{"id":179096,"date":"2017-02-22T04:30:48","date_gmt":"2017-02-22T09:30:48","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/best-approach-to-panhandlers-ignore-them-richmond-register\/"},"modified":"2017-02-22T04:30:48","modified_gmt":"2017-02-22T09:30:48","slug":"best-approach-to-panhandlers-ignore-them-richmond-register","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/intentional-communities\/best-approach-to-panhandlers-ignore-them-richmond-register\/","title":{"rendered":"Best approach to panhandlers? Ignore them &#8211; Richmond Register"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    Editors note: The Registers parent company, Community    Newspaper Holdings Inc., has papers all over the United States.    Each Wednesday, this space will be dedicated to what one of    those papers thinks about the issues facing their communities.  <\/p>\n<p>    In striking down Lexingtons anti-panhandling law, the Kentucky    Supreme Court has further clarified what local governments can    do to discourage individuals from begging: very little.  <\/p>\n<p>    Despite the societal stigma associated with panhandling, this    form of expression is widely considered to be constitutionally    protected speech, Chief Justice John D. Minton Jr. said in the    decision.  <\/p>\n<p>    Its a decision that likely kills similar ordinances across the    state, including the one in Louisville Metro that imposes a    $250 fine, 90 days in jail, or both for those who aggressively    beg for money in public.  <\/p>\n<p>    The landmark ruling also said it is unconstitutional for city    officials to treat individuals who carry signs begging for    money differently from others, such as those with religious    messages such as Jesus Loves You.  <\/p>\n<p>    The only thing distinguishing these two people is the content    of their messages, Minton wrote.  <\/p>\n<p>    The ruling does provide guidance to local governments about    what they can and cannot do to discourage panhandling. Nearly    every city in Kentucky, including Ashland, has debated ways to    limit individuals from begging.  <\/p>\n<p>    The case before the state Supreme Court was brought by    attorneys for Dennis Champion, 58, who has been cited or    arrested more than 550 times for begging, illegal solicitations    and disorderly conduct since 2004 in Lexington and Louisville,    according to court records.  <\/p>\n<p>    Defending the Lexington ordinance, which carried a maximum    penalty of 30 days in jail, a $100 fine, or both, the Fayette    County attorneys office said the city had a compelling    interest in pedestrians not being struck by motorists and in    the efficient flow of traffic. But the 14-page ruling said    Lexington officials failed to show panhandlers were responsible    for traffic delays or accidents.  <\/p>\n<p>    A decade ago, Louisvilles Metro Council enacted an    anti-begging law saying there was an increase in aggressive    solicitation in downtown and throughout the city that had    become extremely disturbing and disruptive to residents and    businesses. The ordinance says certain types of panhandling    has contributed not only to the loss of access and enjoyment    of public places, but also to an enhanced fear, intimidation    and disorder.  <\/p>\n<p>    It was primarily a response to people who (were) getting up in    folks faces, not leaving them alone and demanding money,    Democratic caucus spokesman Tony Hyatt said. Louisville has    defined aggressive solicitation as repetitively approaching or    following pedestrians despite refusals, the use of abusive or    profane language to cause fear and intimidation, unwanted    physical contact, or the intentional blocking of vehicular and    pedestrian traffic. It specifically forbids such behavior    within 20 feet of an automated teller machine, an outdoor    dining area or a bus stop.  <\/p>\n<p>    The high courts ruling does provide a legal road map to how    cities could regulate beggars and that appears to favor    Louisvilles ordinance. Minton wrote that Lexington could    prohibit all individuals from approaching stopped motorists,    which he said targets the behavior a city seeks to prohibit    rather than why a person steps into traffic.  <\/p>\n<p>    The new Supreme Court ruling makes it clear panhandlers have    the right to beg, but that does not mean anyone must give them    anything. In fact, we think the best way for people to respond    panhandlers is to not give them anything to make begging worth    their time.  <\/p>\n<p>     The Daily Independent, Ashland  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>Visit link: <\/p>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"http:\/\/www.richmondregister.com\/opinion\/best-approach-to-panhandlers-ignore-them\/article_51a5eb7c-f892-11e6-a6ea-db49f06a4172.html\" title=\"Best approach to panhandlers? Ignore them - Richmond Register\">Best approach to panhandlers? Ignore them - Richmond Register<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> Editors note: The Registers parent company, Community Newspaper Holdings Inc., has papers all over the United States. Each Wednesday, this space will be dedicated to what one of those papers thinks about the issues facing their communities. In striking down Lexingtons anti-panhandling law, the Kentucky Supreme Court has further clarified what local governments can do to discourage individuals from begging: very little.  <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/intentional-communities\/best-approach-to-panhandlers-ignore-them-richmond-register\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":9,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[187810],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-179096","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-intentional-communities"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/179096"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/9"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=179096"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/179096\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=179096"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=179096"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=179096"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}