At some point we’ve just got to hang the bureaucrats

A 90-year-old man could be going to jail for up to 60 days after feeding homeless people and breaking a new law in Fort Lauderdale that bans people from sharing their meals with members of the public.

Arnold Abbott is likely to face a $500 fine and could be sentenced to spending up to two months behind bars after police officers arrested him on Sunday as he was handing out meals to homeless people in a park .

He was arrested and charged along with two ministers from the Sanctuary Church, which prepares hundreds of meals to dish out every week in their kitchen.

Yes, yes, public nuisance, lots of homeless people gather blah, blah, blah.

But how in fuck did we ever end up with a system where a bit of Christian charity becomes illegal? For we do have it on good authority that it is a duty of ours to feed the hungry, clothe the naked and shelter the homeless. And that authority doesn’t say that we should pass it off the the State to do it for us. Indeed, in one passage we are told to divide our cloak and ask that we may share the cold as well as the clothing.

Bastards, hang the fucking lot of ’em. JC would be turning in that grave he doesn’t have at the very thought of this shit.

43 thoughts on “At some point we’ve just got to hang the bureaucrats”

  1. The bureaucrats are the problem? Or the politicians who vote such matters into law?
    There are I am glad to say people who will ignore such laws and feel its worthwhile breaking them in the best way possible.
    By doing what is right rather than doing what is legal.

  2. I think Arnold didn’t read the memo about things that the State gets to do and things that Arnold gets to do.

  3. Everything that is not specifically allowed by your Lords and Masters is strictly forbidden. That’s why the USA is the freest nation on earth /not.

  4. So Much for Subtlety

    So let me get this right. The State caused this problem by manifestly failing the mentally ill and dumping them on the street. They then ban us doing the Christian thing – and making up for the State’s failure.

    And so instead of admitting they screwed up and re-opening some secure mental health facilities, they jail people for feeding the poor? How do they stand on washing their feet?

  5. “But how in fuck did we ever end up with a system where a bit of Christian charity becomes illegal?”

    When it creates a public nuisance. Simples!

  6. SMFS, it’s not always a case of the state ‘failing the mentally ill’. Sometimes it’s a case of the state having no choice but to respect their ‘right’ to be mad, but not mad enough to lock up.

    Unless you want to give the state powers to commit people willy- nilly?

  7. There must be some creative ways to work around the ban. For example you could drop a sealed bag full of perfectly good food into a bin in the park, then loudly announce the fact.

    The provision of food does act as a magnet though. In the absence of food provision, the homeless would be dispersed across multiple locations; but with food on offer they’ll congregate in one place. It’s the same with illegal immigrants: at the margins, a people-smuggler in Africa is telling erstwhile customers that as long as they can make it to Calais, they’ll be fed and watered there: thus more people will try to make the journey.

  8. @Andrew M

    ‘There must be some creative ways to work around the ban. For example you could drop a sealed bag full of perfectly good food into a bin in the park, then loudly announce the fact.’

    I think if I were a 90-year-old man with an impending date with a maker he believed in, who had earlier taken these pompous Paul B.oring-ish dicks to court to get them to fuck off, I would be more inclined to use my final months (days, week, at a push yes years) to martyr myself and expose them for what they are.

  9. So Much for Subtlety

    JuliaM – “Unless you want to give the state powers to commit people willy- nilly?”

    Not willy-nilly. But the patient rights people have gone nuts. We have an obligation to the mentally ill. An obligation that is not compatible with leaving them to be brutalised, assaulted and raped on the streets. It is unreasonable to say that people who are clearly not capable of making rational choices should be left to do whatever they like as long as they are no immediate threat to anyone else.

  10. A striking example of arse backward thinking.
    Yes the homeless can be a bloody nuisance. But it’s not the homelessness, it’s the mental illness, alcoholism, etc that made them homeless that makes them a nuisance.
    And where do the homeless gather? In public parks. Not in churches or on the courtroom steps. So that’s why the church was handing out food in the park and not the church.
    Jesus wept.

  11. A law to ban the sharing of meals with the public. Just marvel at that.

    So, have they banned that whole Catholic thing with the wine and the bread? Communion, isn’t it?

