digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

WTF? Man in Florida on trial for FEEDING HOMELESS PEOPLE!

wftv.com — It's the first trial of its kind. A man is facing a judge and jury for violating Orlando's ban on feeding the homeless. Eric Montanez, 22, was caught feeding a group in Lake Eola Park earlier this year. The prosecution told Eyewitness News their case rests on video taken of Montanez feeding the homeless, breaking Orlando's feeding ban.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • duggtodeath, on 10/30/2007, -20/+624HOW DARE HE! Imagine a world where people CARE about each other? Jesus Christ would not approve of this! Caring, feeding, helping and treating one another as equals? ***** NO! Good thing my government believes in pre-emptive war so that they may deliver us from this evil!
    • bassgoonist, on 10/11/2007, -11/+35Technically speaking the law isn't against feeding the homeless...misleading headline ftw.
      • askjeffro, on 10/10/2007, -4/+16Actually... The headline really isn't misleading or incorrect when you read it on its own. Point taken, but the inaccuracy is in the description.
      • Carburetor, on 10/11/2007, -3/+19Technically it isn't, but intrinsically it makes it harder to help the poor.
        I understand that according the law of Orlando you actually need to get approval to do humanitarian act (like feeding the hungry) instead of encouraging to do the opposite.
        I don't understand why.
        I really like the states, and all around the constitution thing, but seriously guys, sometimes, you have really weird laws there...
        That's not like feeding the bears or something, we're talking about hungry people out there.
        • diggduggjoe, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Many Americans wish to have everything run by the state. Even, if that means, getting permission to wipe one's own ass.
        • caferrell, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4The homeless in the parks are unsightly and the Orlando transplants don't like to see them They wish these dirty people with such poor taste would just go somewhere else, so they have made it illegal for someone to feed them.
          How many of these hipocrites vote against feeding the homeless and then go to church on Sunday?
      • isellmacs, on 10/10/2007, -6/+0"I don't understand why"
        I would imagine it has something to do with health regulations. The law doesn't prohibit giving food to the homeless, it's intended purpose is regulating MASS feeding of homeless people.
        IMO this law is unconstitutional, but it's not stupid, pointless or malicious.
        What would happen if a Republican, Conservative or some other person who hates poor people were to poison the food and kill off hundreds of poor people? The idea behind many regulations of "X or greater scale" is that on a small scale even evil deeds are (relatively) harmless in the grand scheme of things, yet once you surpass "X" you are now capable of greater things, and as such, there should be some oversight to make sure such things are done in the best interests of the people, and in good faith.
        Not saying I agree or disagree specifically with the law, just a possible explination.
        • GawtMilk, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4If someone hasn't eaten much recently, and you feed them a fair amount of food in one sitting, their stomach will burst and they will die.
          • aNsfpGejzd5zx0z, on 10/17/2007, -0/+1Source? I saw the CSI episode too, but the guy's stomach didn't burst; it just pushed into his other organs I think (that, and it was CSI). I've heard that vomiting is very common, but I've never heard of someone's stomach actually BURSTING. Link?
        • Klinky, on 10/30/2007, -1/+16If someone knowingly fed a bunch of people poisoned food they would be charged with mass murder. I don't see your point on that one...
        • diggduggjoe, on 10/30/2007, -1/+16The point of these laws is to reduce soup kitchens and such in hopes the homeless leave the area. Hiding the problem is not the solution to poverty, but it makes everyone more comfortable when they can believe no one is poor.
      • LeeSoong, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15it is, however, illegal to feed the homeless in las Vegas, for several years now.

        i believe anyone arrested for feeding the homeless should sue for violation of their constitutional civil rights. freedom of association, freedom of peaceful assembly [ 1st amendment ] - and freedom from unreasonable search and seizures [ checking your bag for sandwiches.] 4th amendment.


        i am not a lawyer, consult your own professional counsel.

        Amendment I

        Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

        Amendment IV

        The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

        http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/funddocs ...

        so if you are peacefully giving good food to people who ask for it, that seems legal to me, but not to las vegas.


        • Myztry, on 10/30/2007, -1/+1A constitution is a wondering thing.
          But your government must really get the giggles when it is mentioned.
          Like who's going to enforce it. The government?
        • wakananda, on 10/30/2007, -1/+3We, the People, baby.
    • synce, on 10/30/2007, -67/+7Homeless people are lazy. No one should encourage them by giving them change or food.
      • bratterscain, on 10/30/2007, -4/+38Or they could just be at a temporary downfall in their life and lack motivation. Everyone gets in a slump sometimes. It could just as easily be you homeless and a digger saying the same in your place.
      • meez, on 10/10/2007, -3/+22Change? Spare some change?
      • mortigon, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7chhaaaaaaaange..... CHAAAAAAANGGGE....
      • printenv, on 10/30/2007, -3/+21synce, I am appalled by your ignorance and your total lack of humanity. A lot of people who are homeless are schizophrenic. I suggest you go to wikipedia and read up on it a bit. Maybe then you would understand why it would be so difficult for them. If you still sit there and make the grand generalization that all homeless are lazy I suggest you look closely at who you are.
    • dtilford, on 10/30/2007, -30/+6Yet another comment about the war that has nothing to do with the topic.
      • megarobotguy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Hey you stupid DUMB *****! Did you read his comment or are you just blind! "Caring, feeding, helping and treating one another as equals?" He's talking about the homeless guy, CLUELESS *****-for-brains. The guy cares about them, feeds them, and tries to treat them as equals. It's comments like yours that I wish I can leap into the screen into your room and smash you in the head with the almight hammer of ***** righteousness.
        • dtilford, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1duggtodeath said this - "Good thing my government believes in pre-emptive war so that they may deliver us from this evil!"
          While the rest of his sarcastic rant was about the homeless person, and I agree with it, I fail to see how this part of his comment has anything to do with feeding the homeless.
    • UtopiaInTheSky, on 10/30/2007, -26/+8RTFA, please. You can feed the homeless, but you need a permit!
      • noahhoward, on 10/30/2007, -4/+35Why? Needing a permit isn't any better.
        • UtopiaInTheSky, on 10/30/2007, -22/+7Because you could put poison in the food. He could have gotten a permit easily, fed the homeless, and avoided this whole legal problem. But that's what happens when you don't follow the rules: You get taken to court.
          • fwedwic, on 10/30/2007, -9/+3point taken
          • CZzyzx41, on 10/30/2007, -3/+27No point taken. That's like saying you need a permit to go to your friends house because you might assault or rob them. It's a stupid law and it needs to be appealed.
          • Wacer, on 10/30/2007, -1/+8***** the government trying to make people get permits to do anything. If there are hungry people on the streets and people want to feed them, then ***** the government and its permits.
          • Yurhiness, on 10/30/2007, -4/+3uhm, if it's all the same, I kinda don't mind that people need gun permits. It's a deterrent, at the least.
          • bjornski, on 10/30/2007, -0/+2And then you'd face attempted murder charges.

            This law isn't to "protect" the homeless. It's to drive them out of the area.

            Quit lying to yourself and everyone around by you pushing this "protecting" them crap.
      • bratterscain, on 10/30/2007, -4/+28He needs a permit for someone to take food from him? And that isn't *****? And if someone's going to poison homeless people, they could just as well do it without one just as easily.
      • AliasHandler, on 10/10/2007, -2/+14Like that makes it any better! It's like needing a permit to express your right to free speech! It's just as wrong as making it illegal!
        • Zarokima, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6While I'm not aware of permits, you do need to be in special "free speech zones" away from anyone to whom you actually want to deliver your message.
          • CZzyzx41, on 10/30/2007, -4/+17Free Speech Zones? You know what that is? The borders of the United States of America. Every day I hear ***** about soldiers fighting for our freedom and every day I hear of old freedoms being taken from the citizens of this country. So...when does the military launch it's offensive against congress?
          • Wacer, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I wouldn't doubt in a few years where the free speech zone will be down in the sewer.
          • wakananda, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Americans will have to fight for their right to speak, assemble, defend themselves, be free of official harassment and theft, etc. It's only a question of when. I see more and more awareness of this, from the most suprising quarters. The more the antidemocratic, neofascist globalists attempt to control us, the more we rise above our differences and get in touch with our roots. Roots that slowly but surely strangle any arrogant monarch that tries to enslave us or our children.
      • Jezon, on 10/30/2007, -3/+14So does this permit cover all mass feedings such as barbecues, pot lucks, and picnics? If a soccer mom wants to bring lunch for the whole team does she need a permit? Or is this just a law for homeless people who are in no position to fight an unfair and unjust law?
      • razor150, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Yes, God forbid people being kind to one another without a permit.
      • megarobotguy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1You don't need the permit to feed the homeless. You people didn't read the article nor watched the video?! FYI, you need a permit for a large gathering. The city feels that by feeding the homeless the guy would make other homeless people gather in the area. Therefore, it might cause a safety risk to the people in the area that the homeless are gathering.

        My freaking goodness sometimes I think you people on Digg just comment rather then read the article and/or watch the VIDEO within the article. Oh wait........
    • thcobbs, on 10/11/2007, -16/+54You do realize that the Mayor and most (can't confirm all of them) of the City Council members are Democrats and they enacted the ban?

      Good thing you automatically assume dumb government rules come from the Republicans. And finally, this is a CITY ORDINANCE. It has nothing to do with the Federal Government, and the ordinance is actively interfering with Faith-Based initiatives that care for the homeless.
      • breadbin, on 10/11/2007, -5/+20You make some ridiculous statements. The parent comment made no mention of Republicans or religious organisations yet you felt you simply HAD to bring them up as if both of them have been maligned. Presumably those faith-based organisations have permits to do their work, as do any non-religious organisations that work with the homeless? Okay, so do you have anything useful to add to the discussion?
        • notthemama, on 10/11/2007, -3/+8Actually, the parent comment brought up religion (Jesus Christ) and the government pre-emptive war believers, which usually comes along with bashing the right wingers. thcobbs really isn't out of line for assuming the guy was bashing republicans.
          • breadbin, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The parent comment was also heavily laden with sarcasm, but I think that went over thcobbs' head. His response was in no way related to what the parent comment actually said. The law is not interfering with faith-based initiatives and was never attributed to Republicans, despite someone mentioning pre-emptive strikes in a sarcastic fashion.
            thcobbs is a troll and you'd do well to find a more constructive use of your time instead of trying to defend his paranoid rants.
      • yfguitarist, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Exactly. This has nothing to do with religion. FTR, churches are all about feeding the homeless last time I checked.
        • bjornski, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Well, and molesting children, then closing nunneries to pay for it, when the Vatican shuffles the pedophile off to another "buffet".

          And shilling for donations so their white-suited, coiffed "minister" can fly around the world huckstering his items for sale.

          Or building theme parks for their "congregation".

          Religion is done on a personal level. Organized mass-churches are scams.
      • Lowrads, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Typical corporate liberal Democrats(tm) imo.
      • skyfire1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Democrats and Republicans are like good cop/bad cop. They're both equally capable of ***** you over and they will when they get the chance.
    • CosmicJustice, on 10/10/2007, -23/+3Following Jesus Christ is not about enabling drug addiction and vagrancy. That ones not working.
      • siszam, on 10/11/2007, -2/+37"Let everyone who possesses two shirts share with him who has none, and let him who has food do likewise." (Luke: 3; 11)
        • heliox, on 10/10/2007, -6/+7"Now we command you, beloved, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to keep away from believers who are living in idleness and not according to the tradition that they received from us. For you yourselves know how you ought to imitate us; we were not idle when we were with you. And we did not eat anyone's bread without paying for it; but with toil and labor we worked night and day, so that we might not burden any of you. This was not because we do not have that right, but in order to give you an example to imitate. For even when we were here with you, we gave you this command, anyone unwilling to work should not eat. For we hear that some of you are living in idleness, mere busybodies, not doing any work. Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to do their work quietly and to earn their own living." (2 Thessalonians 3:6-12)
          • aukxsona, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Last I knew the Bible had more thees, thous, shalts and so forth or is this the newer dumbed down version?
          • aukxsona, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1"Now we command you, brethren, in the name of Our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye with draw from every brother that walketh disorderly and not after the tradition he has recieved us.

            For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us; for we behaved not disorderly among you

            Neither did we eat a man's bread for nought; but wrought and travailed night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you.

            Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample upon you to follow us. (this is the most TELLING line as to WHY Christians must do this)

            For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, if any would not work, neither should he eat. ( Why do preachers get paid then?)

            For we hear that there are some who walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busy bodies.

            Now them that are such we command, and exhort, by Our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread.

            Check out line 15 though

            Yet count HIM not as an enemy, but admonish HIM as a brother.. ( 1, the HIM is italicized as if to set apart only men in this older version of the bible, 2, it says not to treat them as an enemy aka if someone else wants to feed them so be it..)

            No go be a good Christian, learn to read better and get a REAL Bible...one older than 100 years okie dokie
        • heliox, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1.
        • breadbin, on 10/10/2007, -4/+13What a surprise. Two completely unrelated statements from a religious text used to argue for either side of a non-religious issue. Bravo!
        • mithrasinvictus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Helioxes comment is about lazy Christians, it does not trump Jesus' opninion on how to treat the poor. (unless Heliox thinks you should only be allowed to feed homeless atheists)
          • heliox, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Huh? I think you got me mixed up with someone else.
    • CosmicJustice, on 10/10/2007, -20/+3Feeble attempts to hijack the Christian gospels as a justification for socialism, communism, and anarchy have been tried since Karl Marx. They don't work.
      • siszam, on 10/10/2007, -2/+13How dare you twist Gods word to do evil.
        http://www.nyu.edu/projects/ollman/docs/practical_ ...
        A ton of scripture telling us how God wants us to treat the poor. Man, pick up your Bible and actually learn what it says. Stop misrepresenting Christianity with lies.
        http://www.zompist.com/meetthepoor.html
      • Lewie, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1The Catholic church is definitely pro-socialism. Anarchy is totally opposite communism. It's close to Libertarianism.
        • bjornski, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1No, the church is Communist. They have the power. They intend to keep it.

          Share it with the citizens? Umm, no way.

          You really need to learn a little more about Socialism and Communism before you start tossing them around as examples.
    • noahhoward, on 10/10/2007, -12/+6I'm kind of torn on this issue. I know it isn't a popular opinion but while I think all people should have a fair chance, and I know some people have hit on hard times, it does not do us any good to support a dead appendage of society. The homeless, regardless of their reason do create a strain on society and logically should be removed. Morals say these people are simply down on heir luck and should be helped... but there are many who are beyond help.
      • AliasHandler, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11There are many who need mental help as well. The mass shutdown of asylums in this country was not the best tack to approach the problem. They needed to be reformed and reorganized like a modern mental health facility and kept in operation. Some genuinely need mental help or drug rehab but end up in a permanent cycle of hospital-jail-street.
      • BrettTheUser, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13You may be right, but we as a society can't give up on helping the people who are just down on their luck, or who do hold stable jobs but for whatever reason are homeless. They're still humans, and if they're starving, give them something to eat. Doing otherwise makes us less than human.
      • thall, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2Your anger is directed at the folks who had plenty of opportunity to better themselves yet chose to leech off society anyway. The term homeless includes those and also folks who have not had that opportunity. So unless you can come up with a slick way to weed out the real bums from the unfortunate ones, you choose to punish the whole group.
      • heliox, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3I know what you mean, but at some point these people need to take action and pull themselves out of the gutter. I don't mind a gub'mint handout to help these people get back on track. A year or so assistance to train them in something.
        But STOP ENABLING THEM! They are victims of crime. They commit crime. At some point we need to stop this and tell them to get their ass in gear.
      • omerhi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2And who decides what exactly constitutes a "dead appendage"? How do we determine if someone is of "use" to society? And why does everyone have to be of use? If someone chooses not to own material things, to not be a part of the modern mad scramble to own the most toys, are they therefore considered useless and worthless?
      • TheHorror545, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2There definately shouldnt be a law banning giving away your food. Its yours to do as you wish after you pay for it. You can give it to your neighbour but not the starving guy down the street? Sounds like discrimination to me. There is no moral obligation for anyone to do so of course, but people should be free to do what they want.
    • bysin, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9I feed homeless people in downtown orlando all the time, no one has ever stopped me.
      • BrettTheUser, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Great! But the article says the ordinance is only against mass feedings in an area, so you shouldn't have anything to worry about unless you organize mass feedings like this group.
      • Carburetor, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I'm glad no one did.
        You're definitely doing the right thing, just try to get the weird approval in order not to get into troubles..
        That's a hurt-warming to see there are still good people out there.
    • jmpeagle, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4ridiculous, if I had children that were under 18 and couldn't afford their own home would I be accused of sheltering and feeding homeless people?
      • notthemama, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1There's a rule against sheltering them too? Wait, technically if you're sheltering them, they aint homeless.
        So if you want to invite some homeless people to live with you, they become non-homeless and you can legally feed them.
        • LeeSoong, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1so, to get around the law, drive around in a large rv, it's a mobile home - invite people in and give them lunch if they want it. having lunch with friends is legal still, right?
    • cliffzdude, on 10/11/2007, -6/+6As I live in the Area, I may have some insight into this topic. Lake Eola is Orlando's premier lake/park. In the late 80's it was not a place to take kids, crime, prostitution, crack heads, the whole gambit. Then the city worked hard and spent literally millions of dollars cleaning it up to make it a desirable family destination. Now down-town Orlando isn't that big, so take that into mind when you realize that just blocks away were and still are places set up to feed the homeless, shelters and soup kitchens. So WHY were they feeding the homeless in a park that isn't really that convenient for the homeless? The answer known locally is -- to make a point. To put the homeless on parade to make a ***** point. Great, so bring in drunk, high, and mentally ill people to a place where Moms and Dads want to bring their tots to see the ducks, to make your point.
      • RobsaysHello, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6The homeless aren't citizens. Those filthy ***** don't deserve to eat lunch in a lovely park. Back to the gutter where they belong. How dare they invade our space. My god, the children might see them. The park is only for REAL people.
        • thedo0od, on 10/11/2007, -7/+0You should really specify whether you're being sarcastic or not.

          For all we know, you could be a republican. :)
      • Niten, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4Where the ***** are your morals? Is it *really* that much more important to you to sweep the "undesirables" under the carpet than to make sure some down on their luck, and as you point out, possibly mentally ill and helpless to improve their own situation, people are free to get a good meal?
    • Conseal, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Damn.. America has got aloooot of serious crimes these days! I mean: Man who gets 30 years for stealing a donut - Yikes! - Woman locked up for 70 years after stealing 13p - Wacky!

      Seriously, America. Arrested for giving people a loaf of bread? He's not handing out toxic waste to them!
      Start dealing with real crimes, not this *****.
      • notthemama, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Dude, while I agree with you about the how the laws are abused here in the usa, please try not to exaggerate. The guy who is up for the donut robbery may get up to 30 years for assaulting the clerk, not simply stealing the donut. Not only that, but I don't know if he's even yet been convicted. He *could* get 30 years doesn't mean he did get 30 years.
      • GenericNumber1, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I'm pretty sure the woman arrested for stealing 13 pence wasn't in American, we use the dollar here if you didn't know.
    • Herostratus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3This is really screwed up. I used to volunteer for Food Not Bombs in Hollywood Fl, and we would repeatedly get harassed by the police for doing so. What has become of America?:
    • digggggggggggg, on 10/14/2007, -1/+5Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he'll eat.... ***** it bums won't learn anything anyways
    • EdwardsNH, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Actually, people who deal with the homeless on a daily basis, as part of their job or volunteers, really hate it when people give food to homeless people. It discourages them from going to shelters where they can get real support.

      Yes, peoples reaction to say WTF seems natural, but once you really investigate this, you find the laws are to protect the homeless.
      • Supurcell, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Yes, by giving them food you are making them dependent on humans for survival. They lose their natural fear of us. You might feel like you've done something nice by putting out a food dish or giving them a few crumbs of bread, but you start to tire of when there's two of them fighting over territory, keeping you up all night, and then you have to pick up the knocked over trash cans in the morning. We have to stop feeding them and start putting trash in homeless-proof cans(the word for "trash can" in the homeless tongue is "smorgasbord"). Hopefully they will regain their ability to hunt and forage for themselves in the wild.
    • ddrfreak007, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0MOTHER ***** 4 biting the hand that Feeds!! (yay for NIN freedom)
    • SIRBERUS, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1You're missing the point... if we start to feed and respect them as human beings, they may get used to it... and then it would crumble our society or something.
    • marc6hd, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Vagrants need guidance before they need money. They are mentally sick people, many of them junkies. There are state and charity programs that exist to get them back into accommodation and employment, the problem is getting them to do it. I used to live in a city that had a small "community" of them and I was harrassed many times for money, so I kind of understand the city laws here.
  • sotopheavy, on 10/30/2007, -37/+496IM IN UR CITY FEEDIN UR HOMELESS!
    • zKman, on 10/30/2007, -17/+105DONT FEED THEM BRO!
    • theradical, on 10/30/2007, -9/+21I literally lol'd
    • xposiactionx, on 10/30/2007, -5/+12I lol'd as well. Nicely done sir.
    • ahoyhoy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Check out those epic muttonchops
      • MetaMars, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3That's the only reason I dugg this story.
    • isaactwito, on 10/30/2007, -15/+4***** YOU. Does anyone else out there realize that those cat things are STUPID AS *****!? I mean, honestly, how can people actually laugh at those things?
      • kodomosuki, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5This meme didn't originate from that stupid lolcat thingy.
        LURK MOAR
      • JoeGrizzly, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4You're not the only one.. I haven't laughed at one lolcat. not even ones that reach the top of digg...
      • MutatedNantuko, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2GET THE ***** OUT OF FYAD!
    • YoureAllSoDumb, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Haha, nice
  • Katrin20den, on 10/18/2007, -8/+76Yeah, electrocute him!
    Seriously, who could have come up with a law of this kind??? One doesn't care about the others while he is fine himself, but make him unemployed, kick his out of his house and see what happens.
    • DreKor, on 10/30/2007, -2/+17I think you're referring to the Disney corporation. They sort of own Orlando and don't want a bunch of homeless people ruining their beautiful illusion.
      • bysin, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Too bad Disney is not in Orlando, its in Lake Buena Vista.
      • thall, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2So they'd rather have a bunch of hungry homeless people begging for food instead of fed homeless people minding their own business???
    • thcobbs, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Gotta thank the City Council and Mayor of Orlando (mostly {can't confirm if they all are yet} democrats by the way)
    • picsectionpleez, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Actually there is a huge homeless problem from Orlando to Panama City. Mainly we're talking SERIOUS drug use, theft, urinating in public. It's more like party crashers that won't go home than people who can't find a job. There are all kinds of t-shirt stands, concession stands and just really a lot of pretty easy jobs, but these folks just are addicted to the beach / party lifestyle.
    • socokoolaid, on 10/30/2007, -1/+6Electrocute?, its taser time!
    • socokoolaid, on 10/30/2007, -6/+1Electrocute?, its taser time!
    • BestJaxx, on 10/30/2007, -0/+2Seriously, its wrong, yes, but it isn't news. This is because the higher powers in the area don't want homeless people there, and they think if nobody gives them anything, they will leave. Its the issue that was addresed on the South Park episode "Night of the Living Homeless," and though it is a horrible thing, it still isn't anything new.
    • EdwardsNH, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Actually, people who deal with the homeless on a daily basis, as part of their job or volunteers, really hate it when people give food to homeless people. It discourages them from going to shelters where they can get real support.

      Yes, peoples reaction to say WTF seems natural, but once you really investigate this, you find the laws are to protect the homeless.
  • natedouglas, on 10/30/2007, -21/+257I think this is quite possibly the clearest proof to come to light that we are living in a decadent society. When you outlaw altruism... who wrote Orlando's laws? Ayn Rand?
    • ivandir, on 10/18/2007, -7/+4DIGG this article like you have never dug before.
    • bratterscain, on 10/18/2007, -1/+6A nation with too many laws is a dictatorship. Paraphrasing a famous quote, forgot who though.
    • iTorrey, on 10/18/2007, -6/+38Actually if you read Ayn Rand you'd know that she'd probably be in favor of citizens voluntarily feeding the homeless. She was against people being forced at the barrel of a gun by government into helping others. And I agree.

      I used to live in Orlando and while getting berated by the homeless while you try to enjoy a day at the park with your family is quite annoying, the homeless have free speech and as long as they don't harass you or assault you they should be allowed to ask for help and you should be allowed to accept or reject this. It's no different than if I asked someone at work if they wanted to come over for dinner tonight. It's my food and I'll give it to whom I want and if they accept no harm has been done.
      • natedouglas, on 10/30/2007, -5/+9Ayn Rand believed that altruism was irrational, since you cannot find a rational justification for it, and she believed that everything that was irrational was anti-life and to be wiped the ***** out.
        • TheHorror545, on 10/11/2007, -2/+12The concept of altruism for its own sake is irrational yes. But you can consider it a payment in exchange for making yourself feel better. That would be honest, and there is a rational justification for it. You can buy a ticket for a ride on a rollercoaster to make yourself feel better, and you can buy a homeless guy some food to make yourself feel better. What needs to be wiped out is the concept that people 'have' to do something, or 'should' do something.
          • natedouglas, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1Where anyone got the concept that I agree with Ayn Rand about the color of the sky, much less anything having to do with philosophy or economics, is completely @#$%ing beyond me.
          • Me1on, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Why do you need a reason to help people? If you feed the homeless because it makes you "feel better," it's not really altruism. Besides, doing something "to feel better" is no more rational than doing something to help someone else.
        • reedatschool, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0Only a sociopath would consider altruism irrational. This isn't about "economics", but more so about reciprocity which existed long before our modern lifestyle.

          Should we have to help our fellow man? Only if you want our society to succeed and prosper. On the other hand if you just another kid with a silver spoon stuck up his ass you probably don't give a ****.
          • natedouglas, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3WTF? Don't yell at ME about what Ayn Rand believed, dammit.
      • Oomsoup, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11I wish more people actually understood Ayn Rand's philosophy. She would have been fine with people feeding the homeless, as long as it was something they wanted to do to make themselves happy. It sucks when people throw her name around without even knowing what they are saying. :(
      • afireinside13t, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Here's the quote from "Atlas Shrugged":

        "If you choose to help a man who suffers, do it only on the grounds of his virtue, of his fight to recover, of his rational record, or of the fact that he suffers unjustly; then your action is still a trade, and his virtue is the payment for your help."
      • EdwardsNH, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1"It's my food and I'll give it to whom I want and if they accept no harm has been done."

        Actually, yes there is harm done. This law is to encourage the homeless to enter shelters, where they can get real help.
    • cmw72, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9Who is John Galt?
    • Skip742, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7As a reader of Ayn Rand, and a former resident of Orlando who used to go with friends to feed the homeless at Lake Eola, I take offense. The government in Orlando is anything but libertarian! These crazy people who run the city believe that it's ok to twist the law if it has a good intention. Machiavelli would be proud.
      Orlando attracts lots of ne'er-do-wells who play at being homeless, so I actually understand the sentiment behind it, but seriously, who in their right mind can think that outlawing giving away sandwiches is ok? What's next, outlawing lemonade stands and girl scout cookies? What? They already did?
      • natedouglas, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Ayn Rand's not a libertarian, and in fact loathed libertarians for "stealing her ideas" (of course, they existed before she did, and managed to express their theories without sounding like assholes).
    • Aldrenean, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2... Welcome to Rapture?
    • scott715, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Why try to reference Ayn Rand when you obviously have no clue what she wrote about?
      Feeding the homeless is not altruism. An example of altruism would be feeding the homeless while letting your own family starve.
  • MaximusIGN, on 10/18/2007, -38/+155USA, the Christian nation where Conservatives don't care about you if you can't fit in a womb. Hell, if you aren't rich, they'll actually go out of their way to rush you to your grave. Jesus would be proud....
    • card51short, on 10/11/2007, -11/+37i know i can't wait until the democrats swoop down from heaven and save us all from the evil conservatives.

      You guys are still playing their game.
    • thcobbs, on 10/11/2007, -5/+36Democrats enacted the law.
    • CosmicJustice, on 10/10/2007, -13/+4Feeble attempts to hijack the Christian gospels as a justification for socialism, communism, and anarchy have been tried since Karl Marx. They don't work.
      • Lewie, on 10/30/2007, -0/+2It's modern Christians who hijacked the gospels! The crazy protestants who came to America because their beliefs didn't were different from everyone else's. If you can't see that Jesus' teachings were to help the less fortunate (what Catholics claim to believe), then you are twisting the words of the man you supposedly worship. Jesus says forgive and help. Where does he say "work hard and don't expect handouts"? or "whores go to hell"?
      • shazzb0t, on 10/30/2007, -0/+2How is anyone trying to hijack the gospels to justify any of the things you are talking about? If anything Christians everywhere should be outraged at this. The fact that we don't hear more about it is perhaps a result of Evangelicals and their circlejerk over God, Country, War and Cash.. Perhaps if they would stop trying to 'defend marriage' and babies they'd realize they are more than partially at fault for the majority of this society's ills than communists, socialists and those dreaded bomb wielding anarachist which I happen to feel akin to. Oh yeah, I am a Christian as well.

        Put down your 700 Club membership card, think and read for yourself and grow a heart America. You are dying of self-inflicted wounds.
    • yfguitarist, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7FCOL, we know it's a tradition at digg, but could you stop trying to hijack the article and bash conservatives/Bush/Christians/Republicans *DIGGDIGGDIGG*? If you must bash, at least try to make a sane point, not something opposite from the truth like you guys are doing.
    • Skip742, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Hmm...do you just spit these phrases out randomly, or do you actually fake like you know what you're talking about before you bash people? Study Orlando politics for a while and see who really is to blame. No conservative would ever support a law like this. We know that too many of us would get arrested. Oh, didn't you know it was conservative Christians who go out there handing out sandwiches all the time?
  • MaximusIGN, on 10/30/2007, -26/+92Wasn't that in the Bible? Give a man some bread and be put to death?
    • drizzlelicious, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9Luke 10:25-37 buddy. Or if you want more, Matthew 25:31-40.
    • tullj01, on 10/11/2007, -1/+24Um....no. Got a reference for that?

      If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, be warmed and filled," without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
      -James 2:15-17

      Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For( I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.' Then they also will answer, saying, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?' Then he will answer them, saying, 'Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.' -Matthew 25:45

      Please don't just make things up and pretend their in the bible, we've got enough Christians doing that.
    • MutatedNantuko, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Well, Drizzle is right. Luke (10:29–37) is the Parable of the Good Samaritan and Matthew 25:31-46 is talking about the blessed as those who give to the downtrodden.
      • sylentmode, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0concluding that these two passages = Give a man some bread and be put to death.....that's one hell of an interpretation.
    • Lewie, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I'm guessing he's being sarcastic. No need to get up in arms (I know it's hard in this thread).
  • Frei, on 10/30/2007, -18/+205So in Florida I can shoot a person who I may see as a vague "threat." But I can't hook a homeless guy up with a sandwich. I think it's time this country peacefully just splits up. Red states, it's not you, it's me.
    • card51short, on 10/18/2007, -6/+55please don't say the only other option is a blue state...can we get a colorless one please?
      • duke1776, on 10/11/2007, -5/+23Me too as I'm also afraid of the "colored's"...
      • blaaguuu, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Wouldn't that be Florida? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Florida has generally been one of the most even, unbiased states, when it comes to democrats vs republicans.
      • MagicCake, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Was that some kind of white power statement?

        (No you assholes, I'm not going to put /sarcasm. Figure it out yourself.)
    • carpespasm, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7actually it's more a deal with being allowed to shoot someone on your property who's trying to cause you harm you can't otherwise get away from if i remember correctly.
      • vitaminKsGood4u, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9actually we changed it. we are now allowed to shoot someone if we feel our life is in danger. it no longer needs to be on our property, and we no longer have to "get away" first. of coarse if you shoot someone, they will investigate the cause of the shooting and if it appears you were mistaken, then you will be charged with murder. so far there has been little problems with the law and there hasnt been any crazy wild west show downs as some expect.
        • iTorrey, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Not sure why you're being dugg down, this is accurate. You can pull a gun and protect yourself if you feel that someone is a threat to you. If you are wrong however you're going to have to pay the price. It's no different than punching someone in the face if you feel you're being threatened. If you are wrong you go to jail for assault if you are right they don't press charges.
    • thcobbs, on 10/10/2007, -9/+8City Law, and the City is controlled by democrats.
    • vitaminKsGood4u, on 10/10/2007, -4/+9you are free to give a homeless man a sandwich in Orlando. you just cant do it at Lake Eola. there is a massive homeless problem at the lake and they are telling the homeless people to leave the lake and go to the shelters down the street. The homeless refuse to go because people are feeding them at the lake. they are trying to get people to donate to shelters instead of just give homeless people money or food. i disagree with the law, but its not as simple as you seem to think. read up on it before making a random comment.
      • RevChris, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7just like ducks
        • vitaminKsGood4u, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6and turtles, but there was much protest over the turtle treatment, as more people liked the turtles
        • freudianslipper, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8I like turtles
      • Frei, on 10/30/2007, -0/+4Yeah they should just go home. Perhaps there is a problem with the shelters? No, homeless shelters are always great.
      • Skip742, on 10/30/2007, -1/+5Don't bother us with the facts, vitaK, we prefer to rant and rave based on our made up beliefs about the situation.
        Yeah, I've been there, and I know you're right, exactly. But, still, the Democrats that passed that law are hideous. Regardless of how bad a problem it is, there's something disgusting about laws that prevent you from giving people food.
        • palmtree3000, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1As a democrat, let me agree that the law is hideous.
          Also, vitaK, i assume they would go the better place. If the park is better for them because people are giving them more food or something, why should the government drive them out in favor of an inferior substitute?
    • random19, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9Florida is a ridiculous state. I'll never go back. Everyone there is 100% grade-A CRAZY.
      • RabidAngel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I don't know how many people realize this but your comment is right on track. That place is bat-***** crazy. I speak from having been there.
      • Birdoftruth, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Oh trust me besides the fact that you stereotyped, I live in the heart of Kissimmee and people here are the worst drivers and crime is skyrocketing. I am moving to Georgia to get out of this hell hole.
        • BrettTheUser, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2You live in Kissimmee? I thought there were only motels and restaurants that look like castles there.

          oooh, I see you want to go to Georgia. I've lived in Atlanta and Northeast Florida, and visited most parts of both states. The ONLY part of Georgia that is better than the Orlando area is the metro Atlanta area, and if you're old money, Savannah.
      • JenadaeXX, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I'm from Davenport (right next to Kissimmee) and not only has crime gone up 10 fold in the last 5 years but property value and the overall area has gone to *****. Florida will be underwater in 10-20 years and i for one wont miss it.
      • skyfire1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I just moved back to Virginia this year. Florida does indeed suck ass. No one there knows how to drive.
      • Abomonog, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Lived across Charlotte and Sarasota counties over the course of 10 years. They don't call them Floridiots for nothing. The entire state is an asylum.
    • CosmicJustice, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2"But I can't hook a homeless guy up with a sandwich".
      It's not so much that YOU can't but that YOU aren't.
  • 0rion16, on 10/18/2007, -8/+258Tomorrows headline:

    Homeless rights activist Eric Montanez, 22, was tasered to death this morning for feeding the hungry.
    • thcobbs, on 10/10/2007, -8/+5Then tell the democrats to repeal the ordinance they passed.
      • fwedwic, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3why do u have to be ignorant all your life
      • throop77, on 10/30/2007, -1/+4omg all democrats suck!... oh wait, it doesn't matter what political party passed this law... the law is absolutely ridiculous regardless of who passed it.
    • vichs, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1best comment on the whole topic lol..... worst thing is... it could happen!
  • TrutherHunter, on 10/18/2007, -64/+11If he really wants to help he would help the homeless get sober, and get jobs.
    • FreakyD, on 10/30/2007, -26/+5Right on!!

      Don't feed em bro!!
    • khail250, on 10/10/2007, -6/+32yes and we can attain world peace by giving daisies to world leaders...
    • revjustin2, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13If you wanted to stop being a troll, you'd put your head in the toilet and flush.
    • sockpuppets, on 10/30/2007, -6/+17What have you done lately to help your fellow man?

      Yeah. I thought so.
      • TrutherHunter, on 10/10/2007, -10/+6I volunteer at the local homeless shelter teaching the homeless how to read, and how to act during a job interview and I drive 3 homeless guys to work every week.
      • yfguitarist, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2What have you done, sockpuppets? You people are so quick to act self-righteous.
    • fuzzmeister, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13Takes quite a bit more effort than just giving them a sandwich...
    • Kurisuku, on 10/10/2007, -10/+1You're joking, right?
    • card51short, on 10/30/2007, -3/+13i know what a loser! He should single handley help every single homeless person get a job if he wants to do anything.
      Anything short of that is evil. EVIL I TELL YOU.
    • fstorino, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5Couldn't them get sober and employed IN ADDITION to being fed? I don't think he *solved* this homeless' problems, but I don't think he did anything bad, either!
    • alricsca, on 10/30/2007, -2/+12For many homeless that might be a true statement, but be aware not every homeless person is a drunk or unwilling to work. People can lose jobs, get sick mentally or physically, or have run away from an abusive home. In big cities job loss can make this happen in one bad month. If times are bad or you are old, job loss can last longer than unemployment. If you are sick, the state seems to no longer care. If I had to choose between constant abuse, and in some cases rape, or living on the street, I know which one I would choose. All I ask is that you keep in mind that you might have been this person had circumstances been different. Take a moment and size them up before you decide they should starve.
      • TrutherHunter, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1I was a runaway I lived on the street for 3 years.
        • sockpuppets, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Do us a favor and keep running.
        • Zarokima, on 10/30/2007, -2/+4To quote sockpuppets's comment about what you've done for the homeless: "*****."
        • thall, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Am I missing something here? Is TrutherHunter a liar or is he being dugg down out of revenge??
      • Xondar, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I agree. Add poor veterans who've been let down by the government a society to that list.
    • ncc74656m, on 10/10/2007, -4/+6The odd issue is that you seem to completely miss the point here. Many homeless suffer from mental illness.
      • CosmicJustice, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2"Many homeless suffer from mental illness."
        Then feeding them in the park is definitely not the answer.
    • spudnic, on 10/30/2007, -1/+10I'll say to you what I say to everyone who says the homeless should just 'get jobs'.
      Next time you apply for a job don't shower for a week beforehand, don't shave, don't eat properly, try to sleep in a park, wear old clothes and don't wash them.
      Don't give an address or phone number.

      Let me know how that application goes for you.
      • thall, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3What are you talking about? He said to HELP the homeless get a job. If you're going to help a homeless person, throwing a few coins in their hat is fine but if your goal is to *really* help them for the long term then help them get a job...pay for a shave & haircut, give out a new set of clothes....
    • ucg1, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Yes, because all homeless people are sane enough to hold jobs.
      • thall, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2What percentage do you think are actually insane and incapable of change?
        • MagicCake, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It's actually rather high, which is probably why he said that. I'm not sure of the number, but it's well into the double digits. I think at least a quarter.
    • MagicCake, on 10/30/2007, -0/+4Hey, they can't get a job if they're dying of hunger! Gotta feed the bastards first. Then give 'em a bath. THEN work on employment.
  • plizard, on 10/30/2007, -11/+116don't feed me, bro!

    edit
    downtown florida - that's why - since disney owns like 95% of orlando, he should be spending his money at disneyworld. not feeding the homeless! duh
    • mrjit, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3That was just stupid.
    • ithasfourtoes, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1i lol'ed extremely loud at your comment, plizard
    • Skip742, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Never actually BEEN to Orlando, have you?
      • plizard, on 10/30/2007, -0/+2no i only worked for the huge anti-semitic, happy faced, racist, pedophile, socialist company through an internship for a year.
    • 2square, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0that comment (the first part) made my day ...still LMAO!!
  • r00t3d0ut, on 10/18/2007, -2/+34this is also happening in west palm beach, fl.
    "Group defies ordinance, feeds homeless"
    http://www.palmbeachpost.com/search/content/local_ ...
  • Phreak411, on 10/10/2007, -20/+10In Soviet Russia homeless feed you

    /got nothing
    • mstoneburner, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1Go back to Fark, asshole.
    • drizzlelicious, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3/then dont say anything
    • MagicCake, on 10/30/2007, -0/+4Judging from the comments around here, Soviet Russia is the craziest ***** place ever. It's a wonder anything ever got done over there...
  • AegisC, on 10/11/2007, -15/+8The homeless were out on the street saying "Change? Got any change?" Meaning, we really need to change our laws!
  • elcaminos, on 10/18/2007, -45/+9Feeding homeless people only enables them to continue being homeless.
    • nblsavage, on 10/30/2007, -4/+36or keeps them from starving to deah.
      • fantasticFlan, on 10/30/2007, -6/+5They should starve and decrease the surplus population. /Dickens
        • wing05, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Now, where are those three ghosts to visit the lawmakers?
    • HemlockUltimate, on 10/18/2007, -2/+8OR, it keeps them from starving
    • joklem, on 10/30/2007, -4/+29Feeding trolls only enables them to continue trolling.
    • WarpFox, on 10/30/2007, -1/+12Does replying to your comment enable you to continue being retarded?
    • ucg1, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9As opposed to being dead?

      Yes, I understand the concept of an "enabler" but in some cases homeless people are so insane they wouldn't survive if people didn't feed them. It's not like the mentally insane would be forced to get a job if you didn't feed them.

      I think to think that giving homeless money isn't helping them much, but I am guilty about making assumptions about what they will spend their money on. However, feeding them makes more sense to me than giving them money, especially if its food I would've thrown away anyway.
      • bratterscain, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I agree somewhat. But it's not really that idea that I disagree with but if it becomes a mass idea. Should we really teach that it's good for others to have less respect for another person, even though they may seem hopeless, should we spread that view around? Should our kids grow up in a society where those thoughts may have some truth, but tell them who is hopeless and who is not? Then what will become of humanity and how we and our kids view each other with a light worth of humanity? I would just be afraid that the total emotional worth of a human would go down if we condone that kind of thought. I wouldn't want that for my future kids.
    • aguynamedjoe36, on 10/30/2007, -1/+11uh yeah.... feeding homeless does not enable them to stay homeless... just alive. this comment was clearly not very well thought out. if you are homeless and someone gives you a cheeseburger the immediate response is, "man i am really glad i am homeless so that people give me free cheeseburgers.... i don't think i ever want a place to call my own or a bed to sleep on." REALLY?
    • clala1220, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3most homeless are mentally disabled.... they can't help themselves...
    • technoredneck, on 10/30/2007, -0/+9And giving sick people medicine only enables them to continue being sick. And teaching a child to read only enables them to continue being illiterate.
    • elcaminos, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I live in Portland, OR where there are shelters and kitchens EVERYWHERE, so I don't think the homeless would starve. We have panhandlers on every freeway onramp, they hassle you everytime you go downtown or ride the light rail. Something tells me they've been enabled.
  • jlungu, on 10/15/2007, -3/+31Orlando wants to keep them hungry so the bait-and-shoot program is more successful.
  • Trocisp, on 10/30/2007, -16/+29***** him, and ***** the homeless. He should've obeyed the law, and now he's going to jail. Good for the government, enforcing the laws like that!
    (That's sarcasm, in case you missed it)
    • Nidy1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10We did.
    • antiorblkflag9, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I almost did as well...
    • antiorblkflag9, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2I almost did as well...
    • vichs, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2me too lol, already was hovering on the bury button son!
    • gavintlgold, on 10/30/2007, -0/+5Whew! I almost thought there was someone as callous as that on the internet... Thank goodness.
  • slackerjack, on 10/30/2007, -7/+55Can we say: 'JURY NULLIFICATION' ?
    • MrSketch, on 10/30/2007, -1/+7Unfortunately, you can't in a court room.
      • Skip742, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Can't what? Can't practice jury nullification? My goodness, you've utterly missed the point. Jury nullification is when the jury bucks the system and does what they "can't".
        • BobSutan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5No, he meant you can't say it inside the courtroom or the judge will hold you in comtempt of court. There's a reason why lawyers can just tell a jury "even if my client did what he was charged for, if you don't agree with the law you don't actually have to find him guilty as you're the 4th check and balance of government that you're not supposed to know about".
      • flashingcurser, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Nullification is your right!
    • SeekerDarksteel, on 10/30/2007, -1/+4Only if you want to be found guilty of contempt of court. :(
  • CrazyRussian, on 10/30/2007, -12/+4Loose the sideburns
    • Mikhail101, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3loose the vodka
    • duke1776, on 10/30/2007, -2/+15"lose"
    • silverchrysalis, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3those sideburns are awesome!
    • Harbinger67, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9He could feed a family of five with those mutton chops.
    • ucg1, on 10/30/2007, -1/+3Let "loose" the sideburns indeed.
      • ucg1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Oh, and I have sideburns just like his. Though in the video it shows he grew it into a full beard (which I will do in the winter).
    • sockpuppets, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5I wish wolverine would bring me a sammich.
    • expatcatalyst, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Let loose of the good English...lose
    • technoredneck, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2My ex had sideburns like that. They were full of awesome.
  • Ladymongoose, on 10/30/2007, -6/+58Jeez! These are people, not bears in a camping ground! What do they think not feeding people is going to do...make them leave? Have some humanity, Flordia!
    • hobbers, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3But people like bears.
    • EdwardsNH, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1No, feeding homeless people keeps them out of shelters where they can get real help. This law is truly to help the homeless.

      If you really want to help volunteer to help in a shelter.
  • PIPBoy2000, on 10/30/2007, -39/+4I'm no Christian (fortunately) but, The bible says quite literally "Help those only who can help themselves"

    Look at the mutton chops on that guy, no wonder hes feeding the homeless...
    • AegisC, on 10/30/2007, -1/+11Where?
    • duke1776, on 10/30/2007, -1/+12uh, no it does not.
    • manicallday, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8This is how I know it's the end of days. No where in the Bibile does it say not to help the poor. I'm just going to go out on the limb here and say the Bibile says that you should help the homeless. Since they are going to inherit the earth and all.
      • vanlawrence, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2That's the Meek that inherit the Earth...
        • manicallday, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Hebrew translation also includes the poor.
    • fantasticFlan, on 10/30/2007, -0/+11Are you possibly thinking of "God helps those who help themselves"? (which isn't from the Bible anyway)
    • silverchrysalis, on 10/30/2007, -0/+12pure sputum and *****, my good man. show me the passage. on the contrary, the bible instructs people to help the poor, the widows, fatherless, etc. you should double check facts before spouting
    • ncc74656m, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Umm, actually isn't it something more along the lines of "What you do for the least of my brothers you do for me"?
    • darkcooger, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9I am a Christian and therefore cannot let your statement pass. The Bible does not say that, nor does the Bible say, "God helps those who help themselves." What the Bible does say quite clearly and quite often is that people are to help the helpless, which is precisely the opposite of what you've suggested. If you're going to quote the Bible, you might consider doing it accurately.
    • spudnic, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Don't think I've ever read the bible, but from what I gather it's much more likely to say that the people who can't help themselves are the ones who actually need help the most.
    • drizzlelicious, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9Good ol Chirstianity bashers that don't actually know anything about the Bible.
      • LogicAJV, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Actually it isn't exactly said in the bible. Its more of the story about god's gifts/god's money. The one that the guy buries the gift to keep it safe, instead of using it. After a few years, everyone that received a gift is brought back to where they got the gift. Then it stated that the gift was taken from him, because he did not use it.

        That is where people get that God helps those that help themself.
        Why I can't believe in the bible: Jesus cursed a fruit bearing tree to never bear any fruit anymore. Any person can see, that Jesus with all his power could of easily help the tree bear the fruit that he wanted it to bear for him.
        • darkcooger, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Your first paragraph is about the parable of the talents. The message is not "use it or lose it." The message, rather, is that you are expected to produce with what you're given. It's the same oft-paraphrased message as repeated in Luke 12:48: "But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked."

          As for your second paragraph, you're making the assumption that Jesus would use his power for his own benefit, but he never did. The cursing of the fig tree seems to be more of an opportunity for Jesus to live a parable, as immediately after cursing the tree, he tells his disciples (who are amazed how quickly the tree withered) that anything is possible through real faith. Some have also said that his cursing the fig tree fulfilled prophecy or that the fig tree mirrored the state of Israel (appears healthy and good from a distance but is obviously corrupt and fruitless on closer inspection).

          The problem with your second paragraph is really that you're effectively tempting Jesus, an act even Satan failed at. Even if you just take the Bible as a work of fiction, you have to realize that Jesus as a character in the book would not have caused the tree to bear the fruit he wanted just because he wanted the fruit. It would have been wildly out of character for him to do so.
    • speerross, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Verily I say unto you, that a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. And again I say unto you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. Matthew 19:23, 24

      Take that capitalists
      (In case you didn't notice, Food Not Bombs is an Anarchist organisation)
      • Lewie, on 10/30/2007, -0/+2That makes you a ..... COMMUNIST!
        AHHHHH!!!!
  • sockpuppets, on 10/13/2007, -3/+17detail.html?reddit

    I wonder where you got this link. :p
    • omarciddo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2SHHH!!!! I'll admit it, but it was too big a wtf story to not submit.
  • DreKor, on 10/30/2007, -2/+16Won't you take me to Orlando where the sun is shining bright?
    All the angels are clean-shaven and the people snowy white.
    Where your problems are all hidden and unhappiness forbidden,
    You will find salvation for a modest fee!
    • Wraithius, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Wow, it's been a while since I've heard any DVN.
  • ChiGGz, on 10/30/2007, -4/+46Please do not feed, poke or disturb the homeless.
  • ImperialSoren, on 10/11/2007, -5/+50I'm here cuz I thought he was feeding on homeless. which is not to be encouraged.
    • zybch, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Depends if you're a zombie or not.
    • noahhoward, on 10/30/2007, -1/+9Actually it would solve a lot of problems if we simply fed the homeless to low income families.
      • DontThinkSo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2A modest proposal.
      • SlipstreamLucas, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2New burger range
        the McBum, McAlco and McVagrant.
        10cents of every burger sold goes to charity.
      • LadyKofNYC, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Soylent Green is people!!!
    • Aros, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I thought the same exact thing; I'm a bit disappointed.
    • CWal37, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Thought exactly the same thing man.
  • thorstrongstone, on 10/10/2007, -16/+9This is why Orlando is the ***** town in this whole ***** country. The people are assholes, the policemen and women all think that their ***** are the biggest.

    I can't ***** wait for hurricane season. I year for something bigger than Andrew to come through and wipe that city off of the map.

    ***** Florida, as well.
    • jseres, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7And you think that arresting a person who feeds homeless is psycho? Your calling for the death of an entire state of people.
      • zybch, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3But THEY deserve it, a homeless person doesn't.
    • natenovs, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5and ***** you too.
    • noahhoward, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2***** town? I challenge you to visit Cochran, Georgia sometime buddy.
    • Skip742, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I don't want to try to challenge your flawless logic, but if you didn't notice it, the guy giving out sandwiches is from Orlando too. Not to mention the homeless people that you apparently care so much about. You are the ultimate in idiocy.
      • thorstrongstone, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1No, you are the idiot. After all, you took my comment seriously.

        Also, if I were being serious, what the ***** makes you think that I give a damn about those people? Huh? I mean, do you think that I had forgotten that they were there?

        Good job Skippy.
  • wtfmate112, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Did you see the mutton chops on that guy?
  • vwvan, on 10/11/2007, -6/+97This is not hard.
    Time for Orlando prosecutors to understand the Digg effect.
    http://www.cityoforlando.net/contact.htm Dial *67 in front of the number to blank your caller id.
    Be courteous and request that they not prosecute the man who fed the homeless.
    Time for a call.
    • airiox, on 10/11/2007, -3/+10Mayor* Buddy Dyer (407) 246 - 2221
      City Commissioner, District 1* Phil Diamond (407) 246 - 2001
      City Commissioner, District 2* Betty T. Wyman (407) 246 - 2002
      City Commissioner, District 4* Patty Sheehan (407) 246 - 2004
      City Commissioner, District 5* Daisy W. Lynum (407) 246 - 2005

      Those are the numbers you should be calling, They are the ones directly responsible for it.

      These are the guys that voted no, don't bother them ;)

      City Commissioner, District 6* Samuel B. Ings
      City Commissioner, District 3* Robert F. Stuart
    • RabidAngel, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Call will be placed tomorrow!
    • isellmacs, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1According to an above poster, they already found him "Not Guilty" so you might wish to rephrase your request to "not prosecute" him.
    • EdwardsNH, on 10/30/2007, -7/+1Whoa... Wait a minute before you contact anyone...

      People who deal with the homeless on a daily basis, as part of their job or volunteers, really hate it when people give food to homeless people. It discourages them from going to shelters where they can get real support.

      Yes, peoples initial reaction to say WTF seems right, but once you really investigate this, you find the laws actually protect the homeless.

  • URnotheonly1, on 10/10/2007, -12/+0Can't feed the bears or the monkeys so wtf? No big deal.
    • zybch, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1They have bears in Florida??
    • darkcooger, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Generally speaking, people are not bears or monkeys. Plus, the bears and monkeys either eat a very carefully planned diet (in a zoo) or whatever they would eat normally (in the wild). It's not quite the same thing, but your confusion can be forgiven. Nitwit.
    • thebellmaster1x, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Since when do 800 pound homeless maul people with giant paws?
    • MagicCake, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Well you see, these were the wild homeless, not the ones in zoos. So it should have been OK to feed them.
  • stutimandal, on 10/11/2007, -5/+11America needs to rise and shine like a Phoenix. Remove these kind of ills from city laws.
    • noahhoward, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Are you prepared to be consumed in the inferno that would have to precede such an event
      • natedouglas, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I could use a tan
        • shazzb0t, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Thats the spirit. Time to burn this bitch to the ground. Let it come.
    • palmtree3000, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1OMIGODI'MONFIRE!
  • glasnostic, on 10/11/2007, -4/+30This is a perfect opportunity for the defendant to take the stand, look the jury directly in the eyes and say this,

    “Though you have been instructed otherwise, it is your right to acquit a person of violating a law that they clearly violated if you feel that law is unjust”.

    All Americans should be given that instruction. As a matter of fact, I think it would be great to hand out some flyers down in front of my local courthouse, that hammer home that concept.
    • psiphre, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6jury nullification is a defacto right, not a legal one
    • jamangold, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6The term for this is called Jury Nullification.
    • CosmicJustice, on 10/30/2007, -1/+6Perfect opportunity to be charged with contempt of court and causing a mis-trial.
    • glasnostic, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8My understanding of the term “right” is basically anything that is not expressly prohibited. Since there are absolutely no laws prohibiting a juror from acquitting for the purpose of nullification, then it is a legal right. Sure. The Supreme Court has backed judges, who choose to suppress this knowledge, but it is a right, and I for one think more people need to know about it. Especially in cases like this. Jury Nullification is at its best when it sends a message to elements of the government who are over applying laws.

      While it may be a fact that the judge can stop a layer from telling the jury about nullification, a defendant should not be stopped form mounting such a defense.
  • vanattab, on 10/30/2007, -31/+5KILL ALL HOMELESS PEOPLE. HELPING THEM SURVIVE ONLY UNDERMINES EVOLUTION AND THE SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST. EVERY CITY IN THE WORLD SHOULD HAVE A LAW AGAINST THIS KIND OF SOCIAL CRIME.
    • zybch, on 10/30/2007, -1/+5I hope your house burns down, your bank accounts get phished clean and and everyone you know that might have offered you shelter gets told you're a kiddie fiddler and won't give you a place to sleep.
      Then we'll see how quickly your tune will change!
    • ltkerr0r, on 10/30/2007, -2/+7Well they are surviving out in the streets, so they are pretty darn fit.
    • bratterscain, on 10/30/2007, -1/+3You know what attributes to survival of the fittest also? It's a lot of the time, nice guys who are accepted by society and therefore, thrive while the dicks of the same financial status, have a harder time. So congrats. If I was Darwinian evolution, I'd throw you out.
    • fwedwic, on 10/30/2007, -3/+4u mean survival of the richest you stupid *****
    • speerross, on 10/30/2007, -2/+6Every city in the world should have a law against you
    • Skip742, on 10/30/2007, -1/+1You bring a whole new dimension to the argument against "evolution".
    • cazoo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Your post is the dumbest thing I read all day. Congratulations asshat.
    • palmtree3000, on 10/30/2007, -0/+1Why do you discredit evolution with this crap?
  • MadScientist420, on 10/11/2007, -6/+7New World Order!? Jebus would not be happy about this.
  • hokie47, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8I tell homeless to go to one of the many day labor places here in Florida. They don't like me very much.
  • airiox, on 10/30/2007, -4/+23"Food Not Bombs" serves all vegetarian meals to the homeless. Homeless Man's response: "No thank you, I would rather starve."
  • AriaStar, on 10/30/2007, -4/+22Uh, don't feed the animals?

    And we wonder why people are less kind to each other these days. You end up with charges pressed against you.

    "the city ordinance that bans mass feeding in one area" - Now are restaurants going to be outlawed too?
    • 3adkied, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Restaurants, company picnics, I think I've even had Thanksgiving dinners that would be considered illegal. From what I gather they consider feeding 25 people too much. I suppose you could just make sure you only feed 24 homeless people at a time.
      Seriously, though, this would seem to directly oppose the right to peacefully assemble guaranteed by the First Amendment.
    • Skip742, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Didn't you get the memo? The Constitution is just a piece of paper. Nobody cares about that stuff anymore.
  • an0nim0us, on 10/30/2007, -3/+38Seriously, what Asshole would report this guy, and not only that, but record him to have solid proof?
    • retsig, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2It was a mass feeding in a public park so I guess the recording is no big deal. Parents with their kids playing, they take their cameras and whatnot. And since it was in a public park maybe some parents got upset due to the possibly large amount of homeless people and called the cops. That's just a wild guess though.
    • AlexWills, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4Maybe someone who lived right across the street from the park, that didn't want mass homeless feedings?

      I'll be dugg down for this, but as a resident of Orlando that lives near these mass feedings, maybe we should have our own mass giveway in the neighborhoods of these people? There are homeless shelters sporatically located in Orlando for a reason.
    • Skip742, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3The police are told to prowl the park waiting for some evil person to feed the homeless.
      Interesting, because when I called the police for a break-in at my house, they didn't seem to have time to deal with it. Guess they had more important business to attend to.
  • Nougat, on 10/30/2007, -2/+16This is civil disobedience. This stands in contrast to smashing up the Comcast office with a hammer.
  • Henron, on 10/10/2007, -18/+13DON'T FEED ME BRO.
  • jnadke, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1Everytime you feed a homeless person, God kills a puppy.
    • zybch, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1I thought that was "Whenever you pay cash to a homeless person to give you a reach-around God kills a puppy".
    • gavintlgold, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1What?!
    • shazzb0t, on 10/30/2007, -0/+2Everytime you recycle a tired meme, God takes a week off your life.. Oh *****.. look what I just did..
  • IndyAaron, on 10/10/2007, -5/+6I realize that there are good reasons for laws. They're meant to keep us safe, and lay down specific mandates about acts that infringe on the rights of others, and determine the punishments for those acts. So this law must have a good reason. Oh wait, it doesn't have any sound reasoning behind it, and it doesn't protect anyone. Feed on bro, the internet is behind you!
    • Skip742, on 10/30/2007, -0/+4There are usually good intentions behind most of the worst human crimes in history. I'm sure if you ask Stalin or Hitler about their murder campaigns, they could offer up good intentions. Even an evil genius with a Machiavellian streak can explain away his worst terror campaigns. The point is that there are some things that should never become laws, even for "good" reasons.
  • cybermort, on 10/30/2007, -6/+25I live in Orlando, one late afternoon walking by the public library in downtown, blocks from lake eola a very old homeless man approached me asking for change. I told him i had non. Then he said if i could get him at least a bag of chips, he said he was starving. I just simply couldn't denied someone food and I didn't thought twice about getting him a sandwich. We should be encouraging solidarity. Why is it that this country only seems interested in pushing dumb christian values likes mariage and abstainance but ignores the important ones... another one for example, peace.
    • wing05, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Gonna hazzard a guess.... Evangelical Christians seem to have a power mentality.... man over woman.... preacher over community/congregation... shepherd over sheep. Us vs. them.

      Homeless, Muslims and anyone else who don't follow the flock are considered "them". Send money to your own religious leaders so they may reach out into the savage 'them-land' and let them see the light but don't you dare take it upon yourself to reach out and realize they aren't as bad as they've told you.

      • shazzb0t, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Exactly, 'defending marriage' from the homos, savin' the little baby jebus's and bombing the brown people around the world are examples of Corporate Christian values. The real Christ wouldn't be so pleased with what today's 'Christians' are doing in his name.
    • bratterscain, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I agree. Those ideals spread and if you care about our future generations, they'll affect them also. If I and no one else offered help to those who needed it, then what's to happen if I'm in trouble? What goes around comes around.
    • skyfire1, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1You made the wrong choice. If you give away all of your change, you'll turn into a homeless.
  • eklass, on 10/10/2007, -11/+13In the interested of story completeness, not all feeding of homeless is illegal. The law limits "serving meals to groups of 25 or more people in parks and other public property within two miles of City Hall without a special permit".

    Agree or not, the law sets in place limitations that the citizens are expected to abide by. Just as, if you want to hold a parade, you get a permit. Similarly, yf you want to feed 25 or more homeless in the downtown area, get a permit.
    • pablo0713, on 10/30/2007, -5/+6Ah yeas, the old "get a permit" attitude. Pretty soon, we'll need a permit just to go outside.
    • bono4u, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0it is like in every society i think, the state is frighten by large groups that could perhaps start a revolution, if larger groups are not officially be permitted than there is room for conspiracy, speculation and at least for police to get rid of it.
      So if the court is not dump, i think he will get away with a warning and a small fee. If he would have go to jail i would say law is missing the point of educating citizens.
  • LembasBread, on 10/30/2007, -18/+8There are legitimate reasons why this should be illegal. For one, the food that is being passed out could easily be tainted in some way and not safe for consumption. Aside from that, it can cause a large public disturbance in a place like this. Fights could easily break out, etc. It's not like they're banned food shelves, they just don't want people feeding homeless people like you would a pidgeon.
    • bolerobell, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5That's a weak justification for the law and really doesn't bear out the "Rational Basis" requirement set out by the Supreme Court for states passing restricting laws like this. That's my opinion, anyways.
    • mstoneburner, on 10/30/2007, -5/+3Preventing food borne diseases and riots seems like a pretty rational basis to me!
    • iTorrey, on 10/30/2007, -2/+6No that's a ridiculous reason because the law says that you can't feed 25 or more people. So if I give "possibly tainted' food to 10 it's ok? And if I were homeless I'd go for possibly tainted over "food I picked from the trash" any day.
    • embonpoint, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1i don't think that was the original intent of this law. why is this only in effect in the one area of Orlando? if they really cared about the safety of the food and people, wouldn't they mandate it to all the zones?
    • wishninja, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Its really about setting up a kitchen and feeding area in a park. The park is not designed for such an activity. Its garbage disposal is not good enough its restrooms is traffic control. All of these problems leads to a big mess that the parks service can not keep up with. The whole place gets trashed and then people that actually pay money in the form of taxes can not use the facilities that they paid money for. The cities are just looking for a quick fix to the problem so instead of passing good laws they pass these crappy ones. Instead of just banning the mass feeding of people in the parks they could have fixed the problem by setting up some sort of program out of a building or having some designated area in a park or abandoned lot. They also could have cited the group giving out the food for littering for all of the trash left strewn all over the place and maybe they could have asked some of the homeless to help pick things up. It just comes down to the fact that most of these homeless p