Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Politics

California Lawmaker Proposes "Homeless Bill of Rights" to Legalize Pissing on the Street

Matt Welch | 1.4.2013 11:48 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Reports the Sacramento Bee:

The heart of Assembly Bill 5 would give legal protection to people engaging in life-sustaining activities on public property. Among other activities, it specifically mentions sleeping, congregating, panhandling, urinating and "collecting and possessing goods for recyling, even if those goods contain alcoholic residue." […]

[The] measure also would give homeless residents the right to sleep in cars that are legally parked, to receive funds through public welfare programs, to receive legal counsel when cited – even for infractions – and to possess personal property on public lands. Local officials could not force the homeless into shelters or social service programs. […]

The bill states that homeless Californians have the right to safe, affordable housing and 24-hour access to clean water and safe restrooms, but Paul Boden, a spokesman for one of its sponsors, said the measure is not meant to require cities and counties to add new facilities.

Boden and other advocates of AB5 say that existing laws to sweep the homeless from public view are similar to Jim Crow laws of decades ago in the segregated South, and to "anti-Okie" laws of the 1930s that prohibited bringing extremely poor people into California.

No reaction yet from Twilight actor Bronson Pelletier. Link via the Twitter feed of Josh Barro.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: John Boehner Wants to Use Debt Ceiling Debate to Force Spending Cuts

Matt Welch is an editor at large at Reason.

PoliticsPolicyCaliforniaHomelessness
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (64)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. kinnath   12 years ago

    Or California could get rid of public property.

    1. Paul.   12 years ago

      Done!

  2. Fist of Etiquette   12 years ago

    “The streets are flooded with the ejaculate of the homeless, and you people are counting on the police?”

    Also, the homeless don’t vote. What’s the incentive for a bill of rights?

    1. Whiterun Guard   12 years ago

      But the bleeding hearts who desperately feel ‘we’ need to help them vote. And vote often!

    2. Certified Public Asskicker   12 years ago

      The streets are flooded with the ejaculate of the homeless

      Beating off is a right!

      1. bmp1701   12 years ago

        “A well-shined dong, being necessary to the disgust of teen girls at the bus stop, the right to publicly bear and fondle your schwanz, shall not be infringed.”

        There. Now we can spend 100 years arguing if you can only only beat off in a public place if you do so in order to disgust schoolgirls.

        1. bmp1701   12 years ago

          Scratch one “only.” I couldn’t help myself; once I did wrote it, I had to write it again.

          1. bmp1701   12 years ago

            And now scratch “did” from the above. Christ, once you start fucking up your sentences, you just can’t stop.

            1. Aresen   12 years ago

              A Lutheran Pastor told me something similar about “touching yourself” when I was a kid.

              HE WAS RIGHT!!!

      2. SugarFree   12 years ago

        A cop I know told me the story of breaking up a bum fight only to discover they were having sex using a plastic grocery bag as a condom.

        1. bmp1701   12 years ago

          You mean, one was wearing the bag? The Naked Gun is now nonfictional, I guess.

          1. SugarFree   12 years ago

            He even told me exactly where in the park. It’s now an ice skating rink. Perhaps a luck 10-year-old is pirouetting over it as we speak.

            1. Groovus Maximus   12 years ago

              I, for one, am thoroughly impressed they actually had the wherewithal to practice safe sex (or something at least in the ballpark).

              1. SugarFree   12 years ago

                It makes you watch that scene in American Beauty with whole new eyes.

        2. John Galt   12 years ago

          We have the most sexually responsible bums in the world. I just swell with pride hearing stories like these.

  3. Whiterun Guard   12 years ago

    Oh please oh please oh please let this pass.

    1. Paul.   12 years ago

      let this pass

      I see what you did there.

  4. LTC(ret) John   12 years ago

    Good to see Kaliforneeyah is keeping its priotities straight.

    Also, “but Paul Boden, a spokesman for one of its sponsors, said the measure is not meant to require cities and counties to add new facilities.”

    To Mr. Boden I have only one thing to say to rebut your assertion – ADA.

  5. Rights-Minimalist Autocrat   12 years ago

    The bill states that homeless Californians have the right to safe, affordable housing and 24-hour access to clean water and safe restrooms, but Paul Boden, a spokesman for one of its sponsors, said the measure is not meant to require cities and counties to add new facilities.

    Uh huh. Foreseeable, not unintended, yada yada.

    1. Drake   12 years ago

      But if they have housing…

      1. John   12 years ago

        But most homeless don’t want housing. They are bums. They like living on the streets, begging and spending their money on booze or drugs.

        1. sarcasmic   12 years ago

          Sadly, you are correct. I learned this in the six months or so that I was homeless.

          There are people who are temporarily homeless due to crappy circumstances, like losing a job and being unable to pay rent. That’s the boat I was in. Those people will not be homeless for long because they find it unpleasant.