  12. Jesus also said to obey the earthly authorities, and IIRC, Saint Paul backed him up on that one. But Christians always come up with an excuse for not respecting the religious rules they find inconvenient, while enforcing those they like on everyone else.

  13. “it’s not always a case of the state ‘failing the mentally ill’. Sometimes it’s a case of the state having no choice but to respect their ‘right’ to be mad, but not mad enough to lock up.”

    Julia, the whole “movement” against loonie bins came from the Californian progressives, starting in the sixties. With that pedigree, are you really surprised that it leads to poor nutters being left to starve, to freeze, and, very occasionally, to murder people?

  14. Hanging’s too good for them – Imprefer the approach of one of the original ‘Courageous States’ , North Korea, where dissenters are ripped to pieces by Dogs.

    Incidentally, Tim, any comment on this ‘revised pie chart’ Murphy has been peddling in response to Osborne?

  15. I don’t know if it’s part of the justification in Fort Lauderdale, but one reason given in New York for this kind of law was that the food being dished out might not be of a sufficient health and hygiene standard so, err, shouldn’t be given out at all. Seriously.

  16. No, you don’t get to blame the bureaucrats for this one.

    Florida’s politicians specifically passed this law in the last few years because they want to stop charitable help to the poor.

  17. Jesus reply regarding Caesar was not a blanket instruction to
    “obey authorities”. It is open to all manner of interpretation. He was speaking wisely to avoid an obvious trap of being invited to speak against Roman power.

    “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesars”–in my book that would equate to “Kill them all”.

  18. Charity has become the government’s job. They don’t want them pesky Christians trying to encroach on their territory.

  19. BiG, St Paul clearly did not mean obeying the authorities to be an absolute rule, since he was himself arrested several times and probably executed.

  20. As to how Jesus would have treated these bureaucrats and politicians, I think John 2:15 gives us a good idea.

  21. ” Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

    2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

    3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:

    4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

    5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.

    6 For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.

    7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.”

    Doesn’t make your point for you BiG. “Let every soul be subject to the higher powers”-There is no power –save God if he exists–higher than my conscience. The rest is open to all manner if interpretation.

    Now–if you are talking about the New International Bible–then I agree that their version of the above passage is pile of cowardly shite that enjoins all to crawl to their masters. But then I don’t have a NI bible–I buy toilet rolls instead.+

  22. Acts 5:29.

    This is a fun game, I like it.

    Julia: I’m sure people don’t loathe you. … That wasn’t what you meant, was it?

  23. Bloke no Longer in Austria

    Psalm 41 applies to this chap, I think.

    Years ago, I had a girlfriend who lived in Vancouver ( of socialist tendencies and Catholic extraction) who used to salve her conscience by distributing McDonalds vouchers to beggars.

    I pointed out that possibly they’d rather have the money.

    To her credit, she thought about this and said “Perhaps I should just cut out the middle man and give them bottles of vodka instead.”

  24. To be fair to the Mental Health authorities in the UK, they have finally managed to sort out the law regarding the whole ‘Mad enough to require medication, but not mad enough to require sectioning’ issue that has plagued the mental health sector for decades. It did only take them about 30 years but they got there in the end. Now you can be put on a Control Order that allows you to live in the community, but still requires you to take the medication that you need to stabilise you. If you refuse to take it, or don’t turn up to doctors appointments they can section you immediately and then medicate you. Its a halfway house between full sectioning (very expensive and unnecessary for many patients) and being free to do as you please (which often means not taking your medication, and reverting to full blown mental health problems).

    I know a guy who spent 30 years yo-yoing between being in secure units under section, and living out in the community, because while he was inside he would be medicated, which would stabilise him, they would then let him out, he’d then stop taking the meds. No-one could force him to take them while he was outside (he was a 100% free man) and they couldn’t section him til his mental issues built up to a point that demanded sectioning again. Which basically meant he had to harm himself or someone else, or threaten to do so, before action could be taken. And this macabre scenario played out year after year for decades. Now he’s on a Control Order, lives in the community, has to take his meds, and lives a (relatively) ordered life. He’s been out now for several years, the longest he’s ever managed to not end up being sectioned. The only time it went wrong was when some do-gooder said it was time they lifted his Control Order. And guess what, 3 months later he’d stopped taking the meds and ended up sectioned again.

    Lord preserve us from the do-gooders.

