Kicking Out the Homeless in Downtown Columbia, South Carolina

[Tacachale]

Columbia has the problem of a number of college towns in that panhandlers see the area as easy pickings, and there are a lot of do-gooders in the student and church communities providing services and free food. They attract people from all over the place. The same thing happens in Gainesville.

[sheclown]

freakin' do-gooders

the world would be so much better off without them

(SARCASM inserted here)

---------------------

Listen...the homeless problem in Jacksonville is only a problem because we freak out about it.  If that "homeless-looking person" isn't bothering anyone, leave him alone.  If he is breaking a law, arrest him. 

We can't fix everything in Jacksonville...duh...and certainly not the homeless situation.

Those who say they are the source of crime are just picking on the small guy.  Very few homeless are criminals.

Believe you me, we have more to fear -- in this city -- from those who wear suits and smell good.

[JayBird]

Actually very few people blame them for crime, and usually those who do are criminals themselves. It isn't so much trying to fix everything as it is trying to help out fellow humanity. No one is forcing them to get help, no one is forcing them to get off the streets, all that is being done is trying to let them know the choices they have and offer help to obtain those choices.

Those "do-gooders" are the voice for the homeless just as you are the voice for the historic homes of Springfield.

[sheclown]

Actually very few people blame them for crime, and usually those who do are criminals themselves. It isn't so much trying to fix everything as it is trying to help out fellow humanity. No one is forcing them to get help, no one is forcing them to get off the streets, all that is being done is trying to let them know the choices they have and offer help to obtain those choices.

Those "do-gooders" are the voice for the homeless just as you are the voice for the historic homes of Springfield.

Jaybird...I was TOTALLY being sarcastic.  I'll adjust my post.

[sheclown]

Columbia's plan to address homelessness tangled in disagreements

Published: August 19, 2013

Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/2013/08/19/2930011/columbias-plan-to-address-homelessness.html#storylink=cpy
By CLIF LeBLANC — cleblanc@thestate.c

COLUMBIA S.C. — Disagreements emerged Monday between key Columbia staffers and the councilman who is the primary author of a plan to convert the city's winter shelter into a round-the-clock operation to divert homeless people from the city center.

Interim Police Chief Ruben Santiago said his department cannot transport homeless adults to the riverfront shelter to get services nor can police tell them they would be charged with a nuisance offense should they refuse.

City manager Teresa Wilson said that neither she, Santiago nor City Council has agreed to transfer any police officers to enforce laws that prohibit loitering, trespassing or other public nuisance offenses in the 36-block Main Street financial and retail district.

Councilman Cameron Runyan, who has pushed a goal of getting homeless people out of the city's financial district so that a fledgling economic boom can continue, contradicted the chief and the manager.

"It was in the plan that council adopted the other night," Runyan said of Wilson's statement about assigning officers to enforce nuisance laws. "So the first thing she needs to do is read the plan.

"Santiago is the one who said in the (Aug. 5 City Hall) meeting that they could transport people," the councilman said. "It was in a meeting with about 15 people – three of whom are elected officials – in which he said the Police Department regularly transports citizens from point A to point B, including the shelter and particularly the women's shelter."

Council unanimously voted at about 2 a.m. on Aug. 13 to proceed with converting the winter shelter from a nighttime operation during cold months into a 24/7 operation starting in mid September. The vote occurred during a 13-hour series of meetings that included a contentious, four-hour public hearing and debate over a vote on putting a strong mayor form of government on the Nov. 5 ballot.

Official minutes of that meeting had not been released by the city at close of business Monday.

Any disagreement about precisely what council adopted is likely to be settled at the next meeting, scheduled for Sept. 3.

"Homelessness is not a crime," Santiago said. "I've got to have the legal right (to question or take anyone into custody). We can't just take people to somewhere they don't want to go. I can't do that. I won't do that.

"I think there are some misconceptions out there that police are going to go out there and scoop up the homeless. We want to make sure we're doing things the legal, proper way."

He said police policy prohibits not filing a charge for volunteering to accept services. "That's basically cutting a deal. It's basically coercion."

Runyan disputes that his plan is a crackdown. He emphasizes that the intention is to extend a helping hand to the homeless. But if they continue to break the law they would be arrested. "And when you get out of jail, you're going to the shelter unless you have provisions to have someone get you from Alvin S. Glenn (the county jail)."

Wilson said there is no commitment to redirect police.

"I'm not saying we're doing that," she said of Runyan's plan to divert nine officers to the city center and one to stand patrol at an access road to the shelter. "We're not budgeted to do that."

Wilson and Santiago are working on the financial and other implications of switching the shelter's mission into a centralized location for meals, transportation and as a drop-off site for released inmates.

Santiago said he will submit his suggested options to Wilson by the end of the week.

She said she will present her recommendations, including changing the contract with Christ Central Ministries to run a 24/7 shelter, at council's meeting next month.

Reach LeBlanc at (803) 771-8664.

Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/2013/08/19/2930011/columbias-plan-to-address-homelessness.html#storylink=cpy

[JayBird]

Gotcha  but my response was more aimed at the latter comments. Those are actually stereotypes of 1970's homeless. As a matter of fact, in 8 years with Jacksonville not one person ever publicly stated that removing homeless would lessen crime or that homelessness contributes to crime, which you stated but I don't believe anyone here even mentioned that because it isn't a major factor. I don't feel anyone "freaks out" about the homeless more than any other cause. It is a problem, but its a problem everywhere. And those whom are attempting to help are not approaching it with a "fix everything" mentality, they approach it with a "if you would like help, I'm here" mentality.

****

Good find on that article, seems to be politics as usual. Nice to see Jacksonville isn't the only place with inept council-mayor-resident relations.

[sheclown]

I have been involved with helping the homeless for over a decade here in Jacksonville and let me tell you people do freakl out about them. I have the tire tracks up and down my back to prove it

[Bill Hoff]

Gotcha  but my response was more aimed at the latter comments. Those are actually stereotypes of 1970's homeless. As a matter of fact, in 8 years with Jacksonville not one person ever publicly stated that removing homeless would lessen crime or that homelessness contributes to crime, which you stated but I don't believe anyone here even mentioned that because it isn't a major factor. I don't feel anyone "freaks out" about the homeless more than any other cause. It is a problem, but its a problem everywhere. And those whom are attempting to help are not approaching it with a "fix everything" mentality, they approach it with a "if you would like help, I'm here" mentality.

****

Good find on that article, seems to be politics as usual. Nice to see Jacksonville isn't the only place with inept council-mayor-resident relations.

I've been participating in a Jax 2025 spin off committee to address homelessness. I can give you some of the stats used later, but a relatively small number of homeless people make up a disproportionately high percentage of crime in Downtown Jax. Chief Ayoub (Zone 1) is happy to speak about it with interested parties.

[NotNow]

Senator: Food Stamps Are Just Like Slavery

By Zack Beauchamp on August 26, 2013 at 1:39 pm

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) equated government programs that prevent people from dying of starvation with slavery in a new profile of his medical practice published today, revealing himself to hold a view of the role of government so limited as to nearly define the state out of existence.

Paul's philosophical excursus is buried in the midst of the too-friendly-for-parody article (it ends with a patient waxing poetic about how Paul "loves people"), but the words are unmistakably Randian. "As humans, yeah, we do have an obligation to give people water, to give people food, to give people health care," Paul allowed, "but it's not a right because once you conscript people and say, 'Oh, it's a right,' then really you're in charge, it's servitude, you're in charge of me and I'm supposed to do whatever you tell me to do."

The comments are an echo of his 2011 claim that accepting a human right to health care "means you believe in slavery," but the Senator's new variation on the theme is notable because it puts the reasoning behind the crazy in stark relief. Particularly, this line: "You don't have a right to anyone else's labor. Food's pretty important, do you have a right to the labor of the farmer?"

The basic idea is that if slavery means forcing people to do things, and saying people have a right to food means the government should require farmers to provide it to them, then a right to food means the enslavement of farmers. A moderately bright high school student could spot the leap of logic here: no one's forcing anyone to farm against their will. In a democratic-capitalist economy, people have a right to choose their career and, as it turns out, enough people end up being farmers that there's generally enough food to go around. A socially-accepted "right to food" merely means the government should pay for the provision of food to those who can't afford it. No stealing, and definitely no slavery.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/08/26/2525961/rand-paul-food-health-libertarianism-hayek/

Leap of logic?  In my high school I learned about taxes.  That's the money that governments require from those of us who are willing/able to pay through the threat (and use) of force.  So yes, anything that "government" does reallocates the labors of one citizen to another...by force.  The question asked here is what level of such reallocation acceptable?  What level is legal? 

What Paul was trying to say, IMHO, was that offering a meager existence without any expectation of gainful employment robs human beings of their dignity and more importantly their freedom of determining their own purpose in life.

We should balance the need to provide for others with the need to not only "want" others to stand on their own, but to "require" it whenever possible.

