He must have mis-spoke while running for office, he didn’t want to solve poverty, he wanted to move poor people out of town (I guess that reduces poverty), demonize them and criminalize their behaviors. Here’s his latest.
Someone has got to explain this to me . . .
Downtown leaders are joining Madison officials in a push to improve safety in response to violence — especially brazen behavior with guns — in the central city.
Some of the things being considered include putting more police on the street late at night and on weekends, enacting tougher rules on loitering and panhandling, seeking more cooperation between police and bar owners, and a grass-roots initiative asking residents and others to report crime and suspicious behavior.
What does panhandling have to do with anything? I’m still trying to figure that out. I actually thought that they had effectively gotten rid of most panhandling, except for one little box (it was outlined with green paint at one point) on State St, but now I’m going to have to check that out.
The loitering law is later described as allowing the police to disperse a crowd if there are gang members gathered. I’m not sure if I’m concerned about that one or not – guess it is all in how it gets used.
I think what disturbs me most is that the solutions seem to target a behavior that has not been linked to the shooting. Much like the homeless were targeted when after the murders of Joel Morino and Brittany Zimmerman murder. And homeless have not been connected to either murder.
Its extremely disappointing behavior by our city leaders. I think they need to explain their logic . . . or lack thereof.
What’s the difference between loitering and panhandling?
Loitering is being somewhere without having a specific reason for being
there. Panhandling is asking strangers on the street for money.
Panhandling = asking for money
Loitering = standing or sitting in public without approved purpose
My question was somewhat rhetorical, but okay. Ya see, I think Soglin would lump the two because they both contribute to the same problem, not because of some mythical “war.”
But Ryan, what problem is that? As you’ll note from the article above, none of the serious crimes that are cited have anything to do with pan handling or loitering, at least as far as I can tell. The other suggestions directly address the problems, but those two seemed tacked on.
forwardourmotto: How was this NOT a case of a bunch of people loitering? Standing around with no place to go, trash talking until someone’s had enough and tries to look all tough?
Well it’s hard to tell exactly what the situation was until all the details come out, but I don’t think it’s pragmatic to enforce a loitering ordinance on that many people. I think the city should look to lower the number of people in the area while upping the number of police in the area.
And see how loitering and panhandling are grouped together? Panhandling certainly didn’t have anything to do with that crime and panhandling is mentioned 3 times in the article. I believe that both potential ordinances are a distraction.
I do like the other ideas mentioned in the article though and I think they’d be more effective too.