  25. Bloke in Costa Rica

    Remember any time some pious jellyfish says, “what would Jesus do?”, that kicking shit over and whipping people are among the options.

  26. dearieme,

    > the whole “movement” against loonie bins came from the Californian progressives, starting in the sixties.

    In the US, maybe, but, in the UK, it comes from a report written by Enoch Powell, whose recommendations were (quite rightly) adopted by the Major Government.

    My mother emptied a lot of the bins. It causes me no end of amusement that a woman who devoted her whole life to hard-Left capital-S Socialism says that the proudest achievement of her life is enacting the recommendations of Enoch Powell. Though she never quite puts it that way, presumably to stop her head imploding.

  27. So Much for Subtlety

    Squander Two – “In the US, maybe, but, in the UK, it comes from a report written by Enoch Powell, whose recommendations were (quite rightly) adopted by the Major Government.”

    Well yes and no. Powell was just the last in a long line of people recommending the closing of asylums. His report is famous but the movement to close them went back to the 1950s at least in the UK.

  28. @Bloke in Germany

    ‘Christians always come up with an excuse for not respecting the religious rules they find inconvenient, while enforcing those they like on everyone else.’

    No, Christians don’t ‘always’ do anything, much like not all muslims do anything, or all sikhs, or all buddhists.

  29. @Interested, fair point. But you can always find a Christian (or Muslim, etc.) who thinks a divine command isn’t if they don’t like it. I wouldn’t care so much if they’d let the remaining artifacts of their thousand or so years in control (in Germany stuff like Sunday opening laws, church taxes on atheists married to Christians, bans on football matches &c. on certain holy days) go the way of all flesh.

  30. And said person of whatever religious persuasion can always find a passage in their holy book of choice that directly contradicts the one you found. And will then deny there are any contradictions, it’s just that the kuffar hasn’t yet obtained the necessary level of enlightenment/insight/brainwashing/salvation/auditing/karma to truly understand the true meaning.

  31. Fort Lauderdale has not banned the feeding of homeless people. They have regulated it. Partly because they are in competition with the charities over helping the homeless and partly because there is a job to do in minimising conflict between users of public spaces.

    There are parallels here with food banks. Food banks enable the welfare state to be shit. Charities handing out food to large numbers of people enables the authorities to ignore the issues homeless people face. In both cases the state likes to give the impression that it is best placed and most able to assist and that really we shouldn’t show any initiative ourselves. This is about the state marking its territory as much as it is about management of public spaces, public health and maintaining law and order.

  32. Excellent remark, Gareth

    “This is about the state marking its territory”

    The same way as dogs do.

  33. All very noble and compassionate .
    But what will you do when the ‘homeless’ gather and start peeing on your doorstep or in front of your business?
    After all you pay the taxes.

  34. I agree with the entirety of this post – apart from the headline.

    “At some point we’ve just got to hang the bureaucrats.”

    It wasn’t the bureaucrats who made the policy. It was the politicians. The bureaucrats are just the luckless souls who have to carry it out.

  35. Churm Rincewind: Yes and No. True at the level of small-fry bureaucrats. Not true when you have a truly malevolent pack of cunts like the UK’s Senior Civil Service. Our present drift to tyranny–eg most of the shite peddled by ZaNuLab and on to that cow May–is their handiwork. At the top level farmers and pigs are one.

  36. So Much for Subtlety

    Churm Rincewind – “It wasn’t the bureaucrats who made the policy. It was the politicians. The bureaucrats are just the luckless souls who have to carry it out.”

    That is not true. The politicians are the idiots who have to defend the policies on TV. Not usually the people who come up with them. We have a permanent ruling class made up of civil servants. The closing of the asylums is a good example. It did not matter which government was in power, the bureaucracy wanted it, along with the Great and the Good, and so in the end they got it. Closing of the Grammar schools likewise. Not Thatcher’s policy but she carried it out because, as a junior Minister, she did not known any better and her Department wanted it.

    No, when the hanging time comes, we need to hang a lot more than the politicians.

  37. Ordinances like this have been passed in cities across the USA. The reason for them is that people who live and work nearby don’t like homeless people congregating in their area, and will vote for politicians who promise to do something to stop it.

    So you need to hang the electorate.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *