A homeless person has no private place of residence, so legally we can kick all of them out of this country, regardless of whether they have broken any laws or not? If so, which I doubt, then I would consider it an abuse of power, punishing those who have commited no crimes, done nothing wrong.
A homeless person has no private place of residence, so legally we can kick all of them out of this country, regardless of whether they have broken any laws or not? If so, which I doubt, then I would consider it an abuse of power, punishing those who have commited no crimes, done nothing wrong.
No, this PARK.
And don't tell me that they would have to leave the country. If we somehow found a way to keep them from sleeping under bridges (Which I doubt) - they would all start renting cheap apartments.
Most, perhaps all of them have the money to do that - they just don't need to, because there's still lots of unguarded park benches.
"You can kill my body, but you can't kill my soul. My soul will live forever!"
A homeless person has no private place of residence, so legally we can kick all of them out of this country, regardless of whether they have broken any laws or not? If so, which I doubt, then I would consider it an abuse of power, punishing those who have commited no crimes, done nothing wrong.
If you're on the land of a club to which you do not belong they are perfectly entitled to kick you out. You might not have done anything wrong but at the same time you don't have a right to be there.
Punishing those who've done no wrong. Pft, they aren't contributing and as such are parasites which are inherently harmful to the host organism, of course they've done something wrong.
The problem would be solved much more quickly if we warned them they had a week to find a job then at the end of that week put the ones without a job on a cruise ship took them out to the middle of the Atlantic and threw them all overboard.
MA: I see you missed the point, if you have the right to kick someone, who has commited no crime, off public land then why not the entire country?
Nem: People who are on pensions do not contribue to society, at least not in a monetary way, they worked before you will say, but so will have some homeless people. The homeless were recieving food from a charity, and so a parasite is the wrong term to use in my opinion. If it were a government run scheme I would still disagree with the stopping of the soup kitchen (unless the money was transfered to another scheme) but it would be within their rights. Making it illegal to give out free food seems a bit wrong to me, it also doesn't stop the homeless problem. Furthermore, not all homeless peolpe are capable of working, no more than someone in a wheelchair is capable of running the 100m sprint.
Nem: People who are on pensions do not contribue to society, at least not in a monetary way, they worked before you will say, but so will have some homeless people.
I don't approve of a state pension.
Our overly compassionate take on pensions is the reason that it's falling through the floor, it's just not economically viable for the government to use the current generation to support the previous one through their old age. These people are parasites, don't get me wrong I know a lot of old people and I like most of them but that's what they are regardless of their character. Now obviously we still have to support them because it wasn't made clear to them years ago that they should look to their own pensions, we've made that bed and now have to lie in it. But in 70 years when our generation comes to a pensionable age that excuse won't hold water anymore, we know that a state pension probably won't be around for us so if we haven't put anything aside against that then that's the end of it.
If you can't pay your taxes then you've no place in society, we have to tolerate the current cluster-fucked situation of the pension system because years ago we made the wrong choice and now have to put up with it for a few years until we can do away with it.
In all fairness and without the concepts of honour or fair deals we should just turf them out but there was an understanding that they'd be provided for in their old age if they payed their taxes and they now continue to pay their taxes out of that which they are provided with so we can't do that, they're still contributing members of society.
The homeless however are under no such protection.
Now as far as I'm aware no-one's making it illegal to give out free food, they're just saying do it somewhere else.
Some people may be incapable of working, but what of it? If someone wants to drag them around and provide for them then that's fair enough but I don't see that I'm under any obligation to support them.
Alrighty then, this debate has been rather more prolonged that I thought it would be. MA, I retract my previous statement directed at you and ask you to ignore it please. I stand by my original view and you two yours, agree to disagree or this will never end .
This site is part of the Defy Media Gaming network
The best serving of video game culture, since 2001. Whether you're looking for news, reviews, walkthroughs, or the biggest collection of PC gaming files on the planet, Game Front has you covered. We also make no illusions about gaming: it's supposed to be fun. Browse gaming galleries, humor lists, and honest, short-form reporting. Game on!
The Pub 
Re: Las Vegas bans feeding homeless in parks 
or this will never end .gif "Sad at the sad color")
. 
Linear Mode
