North Carolina Church Members Threatened by Police for Feeding the Homeless

For six years, a group of volunteers from a church called Love Wins Ministries has gone to a park in Raleigh, N.C., on the weekends to give away food to the homeless there. At least they did until this weekend, when police showed up to stop them. ABC News explains:

[W]hen volunteers went down to their usual weekend spot to dole out the 100 sausage biscuits and the gallons of coffee they had brought to feed the crowds who had gathered Saturday morning, they were also greeted by officers with the Raleigh Police Department, according to a statement on the church group's website.

"An officer said, quite bluntly, that if we attempted to distribute food, we would be arrested," the Rev. Hugh Hollowell wrote on the group's website. "We asked the officers for permission to disperse the biscuits to the over 70 people who had lined up, waiting to eat. They said no. I had to face those who were waiting and tell them that I could not feed them, or I would be arrested."

There’s an ordinance in Raleigh that prohibits distributing food in public parks. The church knew that, so they were actually on the sidewalk next to the park, but that apparently wasn’t enough for the police. The reverend wrote that the police refused to explain what ordinance they were actually violating. They were also told they needed a permit to use the park, which would cost $800 a day.

Follow this story and more at Reason 24/7.

Spice up your blog or Website with Reason 24/7 news and Reason articles. You can get the widgets here. If you have a story that would be of interest to Reason's readers please let us know by emailing the 24/7 crew at 24_7@reason.com, or tweet us stories at @reason247.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • The Deacon||

    But Christians aren't oppressed.

  • Tonio||

    It is unclear from this if a similarly-situated, non-christian group would be harassed for doing the same thing. I suspect it's the feeding part, not the Christianity part.

    Also, North Carolina, so the persecution thing not so believable.

  • Tonio||

    Also, whatever happened to those old-school Christians who were willing to risk death to follow their faith? That sort of spirit is conspicuously absent here.

  • SugarFree||

    Everyone wants to be a victim.

  • Drake||

    You may want to look into the specifics. I don't think they were crucified or fed to the lions for distributing egg mcmuffins.

  • Hyperion||

    But the homeless had to be put down by the cops, to protect them from being fed food that wasn't state approved.

    Ok, that's only dogs and deer right now, but we're getting to the good stuff...

  • John||

    And Tonio's slow sad descent continues.

  • Killazontherun||

    No, I witnessed him feeding a sausage biscuit to a homeless man this morning just after he removed a plank out of the eye of a Christian pastor.

  • Killazontherun||

    And then he mounted the tallest horse in the land and rode into the sunset.

  • Almanian!||

    NICE!

  • Torontonian||

    That "spirit" of martyrdom has been largely replaced by the spirit of civil disobedience (which was also conspicuously absent here).

    I'd like to think that if I was in that situation, I would have gone ahead and fed the crowd, submitted to arrest, and pleaded guilty to whatever they charged me with.

    But this is pure conjecture, since there's virtually zero probability of ever finding me at a church-sponsored event... or in the same place as a crowd of filthy homeless people.

  • Killazontherun||

    In the culture of Southern church goers, opposing the laws of a democratic polity is an entirely different matter than opposing the laws of Caesar. I don't make that distinction either, but it is really deeply embedded in in their culture.

  • BiteMe||

    We still exist. 'We must obey God rather than men.' ~ Acts 5:29

  • Robert||

    I doubt it has anything to do with their religion. A Universal Life Church that was doing similarly in their own bldg. in Surfside, Fla. in the 1980s got burned out. People just don't want bums in the neighborhood.

  • PapayaSF||

    Luckily for them the SWAT team was busy taking down a lemonade stand across town.

  • Andrew S.||

    But remember folks: Without government, hungry homeless people would fill the streets!

  • Live Free or Diet||

    Because if they don't let them be fed they die off, right?

    And outside the park is still inside the park?

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    If you go by old common law regarding right of ways, the street and sidewalk is an extension of the adjacent plats.

    In this case the adjacent plat is a "public park". If only "public property" didn't exist, we wouldn't be witnessing these stupid dilemmas.

  • Marshall Gill||

    I saw this earlier. I will re-post my comment from there.

    The police in America today are evil.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Don't forget the people who elected those who created the damn laws in the first place.

  • Marshall Gill||

    Believe me, I haven't.

  • sarcasmic||

    Elections tend to be a choice between the lesser of two evils, which is still evil.

    It's the nature of the people who seek the job.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    But why are the successful ones always enacting freedom limiting laws such as this? It certainly has to something to do with voter preference.

  • sarcasmic||

    When the choices are busybody A or busybody B, and busybody is going to win.

    Face it. People who have no interest in limiting liberty do not seek out a job that allows them to limit liberty.

    That's why libertarians will always lose. They tend not to seek out power and they tend to sit out elections where the only choices are evil.

  • califernian||

    I don't think that's exactly right.

    Politicians literally say anything to get elected and pretty much bend to the whim of the majority in all things.

    If the majority of people hated busybody laws, nannystatism, and the police state, we wouldn't have all that.

    But we do. Because people vote for it.

  • sarcasmic||

    If the majority of people hated busybody laws, nannystatism, and the police state, we wouldn't have all that.

    If the only people who run for office are busybodies and nannies, then that's what you get.

    Though I must say, I do like the town I live in. The local government is not populated with busybodies. Quite the opposite.

    Short story. They recently legalized fireworks in the state, but let cities and towns add further restrictions. Thing is, it takes a city or town police force to enforce city or town ordinances. State police and sheriffs enforce state law, and state law says fireworks are legal.

    So when some lady at the town meeting complained about her shell-shocked kitty cats and asked the town council to limit fireworks, he politely informed her that even if such an ordinance was passed they couldn't enforce it because the town has no police of its own. Then he reminded her that the people of the town like it that way.

    Someone suggested earmuffs for the cat.

  • prolefeed||

    If the only people who run for office are busybodies and nannies, then that's what you get.

    Yeah, but when the voters get a choice between busybodies and nannies, and full-on libertarians, the libertarians get trounced pretty much every single time.

    The vast majority of voters don't believe in having much freedom.

  • Robert||

    That's because the busybodies and nannies aren't full-on. Radicals lose to moderates.

  • prolefeed||

    Where do you live? I'd like to move there if I can find a job.

  • sarcasmic||

    No jobs. My commute is almost a hundred miles a day. Speaking of which... signing out.

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    I would have suggested offs for her to fuck.

  • Fluffy||

    The whole reason the cats are shellshocked is because of the fireworks ban.

    If there were fireworks every day, they'd get the fuck over it.

    Do you think that anywhere in Baghdad there's a single cat that jumps when a bomb goes off? I doubt it. I bet the cats yawn and say, "Unfortunately some poor cat just lost their slave to another one of those tiresome explosions. Oh dear!" and then roll over and lick their own ass.

  • Mainer2||

    Don't you live somewhere in the northeast ? Where, may I ask is this town without a police force of it's own. I may consider moving there.

  • Duke||

    But why are the successful ones always enacting freedom limiting laws such as this? It certainly has to something to do with voter preference.

    "And Satan led Jesus up and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. And the devil said to Him, "I will give You all this domain and its glory; for it has been handed over to me, and I give it to whomever I wish. Therefore if You worship before me, it shall all be Yours." And Jesus answered and said to him, "It is written, 'You shall worship the Lord your God and serve Him only'"

    "In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.”

    That’s why.

  • Marshall Gill||

    So you are saying it is Epi's fault? I suspected as much!

  • Finrod||

    As South Park put it, almost every election is between some douche and some turd.

  • ||

    The police in America today are evil.

    Well of course. When you create a job where the most perverse incentives are in place, you will get the worst possible people for the job. Whether it is politician, policeman, or priest, eventually the last people you ever want in that job will figure out that that job lets them do exactly what they want to do, whether that's beat people for not respecting their authority, diddling little boys, or being able to fuck over people you don't like and take bribes.

  • Hyperion||

    Only because they are doing the bidding of an evil government.

  • R C Dean||

    So, zey are chust followink orders?

  • Pro Libertate||

    Were the biscuits made with GMO wheat?

  • ||

    More importantly, were they made with dumpstered ingredients?

    I am unsure of the ethics of that. On the one hand, if you dumpster dive when you don't need to you're basically making less food available for the homeless.

    On the other hand, you're signalling your proggy cultural cache.

    Conflict.

  • Dweebston||

    Worse: beef patties. Even the homeless need to watch their cholesterol.

  • Live Free or Diet||

  • Dweebston||

    We're talking Statist bureaucracy, here. If the FDA, USDA, ODPHP, or the Ad Council says so, that flies. Counterveiling evidence need not apply.

  • ||

    Well of course, according to the commentariat, what they should be able to do is drive up with the Church Bus and run a Free Food Truck day. Every day. All day. Forever. Why not? There's a parking space there.

  • Andrew S.||

    I see no problem with them doing that.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    OK, I'll bite: why not, indeed?

  • ||

    Because, shop owners, of course.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    The same shop owners who want no part of having the homeless in their businesses in the first place?

  • sarcasmic||

    The same shop owners who would have the homeless run out of town.

  • R C Dean||

    As long as the parking space is either (a) on private property with the owner's permission or (b) public parking, I got no problem.

  • robc||

    Exactly.

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    I would say parking spaces on a public right of way in front of a business should belong to the business. Its right of way, not right of parking lot. That goes for parades, street fairs, marches, and all that other non-travel bullshit, too.

  • R C Dean||

    I would say parking spaces on a public right of way in front of a business should belong to the business.

    Which is it? Public parking (parking spaces on a public right of way) or private parking (belong to the business)?

