Indy.com
Today:
Unbelieveable
Posted: Mar 31, 2008 in Things to do, Nightlife, Culture
Tags:
What a way to start the day... I could not believe it when I read the front page of the Indy Star today. Who does Greg Ballard think he is? The idea of banning panhandlers is preposterous. I thought the suggestion of charging for expensive panhanlding "permits" particularly insensitive and uneducated and then just crass when it went on to compare homeless individuals to hot dog vendors trying to make a buck.
Homelessness will not go away. I can not think of any major city that I have visited that did not have so-called panhandlers. It takes a pretty shallow person to be bothered by such facts of life. Furthermore, the idea of giving to shelters instead of these individuals will not change the reality that not all homeless are in shelters, use shelters, or have access to shelters.
Mr. Ballard, do you propose we throw panhandlers in jail and use tax payer money to feed them? Should we have an elite unit of your police department devoted to rooting out the "sham" panhandlers from the legitimately destitute souls? Personally, I feel there are more important issues.
At risk of alienating myself, I will make one further comment. I would assume that being a Republican, Mr. Ballard is some kind of "Christian." Considering Jesus was (in my understanding)a homeless panhandler - how would he feel if he decides to "come again" in Indy - see you in jail, bro.
Amen.
(Though I belive there is no possible way to mix religion and politics. I'll let you know if I change my mind when I'm done reading Jesus for President by Shane Claiborne, Chris Haw.)
You have to admit though, it's hard to understand homelessness for people who buy houses ten time bigger than what they need. When you have that much, you can't understand having nothing. They can't understand starting from the bottom and not the middle or the top. And that's a very sad fact.
I find myself torn on the issue of panhandling. On the one hand, I can certainly see how it is viewed as an eyesore on the city. I find it annoying that I have to pass the same guy begging for change every day. And I hate the idea that when people come in from out of town, whether personal guests of mine or people in for major events/conferences, aggressive panhandling is one of the impressions of my city that they come away with.
On the other hand, I think about how miserable I get just being outside for the short walk to the car when it's cold outside, and can't even imagine what it's like to have to live and sleep in those conditions 24 hours a day. I take notice of how hungry I get when I've had to skip just one meal, and can't imagine not eating for days at a time.
I definitely disagree with you on the issue of donating to a shelter vs. giving to the panhandlers. Shelters and charities allocate the money to necessities such as housing, clothing, and food, whereas people who are homeless because of alcohol/substance abuse will continue to feed their addiction above all else. If people choose not to take advantage of the shelters, which are readily available in the Downtown area where this initiative is being implemented, it is quite often because of zero tolerance policies for alcohol and controlled substances. In my opinion, if you don't want free help with the underlying problems such as shaking habits, getting a job, and becoming independent, then you really have no room to complain about your situation. I see more and more homeless people carrying signs that say "Why lie, it's for beer." and I want to hold up a sign in return that says "Why lie, if you'd stop drinking and get a job, you wouldn't have to beg for money."
I can't upload an image to this thread, but this one sends a very strong, simple message about homelessness.
http://www.weburbanist.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/i-want-change.jpg
I find myself torn on the issue of panhandling. On the one hand, I can ...
Nicely phrased, StellarSwarm Living downtown I find myself at times numb to persistant panhandlers at every corner. They're a constant, and I waver between feeling badly that I couldn't drop my spare change into their hats because I have to use it to buy a gallon of milk for my kids; to feeling annoyed that the same guy who I just gifted a fiver to a few days ago flips me off because I took the time to smile at him and apologize I didn't have anything on me today. It's easy to become desensitized to the problem. And, however you might view Greg Ballard's efforts, you can't say he isn't attempting to take the city's best interests to heart. And I don't think wanting to improve our city makes him Shallow.
I found it interesting that it's being touted as an initiative to get rid of panhandling, but what's being proposed is fairly mild. Some cities have actually established "panhandling zones" -- basically small boxes marked in paint on the sidewalks. Anyone looking for a handout outside of those boxes gets ticketed and eventually arrested. Now that's draconian.
The panhandlers in Indy are fairly sedate compared to those in, say, New York. I fondly remember the woman I passed every day in NYC who took in stray dogs. People would come over to pet the dogs, and usually ended up chatting with her and dropping her some change. She would also occasionally adopt one of her dogs (for free) when she found an appropriate home.
Having interviewed homeless people over the years, I can say that while many of them are just regular people who are down on their luck, the rate of substance abuse and mental instability is shockingly high. A tiny, tiny percentage are people who just don't want to work.
I found it interesting that it's being touted as an initiative to get rid of ...
I actually saw a guy sitting on the side of the road one day holding a sign that read--and I'm not kidding--"WHY LIE? I NEED A DRINK."
Gotta appreciate the honesty. I'm sure our esteemed mayor is trying to target those who sit on the highway offramps and stoplights outside of Wal-Marts with their homeless signs, then walk down the street to their car to go home (actually I've seen the same lady on different sides of town asking for money). But wouldn't it be just as easy to just send an edict to the police to pick up some of those people for one of the other laws they're breaking, rather than picking on all homeless people?
I actually find firefighters who collect money at heavily traveled intersections more of a hazard than downtown panhandlers.
John makes an interesting point about the intersection collections. I've seen them done in the name of firefighters, state troopers, churches, youth groups and more. And you always wonder if they're legit.
Even assuming they are, would they be impacted by new panhandling measures? How is charity to a single person different than that given to a group? Are we more likely to give to those we think "deserve" it than to those who are the neediest?
This is turning into exactly the kind of philosophical mud-hole I love to wallow in...
AND...let's just make this more complicated... is panhandling limited to collecting money? Would passing out little handheld flags, or postcards or any of the myriad other things that savvy panhandlers have started doing in order to collect funds count as "sales" or "pandhandling"?