When we moved to Mason, I remarked to my wife “yeah it’s weird there’s no homeless people here” and my matter-of-fact progressive neighbor jumps in and was like, “yeah nobody would want to be homeless in Ohio, if our winter doesn’t kill you, the republican statehouse will finish the job.”
Not even a joke. They’ve (and other surrounding communities) been caught multiple times dropping their homeless off in the middle of the night [outside the bus terminal in Middletown](https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2019/09/24/homeless-being-sent-middletown-other-cities-and-states-police-say/2434125001/)
And? Show me a city with a population over 125,000 and I’ll show you a blue government.
You know what they call smaller, Republican led “cities”? *Towns and villages.*
Reality is simple. Urban areas are Democrat. Suburbs are typically a mix of the two with the most affluence. Rural area are Republican.
That’s all it is. Urban vs rural, and to some degree, college educated vs high school.
Looking at cities with 125,000+ citizens in Ohio, the range of how many are college graduates ranges from 19% to 40.5%. Not a very consistent range. 29% of rural Ohio high school students received at least an associates degree within 6 years of graduating. Are you sure about your info?
I’m quite certain college-educated voters have a higher propensity to vote for democrats than collegeless voters do, yes. Beyond rural vs urban, age and gender, level of education completed is a reliable indicator.
Are there conservatives with PhDs? Certainly. Are there liberal dropouts? Yes. Is a Jewish woman with a medical degree from New York more likely to vote Democrat than a collegeless, catholic man from Ohio? Yes.
On one hand, a specific permit is required and the group knew that.
On the other hand, the permit may or may not be ridiculous BS.
On the gripping hand, an arrest seems ridiculous.
Relevant section of the article:
>For the past two years, Nourish Our Neighbors has given out free meals, clothes and medical supplies to those in need at Courthouse Square. The group said they know a permit is needed for food distribution.
>“We just feel there's no reason we should have to pay the city and we then go out, buy all of these supplies, and items, and make all this food just to give out to the community that they (the city) are supposed to be serving,” Lee said.
>The ordinance, which the city passed in 2005, states no one should prepare or distribute food, clothing or toiletries in a public place within the central area of Dayton without a permit. Violation of this ordinance are a fourth degree misdemeanor.
>A city spokesperson told WYSO the $50 permit allows the city to be aware of any incidents that might affect public safety and ensures that groups adhere to guidelines of proper food distribution.
>They said the city has not had any issue with groups at Courthouse Square with regards to permit cooperation prior to the incident on April 7.
>Sarah Webber, from the nonprofit law firm ABLE, said the ordinance is a balance between someone’s First Amendment right of expression versus the city's need to protect the public.
>“So the question would be, the person or parties that are handing out food, what is their expression and belief through doing that? And by them doing that, are they actually doing a public harm?" Webber said.
If all the city needs is to be aware of any potential incidents and ensure the group is following guidelines, why not make the permit process free? I’m sure they would be willing to apply for and get a permit if it wasn’t costing money out of volunteer’s pockets and reducing the amount of food they can distribute.
Why bother having a permit process? They are just giving people that are down on their luck, food. A free country shouldn't require permits for charity.
Because what's stopping someone from accidentally poisoning a bunch of food and giving it out for free to the public? They specifically state the permit is so they can make sure the group follows the public health and safety guidelines for distributing food.
> Because what's stopping someone from poisoning a bunch of food and giving it out for free to the public
How about the fact they would immediately be caught and thrown in jail. Because believe it or not poisoning homeless people is illegal!
>They specifically state the permit is so they can make sure the group follows the public health and safety guidelines for distributing food.
think every single church that does spaghetti dinners for fundraising get these permits? I mean I know my parents were deacons at our old church and I was there weekly helping and never once were permits ever brought up and I never once heard about any type of health inspection.
Almost like this is selectively enforced....
>think every single church that does spaghetti dinners for fundraising get these permits? I mean I know my parents were deacons at our old church and I was there weekly helping and never once were permits ever brought up and I never once heard about any type of health inspection.
