Politix

Prev Next
Featured Quizzes
Politix Daily Headlines
Featured Debates
Issues

See all 17 issues

People
White House

See all people

DOWN, NOT OUT

California Lawmaker Proposes 'Homeless Bill of Rights'

Legislation would grant the right to sleep, congregate and panhandle in public

Next>

by Dain Fitzgerald

Staff Writer t

Image: blog.timesunion.com

In California, the debate around homelessness seems to have settled on the idea that securing an actual home for the hardcore indigent is a lost cause. The only question now is how best to make public spaces a permanent substitute for a roof over one's head.

Demcoratic Assemblyman Tom Ammiano of San Francisco has proposed a "Homeless Bill of Rights" that would "give legal protection to people engaging in life-sustaining activities on public property," reports the Sacramento Bee. Apart from the right to relieve one's self in public areas, Assembly Bill 5 would likewise grant immunity to those soliciting cash on sidewalks and sleeping in parks.

A spokesman for one of the bill's sponsors likened the current treatment of the homeless to Jim Crow laws, and claimed the hoped-for legislation "would require local governments to leave people in peace who are not committing crimes."

"Houseless people need to be treated like everybody else - it's not a crime to be without a house," said one advocate for the homeless.

Via the Sacramento Bee.
Like this article? B Vote Up
?

Do you support a 'Homeless Bill of Rights'?

View results

Comments (view in Forum)

  • View all 6 replies >
  • Quantummist
    !
    It's California... I'm surprised they haven't put forth legislation Requiring those with Homes to House the Homeless....
  • PoliticalSpice
    !
    You'd love this guy, he is gay, a former stand up comic and used to be on the san fransisco city council. I'll bet he'd like to butter your buiscuit
  • View all 9 replies >
  • Bobolinsky
    !
    @PoliticalSpice-- Not typically. But I did follow this story since it's such a glorious example of the policies of the Left coming home to roost with a big helping of hypocrisy piled on top.
  • PoliticalSpice
    !
    @Bobolinsky well it may look like it from the outside, but it really is not. I know the most the players. The mayor and developers/business community have been trying this stuff for over ten years. The more progressive council members have been opposing it just as long. It's not just the homeless, it's landmarks, development, city v. univerrsity interest, etc.
  • Bobolinsky
    !
    @PoliticalSpice-- And the less progressive mayor/developers and council members got it on the ballot. They're still all progressives, and it's still the Left solving problems by treating the symptoms instead of the problems.

    Sort of like how a "Chinese Company Solves Horrible Working Conditions ... With Nets to Catch Suicide Jumpers"
    http://www.cracked.com/article_20164_5-hilari...
  • View all 6 replies >
  • MouseD
    !
    Just great ...just what law bidding folks needs more sick people on the streets...isn't it enough you liberals forced all the mental folks into us normal folks when you closed down all the mental hospitals...now this crap.....hey liberals why don't you take in all these homeless folks and unstable folks....
  • MouseD
    !
    @woodtick57 ACLU and liberals fought to free them from the hospitals...Reagen was forced to sign the bill due to liberals.....
  • o
    woodtick57
    !
    @MouseD Instead of the asking the liberals to take them in, how bout the religious institutions living off their gov't subsidies? Isn't that what religion is there for? why aren't the churches packed to the gills with homeles people?
  • Godlesspanther
    !
    @MouseD Actually no, cutting funding for mental institutions did originate from the Reagan administration. Being ignorant of actual history in order to blame the people that you enjoy blaming, is not particularly impressive.

    Then we have the ACLU -- what do you actually know about the ACLU? My guess is absolutely nothing.
  • View all 15 replies >
  • o
    Sharpshooter
    !
    A homeless bill of rights is another example of the californication of government. Creating a law doesn't resolve issues, it either generates income in the way of fines or creates new outlaws because the law is untenable to live with.

    Are they going to fine me if I don't allow drunken bums to set up housekeeping on my property, using the garden as their bathroom? We worry about the rights of every non conformist group but have no problem crapping on the rights of the regular people who pay the taxes.

    We leave insane people wander the streets because it would infringe on their rights to lock them up while ignoring the infringement of the rights of the victims of their actions.

    We allow illegal aliens to roam at will without repercussion to avoid infringing on their rights while ignoring the rights of the people their criminal activities impact.

    Now they want to assure homeless people have the right to live where they want while the government charges fitness trainers for use of the public parks their taxes paid for.

    Gee @PolitixDain how does the city feel about bums sleeping on the park benches for FREE?