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    That depends how many rights the landowner ceded to "the public" when the road was originally dedicated. Most dedications don't say anything about parking, so its questionable.

  • ||

    So, you're saying I can't park in front of Avery's if I'm shopping at Marshall's half a block down? And if I shop at Avery's and then Marshall's I need to move my car?

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    Technically "public right of ways" (a form of easement) are dedicated to the public explicitly for purposes of travel, so all other uses of the right of way by the public would be at the discretion of the adjacent property owner if the precedent regarding right of ways still meant anything in this country.

  • robc||

    If that is the case, they shouldnt contain parking spaces at all.

  • robc||

    MP is Tulpa?

  • ||

    :P

    No. But I still don't happen to agree that the mere existence of a public space means that the state is unable to regulate it's precise use.

    And that's the same for the park issue here. There's no difference between setting up a free food distribution and setting up an on site semi-permanent restaurant. Now, you can write an exception to the regulation for charitable events, but you'll still always have some boundaries.

    What the commentariat believes in is apparently no boundaries with regard to usage of public land, and I just don't get that.

  • robc||

    I wouldnt say no boundaries. Whoever said parking on the interstate was okay is stupid.

    But, for example, with food trucks, if parking is okay in a space, then a food truck can park there.

    That is limiting the space to "parking", but doesnt stop the food truck from parking.

    And if its okay for anyone to eat in the park, then handing out food is okay, and thus selling it is okay. Im fine with vendors in public parks.

    Its a PUBLIC PARK.

  • robc||

    Real world example. Lets say Im on a hypothetical date than involves a picnic in a park. Can I give me date food? Of course.

    And thus, I can give a homeless guy food.

    And thus I can sell food, because I dont see how commerce changes any thing.

  • ||

    Because by your example I could show up with a movable fairground and run a fair in the park parking lot every day forever.

    I could show up with an army of workers and temporary tables and run a restaurant there forever.

    And I can think of all sorts of other examples that don't involve permanent structures.

  • Fluffy||

    I could show up with an army of workers and temporary tables and run a restaurant there forever.

    If you don't want me to do that, you could just ban picnics.

    But you don't WANT to do that, because one yuppie handing another yuppie a Snapple is what YOU want to see in the park, but a church member handing a homeless guy a cup of coffee is what YOU don't want to see in the park.

    So you invent ultimately meaningless administrative distinctions that don't remotely constitute differences in kind. And then get all bent out of shape when we refuse to respect them immediately as we must respect all holy writ of the state.

  • robc||

    WHAT FLUFFY SAID

  • ||

    But you don't WANT to do that, because one yuppie handing another yuppie a Snapple is what YOU want to see in the park, but a church member handing a homeless guy a cup of coffee is what YOU don't want to see in the park.

    I've never once expressed my wants. The issue is a right to regulate. robc put up no meaningful boundary. Even a parking space is a regulated use. The Commentariat wants to provide a blanket, minimal definition for parking/park/etc. while not recognizing that the mere existence of the definition constitutes regulation. Otherwise, I could park/drive/ride/shit/drill anywhere, because it's all simply land for use as anyone in the public sees fit.

    I've yet to read anything from the commentariat that convinces me that all of the boundaries are not arbitrary. Most around here simply have a preference for super wide boundaries. But that's still just a preference and not a fundamental truth.

  • robc||

    All man-made boundaries are arbitrary. duh.

    But if the park rule is "you may eat food in the park" then that applies to me, my date, and random bums.

  • robc||

    Of course, there is the obvious solution: No public parks.

  • Robert||

    You imply that we can distinguish you & your date from random bums, else why use different words?

  • Rights-Minimalist Autocrat||

    The issue is a right to regulate.

    This would be one of your premises that requires checking.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    But you don't WANT to do that, because one yuppie handing another yuppie a Snapple is what YOU want to see in the park, but a church member handing a homeless guy a cup of coffee is what YOU don't want to see in the park.

    A church member handing a cup of coffee to a homeless guy would not have been cracked down on. The crowds are the problem, and if you've lived in a decent-sized city the past few years you're familiar with these well-meaning but foolish activities resulting in harassment by bums and denial of use of the park for normal people.

    As Peter Bagge once noted, it's like putting down bits of cheese all over your house and wondering why you have a mouse problem.

  • ||

    resulting in harassment by bums and denial of use of the park for normal people.

    If that is actually the case, the cops should show up at the park and enforce the existing laws against harassment, loitering, assault, public lewdness, vagrancy, etc etc - not show up at the park and COMMIT harassment, assault, etc etc.

  • robc||

    Because by your example I could show up with a movable fairground and run a fair in the park parking lot every day forever.

    Only if the movable fairground is in a vehicle like with a food truck.

    If so, sure.

    I mean, if people are enjoying it, why the fuck not? If the public wants tiny parking lot rides, go for it.