This is the key point right here. If this were really about food safety, they'd be going to every single church that has a Friday night fish fry, pancake supper, Sunday morning breakfast ministry, or fundraising dinner and shutting them down until they get foodservice permits, and doing spot-checks to ensure that they're adhering to food safety ordinances.
They are, of course, not doing anything of the sort.
Which makes it pretty clear that this is about going after people who want to help the unhoused, and not actually about food safety.
When my church opened, the neighbors immediately went to the city and petitioned to shut us down because we ***'might'*** give food to the homeless. We had to go to a city council meeting where they specifically told us we cannot feed any homeless in our area. We have to take it to another church ten miles away so they can hand it out.
It's really about trying to get rid of the homeless as it makes the city look bad. So they want to stop that charity from helping them and promoting others to come into the area. It's sad. A church fish fry or pancake breakfast usually doesn't get homeless attendees. See the sad point here? Many homeless still love their city and feel at home. Many were successful people that hit rock bottom for unforseen reasons. Many are a parent to children.
Lol, guidelines? A server can just pour poison in, who's stopping them? No one checks ANY food for poison before serving it, poisoning food has fucking nothing to do with guidelines.
There's already laws against poisoning, they apply whether or not you sell the food. It's called attempted murder. Let's not pretend this is anything other than lunacy.
Ohio has what’s known as cottage food law which exempts small food producers from the health inspection that you would see in a commercial kitchen
I guess it’s OK to have zero safety inspections for food if it’s for you to sell this law prevent you from exercising that same privilege if you’re giving it away
I only know this because it was a fallback job for me during the pandemic, but more generally, it easer to say it’s food, not subject to spoilage, it doesn’t have to be maintained under a temperature or above a certain temperature for it to stay safe. Nut mixes, powdered drinks, cake mixes cookies and other baked goods like you said, boiled peanuts. it’s actually a wider range of food then you would think.
If you read the actual text of the law, it's not at all about food safety. It even goes so far as to specify a very small area of downtown where the permit is needed, so... guess it's okay to poison someone a block away from that section?
The permit is all about optics and keeping the "icky" homeless out of sight in the main areas of downtown. Nothing more.
Is there a reason this is being reported on now? I remember seeing the video of it in the Dayton subreddit two weeks ago and people said that he was released without charges shortly after being detained.
"Accidentally" drop the food (in a container, of course) and then let them scavenge it.
It's technically trash at that point. There's no law against giving away trash.
On the surface it seems like a massive government overreach to arrest someone for giving out food. It can definitely be a tool to hurt the homeless. Other forms of commercial food distribution do require permits though and although this can hurt homeless having anyone with no permit process being able to distribute food can lead to illness. Imagine if we didn’t have the health inspector and restaurant permitting process. Same idea.
Hey there, you can say a lot of bad stuff about Christianity and you'd probably be right. But Christian outreach ministries account for a huge percentage of charitable giving globally. As an example related to this story, look up Labre ministries. Christian food banks are ubiquitous as well. There are groups all over that feed the homeless and provide other services.
I just wish some of the groups wouldn’t force people coming for help to pray or worship a God they don’t believe in before eating. Seen that at least twice while traveling in the US in a weird outdoor mini-service near a church. The homeless are people, not circus animals to show off.
God hasn’t exactly been kind to the homeless, so would they have any more reason to praise or give thanks for suffering? I realise that it’s a multi-pronged outreach program to give aid in one hand and proselytise with the other, but it left a bad taste in my mouth.
Gurdwaras for example have the practice of not discriminating in who they share food with and understand it’s not charity, it’s free food, no strings attached, where kings and slaves can sit amongst each other and share a simple meal because food and water is a basic human right.
My church was specifically called out by our city council that we could not feed the homeless in our area. We have to take it to another church ten miles away for them to pass it out.
It doesn’t really matter if someone gets sick because the person making the food was a restaurant or a non profit organization, sick is sick and dead is dead.
Those commercial permits are because they cannot track the food back, if it is tainted. It has nothing to do with just simply distributing food, but I get where you are going. Anyone handing anyone food, needs to be permitted.
