urbanSTL

Urban Elitist wrote:

bprop wrote:Well, sitting in two restaurant/cafes within the week, we have had panhandlers come INTO the business, stand by our tables, and request money from the patrons. After getting nothing, they walk out. We made management aware. They say it has picked up recently as well.

That happened to me @ Bar Louie and I was pissed

What did you do about it?

^ What could I do? The guy left immediatly after I told him no, and then I just told the bouncer so he wouldn't let him in again.

Urban Elitist wrote:^ What could I do? The guy left immediatly after I told him no, and then I just told the bouncer so he wouldn't let him in again.

So at least you did something. Good for you. Trash like that counts on most people being uncomfortable and/or afraid of them. And they no that most people won't do anything about it. So they keep on bothering folks until they are thrown out.

Idea I had this morning for street signage:

NEARBY SOCIAL RESOURCES



Food:

SPC, NLEC, CCC, etc.



Shelter, Housing Assistance:

SPC, NLEC, etc.



Employment Assistance:

SPC, etc.



Money for Drugs, Alcohol:

You.



Handouts are not help.

I was leaving Rue13 the other nite and this big dude was aggressively motioning to me for some money. I crossed the street to avoid him and noticed him using the same tactic with another guy getting into his car. He stuck out his hand like they were old buddies and intimidated some money from the guy. While walking down the street, I noticed he was standing directly outside Hair of the Dog waiting to harass his next prey.



I recommend that local businesses (restaurants, bars, etc) band together and work to prevent this type of thing. The door men and valets could possibly shoo off the homeless from harassing clientele, call police, or educate passersby not to provide money to the homeless. If they don't help do something, their businesses stand to be at risk.



I'm sure the Convention Center also brings a lot of people in that are unaware of the problems caused by providing money to the homeless. Perhaps the convention center could be more proactive in this regard. Same for Cards, Blues, Rams games and concerts.....



More money and support should be given to the good agencies and money and support be taken away from the bad ones (And we all know who we are talking about here...) It's very clear that some agencies work to get the homeless off the streets and back into society while others work to keep them there to support their own sick, self-serving interests.

I still think a $50 ticket for those who give money to the homeless is the fastest solution. It would immediately dry up the majority of the money that panhandlers make. They could phase in the tickets by writing warnings for a week or two, and they could posy signs warning people not to give money to panhandlers or be fines. Local news could also be used to get the word out. I think in 1 month a policy like this could have a drastic effect.

^Not really as long as they make it clear that this is to help the homeless and the city as a whole. They could explain that arresting the homeless actually costs the city money since it requires a lot of man power, and then you must house the homeless in jails.



By fining those who give to panhandlers you are actually making money for the city, while forcing the homeless to go to shelters for aid, as they should. 50% of all funds collected should then be directly routed to various local shelters that meet the city's requirements for recieveing said funds, such as keeping the shelter up to code etc.



This way those who give to the homeless are actually forced to give more to them via the fine, and they compensate the city for adding to the panhandling problem.

Urban Elitist wrote:

bprop wrote:Well, sitting in two restaurant/cafes within the week, we have had panhandlers come INTO the business, stand by our tables, and request money from the patrons. After getting nothing, they walk out. We made management aware. They say it has picked up recently as well.

That happened to me @ Bar Louie and I was pissed

I've dined twice outside at Bar Louie and been bothered three times by panhandlers. The manager there needs to do something.

dweebe wrote:I've dined twice outside at Bar Louie and been bothered three times by panhandlers. The manager there needs to do something.

That's just it I was inside!

Urban Elitist wrote:I still think a $50 ticket for those who give money to the homeless is the fastest solution. It would immediately dry up the majority of the money that panhandlers make. They could phase in the tickets by writing warnings for a week or two, and they could posy signs warning people not to give money to panhandlers or be fines. Local news could also be used to get the word out. I think in 1 month a policy like this could have a drastic effect.

Define "homeless". And even if you can, you would have to prove that the giver knew that the guy was homeless.



What if I gave you money on the sidewalk. Would I be arrested?

Semantics. Panhandlers are beggars who approach strangers asking for money. Giving a buddy money on the street does not make your friend a panhandler. Just replace the word homeless with panhandler and it's ok.

The Central Scrutinizer wrote:

Urban Elitist wrote:I still think a $50 ticket for those who give money to the homeless is the fastest solution. It would immediately dry up the majority of the money that panhandlers make. They could phase in the tickets by writing warnings for a week or two, and they could posy signs warning people not to give money to panhandlers or be fines. Local news could also be used to get the word out. I think in 1 month a policy like this could have a drastic effect.

Define "homeless". And even if you can, you would have to prove that the giver knew that the guy was homeless.



What if I gave you money on the sidewalk. Would I be arrested?

^Exactally, it would be a crime to give money to a panhandler, whether or not he has a home or not would be irrelevant so I guess I should have used the word panhandler.

Urban Elitist wrote:I still think a $50 ticket for those who give money to the homeless is the fastest solution. It would immediately dry up the majority of the money that panhandlers make. They could phase in the tickets by writing warnings for a week or two, and they could posy signs warning people not to give money to panhandlers or be fines. Local news could also be used to get the word out. I think in 1 month a policy like this could have a drastic effect.

My initial reaction to this post was - no way you can fine someone for giving money a panhandler. But after thinking about it for a while, why not? Really, this is one of the only real ideas I've heard lately that addresses this growing problem. If it were properly explained and communicated, I doubt there would be much public opposition. Its like phobia says, there's more than enough help available to address the basics of housing, food, and clothing. More often than not, panhandled money goes to drugs and alcohol.

^Exactally. This is the same strategy used to combat prostitution...they arrest the guys who solicit the prostitution. Except in this case, it would just be a large fine, no arrest.

^ good analogy!

innov8ion wrote:Semantics. Panhandlers are beggars who approach strangers asking for money. Giving a buddy money on the street does not make your friend a panhandler. Just replace the word homeless with panhandler and it's ok.

The Central Scrutinizer wrote:

Urban Elitist wrote:I still think a $50 ticket for those who give money to the homeless is the fastest solution. It would immediately dry up the majority of the money that panhandlers make. They could phase in the tickets by writing warnings for a week or two, and they could posy signs warning people not to give money to panhandlers or be fines. Local news could also be used to get the word out. I think in 1 month a policy like this could have a drastic effect.

Define "homeless". And even if you can, you would have to prove that the giver knew that the guy was homeless.



What if I gave you money on the sidewalk. Would I be arrested?

But when this law ends up in court (which it would), those "semantics" become very important.

^Look I'm not a lawyer, the concept of the law is good. I'm sure city attorneys could make it air tight with their legal jargon. Everyone else seems to be able to grasp the overall spirit of the ordinace while you only sit there and nitpick. I'm not writting the law myself, only offering up the basic idea.

Urban Elitist wrote:^Look I'm not a lawyer, the concept of the law is good. I'm sure city attorneys could make it air tight with their legal jargon. Everyone else seems to be able to grasp the overall spirit of the ordinace while you only sit there and nitpick. I'mnot writting the law myself, only offering up the basic idea.

You're right - the concept of the law is good.



Courts don't deal with "over all spirit". They deal with the law as it is written on the page. I suspect your law would be tossed out so fast it would make your head spin.

^You're unbelieveable. I already said city attorney's would have to refine the law, they went to law school and are experts at doing just that. I'm only offering an idea that they could run with. Get over it already. You're just jealous because you didn't think of it.

How do police charge a "John" for just talking to a lady on the street? They set up sting operations and catch them in the act. In our case, you won't have to do that too often for the word to get out and the problem goes away.

The only problem I would have with this is that it would classify the act of being homeless as an illegal activity, which I think is wrong.

appraisalman wrote:The only problem I would have with this is that it would classify the act of being homeless as an illegal activity, which I think is wrong.

It does no such thing. It makes it a crime to give money to panhandlers and then diverts a large percentage of the fine to homelss shelters. Read the posts. It in fact does nothing to punish the panhandler. it does however increase funding to shelters to help them and eliminate harrasment on the sidewalks at the same time.

Or it would classify the act of harassment as illegal.



I like the idea and in the spirit of bad analogies, here's another: I'm walking to my car from the office, talking to my girlfriend, we decide to rent a movie and take it to her place later that night . . . did I just become a John!?!?!?