Is it now a crime to be poor?

[mommamia]

A friend sent me this article. It simply restates many things I found to be true while working closely with the homeless and in danger populations in many states.

Many so called “shelters” are horrible places to be. Most of them separate families, men and sons in one area, wives and daughters in another. Most also put petty rules on the people, such as everybody up by 5am, some lock people out during the day. Many will not take you if you can only get a second or third shift job. Often the people who are supposed to help treat these people, many of them families who never thought they would be in this place as criminals and lowlifes with no worth.

How do we as Catholics stop these kinds of criminalization of poverty? Or do we like these laws so we don’t have to see the problem?

Just wondering how folks feel about laws that make homelessness a crime?

 

[St_Francis]

Eugenics, by GK Chesterton, Part 2, Chapter 2: The Story of a Tramp, page 101

(I must say that I find GKC to be very scary reading.)

But I think that the problem of the homeless is complex. Shelters don’t have enormous budgets for accommodations: they have to separate the men and women because otherwise who knows what might happen? Not all homeless people are people who just fell on hard times: quite a few are crazy, another part are drunks or drug addicts. Used to be that the people who really had mental problems were locked up in asylums, but that was before this was deemed to be damaging to their civil rights, so now we just lock them up in jail. Go figure.

And it’s true that shelters are also unable to accommodate odd schedules and the like. Some of those who volunteer at the shelter have 9-5 jobs to get ready for and arrive at, so everything has to be taken care of in good time in the morning. And so on and so forth.

 

[Michaeljc4]

This was a very painful article to read. Homelessness is an enormous and perplexing problem. The majority of the homeless are suffering from the dysfunctional trifecta of substance addicdtion, mental illness, and poverty. The simple solution–promoted by many good people who work with the homeless–is to just give them a home. However, if agencies insist on drug and alcohol free environments, a lot of these poor, broken people simple won’t do it. They are lost to the demons of their addictions. So sad.

I live near Boston, and a few weeks ago, my wife and I stayed overnight in the city for a wedding. I was amazed at how many homeless people I saw that weekend. More than ever before. I can only imagine what the situation is in New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles…

 

[briansnat]

How is the implementation of rules criminalization? We all deal with rules, sometimes petty ones. I have to be out the door by 6:45 am. If I’m not at the bus stop by 7 the bus is going to leave without me. That’s the rule. I have to be in work by 8 and I have to put in 8 hours.
Those are the rules. If I don’t pay my credit card bill on time they slap a late fee on me, it’s a rule.

Rules are implemented in homeless shelters for reasons. People don’t sit in offices thinking up the petty rules they can implement to degrade the residents. Rules are usually made in response to problems. You can’t have people coming and going at all hours because it will disturb the peace. Sometimes people have to be out by a certain hour because the space is used for other things during the day. The rules are there for the safety and comfort of the majority of the residents. The rules are also there to provide structure in the lives of many people who dearly need it.

No rules = anarchy. That sort of environment is not compassionate. In fact it’s quite the opposite.

 

[WillieWonka]

A friend sent me this article. It simply restates many things I found to be true while working closely with the homeless and in danger populations in many states.

Many so called “shelters” are horrible places to be. Most of them separate families, men and sons in one area, wives and daughters in another. Most also put petty rules on the people, such as everybody up by 5am, some lock people out during the day. Many will not take you if you can only get a second or third shift job. Often the people who are supposed to help treat these people, many of them families who never thought they would be in this place as criminals and lowlifes with no worth.

How do we as Catholics stop these kinds of criminalization of poverty? Or do we like these laws so we don’t have to see the problem?

Just wondering how folks feel about laws that make homelessness a crime?

Well, you as Catholics could open your own shelter. Do you expect someone else to do it for you according to your specifications?

 

[mommamia]

Well, you as Catholics could open your own shelter. Do you expect someone else to do it for you according to your specifications?

Actually I volunteer at a shelter run by an order of Nuns that is wonderful.

But, this article wasn’t specifically about homelessness, but about being poor. And how the government finds the poor, and working poor an easy target. And how hard it can be to get back on your feet in the face of such a hostile environment.

