Apparently the UK government plans to make begging a criminal offence, because they class it as 'anti-social behaviour': -

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2828149.stm

Is it just me, or does anyone else find such a measure Draconian in the extreme?

I am confused by the intent of the proposed law. The penalty will be fines. What happens if the fines are not paid?

I do think it is appropriate for society to intervene when someone is begging. Begging can be a nuisance.

This seems oddly familiar? Didn't Britain have debtor's jail during the 18th and 19th century?

From the BBC link provided in topic:


Are they serious!?
Their claims that there is no need for begging in the UK sounds like nothing more than denial! Turning their back on a problem is certainly not going to make it go away. And I seriously question the methods by which they seem to be approaching it.

Their suggestion that a "persistent minority can sometimes ruin whole communities" is, at least in its wording, appalling. While the report is currently only in reference to homeless people, what kind of loose policy is this to be throwing around? "It's time to support the majority against the minority"...? Goodness.

With the political climate being what it is today and Tony Blair's perpetual negligence of the people's voice, one can't help but question in what officials in the UK think they are doing. Where in the history or principle of democracy does it anywhere say the majority should have decided favor against the minority?

And what do they hope to gain by fining or arresting homeless people? How are they supposed to pay? Is prison supposed to somehow provide them with shelter and employment after time served? Will arresting people and leaving them unaided serve to better the communities they allegedly threaten to ruin?

This is ridiculous.

You are right. This is ridiculous - and it is also a horrifying insight into how the New Labour government view the very people they are supposed to be helping.

Is the Home Office actually suggesting that people are voluntary living on the streets begging pennies from strangers, rather than taking advantage of the fail-safe welfare system Labour seem to believe they have instituted?

Are the government suggesting that homelessness and begging are lifestyle choices?

The fact of the matter is that begging hoes on because the welfare system is flawed. People are homelsess because the welfare system is flawed. It seems that the government is tired of trying to help people, and has decided instead to sweep its failures under the carpet in order to regain the Middle Class vote.

I think that, when a government actively seeks to alienate and ostracise the poorest sections of society simply to spare the blushes of those who are more well, there is something seriously rotten in the state of Britain.

I think Blair and his ministers are consciously and calculatedly trading suffering for votes

Hey yall, This is the british we are talking about, A country that is ruled by a 1000 year old queen, a country that has always seemed a mite bit contrary mind you!! And it also rains almost every day, So if they get rid of the beggers on the street the only thing they have to worry about the will be the buggers on parliment!!!!

No reason to be insulting to our friends across the pond. Let's be constructive in our posts, please

''1000 year old Queen?'' I thought Quentin Crisp left Britain for America.

''A mite bit contrary mind you'' Care to translate that into something approaching Standard English. Standard American English will do :-)

"And it rains almost everyday"? *Sigh* Yes, and we all wear bowler hats to work, nobody lives or works outside London, the policemen all ride bicycles, and the wroking classes all speak like Dick van Dyke in Mary Poppins. New stereotypes urgent needed on your side of the pond, I'd say.

"Buggers on parliament"? A reference to the fact that we have openly gay men and lesbian women in our legislature and entetainment industry, perhaps? Frankly, if that makes us 'contrary', I'd say that the USA could do with a dose of contrariness. How many openly gay congressman are there? How many gay, and OUT Hollywood male actors are there? Now subtract the British ones - Sir Ian McKellen, etc. Who are you left with?

To the question at hand (before I get told off like you did :-) )

I think that the proposed laws (for they are still only proposals) to outlaw begging are somewhat draconian, but are also somewhat necessary. Because we have a welfare state, we have fewer beggars, and little of the 'hobo' culture you have there (left over from the Great Depression?). Many of these, especially in the biggest cities, are indeed people who have fallen through the (increasingly threadbare) welfare net. Some, however, are not. I know of at least five 'beggars' in my town (pop 180,000) who treat it as just their job. They are not homeless - the five I'm thinking of rented a rather pleasant house in my own street - and they also fraudulently claim benefits (by not declaring their begging proceeds as income). I do not argue that trying to crack down on abusers like these by outlawing begging is not using a sledgehammer to crack a nut - it is. But, from some perspectives, i.e. those other than 'legitimate' beggars, it can be seen as justification for doing so.

Another 'reason' used is the same kind of 'zero tolerance' for lawlessness and antisocial behaviour successfully applied to New York City some years ago. It didn't make the beggars disappear, they just went to less visible places. It would help London or Oxford tourism, and help Londoners and Oxonians feel better about themselves, just the same as it did for New Yorkers.

