy, in the voice that echoes that of a Californian surfer by Hollywood's standards, said "What's the point dude? Going to school to get a sh*t degree, and having a sh*t job. For what?" as he takes a swig out of his 40 oz. It just isn't worth the hard work and dedication to a decent life to live in a "box," as many were putting it. Many of the kids, by the end of the documentary, picked up and moved to another city shortly thereafter. Unfortunately our bums don't have the same drive to leave and go bum elsewhere.
What was really angering was that several of the bums sleeping in the Golden Gate Park were outraged when an officer had the tenacity to wake them up at 5:30 in the morning (why do bums care what time of day it is, ever? Do they have a busy schedule?) to write them tickets for camping in a park. Also the bums who were angry when people wouldn't give them chance, even though those same people had no drive to get off the street. The 17 year old who "loved" living on the street and could never picture himself settling down was begging someone leaving a restaurant for their leftovers. I guess, why would you WANT to get off the streets? He's not working, he's not paying taxes, he does whatever the hell he wants all day. Back to the other bums, they also got fines for using the park as their bathroom in some cases. As Larry Rice is to STL, there is some local organization would take their tickets and go through a legal process to get them dropped, which angered the locals.
What really gets me is the repeated sentiment that "we aren't hurting anyone," as they beg for change on the street and take dumps on the sidewalk, as one local resident said.
It was shocking to see all of the bums that have no desire to leave the streets. They say they are fully self sufficient, and a bad family life is a reason why many of them left home, yet they survive off the money of hard working people who is handing it out to them. They also spoke of taking a bus to "well-to-do" suburbs and making much more money than they can in the city, because suburbanites thought it was cool to see "traveling" kids.
All in all it was sickening. If you ever get the chance to watch it, it was on MSNBC, titled "Runaways."
One guy, in the voice that echoes that of a Californian surfer by Hollywood's standards, said "What's the point dude? Going to school to get a sh*t degree, and having a sh*t job. For what?" as he takes a swig out of his 40 oz. It just isn't worth the hard work and dedication to a decent life to live in a "box," as many were putting it. Many of the kids, by the end of the documentary, picked up and moved to another city shortly thereafter. Unfortunately our bums don't have the same drive to leave and go bum elsewhere.
What was really angering was that several of the bums sleeping in the Golden Gate Park were outraged when an officer had the tenacity to wake them up at 5:30 in the morning (why do bums care what time of day it is, ever? Do they have a busy schedule?) to write them tickets for camping in a park. Also the bums who were angry when people wouldn't give them chance, even though those same people had no drive to get off the street. The 17 year old who "loved" living on the street and could never picture himself settling down was begging someone leaving a restaurant for their leftovers. I guess, why would you WANT to get off the streets? He's not working, he's not paying taxes, he does whatever the hell he wants all day. Back to the other bums, they also got fines for using the park as their bathroom in some cases. As Larry Rice is to STL, there is some local organization would take their tickets and go through a legal process to get them dropped, which angered the locals.
What really gets me is the repeated sentiment that "we aren't hurting anyone," as they beg for change on the street and take dumps on the sidewalk, as one local resident said.
It was shocking to see all of the bums that have no desire to leave the streets. They say they are fully self sufficient, and a bad family life is a reason why many of them left home, yet they survive off the money of hard working people who is handing it out to them. They also spoke of taking a bus to "well-to-do" suburbs and making much more money than they can in the city, because suburbanites thought it was cool to see "traveling" kids.
All in all it was sickening. If you ever get the chance to watch it, it was on MSNBC, titled "Runaways."
^Yeah, well teenagers are idiots. I understand why everyone gets pissed off about the homeless and I agree that something needs to be done, but it sickens me when people refer to them as "trash" or something. It's a human being, for God's sake. And I'm not referring to you, Juice. Contrary to popular belief, there actually are homeless people who want to better themselves and their situation but just can't seem to get on their feet.