    I could show up with an army of workers and temporary tables and run a restaurant there forever.

    Sure, Im all for vendors in public parks. If the public doesnt like it, dont spend dollars and it will go away.

  • mr simple||

    Can I give me date food?

    Are you a pirate in this hypothetical?

  • robc||

    Are you a pirate in this hypothetical?

    Possibly. This may not be entirely hypothetical, but I dont know if she is into that kind of thing yet.

  • Almanian!||

    robc - ALWAYS with the pirate cosplay.

  • SugarFree||

    If she didn't want to date a pirate, she should have said so on her match.com profile.

  • robc||

    If she didn't want to date a pirate, she should have said so on her match.com profile.

    This was a blind date setup. In my experience, that is even worse than an online situation, but in this case, it seems to be off to a good start.

    The picnic is a hypothetical, but not entirely out of play yet.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Not pirate. Leprechaun.

  • robc||

    No.

    Im still trying to see how you arent Tulpa. You are saying the exact same thing.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    Right, robc: whenever multiple people who disagree with you, it's really just one person using a bunch of different names.

  • R C Dean||

    There's no difference between setting up a free food distribution and setting up an on site semi-permanent restaurant.

    Sure there is. A weekly distribution of food for charity is a completely different animal than a semi-permanent restaurant.

  • robc||

    Sure there is. A weekly distribution of food for charity is a completely different animal than a semi-permanent restaurant.

    Im not sure I agree. I dont see much difference at all between the charity and a hot dog vendor, for example.

    A lot depends on what is meant by "semi-permanent". A "structure" probably crosses the line at some point, even if torn down every night.

    Unless day structures are typically allowed in the park.

  • Jaybirdmojo||

    Was the coffee fair trade?

  • From the Tundra||

    More importantly, did the sausage come from pigs not subjected to gestational stalls?

  • Almanian!||

    PIGS??? GROSS!

    It's gluten-free, cruelty-free TURKEY sausage made in cruelty-free locations by volunteers, who only use turkeys who died from natural causes.

    It costs $7000/lb, and tastes terrible.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    But remember, people are incapable of voluntarily organizing a way to help the less fortunate without the benevolent hand of government creating a bureaucracy run on looted money to manage it.

  • kinnath||

    Fuck You That's Why

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Do you want ants? Because that's how you get ants.

  • Raston Bot||

    I love ants. They clean up my messy counter.

  • Almanian!||

    Ants are the orphan workers of the insect world.

  • ||

    Should have gone and set up on the steps of City Hall. Call it a demonstration.

  • mr simple||

    Only if they have a permit for demonstrations with the proper forms showing they paid the fees.

  • Matrix||

    The reverend wrote that the police refused to explain what ordinance they were actually violating.
    They don't know, and they don't care. You can be arrested for anything, and they will come up with something to charge you with.

  • Finrod||

    Clearly they're violating the FYTW ordinance. Every town seems to have one.

  • ||

    Maybe they should have been handing out donuts instead.

    And I know it's totally easy to say this when I'm not in the position, but that reverend should have told the cop to get bent (in a more jesus like manner) and started passing them out.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    Jesus would have.

  • The Deacon||

    The Sevo signal has been lit.

  • Live Free or Diet||

    "And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables;"

  • robc||

    But that was on his own private property.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    Clearly a public accommodation. And interregion commerce.

  • SugarFree||

    Without some documentation that he was the Son of God and a will of some sort (assuming God passed on), Jesus would have a tough time proving ownership in court.

  • SugarFree||

    Jesus would have.

    Hmm... Infinite fish biscuits...

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    McDonalds is Jesus? Who else is turning bread into fishsticks?

  • SugarFree||

    No, I was think more of fried fish fillet on a biscuit. Damn, that sounds good.

  • robc||

    First 7000 customers eat free.

  • Pro Libertate||

    How is it they haven't done this yet? I mean, they have the Fillet 'o Fish. They have the biscuit.

    Next up? McGriddle 'o Fish.

  • robc||

    Theyve only been doing the chicken biscuit for about 2 years or so.

    BTW, when traveling east on I-64 towards West Virginia, the last exit before getting to Ashland, KY has a McDonalds that uses non-standard biscuits. Clearly an employee said "Fuck this, I know how to make real biscuits" and started making them from scratch every morning.

    I recommend sausage biscuits from that specific McDonalds.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Sure, chicken on a biscuit. So why not fish?

    Good biscuits are a good thing.

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    McDonald's franchise oversight department has been notified of this discrepancy and will initiate corrective action promptly. Thank you for your concern.

  • Pro Libertate||

    They must allow some regional variations--I've seen them many times over the years. Some spread pretty far or even go national, like sweet tea.

  • SugarFree||

    The national variations are more extreme. Big Macs on baguettes. Mango fried pie. Fillet O' Shrimp. Fried cheese wrap.

    Also... bring this to America!