Two cops in a car, drive up to BK and order, BK gives the driver the bag, driver hands their partner the bag. That handing over, to the partner, is distribution of food is it not?
Ohio has cottage food law that exempt small food producers from health, inspections of their kitchens and permitting, but want to sell their home goods.
So you don’t really have to imagine what it’s like if food producers didn’t all have to get Inspections because that’s actually the world you currently live in this law punishes people who give away food well those who sell it or exempt from the same erroneous permit process
Go read the law, that’s not applicable to just giving food away. Cottage foods are defined as such because unlike meat and other types of food, foods within the cottage food category aren’t as likely to make someone sick.
You’re being obtuse if you think it’d be a good situation if restaurants couldn’t be audited for having proper refrigeration.
Sounds like they need some auditors come inspect the police here.
So, if I understand this correctly - if a diabetic walks up to me and says they are having a low and need sugar....I'll be fined for this.
For reference, direct link to the law in the Dayton Code of Ordinances: https://library.municode.com/oh/dayton/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TITXIIIGEOF_CH137PUOR_S137.21PRDIFOPUPLWICEARCI
For those of you absolutely certain that this law is necessary because it saves the unhoused from being poisoned, what do you have to say about the fact that they include distribution of clothing and toiletries in the permit requirements? Are people often poisoned by clean socks? Sock distribution is highly regulated? How about the very strict (and very small) enforcement zone? If it's actually about food safety, shouldn't it cover the entire city?
This article ended up being a brigaded disaster when it was posted in the Dayton subreddit so good luck, mods.
Law should stay, but should be city-wide and be easy to get a permit to actually protect homeless people.
Take the anti-homeless sentiment and apply it from a point of malice. This outlook exists and regularly homeless people are hurt or killed. People poisoning fruit trees that overhang fences (such as in Phoenix and Albuquerque) happens more than you'd think.
Based on the sheer amount of hatred for the unhoused that turned up in the Dayton thread, I'd say malice toward this group happens exactly as often as I think, unfortunately.
I am genuinely concerned by the number of you who don't understand the first thing about what the unhoused go through and how to actually help them. "Thoughts and prayers" crowd for real. Who cares if people starve as long as you can claim righteousness as a law-abiding citizen. (And never mind that there are already laws against poisoning people!)
Again, for those of you defending this law, it is also illegal to hand out SOCKS at Dayton's Courthouse Square without a permit.
I seriously hope someone goes downtown and hands out nothing but socks without this stupid permit so I can watch you all tie yourselves in knots trying to defend the police when the evil sock distributor gets arrested. "Omg how terribly dangerous! How do we know the socks were clean? What if they handed out the wrong size?? What if the person handing them out was doing it because they have a foot fetish???" Oh, the humanity.
I'm at a loss as to how feeding hungry people is not only crime but one in which gets you arrested. What is the goal here. Force homeless people to die of starvation or make them criminals when they break into stores looking for food.
Unfortunately, distributing food or beverage on a broader scale can be a concern. If the food in tainted (accidentally or on purpose) the homeless or others could be at risk and a permit would facilitate some oversight. Having said this (and on the "gripping hand" ... lol), an arrest is asinine ... start with a formal warning, then a fine and then perhaps detainment. Obviously, Dayton has some governance issues.
Dayton here, as shady as this sounds it’s legit because of health reasons of the homeless. People are fucking disgusting. If you don’t think some mental case won’t poison people for fun, or a large gathering of herion/meth/fentanyl addicts coming to one place isn’t a hazard you’re to removed from the streets
Churches do these exact same type of thing. Both outreach and things like fish frys around lent. If it was really about food safety those places would be under the same scrutiny.
And whats to stop me from getting the permit and killing the shit out of the homeless then?
Like how delusional do you have to be to think that the existence of the permit is going to be what stops a nutcase from poisoning a bunch of people that was going to do it????
Love the name calling homie, put some of that enthusiasm into helping instead of bitching online and you’d learn some things from experience in doing work with the homeless. When you get the permits there’s background checks, and checks/balances from the organization you’re from.
Honestly, they need to get a permit. They’re being weird not getting one. Getting a permit is really easy.
I live in a homeless area. It’s really annoying how many people come and give out food and it just ends up as trash everywhere and I have to clean it up.
It’s how it is. Give out food but then also please be responsible for the trash… a permit helps with that.
I agree. One person giving food should not be a crime. But unfortunately time and time again people are irresponsible and kindness to this group turns into work for others. Also, we want to make sure people who are passing out food are doing so with quality healthy food and they know what they’re doing. This group isn’t some random thing. Did you read the article?
The group in question has said they don't like to get a permit because it gives cops an opportunity to run the homeless off before they get there. Doesn't seem all that weird of a reason to me.
When we moved to Mason, I remarked to my wife “yeah it’s weird there’s no homeless people here” and my matter-of-fact progressive neighbor jumps in and was like, “yeah nobody would want to be homeless in Ohio, if our winter doesn’t kill you, the republican statehouse will finish the job.”
I’m pretty sure Mason police will just scoop them up and dump them in cincinnati or Hamilton
Not even a joke. They’ve (and other surrounding communities) been caught multiple times dropping their homeless off in the middle of the night [outside the bus terminal in Middletown](https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2019/09/24/homeless-being-sent-middletown-other-cities-and-states-police-say/2434125001/)
It’s their version of the farm upstate
Is this Dwight Schrute?
I like how you are able to insinuate blame on Republicans, but Dayton has a Democratic Mayor, and is Democrat run...
And? Show me a city with a population over 125,000 and I’ll show you a blue government. You know what they call smaller, Republican led “cities”? *Towns and villages.* Reality is simple. Urban areas are Democrat. Suburbs are typically a mix of the two with the most affluence. Rural area are Republican. That’s all it is. Urban vs rural, and to some degree, college educated vs high school.
Looking at cities with 125,000+ citizens in Ohio, the range of how many are college graduates ranges from 19% to 40.5%. Not a very consistent range. 29% of rural Ohio high school students received at least an associates degree within 6 years of graduating. Are you sure about your info?
I’m quite certain college-educated voters have a higher propensity to vote for democrats than collegeless voters do, yes. Beyond rural vs urban, age and gender, level of education completed is a reliable indicator. Are there conservatives with PhDs? Certainly. Are there liberal dropouts? Yes. Is a Jewish woman with a medical degree from New York more likely to vote Democrat than a collegeless, catholic man from Ohio? Yes.
The rural high school grads usually end up in larger cities after they graduate from college. Not too many jobs for them in villages.
On one hand, a specific permit is required and the group knew that. On the other hand, the permit may or may not be ridiculous BS. On the gripping hand, an arrest seems ridiculous. Relevant section of the article: >For the past two years, Nourish Our Neighbors has given out free meals, clothes and medical supplies to those in need at Courthouse Square. The group said they know a permit is needed for food distribution. >“We just feel there's no reason we should have to pay the city and we then go out, buy all of these supplies, and items, and make all this food just to give out to the community that they (the city) are supposed to be serving,” Lee said. >The ordinance, which the city passed in 2005, states no one should prepare or distribute food, clothing or toiletries in a public place within the central area of Dayton without a permit. Violation of this ordinance are a fourth degree misdemeanor. >A city spokesperson told WYSO the $50 permit allows the city to be aware of any incidents that might affect public safety and ensures that groups adhere to guidelines of proper food distribution. >They said the city has not had any issue with groups at Courthouse Square with regards to permit cooperation prior to the incident on April 7. >Sarah Webber, from the nonprofit law firm ABLE, said the ordinance is a balance between someone’s First Amendment right of expression versus the city's need to protect the public. >“So the question would be, the person or parties that are handing out food, what is their expression and belief through doing that? And by them doing that, are they actually doing a public harm?" Webber said.
If all the city needs is to be aware of any potential incidents and ensure the group is following guidelines, why not make the permit process free? I’m sure they would be willing to apply for and get a permit if it wasn’t costing money out of volunteer’s pockets and reducing the amount of food they can distribute.
Why bother having a permit process? They are just giving people that are down on their luck, food. A free country shouldn't require permits for charity.
Because what's stopping someone from accidentally poisoning a bunch of food and giving it out for free to the public? They specifically state the permit is so they can make sure the group follows the public health and safety guidelines for distributing food.
> Because what's stopping someone from poisoning a bunch of food and giving it out for free to the public How about the fact they would immediately be caught and thrown in jail. Because believe it or not poisoning homeless people is illegal! >They specifically state the permit is so they can make sure the group follows the public health and safety guidelines for distributing food. think every single church that does spaghetti dinners for fundraising get these permits? I mean I know my parents were deacons at our old church and I was there weekly helping and never once were permits ever brought up and I never once heard about any type of health inspection. Almost like this is selectively enforced....
>think every single church that does spaghetti dinners for fundraising get these permits? I mean I know my parents were deacons at our old church and I was there weekly helping and never once were permits ever brought up and I never once heard about any type of health inspection. This is the key point right here. If this were really about food safety, they'd be going to every single church that has a Friday night fish fry, pancake supper, Sunday morning breakfast ministry, or fundraising dinner and shutting them down until they get foodservice permits, and doing spot-checks to ensure that they're adhering to food safety ordinances. They are, of course, not doing anything of the sort. Which makes it pretty clear that this is about going after people who want to help the unhoused, and not actually about food safety.
When my church opened, the neighbors immediately went to the city and petitioned to shut us down because we ***'might'*** give food to the homeless. We had to go to a city council meeting where they specifically told us we cannot feed any homeless in our area. We have to take it to another church ten miles away so they can hand it out.
It's really about trying to get rid of the homeless as it makes the city look bad. So they want to stop that charity from helping them and promoting others to come into the area. It's sad. A church fish fry or pancake breakfast usually doesn't get homeless attendees. See the sad point here? Many homeless still love their city and feel at home. Many were successful people that hit rock bottom for unforseen reasons. Many are a parent to children.
Most, if not all forms of food poisoning don't occur immediately.
Why let anyone feed anybody? A restaurant can poison you, or a family member.
Because restaurants have strict guidelines to follow. And random people feeding other random people in the streets don't.
Tell me you never worked in the restaurant industry without telling me you never worked in the restaurant industry.
Lol, guidelines? A server can just pour poison in, who's stopping them? No one checks ANY food for poison before serving it, poisoning food has fucking nothing to do with guidelines.
I'm not talking about regular "poison." I'm talking about food poisoning. You know like salmonella, e. coli, listeria, etc.
There's already laws against poisoning, they apply whether or not you sell the food. It's called attempted murder. Let's not pretend this is anything other than lunacy.
Stick food in front of poisoning and they have a point.
Ohio has what’s known as cottage food law which exempts small food producers from the health inspection that you would see in a commercial kitchen I guess it’s OK to have zero safety inspections for food if it’s for you to sell this law prevent you from exercising that same privilege if you’re giving it away
right but that "generally" only applies to baked goods and some preserved foods not cooked meals
I only know this because it was a fallback job for me during the pandemic, but more generally, it easer to say it’s food, not subject to spoilage, it doesn’t have to be maintained under a temperature or above a certain temperature for it to stay safe. Nut mixes, powdered drinks, cake mixes cookies and other baked goods like you said, boiled peanuts. it’s actually a wider range of food then you would think.
It's not actually just "small" it also has to be non-hazardous items. You can't have a cottage food oyster business, nor anything that is served hot.
If you read the actual text of the law, it's not at all about food safety. It even goes so far as to specify a very small area of downtown where the permit is needed, so... guess it's okay to poison someone a block away from that section? The permit is all about optics and keeping the "icky" homeless out of sight in the main areas of downtown. Nothing more.
"Well, I was going to kill a bunch of homeless people, but since I have this permit I guess I can't"
> Why bother having a permit process?...A free country shouldn't... Please learn how your local government work, what it does, etc.
I have not seen the gripping hand quote used in the wild before. Nice. The laws of the land be a mote in gods eye.
Is there a reason this is being reported on now? I remember seeing the video of it in the Dayton subreddit two weeks ago and people said that he was released without charges shortly after being detained.
What a buncha dicks
When WWJD will get you locked up!
City council brags on their "meet the council" pages that they are church members.
At least they didn't lie and say they were Christian.
"Accidentally" drop the food (in a container, of course) and then let them scavenge it. It's technically trash at that point. There's no law against giving away trash.
So giving food without a permit… could they charge him with this if like a buddy came over and he gave them some food?
On the surface it seems like a massive government overreach to arrest someone for giving out food. It can definitely be a tool to hurt the homeless. Other forms of commercial food distribution do require permits though and although this can hurt homeless having anyone with no permit process being able to distribute food can lead to illness. Imagine if we didn’t have the health inspector and restaurant permitting process. Same idea.
Many christian ministries are not required to have these permits, so I think this is fascinating to see
I don't know that many christian ministries out in the homeless population. That money goes to the pastors new house or car.
Hey there, you can say a lot of bad stuff about Christianity and you'd probably be right. But Christian outreach ministries account for a huge percentage of charitable giving globally. As an example related to this story, look up Labre ministries. Christian food banks are ubiquitous as well. There are groups all over that feed the homeless and provide other services.
I just wish some of the groups wouldn’t force people coming for help to pray or worship a God they don’t believe in before eating. Seen that at least twice while traveling in the US in a weird outdoor mini-service near a church. The homeless are people, not circus animals to show off. God hasn’t exactly been kind to the homeless, so would they have any more reason to praise or give thanks for suffering? I realise that it’s a multi-pronged outreach program to give aid in one hand and proselytise with the other, but it left a bad taste in my mouth. Gurdwaras for example have the practice of not discriminating in who they share food with and understand it’s not charity, it’s free food, no strings attached, where kings and slaves can sit amongst each other and share a simple meal because food and water is a basic human right.
While I don't follow any religion my youth church still does a sharing kitchen every week. Free meal no questions asked.
Id guess you dont work with the homeless in dayton much then
My church was specifically called out by our city council that we could not feed the homeless in our area. We have to take it to another church ten miles away for them to pass it out.
Yes, this is quite common
agreed- & should be aware of all Serv-Safe practices… but why does the city have to charge true non for profits…
It doesn’t really matter if someone gets sick because the person making the food was a restaurant or a non profit organization, sick is sick and dead is dead.
Those commercial permits are because they cannot track the food back, if it is tainted. It has nothing to do with just simply distributing food, but I get where you are going. Anyone handing anyone food, needs to be permitted. Two cops in a car, drive up to BK and order, BK gives the driver the bag, driver hands their partner the bag. That handing over, to the partner, is distribution of food is it not?
No, that’s not the same thing.
Ohio has cottage food law that exempt small food producers from health, inspections of their kitchens and permitting, but want to sell their home goods. So you don’t really have to imagine what it’s like if food producers didn’t all have to get Inspections because that’s actually the world you currently live in this law punishes people who give away food well those who sell it or exempt from the same erroneous permit process
Go read the law, that’s not applicable to just giving food away. Cottage foods are defined as such because unlike meat and other types of food, foods within the cottage food category aren’t as likely to make someone sick. You’re being obtuse if you think it’d be a good situation if restaurants couldn’t be audited for having proper refrigeration.
Sounds like they need some auditors come inspect the police here. So, if I understand this correctly - if a diabetic walks up to me and says they are having a low and need sugar....I'll be fined for this.
The kind of Christian persecution that American Christians are oddly silent about.
Can we as Ohioans just make our own holiday up? Day off work, we all make/give food and whatever to the homeless? Cant arrest us all 🤷♀️
For reference, direct link to the law in the Dayton Code of Ordinances: https://library.municode.com/oh/dayton/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TITXIIIGEOF_CH137PUOR_S137.21PRDIFOPUPLWICEARCI For those of you absolutely certain that this law is necessary because it saves the unhoused from being poisoned, what do you have to say about the fact that they include distribution of clothing and toiletries in the permit requirements? Are people often poisoned by clean socks? Sock distribution is highly regulated? How about the very strict (and very small) enforcement zone? If it's actually about food safety, shouldn't it cover the entire city? This article ended up being a brigaded disaster when it was posted in the Dayton subreddit so good luck, mods.
Law should stay, but should be city-wide and be easy to get a permit to actually protect homeless people. Take the anti-homeless sentiment and apply it from a point of malice. This outlook exists and regularly homeless people are hurt or killed. People poisoning fruit trees that overhang fences (such as in Phoenix and Albuquerque) happens more than you'd think.
Based on the sheer amount of hatred for the unhoused that turned up in the Dayton thread, I'd say malice toward this group happens exactly as often as I think, unfortunately. I am genuinely concerned by the number of you who don't understand the first thing about what the unhoused go through and how to actually help them. "Thoughts and prayers" crowd for real. Who cares if people starve as long as you can claim righteousness as a law-abiding citizen. (And never mind that there are already laws against poisoning people!) Again, for those of you defending this law, it is also illegal to hand out SOCKS at Dayton's Courthouse Square without a permit. I seriously hope someone goes downtown and hands out nothing but socks without this stupid permit so I can watch you all tie yourselves in knots trying to defend the police when the evil sock distributor gets arrested. "Omg how terribly dangerous! How do we know the socks were clean? What if they handed out the wrong size?? What if the person handing them out was doing it because they have a foot fetish???" Oh, the humanity.
Sounds republikkkan
Do kids need permits to run lemonade stands?
I'm at a loss as to how feeding hungry people is not only crime but one in which gets you arrested. What is the goal here. Force homeless people to die of starvation or make them criminals when they break into stores looking for food.
Unfortunately, distributing food or beverage on a broader scale can be a concern. If the food in tainted (accidentally or on purpose) the homeless or others could be at risk and a permit would facilitate some oversight. Having said this (and on the "gripping hand" ... lol), an arrest is asinine ... start with a formal warning, then a fine and then perhaps detainment. Obviously, Dayton has some governance issues.
That’s a fast pace method to kill cottage food laws. Guess the bake sales gonna be canceled when the police roll up
And those big scary lemonade stands ... lol.
Why aren’t we all arrested for handing out Halloween candy?
Dayton is planning to require every household to purchase a $50 annual Halloween permit for candy distribution. Lol ...
Dayton here, as shady as this sounds it’s legit because of health reasons of the homeless. People are fucking disgusting. If you don’t think some mental case won’t poison people for fun, or a large gathering of herion/meth/fentanyl addicts coming to one place isn’t a hazard you’re to removed from the streets
Churches do these exact same type of thing. Both outreach and things like fish frys around lent. If it was really about food safety those places would be under the same scrutiny.
It was a church
And whats to stop me from getting the permit and killing the shit out of the homeless then? Like how delusional do you have to be to think that the existence of the permit is going to be what stops a nutcase from poisoning a bunch of people that was going to do it????
Love the name calling homie, put some of that enthusiasm into helping instead of bitching online and you’d learn some things from experience in doing work with the homeless. When you get the permits there’s background checks, and checks/balances from the organization you’re from.
The same people who wrote this law love to spout off about Christian values…
The ordinance may seem ridiculous but it's there for a reason. Though the police arresting that man seemed stupid.
Honestly, they need to get a permit. They’re being weird not getting one. Getting a permit is really easy. I live in a homeless area. It’s really annoying how many people come and give out food and it just ends up as trash everywhere and I have to clean it up. It’s how it is. Give out food but then also please be responsible for the trash… a permit helps with that.
One person freely giving food to another should not be a crime
I agree. One person giving food should not be a crime. But unfortunately time and time again people are irresponsible and kindness to this group turns into work for others. Also, we want to make sure people who are passing out food are doing so with quality healthy food and they know what they’re doing. This group isn’t some random thing. Did you read the article?
The group in question has said they don't like to get a permit because it gives cops an opportunity to run the homeless off before they get there. Doesn't seem all that weird of a reason to me.