Panhandlers

[Dr Awesomesauce]

With a ban on panhandling are you not just criminalising the poor? How would it be enforced? Do we round them up every morning and ship them off to labour farms? OK I'm being a tad dramatic here but I do believe it's a slippery slope. Frankly, we've made a pretty big mess of our society and I think we should have to look it square in the eye every day.

As a side note, anybody who's been to a Third World country knows the streets are filled with people hustling to make a buck, selling this, that and the other. Well, naturally, that's illegal in Canada. If you want to sell something on the street you need a license and aside from the expense there are probably lots of restrictions as to what you can sell and where. So, the typical struggling Canadian has few options in front of him: work for minimum wage; go on the dole; or beg for change down on the corner. We've largely legislated creativity and initiative out of our culture, so this is what we get.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

Originally Posted by Pearlstreet

Last year there was one guy who was 'playing' the parking cone as a trumpet while in a delusional state. Great show....

I've seen much worse at parties with 'civilised' people not to mention on university campuses with, well, less civilised types.

For some, the difference between being housed and sober and being homeless and blasted on Aqua Velva is a shockingly fine line.

[Jon Dalton]

Originally Posted by Pearlstreet

Last year there was one guy who was 'playing' the parking cone as a trumpet while in a delusional state. Great show....

If that was who I think it is, he's a friend of mine and used to go by 'the pyloneer.' He's more into electronic music these days.

[SteelTown]

I have zero issues with on street entertainers.

[SteelTown]

lol that would've been entertaining to watch.

[SteelTown]

The same way the city enforce no smoking in parks and no idling.

Out West most cities have by laws against panhandling.

[SteelTown]

I have absolutely zero issues with on street entertainers or buskers.

Panhandlers is a blight on the core that symbolizes a broken system. It needs to be eradicated much like poverty needs to be eradicated.

So matt why did you panhandle? If you don't mind telling.

[HillStreetBlues]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Panhandlers is a blight on the core that symbolizes a broken system. It needs to be eradicated much like poverty needs to be eradicated.

As you say, it is symbolic and symptomatic of an imperfect system. The goal can never be to eradicate a symptom, particularly when that symptom is composed of human beings.

You're right that poverty needs to be eradicated, not panhandling.

[SteelTown]

So if we eradicated poverty what's the point of panhandling? Seems like after that it's a substance abuse problem. Which I suspect is the majority of Hamilton's panhandlers.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

^I get what you're saying but, quite frankly, we won't be eradicating poverty any time soon because, well, we're not even trying. There was a brief moment there, before most of us were born, when the wealth we created was distributed much more evenly than it is today. Those days are long gone and they're not coming back, so unless we go Communist tomorrow, poverty will continue to grow unabated until society ceases to function in the way we're accustomed. Perhaps then panhandling will be seen as a decent career choice, rather than the last resort that it is today.

[thistleclub]

I wonder how much money has come out of fines related to feeding pigeons? It's been a decade or so. Surely some violations must be on the books. Also having flashbacks to the anti-swearing proposal.

[HillStreetBlues]

Originally Posted by thistleclub

Also having flashbacks to the anti-swearing proposal.

I find the "broken window" theory of criminality pretty compelling, and I'd welcome a ban on profane or offensive language. This is not an issue of free speech: we accept other laws that curtail people's ability to say things that we generally find distasteful.

It is much more cost-effective to police the nuisance crimes that can lead to other criminal behaviour or cause to creat an environment in which criminality to thrive. It's wrong and even backwards to say that you have to eliminate the more serious crimes first. We should all pay more attention to those "petty" crimes like vandalism, littering, and even just anti-social behaviour like profane or disrespectful speech. If we collectively and individually send messages that these activities are unacceptable, fewer people will engage in them and then in turn engage in more serious crimes.

That having been said, I don't think this applies to panhandling. Begging in a respectful way doesn't impede anyone else.

[bigguy1231]

Originally Posted by pEte fiSt iN Ur fAce

^I get what you're saying but, quite frankly, we won't be eradicating poverty any time soon because, well, we're not even trying. There was a brief moment there, before most of us were born, when the wealth we created was distributed much more evenly than it is today. Those days are long gone and they're not coming back, so unless we go Communist tomorrow, poverty will continue to grow unabated until society ceases to function in the way we're accustomed. Perhaps then panhandling will be seen as a decent career choice, rather than the last resort that it is today.

Even then there were panhandlers in the streets. I remember seeing many more back in the 60's than I do now. Back then they were just referred to as bums. They used to line King St. with their cups every day. As a kid we just took a wide berth around them, but most adults just ignored them.

[Katrillion]

I'm a high school student and my friend group really aren't afraid to go downtown but it is so dirty and gross there. I know half the population at my school would rather go to the Ancaster Meadowlands Power Centre.

[HillStreetBlues]

Originally Posted by Katrillion

I'm a high school student and my friend group really aren't afraid to go downtown but it is so dirty and gross there. I know half the population at my school would rather go to the Ancaster Meadowlands Power Centre.

They are afraid of going downtown, and the reason is because it is so dirty and gross. And they're not wrong to be afraid, because unpleasant situations including crime are a lot more likely to happen in places that are dirty and gross.

If we cleaned up the streets, both the risks and as importantly the perceived risks would go down, and their preferences would change.

[movingtohamilton]

Originally Posted by hillstreetblues

...if we cleaned up the streets, both the risks and as importantly the perceived risks would go down, and their preferences would change.

^ +1

[thistleclub]

Five downtown areas of concern as captured in the Hamilton Police Services' An Overview of Violence-Prone Areas in Hamilton: Three Years Later:

Frequency of Violent Calls-For-Service
Hess Village 11 (2009) / 15 (2012) = +36.4%
Jackson Square/Gore Park/King William 85 (2009) / 67 (2012) = -21.2%
James North/Ferguson North 72 (2009) / 47 (2012) = -34.7%
Sanford/Tisdale 76 (2009) / 59 (2012) = -22.4%
Wellington/West 17 (2009) / 19 (2012) = +11.8%

Frequency of Assault Calls-For-Service
Hess Village 57 (2009) / 55 (2012) = -3.5%
Jackson Square/Gore Park/King William 133 (2009) / 96 (2012) = -27.8%
James North/Ferguson North 158 (2009) / 137 (2012) = -13.3%
Sanford/Tisdale 75 (2009) / 56 (2012) = -25.3%
Wellington/West 28 (2009) / 20 (2012) = -28.6%

Frequency of Robbery Calls-For-Service
Hess Village 4 (2009) / 3 (2012) = -25.0%
Jackson Square/Gore Park/King William 31 (2009) / 19 (2012) = -38.7%
James North/Ferguson North 29 (2009) / 14 (2012) = -51.7%
Sanford/Tisdale 32 (2009) / 20 (2012) = -37.5%
Wellington/West 10 (2009) / 5 (2012) = -50.0%

[movingtohamilton]

Thanks for posting this. The decline in frequency for all calls in the JS/GP/KW zone stands out. Now the challenge: focusing on the perceived risks noted by hillstreetblues.

My middle-class bias will be obvious: continued private-sector investment in that zone will attract people with money to spend. Intensification of "live, work, play" opportunities.

"Dirty and gross" can be replaced with "destination". From the historical photos posted, this once was a vibrant area. It can be again.