    Bakehouse Brekkie Roll - Australia

    Bacon, egg, a slice of cheese, golden potato rosti and onion relish on a sourdough roll.
  • Pro Libertate||

    Yes, I saw some strange variances in Malaysia, though I was still able to get a cheeseburger with fries, and a (sugar!) Coke with virtually no ice.

  • Shock G||

    I sang on Doowutchyalike, and if ya missed it, I'm the one who said "just grab 'em in the biscuits!"

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    We need more people like Shock G on this board.

  • ||

    I hate fillet o' fish.

    *ducks for cover*

  • sarcasmic||

    Maybe the reverend has survival instincts or something crazy like that.

  • ||

    Probably. Like I said, I can't say I wouldn't do the same.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Guilty of annoying somebody is what it boils down to.

  • Blinded by the Derp||

    Columbia SC is also annoyed by the homeless
    http://www.newser.com/story/17.....-them.html

    That or they do not want to pay for paper targets anymore for the PD.

  • sarcasmic||

    re-posting my comment on the 24/7 story:

    Well if that food wasn't made in an inspected and licensed facility with prior permission from the health department using government approved recipes, how can anyone be sure that it isn't poison?

  • ||

    We should set up a government agency that inspects donated food. Just to be sure.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    OMG you're so right. They don't have any papers. For that matter, my mom doesn't have any permits either. Holy shit, she could have killed me and the government didn't do anything to protect me at all. I demand action!

  • sarcasmic||

    It's the same reason you're not supposed to feed the pigeons. If you feed them they keep coming back.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Raleigh doesn't want them feeding homeless because then you have visible homeless in Raleigh. Public parks are for people with fixed addresses.

  • some guy||

    Simple solution: Stack the biscuits and coffee neatly in park trash cans. Wink at homeless and flip off the cops as you leave.

  • sarcasmic||

    I'm sure there are ordinances about picking stuff out of the trash.

  • ||

    I'd have paid cash money to see that. However, I'm quite sure someone would have gotten beaten for it.

  • Hyperion||

    NR, but... has anyone heard that Matt Damon and the Prez have broken up?

    Matt Damon breaks up with the messiah, over Snowden

    Damon has rather fallen out of love with the current US government. He recently told BET of President Obama: "He broke up with me."

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Hoooooooly shit. There is a limit to his stupidity.

    MATT DAMON!

  • John||

    Someone needs to tell Damon and Jarvis the same thing. Too fucking bad. You helped him get re-elected, so no one including Obama gives a shit what you and other aggrieved liberals think. Everyone knows how you will be voting in the next and every other election. So no one gives a shit what you think.

  • ||

    To be more accurate:

    no one gives a shit what you think feel.

    The original implies thought.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Your tax dollars hard at work, helping the poorest and most vulnerable Americans!

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Everyone wants to be a victim.

    Not I, said the ratfucker.

  • SugarFree||

    Hate the game, not the playa.

  • Pro Libertate||

    On slow days like this, we should comment in Latin. Using Google Translate to read and to comment. No English.

  • Guy LaGuy||

    En malrapida tagojn kiel ĉi tiu, ni devus diri en latino. Uzante Google Translate por legi kaj komenti. Ne angla.

  • Pro Libertate||

    No fake languages.

  • robc||

    Hitaissa päivää näin, meidän pitäisi kommentoida latinaksi. Google-kääntäjän avulla lukea ja kommentoida. Ei Englanti.

  • Pro Libertate||

    It's my game, and I said Latin.

  • Guy LaGuy||

    Someoen vita nihil potes facere meliores te oporteat facere.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Accende intus stupam repetere.

  • tarran||

    Someoen vita nihil potes facere meliores te oporteat facere.

    Google Translate prohibetur!

  • robc||

    As languages go, Finnish is actually damn far from Latin, IIRC.

  • Hyperion||

    There are lots of Latin based words in English. So let's just go with English, problem solved.

  • Hyperion||

    Nao podemos falar Ingles? Eu tenho um triste ):

    Dude, no one speaks Latin, except ... maybe the pope? This will be really fucked up.

  • Hyperion||

    Ok, at least my effort is a language based on one of those perverted Latin languages concocted by the uncivilized barbarian hordes...

  • Pro Libertate||

    Monstra mihi tuum mammis.

  • Guy LaGuy||

    Pro Libertate dalenda est.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Ego occidam te ultimum.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    That's the motto on my family crest, by the way.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Monstra mihi tuum mammis I meant. The blazon is just a portrait of Kat Dennings.

  • Finrod||

    Personally I like posting things in rot13 (a-n, b-o, ... m-z, n-a, etc). It used to be a standard on Usenet to post offensive jokes in rot13 so that to read it you had to choose to descramble it.

  • Finrod||

    Between the letters there are supposed to be arrows, not just hyphens. Silly HTML.

  • Rights-Minimalist Autocrat||

    Romanes eunt domus.

  • R C Dean||

    Hate the game, not the playa.

    My hatred is vast, and contains worlds.

  • John||

    Basically this is looking at homeless people the same way we do pigeons. If you feed them, more will show up and cause a bigger problem. At some level I can understand that. But maybe we ought to think about better ways of dealing with the homeless than going after people who feed them.

    If it is so bad for these people to feed them, maybe we ought to rethink sending them welfare checks.

  • sarcasmic||

    As someone who was homeless for a few months one year when my lease ran out and my employer folded in the same month, I can tell you that the government doesn't do shit for the homeless other than harass them.
    Thing is, to get welfare or anything like that, you must totally submit to your masters. Many homeless people are that way because they are defiant and lack respect for authority. That's why cops beat them up so much.

  • John||

    The problem is that there are three types of homeless people. There are people like you who don't want to be homeless and have just had a bad break. Then there are people who are mentally ill and are just fucking out of it. Then there are people who are just bums who would rather beg and be a bum than work or have any responsibility.

    We don't do shit for homeless people because we never tailor any help for the first type or admit the obvious about the second type. We have to treat them all the same in the name of fairness. There ought to be programs that give anyone who is homeless a chance to get out of it. And anyone who says they would rather be a bum, ought to be told to go fucking starve.

  • sarcasmic||

    Also, that experience of being homeless is part of what turned me into a libertarian.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Also, that experience of being homeless is part of what turned me into a libertarian.

    Wait, are you suggesting that you don't forever owe your life to the government because of the SOCIAL SAFETY NET!!!!!!!

    Which obviously so was effective in your case.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    But welfare is untainted public money and can only have good effects.

  • Guy LaGuy||

    Feeding the poor is something only the government can do.

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    The town where I currently reside had a bit of a bum infestation a few years back. Somebody went around and spray painted slogans such as "do not feed the bums" on sidewalks everywhere. Cleared that right up.

  • John||

    Whenever there is a bum infestation, crime goes up. While I wouldn't support the police stopping them, I certainly wouldn't encourage a nearby church to feed the bums. If they want to feed the bums do it off premises.

  • sarcasmic||

    Churches feeding bums is private charity in action. I totally support it.

  • John||

    I would never tell them not to. That is for sure. I am not sure just handing out food does much good though. I think they need to be doing t hings to give people a way out of that.

    The thing is most honest people end up homeless because of our fucked up land lord tenant laws. It is not a coincidence that there are more homeless people in cities that have really pro tenant real estate laws. In those states landlords, since it is so hard to kick someone out, make you come up with all kinds of security and will often refuse to rent to someone with bad credit. So someone who doesn't have first and last months rent in cash laying around and how has bad credit is fucked. They can't live anywhere.

  • prolefeed||

    It's more than that. There are all sorts of building codes and regulations that price people out of the market.

    For instance, you can't build and rent rental spaces that are 6' by 4' with shared bathrooms and kitchens, which would drop monthly rents down to $100 or less. Almost anyone could scrape up that kind of change and end homelessness for anyone who actually wants a roof over their head.

  • John||

    That too. In most cities there is not such thing as cheap housing. One of the favorite indoor outdoor sports of asshole liberals is making fun of trailer parks. Nothing more worthy of ridicule than providing cheap housing to people who need it.

  • prolefeed||

    When I met my GF, she was living in a converted room that was 6' by 13', including bathroom and hot plate for cooking. Totally illegal, but that was what she could afford.

  • Hyperion||

    So your GF is from Tokyo?

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    "6' by 4' with shared bathrooms and kitchens"

    Big government wishes to maintain its monopoly on arranging for the homeless to live in those kinds of accommodations.

  • John||

    And if we just move the poor people somewhere else, they will go away. Liberals really believe that. They will go in and gentrify an area and thing the poor people who live there will somehow not be poor because they are living by special white people. See, poor people are just poor because of bad luck. and having a lucky white person next door gives you better luck.

  • ||

    Seattle has, I shit you not, "wethousing", which is they give the hobos a place to stay and give them some alcohol. They might have finally stopped doing this but I had a co-worker whose ex-wife had been a social worker in Seattle and quit because she couldn't believe the shit they were doing.

    Of course, at the end of the day its true purpose was a jobs program for people with social science degrees.

  • John||

    Wow. I am told that in San Fransisco the bums are quite aggressive. Thanks to the social worker advocate it is basically impossible for the police or anyone else to do anything about it.

  • ||

    Seattle bums can be very aggressive. My carry gun is much more potentially for a crazy hobo than for a mugger.

  • John||

    I would say a crazy bum is the most likely use for your weapon. Bums don't bother me too much because I am young and enough and big enough that they don't look at me as being worth the effort. But if you are old or a woman or a smallish man, they are like lions going after a sick wildebeest.