[NotNow]

Seditious?  How so?  Other than the snarky "pink" comment, and saying that my comment is "seditious", do you have anything to offer this conversation?

[JayBird]

What Paul was trying to say, IMHO, was that offering a meager existence without any expectation of gainful employment robs human beings of their dignity and more importantly their freedom of determining their own purpose in life.

Not sure the point here, in the State of Florida you must be actively seeking employment in order to continue to recieve any food stamp benefits. The exceptions being if you are medically disabled, currently enrolled in an educational program, or actively participating in a government funded work program. And all of those exceptions do not receive the full benefits. Florida has actually been criticized by the liberal side because they have strict enforcement rules such as  when they discontinue your benefits immediately upon opening an investigation instead of waiting to determine if you actually are complying.

[JayBird]

Gotcha  but my response was more aimed at the latter comments. Those are actually stereotypes of 1970's homeless. As a matter of fact, in 8 years with Jacksonville not one person ever publicly stated that removing homeless would lessen crime or that homelessness contributes to crime, which you stated but I don't believe anyone here even mentioned that because it isn't a major factor. I don't feel anyone "freaks out" about the homeless more than any other cause. It is a problem, but its a problem everywhere. And those whom are attempting to help are not approaching it with a "fix everything" mentality, they approach it with a "if you would like help, I'm here" mentality.

****

Good find on that article, seems to be politics as usual. Nice to see Jacksonville isn't the only place with inept council-mayor-resident relations.

I've been participating in the Jax 2025 subcommittee to address homelessness. I can give you some of the stats used later, but a relatively small number of homeless people make up a disproportionately high percentage of crime in Downtown Jax. Chief Ayoub (Zone 1) is happy to speak about it with interested parties.

Please do, because that is not what JSO presents to the public via its web site or even what that same Chief spoke on at a ShAdCo meeting last month.

(Edit) also keep in mind that Zone 1 is the entire area bordered by 95, the Trout River and the St Johns River. The majority of the crime in Zone 1 is in sector C (north of 20th street) and when you look at sector A (DT/LaVilla/Sports Complex less than 20% of those arrested have no address and less than 3% of those have no address when they appear in court (this is due to people not providing address when arrested and booked into the PTDF). It comes down to opportunity, those living on the street have a limited opportunity to commit a crime and those in the shelter programs lose the little they have (if you commit a crime while residing in any shelter in Jax you are banned from admittance for a period of 365 days), but if you have numbers showing otherwise I would be very interested to see them because that would imply someone is playing politics.

[JayBird]

I have been involved with helping the homeless for over a decade here in Jacksonville and let me tell you people do freakl out about them. I have the tire tracks up and down my back to prove it

I guess it depends on perception. Some might say the preservationists freak out, others will say RAP freaks out, and yet there are those that say the Beaches freak out over city decisions. The bottom line, those are stereotypes that can be proven inaccurate by simply visiting the programs in Jax, walking the streets and then comparing the statistical data with that of other cities. Homelessness is not an epidemic in Jacksonville, yet those outside of the loop believe it is.

[NotNow]

so taxes are done at gunpoint?

Ummm, yes.  we are all forced to pay income taxes.  For those of us that are required to pay, the alternative is prison.  If you refuse to go to prison, you will be forced to go...at gunpoint if necessary. 

Didn't you know that?

[NotNow]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition

In law, sedition is overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that is deemed by the legal authority to tend toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. Seditious words in writing are seditious libel. A seditionist is one who engages in or promotes the interests of sedition.

Typically, sedition is considered a subversive act, and the overt acts that may be prosecutable under sedition laws vary from one legal code to another. Where the history of these legal codes has been traced, there is also a record of the change in the definition of the elements constituting sedition at certain points in history. This overview has served to develop a sociological definition of sedition as well, within the study of state persecution.

The difference between sedition and treason consists primarily in the subjective ultimate object of the violation to the public peace. Sedition does not consist of levying war against a government nor of adhering to its enemies, giving enemies aid, and giving enemies comfort. Nor does it consist, in most representative democracies, of peaceful protest against a government, nor of attempting to change the government by democratic means (such as direct democracy or constitutional convention).

Sedition is the stirring up of rebellion against the government in power. Treason is the violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or state, giving aid to enemies, or levying war against one's state. Sedition is encouraging one's fellow citizens to rebel against their state, whereas treason is actually betraying one's country by aiding and abetting another state. Sedition laws somewhat equate to terrorism and public order laws.

You have quoted an explanation of the definition of sedition.   Can you explain specifically why you called my comments seditious?