  •
    bsking
    !
    Okay a bill of rights to protect life sustaining activities on public property.... translation:
    you will no longer be able to arrest a homeless person for taking a crap in the middle of the street... or peeing on a parking meter.. both of those functions are life sustaining activities

    and some people still wonder what the hell is wrong with California?.
  • u
    mtkopf
    !
    " apart from being allowed to relieve ones self in public..."
    While you were getting your conservative panties all in a bunch over a law which protects some of the most vulnerable among us, you obviously missed the part where it says the homeless WON'T be allowed to urinate/defecate in public.
  • RoyFloyd
    !
    Wrong. Whipping out one's johnson and peeing indiscreetly could get you an indecent exposure rap and therefore on the sex felons list--very bad. Dropping a deuce, I don't know. Littering? An EPA toxic substance fine?
    People need to relieve themselves, and if there is an open and accessible bathroom in a reasonable proximity folks should use it. In many areas perhaps more need to made available. If not, when you gotta go... you gotta go.
  • AlexMIA
    !
    @mtkopf That's not what the article reads.''apart from being allowed to relieve ones self in public.....''''The bill would LIKEWISE allow panhandling and sleeping in public spaces'' Where is the won't be allowed?
  • View all 18 replies >
  • u
    Romney_Rube
    !
    Say, this is a great idea since America is going to collapse anyway! Let's take it a step further and allow the homeless to have unabated squatter's rights on both public and private lands, plus a complete exemption from prosecution for all misdemeanors(i.e., public drunkenness, shoplifting, etc.), and instant qualification to any and all welfare programs available including simultaneous multi-state access. Free transportation benefits and the right to any and all unclaimed hotel vacancies after midnight can be added after this initial BOOST gets ramped up. If we're going to destroy this nation, then let's go all of the way.
  • hwyangel
    !
    So what's a guy to do when they need three hots and a cot and the shelter is full?
    How about we practice common sense and just ignore them like everyone else and leave the helping to those of us that have been helping them all this time.
  • hwyangel
    !
    @woodtick57

    Soup kitchens, shelters, churches...
    It's the police that usually harass the homeless by confiscating their gear, tearing up their camps or writing bogus tickets like loitering because they set on a bus stop bench too long or camping without a permit.
    For example in Tucson Arizona there are signs up in the public park (on stone and speedway) that say "don't feed the homeless", and in Colorado Springs the police will "beat the bushes" to look for gear that was hidden while the owner is at the day labor service. Then when a homeless person tries to get arrested intentionally because the weather is way below freezing they just get run out of town. It's not the regular citizens that are bothering the the homeless, they usually just ignore them.
  • hwyangel
    !
    @woodtick57

    I wouldn't say all, some are just not in the right location or able to obtain the permits.(Usually because the residents don't want them there)
    The ones that don't are either members of the ministerial alliance, provide motel and food vouchers or will give you a ride to a safe haven.
  • kathyparsell
    !
    @hwyangel it's hard to get a hypocrite to ever change their mind. Let.'s keep trying and hope for the best. Best for the homeless and the taxpayers.
  • View all 11 replies >
  • u
    Cheenoguy
    !
    So all of the people opposed to this,
    Where the f$ck do you propose these people sleep? I suspect if someone proposed mass executions of the homeless for the sin of losing at life you people would ask to perform the execution. Probably been itching to use your ak anyways.
  • AlexMIA
    !
    I'd say you can levy a homeless tax on top of sales tax in order to build or procure shelters where they can sleep and shower. Then open it up to churches and non-profits willing to do the missionary work. Maybe even try helping them with some meaningful employment.
  • Wary
    !
    @texas_cutie75 California is big on passing competing legislation. I guess if the homeless don't exercise it'll be okay?
  • marine1
    !
    Stand by there will soon be a panhandler tax amendment in the works. It will be like a sales tax and the provider will have to add 20% for the city:}
  • Keyjo
    !
    I have mixed feelings on this.
    Many of the homeless are Veterans. Many ate mentally ill people. Many are people who in these hard times, have fallen on especially hard times. Some are abandoned wives or abandoned children. And they are, should be already covered by the same bill of rights as those of us more fortunate.
    However, some municipalities have begun enacting "anti homeless" laws which pretty much outlaws homelessness. While I think that the homeless should have equal access to public property, including sleeping on park benches, beaches, etc.... All the while, we must balance this with the equal rights of public safety and freedom from harassment.
    Especially the freedom to panhandle unregulated. Many panhandlers are intimidating, aggressive individuals. Certainly the public has the right to, the government the duty to provide, legal deterrents to aggressive panhandlers.
    Mentally ill people roaming the streets, another Reagan legacy!
  • Mbjhug
    !
    I'm also mixed about this, but my human decency usually gets the best of me. Worst case, they take all the money they get from panhandling and whatnot to the liquor stores and stimulate the economy that little bit. Best case they save the money and get back up on their feet.