  • ||

    John, I'm six feet tall and 205 lbs. And I've seen a hobo who must have been at least 6'5" and 250-270 lbs raging out on a trash dumpster and smashing it with shit near a bus stop. Let me assure you that the people at that bus stop were either reaching for their guns or wishing they had one.

    The hobos here are often crazy enough that even if they're smaller, they're crazy enough to do anything. I don't care if I'm bigger, if they pull a knife I'm in big trouble without a gun.

  • John||

    Very true. I haven't ever run into a truly crazy one. But if I lived in a place like Seattle or San Fran, I would carry a gun.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Yeah, dude, "hobo strength" is actually a level above "retard strength".

  • Almanian!||

    six feet tall and 205 lbs

    We have met derpfee, and he is....Episiarch.

    Why don't you go do some Olympic Fairchild Surfing, tuff gai?

  • lap83||

    They have wethouses in my hometown of Minneapolis too.
    http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH.....index.html
    "The residents receive a monthly check of $89, and most of it goes to alcohol."

  • lap83||

    I credit living in Minneapolis just out of high school with my transformation to being a libertarian. Even as a poor college student I would give spare change to homeless people until I was tired of the attitude and sense of entitlement I got from all of them. They would try to fucking upsell me on my donation "If you give me more money I can take the express bus to the shelter" me: "You don't sound very grateful" Her: "I'm grateful, I just don't know why you won't let me take the express bus" Me: "No, you're ungrateful. Leave me alone"
    Then I had the realization that anyone who deserved my help was probably too dignified to ask for it. The entitled, lazy assholes are the only ones who request money.

  • prolefeed||

    So, if you could show that whenever you had a "black infestation" in a neighborhood, crime rates went up, then you would support forcibly removing the black residents from that neighborhood?

    Do you ever read your posts and ask yourself if maybe you are kind of statist?

  • John||

    Do you ever read my posts at all? Where did I ever say that we should forcibly remove anyone?

    While I wouldn't support the police stopping them, I certainly wouldn't encourage a nearby church to feed the bums. If they want to feed the bums do it off premises.

    Not seeing anywhere in that where I say anyone should be forced to do anything.

    Ever ask yourself if maybe you are kind of retarded?

  • prolefeed||

    Whenever there is a bum infestation, crime goes up.

    Using the phrase "bum infestation" sounds kind of dickish. You're talking about human beings, many like sarcasmic. just sayin.

    While I wouldn't support the police stopping them, I certainly wouldn't encourage a nearby church to feed the bums.

    And when the church members inevitably ignore you because they feel that helping the poor is doing what Jesus told them to do, then what?

  • John||

    And when the church members inevitably ignore you because they feel that helping the poor is doing what Jesus told them to do, then what?

    That is just too fucking bad for me. Sometimes people do shitty things.

  • prolefeed||

    Trying to figure out which branch of Christianity you belong to that teaches that feeding the poor and downtrodden is doing "shitty things". My copy of the New Testament seems to praise that sort of thing. Perhaps it is a bad translation.

    Luke 14:13-14 ESV

    "But when you give a feast, don't invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed, because feeding bums and having them infest your neighborhood is a shitty thing to do to your neighbors. Drive those bums off, and you will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.”

    Is that how your Bible reads?

  • John||

    That doesn't mean feeding them there is the best idea. The point is to help them not enable them. Rather than spend their time handing out food, something that is easy and makes them feel good, perhaps they ought to spend time working with individual people providing help that gets them on their feet.

    Sadly the world is not so simple. There really are lousy people out there. And when you invite homeless people into your neighborhood, the crime rate goes up and other people suffer. Life sucks like that sometime. If we could solve these problems by handing our free food and making ourselves feel good, we would have solved them a long time ago.

  • Finrod||

    My version of the Bible says "Do not cast your pearls before swine".

  • Rights-Minimalist Autocrat||

    The bible was written 17 centuries before Adam Smith, which makes it about as useful as an economics text as it is as a science text.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    And when the church members inevitably ignore you because they feel that helping the poor is doing what Jesus told them to do, then what?

    I'd tell them to help the poor on their own damn property.

  • R C Dean||

    If they want to feed the bums do it off premises.

    NIMBYism. Perhaps the lowest form of civic participation.

  • John||

    There is nothing wrong with having poor neighborhoods. Poor people don't magically become better off when you move a lucky white person in next door to them.

  • Hyperion||

    I can't figure out why the messiah hasn't cured this homelessness yet. The least he could do would be to invite all of them to come to the whitehouse and hang out with him and Jay Z and Beyoncé, where they can be served wonderful and nutritious foods from the queens garden.

    It's probably just because Obama is unaware that there are homeless people. Maybe if the homeless are lucky, he learn about their plight on the TV.

  • ||

    I know it's easy for my to be an armchair cowboy here, but too bad the guy didn't go ahead and get arrested for feeding a biscuit to a homeless person. I would've been happy to have that on my CV.

  • Guy LaGuy||

    The problem with food distribution being voluntary is troubling, because it makes it seem like it's up to you if another person has enough to eat.

  • BiteMe||

    No. You have it backwards. The problem with COMPULSORY food distribution is it MAKES you responsible for EVERYBODY. Voluntary means you see a need and you meet it - if you choose to. Just because you volunteer to do something, it doesn't mean you're responsible for it. It means you either have a heart, or you have the ability to meet another human being's need.

  • ||

    You're the worst character ever Guy.

  • lap83||

    That comment certainly puts the tard in progtard.

  • H. ReardEn||

    Feeding of the homeless was ongoing for 6 years. One would think the the church pastor, a supposedly upstanding member of the community, deserved a little more discretion than show. But how can the police rack up overtime on a Saturday when the chief invites the pastor to the station for a discussion of the legality of his charitable activities?

  • John||

    I am frankly surprised they didn't use a SWAT team. The SWAT team must have already maxed out its overtime for the month.

    But notice the story says "officers". So apparently it takes a whole group of our brave servants to deal with a dangerous group of church going do gooders.

  • Hyperion||

    Maybe one of the zealots said something about the constitution and got on the terrorist list.

    I've had about enough of this Christian Taliban feeding homeless and blowing shit up.

  • Hyperion||

  • ||

    I missed his interview with Garibaldi the other day but heard the lead in to it.

    My assumption was that this book was promoting the "Conventions" portion of Article 5?

    Anybody read it?

  • ||

    Mark Levin is a radio host and a Constitutional scholar. Invoking Article V of the Constitution, which sets out methods for amendments, Levin has proposed a number of changes to term limits, taxation, restoring states' power and more.
    ...For those who think that this kind of centralized power is dangerous and even tyrannical, Levin's amendments seek to address the power that the Federal government has arrogated unto itself, a power that never was the original intent of the Founding Fathers and which reduces individual liberty significantly.
    Levin's amendments include:

    1. Term limits, including for justices.
    2. Repealing Amendment 17 and returning the election of senators to state legislatures
    3. A congressional supermajority to override Supreme Court decisions (overruling what could be a stacked court)
    4. Spending limit based on GDP
    5. Taxation capped at 15%
    6. Limiting the commerce clause, and strengthening private property rights
    7. Power of states to override a federal statute by a three-fifths vote.

    These ideas will be opposed by those who favor central planning and a very powerful federal government, who believe that a few should decide the fate of many, who like the current system and the way it's headed.
  • The Late P Brooks||

    The problem with food distribution being voluntary is troubling, because it makes it seem like it's up to you if another person has enough to eat.

    I thought for a moment you had become self-aware, and it frightened me.

  • Almanian!||

    I'm not understanding why they didn't just feed the people in their church? They don't have a building? It's not big enough?

    "Come in for a prayer service - OBTW, we'll be serving bisquits and coffee in Fellowship Hall after the service...."

    Yeah, it's not taking on the statists - but it's getting the people fed.

    Too lazy to read the article - maybe it's in there... fuck it.

  • Guy LaGuy||

    You can't ask someone to sit through a religious service just to give them food.
    It's reprehensible.

  • John||

    Yeah because no one ever got off the skids via religion. Nope. There are not millions of former drug addicts and drunks and various other former degenerates who stopped being so do to the exposure to religion.

    Do you have problems tying your shoes? Feeding yourself? Remembering to breath? If not, it is amazing that someone with your low IQ can function so well.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    You can't ask someone to sit through a religious service just to give them food.

    Why not? Missionaries of all faiths do it all the time. Not to mention that giving free food after a religious service is a daily part of the Sikh religion. Many Muslim religious organizations also give free food after Ramadan services.

  • lap83||

    But it's perfectly fine to ask for someone's undying political fealty in exchange for welfare, right?

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    Can you ask someone to sit in a cubicle for 40 hours a week if they want to eat?

  • Killazontherun||

    Raleigh is really spread out. Most cities here are. I don't know where the church is in location to the area being served, but likely on the outskirts of town as most decent sized churches are there. Probably as a matter of convenience to the homeless.

  • BiteMe||

    I'd have fed them, gone to jail for it and then dealt with the repercussions.

    We must obey God rather than men. ~ Acts 5:29

  • The Late P Brooks||

    This is why cops need APCs; a mob of pissed-off ravenous bums, with their superhuman bum strength, would go through that gaggle of baboons like Sherman went through the Georgia countryside.

  • OldMexican||

    They were also told they needed a permit to use the park, which would cost $800 a day.


    Heigh-Ho!

    Heigh-Ho!

    Heigh-Ho! Heigh-Ho! It's the park we go to extort!

    (whistle)

    Heigh-Ho! Heigh-Ho!
    Heigh-Ho! Heigh-Ho! Heigh-Ho!

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement