People arrested for giving homeless food in Florida

LighterGuy

http://abcnews.go.com/US/arrested-feeding-homeless-orlando/story?id=13802769

Members of the organization Food Not Bombs were in good spirits as they passed out corn on the cob, rice, beans and other vegetarian dishes to the homeless and hungry in an Orlando park. This cheer was interrupted when police officers on bicycles arrived and arrested five of the volunteers.
This is not the first time this scene has played out for members of Food Not Bombs.
Since June 1, a dozen members of the group have been arrested for violating a new Orlando city ordinance that prohibits sharing food with large groups in downtown parks more than twice a year.
The mayor of Orlando even branded them "food terrorists."
Food Not Bombs is an international political organization that protests war, poverty and the destruction of the environment, according to their website. The group meets to distribute food twice a week in downtown Orlando's Lake Eola Park.

Basically to sum it up. Threre is a rule in Orlando that if you feed more than 25 homeless people at once. You are breaking the law. They were feeding 40 people.

... so people get arrested for doing something good.

thoughts?

The King of Moo

Man, Jesus would've at least got life for the loaves and fishes!

iamstop

There are booked dedicated to silly and or crazy laws that are old and out of date or whatever, that is all well and good, but actually enforcing them is just redick!

RichieC

OSI wrote: »

The law is the law

a sheep is a sheep

Scarinae

What is the possible reason behind this law? Is feeding large groups of the homeless a bad thing? What on earth is 'food terrorism'?

The King of Moo

Is it really a new ordinance? It sounds like one of those wacky ancient laws still in effect.
I don't see what problem there is in sharing food. Maybe it just sounds too socialist.
And I'm sure some of the homeless were a bit annoyed to get vegetarian food!

careca11

LighterGuy wrote: »

http://abcnews.go.com/US/arrested-feeding-homeless-orlando/story?id=13802769



Basically to sum it up. Threre is a rule in Orlando that if you feed more than 25 homeless people at once. You are breaking the law. They were feeding 40 people.

... so people get arrested for doing something good.

thoughts?

ONLY IN AMERICA

iamstop

Fishie wrote: »

What is the possible reason behind this law? Is feeding large groups of the homeless a bad thing? What on earth is 'food terrorism'?

That's what I was thinking, the first thing that came to mind was Kraft. Then Coke and McDonalds.

IngazZagni

Hmm, does anyone know the reason behind the law? The first thought I had was that it was something to do with quality control. As this is completely uncontrolled, there is nothing to prevent all these people from being food poisoned as it's just some random people giving out food. Then again it is free and their choice to consume it or not.

Kevin Duffy

"international political organization that protests war, poverty and the destruction of the environment" -there's the problem for the Florida authorities, these things are fundamental to the American way of life! Goddamn commie-hippies!

Wetai

Police on (push?) Bicycles? How did they bring them down to the Police station?

Kojak

"Food Terrorists" - I wonder are they linked to al-Queda?? :rolleyes:

DrumSteve

Well they can't be feeding those poor homeless people... we can't be having that.

There really aren't enough bad things to be said about this. Between this and arresting people for dancing.... What's gone wrong america?

Send me your weary? Not if there are more than 25 of them in a public place thank you very much.

Pure Sound

It probably represents Communism too much for them, as we all know sharing is wrong

Spread

The King of Moo wrote: »

Is it really a new ordinance? It sounds like one of those wacky ancient laws still in effect.
I don't see what problem there is in sharing food. Maybe it just sounds too socialist.
And I'm sure some of the homeless were a bit annoyed to get vegetarian food!

I imagine this could be interpreted unlawful assembly. There are laws on this subject in most countries ......... needing police permission before crowds over a certain amount congregate etc. But there are other dumbass rules down South:
In Atlanta it is illegal to make faces at school children while they are studying.
In Kentucky, women may not appear on the highway in bathing suits unless they carry clubs.
In Birmingham, Alabama, it is illegal to drive a car while blindfolded.

ScumLord

Maybe they just showed up and started firing out food which would be illegal in any country due to the possibility of poisoning hundreds of people.

Manic Moran

LighterGuy wrote: »

Basically to sum it up. Threre is a rule in Orlando that if you feed more than 25 homeless people at once. You are breaking the law. They were feeding 40 people.

... so people get arrested for doing something good.

thoughts?

Two or three possibilities come to mind.

1) You start feeding a whole bunch of people, then you start coming under the category of 'restaurant', with all the accompanying requirements for licensing, health inspections, certifications and so on.
2) You may start interfering significantly with the government's running of the program. (Not that the government is the sole provider, but at least should know who's out there doing much work).
3) Giving a man a fish is all well and good, but the city's programs may be linked to a 'teach him to fish' policy, which this could be undermining.

NTM

mawk

I'd hazard a guess that if these guys hand out food every saturday, say, then the park will soon be full of homeless people every saturday; being a nuisance to the tax paying public who want to use the park.
It promotes loitering and probably littering.
It might well also prolong the cycle of dependency for the ones who are physically/mentally able to care for themselves but don't.

mikemac

It's a public park

Feed 40 people today, with more resources and volunteers it'll be hundreds of homeless hanging around that park all day waiting.

People will complain, people might feel intimidated and while you might say NIMBY, there is probably a better area like a hall or somewhere for this.

Gunsfortoys

Manic Moran wrote: »

Two or three possibilities come to mind.

1) You start feeding a whole bunch of people, then you start coming under the category of 'restaurant', with all the accompanying requirements for licensing, health inspections, certifications and so on.
2) You may start interfering significantly with the government's running of the program. (Not that the government is the sole provider, but at least should know who's out there doing much work).
3) Giving a man a fish is all well and good, but the city's programs may be linked to a 'teach him to fish' policy, which this could be undermining.

NTM

This isn't a daily occurrence so how in the hell is it affecting businesses?

I cannot believe it is a crime to feed someone that is hungry. Sickening.

Run_to_da_hills

The states always had strange vagrancy laws against begging etc so this dosen't surprise me at all.

Give it a few years and the same will apply over here.

Seachmall

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

This isn't a daily occurrence so how in the hell is it affecting businesses?

Affecting businesses for just one day is still affecting businesses.

The assembly of large crowds without permits is illegal in many places for good reason (they could be blocking ambulance/fire truck routes is just one example).

I cannot believe it is a crime to feed someone that is hungry. Sickening.

Feeding hungry people isn't a crime, organizing large gatherings in public places without alerting the appropriate authorities is.

Kevin Duffy

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The states always had strange vagrancy laws against begging etc so this dosen't surprise me at all.

Give it a few years and the same will apply over here.

Which would explain being arrested for distributing the food how?

Kevin Duffy

Seachmall wrote: »

Affecting businesses for just one day is still affecting businesses.

God forbid a business should be affected, far better that poor people should go hungry.

Seachmall wrote: »

Feeding hungry people isn't a crime, organizing large gatherings in public places without alerting the appropriate authorities is.

You don't think that maybe the stupid mayor's statement on the issue indicate they wouldn't have got permission and that maybe the just thing to do was to go ahead and disobey?

Overheal

I thought it would be pretty obvious that the ordnance is to keep the Homeless out of city parks lining up for food. There are soup kitchens and shelters for that.

What the OP article doesn't tell you by the way is that the police waited until all the food was distributed before making the arrests,

Police waited until everyone was served to make the arrests, said Douglas Coleman, speaking for Orlando Food Not Bombs.

"They basically carted them off to jail for feeding hungry people," said Coleman, who was not present. "For them to regulate a time and place for free speech and to share food, that is unacceptable."

Orlando Food Not Bombs has been feeding the homeless breakfast on Mondays for several years and dinner on Wednesdays for five years.

Police had not enforced the ordinance while the court battle continued. The U.S. District Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in Atlanta ruled that city rules regulating how often large groups of people can be fed in a park do not violate the Constitution.

The penalty for violating Orlando's ordinance is 60 days in jail, a $500 fine or both.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/crime/os-homeless-feedings-arrests-20110601,0,7226362.story

davetherave

They knew exactly what they were doing. This was just a publicity stunt. If they were that concerned about feeding the homeless without having any ulterior motives then they would have rented a hall or gone to any number of charities or food kitchens. Instead they decided they were above the law and intentionally broke the law. They wanted to get themselves arrested to get in the news....mission complete.

Run_to_da_hills

Kevin Duffy wrote: »

Which would explain being arrested for distributing the food how?

People offering food is only encouraging people to beg, America has serious problems with street beggars. Nearly all cities have designated areas, soup kitchens or issue some sort of food stamps offered to people in need to try and stop the problem.

There is also the risk that the food offered by non approved sources could be drugged, poisoned or contaiin ecoli etc.

Seachmall

Kevin Duffy wrote: »

God forbid a business should be affected, far better that poor people should go hungry.

Yup.

You don't think that maybe the stupid mayor's statement on the issue indicate they wouldn't have got permission and that maybe the just thing to do was to go ahead and disobey?

Nope.

Biggins

What confuses me is that if they had been doing it for years - obviously with some success and thought in the process of handing the food out in the right way - why the move against them now in the last few months?
Anyone know why exactly this law was brought into force?
Someone said its might be due to congestion - well it was in a park (and don't forget, they had been doing it for years it appears) so had there been objections beforehand and if so why wasn't something done about it then instead of letting it continue for those years?

I suspect we are not getting the full story here - or I'm missing something.

Overheal

davetherave wrote: »

They knew exactly what they were doing. This was just a publicity stunt. If they were that concerned about feeding the homeless without having any ulterior motives then they would have rented a hall or gone to any number of charities or food kitchens. Instead they decided they were above the law and intentionally broke the law. They wanted to get themselves arrested to get in the news....mission complete.

It's Civil Disobedience. Not a new concept by any means, a form of protest against perceptibly stupid laws.

Biggins

Overheal wrote: »

It's Civil Disobedience. Not a new concept by any means, a form of protest against perceptibly stupid laws.

...And it appears they had been doing it for some time, so they were just continuing on as before - all right, in knowing defiance of a ruling.
So not exactly rushing out to maybe create a publicity stunt just as such?

And halls etc cost money. Maybe why they were always doing it outside was so that they could conserve what little funds they had, to spend on food etc?

I dunno who's really right or wrong (if anyone totally is!) but there is more to this story somewhere I think.