    I'd like to think of it as a job of sorts. Can't get paid if you don't show up.
  • Keyjo
    !
    @Mbjhug
    Yeah, back in the better economic times, some of these people claimed to make upwards of $300 daily: tax free.
    I knew a couple of people in Long Beach who panhandled, but weren't actually homeless. It was, as you said, their job! I considered it myself. More money than cab driving.
  • kathyparsell
    !
    I fortunately cannot conceive of of what you on the west coast (or even larger cities on the east coast) deal with when you encounter the homeless. it's not that we in (BFE) don't have homeless pelple, it is that the climate is so severe in the winter and the opportunities so few year round that for the most part or cities and outreach programs handle all but the most hardcore and they then run afoul of the police or move on. Despite this I personally are sickened with each shanty town or other evidence of thir desperation. Panhandling however I have no patience with, it has caused the Red Cross to be denied the ability to ring bells and the VFW has been .relegated to road medians. Some things go to far.
  • u
    Allknowing
    !
    Keyjo I agree with you. However; America and Americans stay true to form. America and most Americans are bullies. Like the bully in school, America, picks on the weakest in our soceity. It's a shame and a sin before God, how the mentally ill are demonized in this country. There's no other group of people that are sick, that get so mistreated, and denied the help they so desparately need, then the mentally ill. Mental illness is a disease of the brain; like liver disease, heart disease, ect, ect. Yet; those with diseases of the brain are not treated the same as those with other diseases. To make matters even worst for these individuals, there are Laws in place, that even deny the loved one of these individuals to speak on their behalf, as they cannot speak for themselves. America and Americans percieves itself to be a great nation, however, I defind a great nation, on how it treats the least in its soceity. So, from where I stand America and Americans are at a minus 0, a hundred times over. The mentally ill roaming the streets, being thrown in jails and prisons, and denied treatment and or care, is Reagans' legacy, and you saw how his life ended. However; now it is the American peoples legacy, it's up to us to call for change and to make it happen, for those who cannot help themselves, as this is only right, and the humane thing to do.
  • u
    tomincali
    !
    this will lead to those folks getting more pushy and using the restroom out in the open.

    in my town there is room for all at the shelters. thing is there are rules they must follow,the ones living on the streets do so at choice and not wanting to follow rules. the only ones asking for money are trying to get booze dope or both,all their food clothing and shelter needs are met . i have worked with a few in the past who had the money for a place they preferred to live bill free in makeshift shelters.
  • Mbjhug
    !
    Not misguided, not a step in the wrong direction. This is giving them a chance to better themselves. Whether they take the opportunity or not is up to the individual, I applaud the attempt at giving someone a (second) chance.
  • AlexMIA
    !
    A state badly in debt with a bad economy is going to make it so that tourist can be scared off by panhandlers and people popping a squat in the park. I'm sure that will make a great story back home. We went to California on vacation or to see aunt so and so, and it was full of homeless people asking for money, and our daughter Nancy saw one taking a poop at the park. She wouldn't stop crying! Yeah, nothing stupid about that idea!
  • harold_lloyd
    !
    I'd support it if it included a section on dealing with homeless persons who are mentally ill.
    Dumping people out of hospitals onto the streets was about the dumbest thing we ever did.
  • RoyFloyd
    !
    If California does fall into the ocean, it'll be the loss of one helluva a cash cow for the red states suckling on the federal teat. Watcha all gonna do?
  • View all 16 replies >
  • Funkywhiteboy7
    !
    If we were talking about people sustaining themselves in a forest or unpopulated place I could MAYBE understand something like this. But this is the real world, and the homeless have 3 huge problems: alcoholism, drug addiction, and mental illness. Not in every case, but in a vast majority. To get behind a homeless bill of rights would mean you are basically sanctioning the activities that go along with these three problems, such as panhandling, stealing, public intoxication, etc. I don't think tax paying citizens should be forced to deal with this. Our kids shouldn't be accosted on their way home from school. A shop owner shouldn't have to apologize to his customers because they had to step over a guy in his sleeping bag to get in the door. I'm all for helping people and giving them a hand up, but a homeless bill of rights would surely infringe on the rights of the hard working TAXPAYER in these areas.
  • kathyparsell
    !
    That is where you failing your argument , if the taxpayers don't either support those less fortunent or offer services to deal with them, then this is what happens in an enlightened society where all people are quranteed enalienable rights. Too bad you can't have it both way.
  • Funkywhiteboy7
    !
    @kathyparsell I'm not saying people don't have rights. I'm saying that creating a bill of rights that allows people to set up homeless camps in public parks, panhandle in neighborhoods where kids are playing, and virtually ensure that every homeless person in a 150 mile radius flocks to this particular city INSTEAD of trying to get these people help, and get them off the streets is foolish. Homeless people aren't arrested because they don't have an adresS. They get arrested for peeing on sidewalks, taking baths in park fountains, and harassing people for spare change. Furthermore, their untreated addiction and mental health issues make many of them ticking time bombs. The answer is to fine tune programs and protocalls to help these people, not encourage, attract, and promote a lifestyle, which by its very nature sucks the lifeblood and resources out of a community and creates an atmosphere where children may not be safe using these public parks. That's not the answer
  • kathyparsell
    !
    @Funkywhiteboy7 I have a limited experience with the homeless, however I live in an area where mental illness is rampant. Be it due to embreeding or lack of pre/post natal care or just bad f- ing luck. It is a reality that my area of the country struggles with daily, both law enforcement And the families who have little idea how to cope and so, I can relate the two issues. In the seventies the USA released thousands from not only the mental institutions but also from the VA Centers where previously the veterans who couldn't adapt to civilian society lived in relative security. For years the major cities have dealt with these issues, now they are not only dealing with the issues of population,but also the human rights aspect of them. We, the citizens pay plenty of taxes which have for years been squandered, now the chickens have come home to roost! What to do? It is up to the taxpayers but not at the expense of those who need to be protected!
  • R Load more comments...