          Then there are those who make it a lifestyle. And they like it. No one to answer to. No responsibility. No ties. Hungry? Go to a church, shelter or soup kitchen. Want money? There’s always a need for day labor. Tired of the town you’re in? Move. It’s not like you’re tied to anything. Any effort to house those people will ultimately fail. Good luck getting liberals to accept that, though. Intentions trump results.

          1. John   12 years ago

            I lost my innocence about homeless when I moved to Washington and talked to the bums outside of the restaurant where my then girlfriend worked. They all were quite honest about how they could make $8 an hour begging, sleep in the shelter, get free meals and pretty much have all the money they needed for whatever drugs or booze they liked.

            And yes, some honest people do end up homeless. And those we should help. But the rest of them, can fucking die for all I care.

            1. sarcasmic   12 years ago

              And yes, some honest people do end up homeless. And those we should help.

              How do you tell the difference and how do you help them?

              1. John   12 years ago

                That is easy. The ones who are honest are happy to take a job or a place to live or take steps to get back on their feet. The ones who are not, want no part of that.

                Like you said above, honest people find being homeless unpleasant and will do anything to get out of it. The bums think it is a preferable lifestyle.

                1. sarcasmic   12 years ago

                  So you’re saying that the ones who deserve help don’t need it, because they will help themselves. Right? If so, I agree.

                  1. John   12 years ago

                    But you can still help people who want to help themselves. There is a place for charity in the world. When you were homeless, if someone had realized your plight and offered you a place to sleep or a meal or an odd job, you would have taken it right? They would not have been wrong to take it.

                    Let me give you an example. I had a friend in law school whose father had a large business along with a sizable ranch. This was a guy who really could always find something for someone to do. Anytime he saw someone with one of those “will work for food” signs, he would stop and tell them he had a job if they were willing. Never once did he get someone to take him up on the offer. But if someone had, they would have been an example of the honest homeless, i.e. someone who wanted to work rather than beg.

                    1. sarcasmic   12 years ago

                      Someone working a sign is not going to help themselves. That is a given.

                      Round here some guy was working a sign and made the mistake of contacting the newspaper to try to gin up some pity. The reporter actually investigated the guy and found he was living in a trailer, not really homeless, unemployed because he quit his job, had an extensive police record, and was generally a scumbag. They published the story and he was never seen again.

                      Anyway, by “help” I was thinking in the context of government action. If you want to help the homeless, I’d say giving to churches is where it’s at.

            2. Redmanfms   12 years ago

              And those we should help.

              As somebody who spends enough time working for a charity organization that it is practically a second full-time job, that is the rub. Separating the grifters from those genuinely in need is essentially what I do.

              My job there is to investigate and maintain a database of “charity shoppers.” It is difficult work sometimes, because there are some people who are truly in nearly perpetual need and they aren’t always that easy to differentiate from the grifters.

              1. John   12 years ago

                To quote Joe from Lowell. Redmanfms, you really are doing Gods work in some of America’s toughest neighborhoods.

                1. Groovus Maximus   12 years ago

                  Redmanfms, you really are doing Gods work in some of America’s toughest neighborhoods.

                  He really is, John. I accepted charity cases from Catholic Charities when I was in The States, and his work is never done WRT vetting people who needed medical care but could not afford it and almost literally did not have a pot to piss into and no real assets of which to speak. You would be surprised how many people would try to game the system by feigning destitution to get a procedure done at little or no cost to them when in reality, they could either afford it or could at least set up a payment plan.

        2. EDG reppin' LBC   12 years ago

          Bingo! When I lived in Venice Beach, it became apparent that many of the homeless actually had jobs in retail, coffee shops, etc. They chose to sleep in tents on the beach so they could squander their disposable income on drugs.

          Granted there was a contingent, say about 20% that were completely insane, and could not function in normal society. But I would guess a good 50% of the “homeless” like a mobile lifestyle, sleeping in tents, and having adventures.

          1. Drake   12 years ago

            Familiarity really does breed contempt. My time in Southern California changed my mind about the homeless.

            Sure some were on a run of bad luck and looking to claw their way back into society. Most were flat-out bums. Interested in getting drunk and/or high, and generally relaxing while the rest of us work for a living.

  6. RightNut   12 years ago

    said the measure is not meant to require cities and counties to add new facilities.

    ‘Not meant to’ does not mean ‘will not’. Does California not realize they are flat fucking broke?

    1. Sevo   12 years ago

      “‘Not meant to’ does not mean ‘will not’. Does California not realize they are flat fucking broke?”

      The majority of CA voters think we can just get rid of Prop 13 and everything will be peachy.

      1. Bones   12 years ago

        I hope it happens and I can’t wait for their taxes to go through the roof. And I look forward to business leaving the state in record numbers.

        1. PapayaSF   12 years ago

          You mean “in even greater than the current record numbers.”

  7. sarcasmic   12 years ago

    I worked with an immigrant who told me that in Cuba there is no homelessness because it is a crime to refuse a comrade who knocks on your door requesting a meal and a place to sleep.
    Likewise there is no need for public transportation since it is a crime to pass a hitchhiker.

    If only California was more like Cuba.

    1. Some call me Tim?   12 years ago

      I believe it’s only mandatory for government vehicles to pick up hitchhikers, and only if they have space for them.

    2. juris imprudent   12 years ago

      Give them time, the Dems only just got their super-majority.

  8. EDG reppin' LBC   12 years ago

    California’s state and municipal parks are meant to be used as toilets and crash pads for the homeless and other degenerates. Not to be used by all taxpayers in a way that increases health, recreation, and enjoyment. See the article below for an example.

    http://la.curbed.com/archives/…..s_park.php

    1. SugarFree   12 years ago

      Apparently, parks are the government’s private property and can do as they see fit with them.

      1. John   12 years ago

        You can use it how you like. But you shouldn’t be able to use it to other people’s detriment. If homeless can use it to harass people and shit and so forth, why can’t I use it to raise cattle? It is a public park right? I know my cows shit on everything and my bull gets pretty aggressive sometimes. But fuck you SF, sue me if he stomps you. Otherwise, you can’t complain. If the homeless can live there, I can raise cattle there.

        1. SugarFree   12 years ago

          I was taking a swipe at Tulpa, John. That’s his “logic” for cities fucking over food trucks.

          1. John   12 years ago

            Sorry. I missed that.

    2. Robert   12 years ago

      Palisades Amusement Park
      Stinks all day and after dark.

  9. RightNut   12 years ago

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_hmXbLCEkE

    1. RightNut   12 years ago

      shorter version for those with ADD

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuQzkt5a2EU

  10. juris imprudent   12 years ago

    The inmates are in control of the asylum. In a sane world that would have been a link to The Onion, not the Bee.

    1. Aresen   12 years ago

      The difference between The Onion and The Bee is that the former usually runs the same story about two years earlier.

  11. Paul.   12 years ago

    Next thing you know, they’ll want to give non-homeless people a bill of rights! Where will it end?!!

    1. LTC(ret) John   12 years ago

      Does ours give us tons of free shit and access to any property we want too?!

      Hurrah, no more permits, insurance requirements, sanitation regulations or other impedimentia on public lands!

  12. albo   12 years ago

    Another step in California’s effort to legislative itself into Utopia.

    So, if they’ve basically given up and are saying, “Okay, make yourself at home outside on public land,” does this mean we can stop all that tax money we’re spending on social services?

    1. Zeb   12 years ago

      I think that would be a good compromise.

  13. SIV   12 years ago

    No “right to travel” on empty rolling stock?

    Why does the Golden Bear State hate hobos?

    1. LTC(ret) John   12 years ago

      No, no! That is coming once they finish the Sooper High Speed Rail!

  14. Night Elf Mohawk   12 years ago

    So if I read this correctly, I can soon legally transport containers with alcoholics’ residue in them?

    1. LTC(ret) John   12 years ago

      Hobo killin’ and disposin’ made easy!

  15. Mad Scientist   12 years ago

    Only in California do bums have the right piss on the beach but it’s illegal for me to toss a frisbee there.

    1. PapayaSF   12 years ago

      LOL

  16. BakedPenguin   12 years ago

    Also, I’m surprised that Matt didn’t link to this, especially since Bagge just had a piece yesterday.

  17. Enough About Palin   12 years ago

    “homeless Californians have the right to safe, affordable housing and 24-hour access to clean water and safe restrooms”

    They had all of that before “caring” activists used the courts to close down all the nervous hospitals.

  18. ChrisO   12 years ago

    So, it’s swell if homeless guys leave poop on the lawn at the public park, but a horrible crime if my dog does it. Gotcha.

    1. Aresen   12 years ago

      Well, your dog is better trained.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

The Latest Escalation Between Russia and Ukraine Isn't Changing the Course of the War

Matthew Petti | 6.6.2025 4:28 PM

Marsha Blackburn Wants Secret Police

C.J. Ciaramella | 6.6.2025 3:55 PM

This Small Business Is in Limbo As Owner Sues To Stop Trump's Tariffs

Eric Boehm | 6.6.2025 3:30 PM

A Runner Was Prosecuted for Unapproved Trail Use After the Referring Agency Called It 'Overcriminalization'

Jacob Sullum | 6.6.2025 2:50 PM

Police Blew Up This Innocent Woman's House and Left Her With the Bill. A Judge Says She's Owed $60,000.

Billy Binion | 6.6.2025 1:51 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!