But if it's bad for the British to do this, was it also bad for Giuliani-era NYC? Or is it a way to feel smugly superior to the old country? (Posts like fisherman's indicate that perhaps it is, at least in part).

I once asked a homeless man in Liverpool why he was begging. Didn't he get any unemployment benefit? The reason I asked this is because we do in Denmark and I couldn't believe the British would be so different to us.
He replied (and I can't vouch for the truth of this) that in order to get unemployment benefit, you have to have an address so they can send you the money. So a homeless person could not get any benefit because they had no registered home.
The argument was; that if the unemployed person was not registered at a fixed address then they could simply apply for benefit from several county councils.

I don't know how it works in Britain, but in Denmark we all have a state issued ID number, so any money paid out to us, is done so by means of a national system. And consequently, we don't really have homeless people begging in the streets, or if we do, they usually have the decency to pretend they are street performers!

It sounds fairly contrary to their "Socialist" type of system, and reminicent of some "cleansing activities" of not only the past, but more recently as well, in the eastern block countries.

What are they going to do with those people?

Not a very "Punk Rock" attitude or even socially conscious.

Don't waste our space here posting only emoticons, please.

Our RULES state that posts must be constructive and on-topic.

Well, we can speculate all we want on the reasons people are homeless. All studies are done by asking people who are homeless and we trust that they tell us the truth. The fact is, it's embarassing as hell to be homeless and the reasons are usually far more embarassing.

What some consider to be "laziness", I think it's more complicated than that. Imagine if you will, you've just lost everything, your worldly possessions consist of the clothes you have on and a shopping cart you fill with garbage you find laying around that you can make use of. Imagine what you have to go through on a daily basis just to find someplace to sleep, things to eat, cops to avoid for loitering. Imagine the thought of applying for a job with the rags you have on. Whether you're applying for a job in an office or in a warehouse, nobody wants to hire a guy that smells like the subway.

Does this make it impossible to bounce back? Absolutely not, but for those that are there it can easily seem that way. Between manic depression and overwhelming self worthlessness, it's very difficult.

I support programs to help them get on their feet, temporary housing, job training, things like that, but it will still be up to them to make it happen for themselves.

unfortunately, or rather fortunately, I have first hand experience on this subject. I say fortunately, because I now appreciate the hard work, job and life that I have now.

In 1998 I was in a very abusive relationship, she was an addict. Her addiction cost us everything, and I was young, stupid and "in love" with her and we ended up homeless. We received help by checking into the local shelter, but there were rules.
1. Had to be drug tested once a week.
2. Had to get a job within one week of checking in. (They had connections.)
3. Had to be in by 8pm, up at 5am and out by 7am. You couldn't sleep in or lounge around the home. You had to be productive.
4. You had to turn your pay check over to the home. They would give you $20 a week for smokes or what ever. 80% of your check went into a savings account for you to get you back on your feet. 20% of your pay check went towards the shelter.

I stayed there a month and a half and saved enough money to restart my life and am just fine now. I saw many people who didn't want to follow the rules and would rather suffer on the street than compromise in order to improve their situation. I appreciated the opportunity that was provided to me and they treated me with respect and encouraged me to get my life straightened out.

BTW, I broke up with that woman and I'm not one bit heartbroken over it! in fact, I have a bumper sticker on my car that says: I STILL MISS MY EX, BUT MY AIM IS IMPROVING!

It's been nearly four months since this thread started. Do any of our friends from across the pond have word on whether this passed?

The Down Town Atlanta commission is discussing a ban on pan handling right now.

It is a very draconian measure I agree, especially for a left-wing government.
In truth, a law like this is unlikely to be enforced (very effectively) anyway.

Have a look here Jaime (On my favourite site, the BBC )

It looks like begging has only been made illegal in City Centres. I understand that 2 beggars have been fined and banned from the City Centre in manchester since this story.

I am from London and I can say that no action has been taken on the homless people, perhaps of more interest is that two towns on the south coast have offered free train tickets to the homeless to anywhere in the uk as long as they get out of town. I think that america has more of a homless problem than the uk, when vising San Francisco and Vancouver i was shocked at the numer of beggars in comparison to London, they really ruin the image of americas cities. Europe is alot less tolerant of homlesness.

I don't think the issue has much to do with tolerance per se, but rather the fact that the majority of Western European countries have larger and more developed social welfare systems than America, which means that the proportional number of homeless people in Europe as compared tp the US is consequently less.