This isn’t just affecting the drug addict on the street anymore, this is affecting the working poor, our neighbors and friends. People are falling into a hole with no help in sight.

This is about making laws that criminalize helping the poor. It is now illegal in several states to “aide the homeless” to pass out food or blankets. What is wrong with our country that sharing food should be illegal???

 

[WillieWonka]

Actually I volunteer at a shelter run by an order of Nuns that is wonderful.

But, this article wasn’t specifically about homelessness, but about being poor. And how the government finds the poor, and working poor an easy target. And how hard it can be to get back on your feet in the face of such a hostile environment.

This isn’t just affecting the drug addict on the street anymore, this is affecting the working poor, our neighbors and friends. People are falling into a hole with no help in sight.

This is about making laws that criminalize helping the poor. It is now illegal in several states to “aide the homeless” to pass out food or blankets. What is wrong with our country that sharing food should be illegal???

In what state is it illegal to give someone a blanket?

 

[Spiritoftruth]

,only a crime for those that don’t care about the poor and those that fail to see that they are only “not poor” due to a twist of fate and the grace of God!

 

[mommamia]

In what state is it illegal to give someone a blanket?

Here are some of the laws related to helping the homeless. While I’m not aware of any law that specifically mentions blankets, usually volunteers are arrested or ticketed on more vague laws such as creating a public nuisance, or disturbing the peace.

 

[WillieWonka]

Here are some of the laws related to helping the homeless. While I’m not aware of any law that specifically mentions blankets, usually volunteers are arrested or ticketed on more vague laws such as creating a public nuisance, or disturbing the peace.

“Las Vegas passed a law in July 2006 that prohibits providing meals within city parks that would normally be provided for in a rescue mission or shelter. (57.Bill No.2006-37) Orlando followed suit supporting a similar law last summer that makes it illegal to feed more than 25 people at a time without a permit.”

I’m really not sure what the problem is here. You told us, “It is now illegal in several states to “aide the homeless” to pass out food or blankets.” That kind of exageration does not help your cause.

 

[manualman]

If there ARE available shelters or food services for the poor, then why is it a bad thing to ban random distribution of food to large groups of people in public parks?

Speaking to the sanitation side of things, most cities already barely keep the lid on rats and vermin infestation. Introducing food distribution into places not designed for it risks the overall public health because the waste and leftovers are inevitably not disposed of properly.

I hear your complaint and I agree we don’t do enough for the desperate. But good intentions are no safeguard against unintended consequences. Just like in medicine, “first, do no harm” must be the prime directive.

 

[WillieWonka]

If there ARE available shelters or food services for the poor, then why is it a bad thing to ban random distribution of food to large groups of people in public parks?

Speaking to the sanitation side of things, most cities already barely keep the lid on rats and vermin infestation. Introducing food distribution into places not designed for it risks the overall public health because the waste and leftovers are inevitably not disposed of properly.

I hear your complaint and I agree we don’t do enough for the desperate. But good intentions are no safeguard against unintended consequences. Just like in medicine, “first, do no harm” must be the prime directive.

Such laws apply to everyone. One can get a permit for an event. What they cannot do is transform public spaces into privates peces by taing them over and monopolizing the resource.

It’s the random nature of such activities that deprives the rest of the citizens of the use of the public space.

 

[jpk1313]

it has always been a crime in the eyes of the rich. to be poor in this world means that those in power do not care about them. the rich keep the poor down so that they may have more money and power. we can do nothing other than charity to help the poor until the rich start having a moral compass that is not broken. But on the brighter side of things when socity collapses all the yuppies and trust fund babies and powermonger politians will be runnunig to the homless looking to learn to survive with nothing. And I for one welcome our new homless overlords they’ll probably do a better job runnung things than a buch of money hungry warmongers we have now.

 

[WillieWonka]

it has always been a crime in the eyes of the rich. to be poor in this world means that those in power do not care about them. the rich keep the poor down so that they may have more money and power. we can do nothing other than charity to help the poor until the rich start having a moral compass that is not broken. But on the brighter side of things when socity collapses all the yuppies and trust fund babies and powermonger politians will be runnunig to the homless looking to learn to survive with nothing. And I for one welcome our new homless overlords they’ll probably do a better job runnung things than a buch of money hungry warmongers we have now.

Well, keep waiting. It will surely happen any day now…

 

[rwillenborg]

Well, you as Catholics could open your own shelter. Do you expect someone else to do it for you according to your specifications?

I guess I don’t understand what you’re saying here
Catholic organizations are one of the largest providers of homeless shelters in the US, and, yes, there are rules at these shelters.

I have worked for a long time for the capuchin soup in Detroit, run by catholic friars.
Here’s a bit of what they do:

2,000 hot meals are frequently served each day at our​

two locations

About 300,000 pounds of food distributed per month to families​

About 30,000 articles of clothing given to clients per month​

More than 500 pieces of furniture and appliances given to families each month​

Showers and a change of clothing for up to 30 homeless and poorly housed persons per day​

Jefferson House, a substance abuse treatment program servicing up to 12 indigent men​

A children’s library and art therapy studio serving up to 800 children per month​

A 25,000 square foot urban farm project​

(i’d like to note that the urban farm project is probably the one of the largest organic urban farms in the midwest, if not the country. We even make our own honey!)

Regarding shelter rules:
Groups of strange men should NEVER EVER EVER be bunked with groups of strange women. Would you want your daughter to be sleeping in a room with twenty men she doesn’t know? I don’t think so.
You say you’ve worked with the homeless, and I don’t doubt that, but I wonder how after working with people living in these situations that you would question the wisdom of separating the sexes? I often wish we had more ‘family’ accommodations available (there are some) so that yes, we could keep families together, but the place simply was not built for that. We try to maximize the number of people we can get in there safely and with a fair degree of comfort. I admit the solution is not perfect, but we work with what we’ve got.
As for why they are asked to leave during the day - you have to PAY people to work at the shelter during the day, not to mention the additional cost of utilities. (Many family shelters are 24 hours though). If a shelter wants to make sure it has enough money to stay open 365 NIGHTS of the year, it often needs to be closed during the day. Besides, there are other options available during the day, such as the soup kitchens which are often adjacent or at least nearby. Also, some of these people DO have jobs (not enough to make rent from their pay on them, but that’s another thread) so they have someplace they need to be during the day anyway, and again, if a shelter is going to help as many people it can with their limited dollars, cutting back on daytime hours makes alot of sense, since you are servicing fewer people during that time.
Also, it’s not healthy in my experience for people to stay at the shelter all day. During extreme cold and extreme heat these shetlers often stay open 24 hours a day, but have you ever hung around with the same 20 people, never leaving their presence for three consecutive days? Oh yeah, and the showers aren’t necessarily in the same building. It’s not pleasant, for anybody.
I would agree that the poor, and particularly the homeless, are treated shabbily, if not downright inhumanely. (Jsut recently there was an article in the paper about how a couple of homeless men were beaten to death by kids - literally, 13 year olds with baseball bats. It’s disgusting!) I would argue, however, that the people who treat them in such a way are generally not the same ones who are working at the homeless shelters. Some people are, yes. Some volunteers and employees are crabby, nasty and downright mean. I do not think that is what is most often the case though.
having said all that, I wish my city (Detroit) would pass stricter laws to keep people from begging on the streets. It makes people not want to come downtown, which means instead of patronizing businesses, and keeping those people who are brave enough to open anything in the city in business, their potential customers go somewhere else - some other restaurant in the suburbs because they don’t want to get bothered by six different men on their walk from their restaurant to the parking structure.

It’s so very sad.

 

[WillieWonka]

I guess I don’t understand what you’re saying here
Catholic organizations are one of the largest providers of homeless shelters in the US, and, yes, there are rules at these shelters.

I’m saying people who don’t like the way shelters are run are free to start their own and run it their way instead of complaining about how others do it.

 

[royal_archer]

A friend sent me this article. It simply restates many things I found to be true while working closely with the homeless and in danger populations in many states.

… How do we as Catholics stop these kinds of criminalization of poverty? Or do we like these laws so we don’t have to see the problem?

Just wondering how folks feel about laws that make homelessness a crime?

I found it noteworthy that the editorial complained about ‘ticketing and arrests for more “neutral” infractions like jaywalking, littering or carrying an open container of alcohol’ later adding using pot, and jumping turnstiles. I can agree with not arresting people for unavoidable conditions (such as sleeping on the streets) but these crimes are not unavoidable. If someone is homeless they shouldn’t be wasting money on drugs and booze. There is also no reason they have to cross streets in the middle of traffic. If they are dependents of society, they should be helping by picking up litter, not dropping it. Jumping turnstyles is simply stealing services.

With that said, I am in an industry that has a tendancy for surges in employment followed by big cuts. I have been caught up in several of those cuts and have found myself with out a place to sleep. Cudos to Walmart for allowing me to sleep in my car in their parking lot. In that situation, there should be places for people to hang out in relative safety. For example any government owned property that is not being used for something else such as government office parking lots at night. This does not cost the tax payers one cent and as public property it should be open to the public.

 

[royal_archer]

it has always been a crime in the eyes of the rich. to be poor in this world means that those in power do not care about them. the rich keep the poor down so that they may have more money and power. we can do nothing other than charity to help the poor until the rich start having a moral compass that is not broken. But on the brighter side of things when socity collapses all the yuppies and trust fund babies and powermonger politians will be runnunig to the homless looking to learn to survive with nothing. And I for one welcome our new homless overlords they’ll probably do a better job runnung things than a buch of money hungry warmongers we have now.

The rich (as well as the contributors of all classes) would rather see these people as productive contributing members of society. The rich are rich because of the creation of wealth. Those who are not working are not creating wealth for the rich, instead they are consuming more resources than they are producing. This takes money from the wealthy. The only people bennefitting from this are those who seek the political power that can be leveraged from the result of the condition of the poor.

 

[4everjustjesus]

A friend sent me this article. It simply restates many things I found to be true while working closely with the homeless and in danger populations in many states.

Many so called “shelters” are horrible places to be. Most of them separate families, men and sons in one area, wives and daughters in another. Most also put petty rules on the people, such as everybody up by 5am, some lock people out during the day. Many will not take you if you can only get a second or third shift job. Often the people who are supposed to help treat these people, many of them families who never thought they would be in this place as criminals and lowlifes with no worth.

How do we as Catholics stop these kinds of criminalization of poverty? Or do we like these laws so we don’t have to see the problem?

Just wondering how folks feel about laws that make homelessness a crime?

I think awareness is a big thing. Unless people know that this stuff is going on, they can’t do anything about it. Also, your church may have or be part of a program that assists in getting homeless people jobs and schooling. Just do some research. But I really think awareness is the key here. There are plenty of people who would help if they just knew… and putting them in touch with programs that assist homeless would really be good too.

 

[royal_archer]

It seems like there are three categories to the homeless that need to be addressed. And I don’t feel that the same solution is applicable accross these three categories.

1. The addicted and mentally incompetant. These are the people who have no control over their condition and can not make rational decisions. These people need to be in a structured environment where they can get the help and oversight they need to survive. Possibly court appointed guardians.
2. The lazy and habitual criminals. These are the people who could be contributing members of society if they choose to be but they choose to scrape by leaching off society and taking what they can get. These people should be taken off general assistance and forced to get a job. Any assistance they get should be predecated by their earning it. (eg if you clean the bathrooms of the shelter, you can stay here tonight.)
3. The temporarily displaced. These are the people who have the rational capacity and will to work but because of a condition beyond their control or through some poor planning on their part are now in a dire condition. These people will do fine with barracks style living and will be glad to pay back for their assitance. I bet that if shelters only dealt with this type of person, They would not have the problems addressed in other posts.

The problem is that treating the 1s and 2s like the 3s will only worsen their condition. Treating the 3s like the 1s and 2s will only demoralize them. Overall, we need to stop the one size fits all solutions.