- 2,772
Yes definitely, Shimmy. There was one couple who was deeply in love, from their meeting 2 weeks earlier
They were actually TRYING to get off of the streets, especially since she was 5 months pregnant. By the end of the show, she had the baby, and they had an apartment in a shelter. They made the valiant efforts of going to the social services offices and getting the paperwork necessary to prove that she was pregnant as well as homeless (they had to have written proof of homelessness, which I found a bit odd).
The only people in the documentary that was trying to get off the streets, made it off the street. Not everyone in the documentary, however, was a teenager. One of them was a 27 year old who lost her leg trying to hop on to a moving train while "drifting" with a friend. She claimed a bad home life to her homelessness, but she was now 27 years old and not trying to get off the streets. She actually had a comical tattoo dedicated to her leg.
It doesn't sicken me when people refer to people like her as "trash" by any means. She may be human, but she has made the choice to remain on the streets and be a bum, begging for change on the street.
They were actually TRYING to get off of the streets, especially since she was 5 months pregnant. By the end of the show, she had the baby, and they had an apartment in a shelter. They made the valiant efforts of going to the social services offices and getting the paperwork necessary to prove that she was pregnant as well as homeless (they had to have written proof of homelessness, which I found a bit odd).
The only people in the documentary that was trying to get off the streets, made it off the street. Not everyone in the documentary, however, was a teenager. One of them was a 27 year old who lost her leg trying to hop on to a moving train while "drifting" with a friend. She claimed a bad home life to her homelessness, but she was now 27 years old and not trying to get off the streets. She actually had a comical tattoo dedicated to her leg.
It doesn't sicken me when people refer to people like her as "trash" by any means. She may be human, but she has made the choice to remain on the streets and be a bum, begging for change on the street.
I think most of us recognize the difference between homeless people that are legitimately down-on-their-luck and the chronic homeless, who don't care about their situation, e.g. most of the people hanging out in Lucas Park. When people rip on the homeless they are usually referring to the latter.
whatever it takes: get them out of Lucas Park. Yes, it's that simple.
See the movie "The pursuit of happyness" (not a mis-spell), to realize there are people who TRY and do succeed in breaking the homeless cycle.jlblues wrote:I think most of us recognize the difference between homeless people that are legitimately down-on-their-luck and the chronic homeless, who don't care about their situation, e.g. most of the people hanging out in Lucas Park. When people rip on the homeless they are usually referring to the latter.
Then, we can see reality and people who "may" not be trying to break free of the cycle. Hanging around DT in hope for a free meal or panhandling is NOT trying. I wish there was an easy way to distinguiish between those homeless who are trying (and deserve the FULL help of all resources to help them) and those who "prefer the homeless lifestyle".
From my experience of getting panhandled, that is a full time job of "some" of those individuals.
- 1,282
City stops church's meals to homeless
Group urged to help drop-in center
By Jim Merkel
Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:21 AM CST
Every Wednesday night for the last four years, Denny Blanton goes to a downtown park to eat a meal served by members of Oakville's Oak Bridge Community Church.
But since the start of December, church members have brought him and about two dozen others on Wednesday nights to the Hardees at 601 Chestnut Ave., where they bought whatever they wanted on the menu.
The change came after church members were approached by police at a park at Eighth and Chestnut streets on Nov. 28 and told they no longer could serve the homeless meals unless they followed detailed city health rules.They also were handed a flier asking them to help at a city-supported evening meal program at Centenary Cares, a drop-in center at Centenary United Methodist Church, 16th and Olive streets.
Blanton lives in an efficiency apartment at the Mark Twain Hotel, 205 N. Ninth St., but said he has been homeless twice in the last five or six years. He said he depends on programs like the church's because his part-time housekeeping job at St. Louis University pays for his housing, but not his food.
"They want the homeless more or less out of sight, out of mind," said Blanton, 54.
Jonathan Herrick, who has run the program for about four years, said about 70 or 80 people are served on an average night.
