Las Vegas marshals ticket 7, arrest 3 amid homeless protests

[danarhea]

Here it is, folks...... The newest compassionate Conservative idea. Feed someone who is hungry, go to jail or pay a thousand dollar fine or both. I do not see how this particular brand of Conservatism can be construed as remotely compassionate, or truly Conservative, for that matter.

Years ago, when I was growing up, my father instilled in me a sense of compassion. Our boy scout troop, sponsored by the Elks lodge my father was active in, feed the hungry frequently. Republicans where I grew up believed, as I believe to this day, that although it is not the business of the government to force people to feed the hungry, it was the civic duty of those who were well off to help out those who werent.

I still believe strongly that the government does not have the right to take money out of the pockets of some to feed others. People should want to help out others, but should never be forced. Americans ARE generous, if the government allows them to be generous. In my honest opinion, the government telling people that they are not allowed to be generous is unconstitutional, and immoral.

Just as government should not force people to be generous, government should never act to prevent generosity. It is none of their damn business, and what they are doing in Las Vegas is hurting the good name of Conservatism everywhere.

Finally, this is something that Jesus would certainly never do, and at the end of days, when we all stand before God, some politicans will be standing there in everlasting shame.

Article is here.

 

[thenextbesthang]

damn right.

Go after the ones who can't help themselvs first (homeless).

 

[akyron]

Why are they leaving food out in the public parks?

It would be more logical to draw the homeless to the homeless shelters where multiple services would be available to support them.

 

[danarhea]

Why are they leaving food out in the public parks?

It would be more logical to draw the homeless to the homeless shelters where multiple services would be available to support them.

1) Except that most homeless shelters have unsanitary conditions.

2) Truly needy people are mixed in with druggies and gangbangers in the shelters, not to mention rapists and thieves.

3) Most shelters require you to listen to a religious sermon.

4) What multiple services?

For these, and other reasons, many do not use the shelters.

 

[jfuh]

1) Except that most homeless shelters have unsanitary conditions.

2) Truly needy people are mixed in with druggies and gangbangers in the shelters, not to mention rapists and thieves.

3) Most shelters require you to listen to a religious sermon.

4) What multiple services?

For these, and other reasons, many do not use the shelters.

Well, another huge reason is simply that most ppl that are homeless are themselves phsychologically impeded in having a variety of issues. The top one of course being pschytsophrenic...... don't bother I can't spell today.

 

[akyron]

For these, and other reasons, many do not use the shelters.

I see. Dirt and grass is better than a shelter. Got it.


multiple services include

emergency shelter and access to donated food, Housing placement services, job placement services, vocational services, life skills classes, case management, and children's services,the center will offer counseling, Internet services, laundry facilities and showers.



um no. Leaving food on the concrete in the park is not the best way to help the homeless. Encourage them to get to a shelter.


"food and water she set on a cement wall "

 

[RightinNYC]

1) Except that most homeless shelters have unsanitary conditions.

2) Truly needy people are mixed in with druggies and gangbangers in the shelters, not to mention rapists and thieves.

3) Most shelters require you to listen to a religious sermon.

4) What multiple services?

For these, and other reasons, many do not use the shelters.

Most shelters have unsanitary conditions? What about the parks that the homeless here have turned into scenes of disarray?

If you read a little more about the story, you would know why this rule was enacted. Various groups in Las Vegas have gotten into the habit of feeding the homeless in the middle of the cities biggest and most highly traveled parks. The homeless people have reacted to this, moving into those areas and setting up their "homes" there. This has made the parks in Vegas some of the filthiest and most unsafe in any major city.

The city is opposed to this, and feels that it hurts the homeless in the long run. By feeding them in the parks, they are more inclined to stay out there, less inclined to stay in the shelters, less inclined to get the help that they need, and more inclined to cause trouble. Thus, the regulation. Then, some bored news organization picked it up on a slow news day, it got repeated every so often (I first heard about this about a month ago), and now its getting some play in situations where people don't know the whole story.

For those who still think its a bad idea: Think about your nearest town center. The local park where you take your kids, or where you used to play as a kid. Think about the fountain, the grass, the ice cream men, the dogs running around, etc. Now imagine that same scene, overrun with 2 dozen homeless people, belongings strewn all over the place, many of them drinking in public in front of your children. All while a shelter that provides food and safety for these same people sits empty two blocks away.

Would you be happy?

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Most shelters have unsanitary conditions? What about the parks that the homeless here have turned into scenes of disarray?

If you read a little more about the story, you would know why this rule was enacted. Various groups in Las Vegas have gotten into the habit of feeding the homeless in the middle of the cities biggest and most highly traveled parks. The homeless people have reacted to this, moving into those areas and setting up their "homes" there. This has made the parks in Vegas some of the filthiest and most unsafe in any major city.

The city is opposed to this, and feels that it hurts the homeless in the long run. By feeding them in the parks, they are more inclined to stay out there, less inclined to stay in the shelters, less inclined to get the help that they need, and more inclined to cause trouble. Thus, the regulation. Then, some bored news organization picked it up on a slow news day, it got repeated every so often (I first heard about this about a month ago), and now its getting some play in situations where people don't know the whole story.

For those who still think its a bad idea: Think about your nearest town center. The local park where you take your kids, or where you used to play as a kid. Think about the fountain, the grass, the ice cream men, the dogs running around, etc. Now imagine that same scene, overrun with 2 dozen homeless people, belongings strewn all over the place, many of them drinking in public in front of your children. All while a shelter that provides food and safety for these same people sits empty two blocks away.

Would you be happy?

Not to mention the stench.

 

[Picaro]

see. Dirt and grass is better than a shelter. Got it.

Yes, in the vast majority of cases, very much so ...

multiple services include

emergency shelter and access to donated food, Housing placement services, job placement services, vocational services, life skills classes, case management, and children's services, the center will offer counseling, Internet services, laundry facilities and showers.

Hahahahaha ... you truly have no clue at all.

1) Except that most homeless shelters have unsanitary conditions.

2) Truly needy people are mixed in with druggies and gangbangers in the shelters, not to mention rapists and thieves.

3) Most shelters require you to listen to a religious sermon.

4) What multiple services?

For these, and other reasons, many do not use the shelters.
Yesterday 07:03 PM

Indeed, especially numbers 2 and 4.

There are still Republicans helping out around here, more so than so-called 'Democrats', who never seem to want to mingle with the rabble around here ... too busy harangueing City Hall and 'Fightin Da Man', I guess ...

 

[akyron]

you truly have no clue at all.
[\QUOTE]

I have taken a homeless person into my home to clean up and get straight. Have you?

We visited several shelters from Texas to Louisana taking advantage of many services.
Have you?

Of course there are problems but leaving food in the concrete and dirt wont solve anything.

Your unwarranted attack simply shows your ignorance.
You may retain the title of clueless and uninformed yourself.

 

[Patrickt]

"1) Except that most homeless shelters have unsanitary conditions.

2) Truly needy people are mixed in with druggies and gangbangers in the shelters, not to mention rapists and thieves.

3) Most shelters require you to listen to a religious sermon.

4) What multiple services?"

1. Any evidence to offer that most homeless shelters have unsanitary conditions?

2. Would you care to enlighten us on how the "truly needed" are segregated from the "druggies and gangbangers" in a public park?

3. Any evidence that "most" shelters require you to listen to a sermon?

4. In a shelter, people are directed to food stamps, free health clinics and government health services, job banks, food banks, and mental health centers. Those can be considered "multiple services". What is offered in the park besides bologna sandwiches?