urbanSTL

steve wrote:Actually, TGE, I spoke too soon. One way to commit Assault 3rd, a misdemeanor, is to:



purposely place[] another person in apprehension of immediate physical injury.



See RSMo 565.070.



But does asking somebody for some change "purposely" put another in apprehension of "immediate physical injury"?



But I suppose it's possible.

TGE-ATW wrote:Thats what I'm talking about steve. When the homeless simply ask for change it is no problem, BUT, when they get verbally abusive and/or follow you for a few steps after being denied (agressive panhandling), they are committing 3rd degree assault. Why isn't this illegal in MO? probably because it is an offence which is only punishable by a fine, which in the case of the homeless is a joke. I am not a lawyer and would like to have this clarified. I don't want all the homeless locked up, but they should be held accountable for their actions.

JCity wrote:

What ever happend to the cop who told the bums to "move it along"? The ol' tap on the shoulder with the police baton...



Thank you ACLU! Again, where do the members of this organization live? We should hand out their addresses, so the homeless can go LIVE with them in their homes, or at least their backyards! great idea, IMOP.

Expat wrote:Frankly, I have never been to a big city that doesn't have street people. When mixed in with lots of regular people they aren't noticed as much and seem less threatening. Diluting them through density might be the best answer.

stlmike wrote:Even public parks are allowed to close at night.

TGE-ATW wrote:I think that looking for a legal basis for getting rid of them is pointless and will start running us around in circles again. The real way to get them out of Lucas Park and reduce their presence in DT is to move Rice, and any other services they are using away from DT and Lucas Park. Is Rice actually leaving for KC as was stated earlier? How can we effect the relocation of the services? Does Rice lease, rent, or own?

What lured me into the city and what seems to be pulling on people in every city in the country is the attraction to the renewal of urban culture. Buildings that had fallen into decay are being restored with restaurants, coffee shops, retail stores and theaters, bringing back the pre-automobile era when people lived near one another and their offices and recreational areas were within walking distance. Loft life is more complicated: The laundry is down the hall and it is shared by all of my building's residents. Every morning I have to try to remember where I was able to park my car. Grocery shopping must be more frequent when what you buy may have to be carried for a couple of blocks and then up a flight of stairs. Even retrieving the morning paper can be a somewhat of a challenge. But still, when a friend tells me that he can't meet for coffee because he has to mow his yard, I have to try not to gloat.



Suburbs segregate the population by income level. The houses on my former street were all priced close enough to one another that only professionals lived there. Over the hill, where prices were much higher, live the moderately wealthy. Other neighborhoods are priced such that only the poor live there. In my new neighborhood I am surrounded by a cross-section of society. Well-known community leaders are just down the hall and yet, on the front steps, two homeless guys were waiting to see if I have any spare change for them on my first day here. College students are all around me, as are the eclectic employees from area restaurants and bars. All income groups live and work in every city block and that seems much more like "community" to me than suburbia ever could.



Urban renewal helps to stop the environmental impact of urban sprawl. It increases the property values for those who have an interest in city buildings. It creates a new economic center for the community. But the downside is an effect called "gentrification." It is great for the newly revitalized inner-city neighborhoods, but where do the people who once called this old hotel "home" live now?

It is great for the newly revitalized inner-city neighborhoods, but where do the people who once called this old hotel "home" live now?

southslider wrote:Does Lucas Park not have a curfew? If so, not even a well-groomed person should be on a bench or loitering past curfew. Still seems like there's a lack of enforcement to me.

But the downside is an effect called "gentrification."

TIABstl wrote:But....While walking down Washington, a man asked me if I wanted to buy "real 14k gold chains" for cheap and I saw a man, either drunk or mentally ill, laying passed out on the steps outside the OPO.



I really must be some sort of sh*t magnet.