"We're trying to find other options," he said, adding that he doesn't want to break any laws. "We also don't understand why you can't feed people in need."
City Human Services Director William Siedhoff, who handles homeless programs for the city, said there are provisions in city ordinances related to the distribution of food to the public based on concerns about the food's safety.
People are being encouraged to go inside the Centenary Cares Drop-in Center at Centenary United Methodist Church, 55 Plaza Square. It's open for breakfast, lunch and dinner with seating for 250. It brings the homeless out of the elements and lets them use restrooms and showers, he said.
"The effort here is to do it in a sanitary and a safe way," Siedhoff said. "It really is trying to bring a bit of orderliness to the process."
Often, people who bring meals to the homeless outside don't clean up, Siedhoff said. This has brought rats to one park frequently used by the homeless - Lucas Park at 13th and Locust streets.
Read More
Group urged to help drop-in center
By Jim Merkel
Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:21 AM CST
Every Wednesday night for the last four years, Denny Blanton goes to a downtown park to eat a meal served by members of Oakville's Oak Bridge Community Church.
But since the start of December, church members have brought him and about two dozen others on Wednesday nights to the Hardees at 601 Chestnut Ave., where they bought whatever they wanted on the menu.
The change came after church members were approached by police at a park at Eighth and Chestnut streets on Nov. 28 and told they no longer could serve the homeless meals unless they followed detailed city health rules.They also were handed a flier asking them to help at a city-supported evening meal program at Centenary Cares, a drop-in center at Centenary United Methodist Church, 16th and Olive streets.
Blanton lives in an efficiency apartment at the Mark Twain Hotel, 205 N. Ninth St., but said he has been homeless twice in the last five or six years. He said he depends on programs like the church's because his part-time housekeeping job at St. Louis University pays for his housing, but not his food.
"They want the homeless more or less out of sight, out of mind," said Blanton, 54.
Jonathan Herrick, who has run the program for about four years, said about 70 or 80 people are served on an average night.
"We're trying to find other options," he said, adding that he doesn't want to break any laws. "We also don't understand why you can't feed people in need."
City Human Services Director William Siedhoff, who handles homeless programs for the city, said there are provisions in city ordinances related to the distribution of food to the public based on concerns about the food's safety.
People are being encouraged to go inside the Centenary Cares Drop-in Center at Centenary United Methodist Church, 55 Plaza Square. It's open for breakfast, lunch and dinner with seating for 250. It brings the homeless out of the elements and lets them use restrooms and showers, he said.
"The effort here is to do it in a sanitary and a safe way," Siedhoff said. "It really is trying to bring a bit of orderliness to the process."
Often, people who bring meals to the homeless outside don't clean up, Siedhoff said. This has brought rats to one park frequently used by the homeless - Lucas Park at 13th and Locust streets.
Read More
- 11K
OMG - "It's not what Jesus would want to do"?!?!?!?! I guess Jesus would like to litter - or maybe Jesus would also choose to live in the burbs and drive to meet the homeless once a week. Someone needs to get righteous with this issue and point out the idiocy of some of these comments. It's a feakin' city park - not an outdoor food pantry!?!?! And why people choose to ignore established opportunities to help people and instead got to freakin' Hardee's is really beyond me. What a waste of money. A good meal can be had for 1/2 the price - they're helping HALF the people they could!!!! Take the damn high ground from them!
By the way, it's very nice to see this happening so early on in downtown's development. I thought it would take a couple hundred more residents in the area of the park to make a difference. This is a smart, well reasoned, compasionate move.
By the way, it's very nice to see this happening so early on in downtown's development. I thought it would take a couple hundred more residents in the area of the park to make a difference. This is a smart, well reasoned, compasionate move.
I do not get it.
If there are CENTERS to take care of the homeless with a capacity of feeding 250 at one go, AND have showers and shelter, WHY do these churches think the homeless are better served eating in the park?
I have never been homeless and will admit I may be missing something here, but I can think logically.
For the people in the article who said "This is not what Jesus would want us to do", please let me know if Jesus would not have invited these homeless into his house. He would have. So........... the vans you have to bring food from your suburban church can be used to take some of these homeless back, OR at the least take them to shelters that CAN take care of them.
If there are CENTERS to take care of the homeless with a capacity of feeding 250 at one go, AND have showers and shelter, WHY do these churches think the homeless are better served eating in the park?
I have never been homeless and will admit I may be missing something here, but I can think logically.
For the people in the article who said "This is not what Jesus would want us to do", please let me know if Jesus would not have invited these homeless into his house. He would have. So........... the vans you have to bring food from your suburban church can be used to take some of these homeless back, OR at the least take them to shelters that CAN take care of them.
I guess you type faster than I do Grover.Grover wrote:OMG - "It's not what Jesus would want to do"?!?!?!?! I guess Jesus would like to litter - or maybe Jesus would also choose to live in the burbs and drive to meet the homeless once a week. Someone needs to get righteous with this issue and point out the idiocy of some of these comments. It's a feakin' city park - not an outdoor food pantry!?!?!
By the way, it's very nice to see this happening so early on in downtown's development. I thought it would take a couple hundred more residents in the area of the park to make a difference. This is a smart, well reasoned, compasionate move.
.....good pointsSimple. Charity can either be altruistic in nature or not. Unfortunately, some may care more about themselves feeling good than actually helping in the most appropriate manner. By the way, that appeared to be a fairly balanced article. Kudos to the reporter.STLDTFAN wrote:I do not get it.
If there are CENTERS to take care of the homeless with a capacity of feeding 250 at one go, AND have showers and shelter, WHY do these churches think the homeless are better served eating in the park?
Good to see the city enforcing this behavior and getting the message out. The homeless are not being ignored -- they're being protected from potentially unsafe food and fed in a more safe, organized fashion while better respecting the community at large.
The Community Churchites have never liked the Methodists, that's why they don't want to work with Centenary. Now for some perspective: It all goes back to the Methodo-Communitesticular Investiture Controversy of 1143. You see, Communitus IV, the Holy Oakville Emperor, got into a fight with Pope Method VII regarding who would control appointments to the "Supreme Council for Misplaced Do-goodery" as well as the the selection of the "Prelate For Things That We Thought Would Help, But We Didn't Think Through All The Way And In Fact ***** Everything Up." Pope Method overturned centuries of Medieval law by saying that all power to appoint these positions stemmed from God and thus fell under his purview. Communitus argued that, as he was King by divine right, that he should continue to wield those powers (as other kings had for centuries). Method excommunicated Communitus, Communitus apologized and wore a hairshirt while standing in the snow as penance, Method lifted the excommunication, Communitus mustered an army and invaded the western section of downtown, Civil War erupted in Oakville. After decades of fighting, the two sides eventually made peace at the Concordat of Kirkwood. Despite this peace, the two sides have continued to distrust each other for centuries. This distrust has resulted in their divergent views regarding the best way to help the homeless while simultaneously screwing over everyone else. In conclusion, the ignorance of the city strikes again. The legacy of the Methodo-Communitesticular Investiture Controversy was apparently completely ignored in making their current recommendation for the two groups to work together (its like the city has no idea that this thing even happened!). Considering the long and bitter history of these two groups, I think we will all have to keep waiting for a real solution to the homeless-feeding to be found.
- 390
It's much easier to throw together a lunch time "food ministry" than to seriously tackle problems of homelessness and to work with and within established organizations doiong the hard work with the homeless. Much easier.
- 542
Someone asked what Jesus would do. I'm no Biblical scholar, but I think he was pretty clear on the matter:
Matt 5:42 "Give to anyone who asks of you, and do not turn your back on one who wants to borrow."
Matt 5:42 "Give to anyone who asks of you, and do not turn your back on one who wants to borrow."
"Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime" - Chinese Proverb
- 6,775
"Get a job, you lazy piece of carp" - TCS