Putting the ‘Art’ in Arthritis: Seniors Gather to Make Protest Signs for Saturday’s...
Jettisoned ‘Journos’: Jim Acosta Reacts to FCC Chair Brendan Carr Celebrating Cast-Off Med...
'Fight the Oligarchy' Bernie Sanders Caught in First Class While Government Workers Left...
'No Kings' Cheerleader Hakeem Jeffries Says OF COURSE Trump Always Had the Authority...
Nerdeen Kiswani Targeted in Foiled Firebomb Plot — The Same Tactics She Defended...
Trauma Drama: Tim Walz Whines About Anguish Minnesotans Are Feeling Due to Enforced...
New Secret Service Low: Agent on Jill Biden Detail Negligently Discharges Weapon …...
Party Priorities: Dem Pramila Jayapal Says ICE Must Be Prosecuted and Illegal Aliens...
Same People Who Defended Harassing Christian Bakers Now Cheer When Sarah Huckabee Sanders...
From Match Day Chaos to Monopoly Power: House Judiciary Exposes How the Residency...
The Hidden Cost of the Senate Deal: Unpaid ICE Support Staff Holding Up...
Public Health Officials Lied, Hypocrisy Ruled, Trust Died: Brutal X Thread Conor Friedersd...
Nice Backpedal, Bro! Jimmy Kimmel's Attempt at Damage Control on Markwayne Mullin Flops...
Democrats Unleash Celebrities to Fight Voter ID: 'Women Are Too Dumb to Get...
The Olympics FINALLY Adopts a Policy of Sanity, and CNN Just Can't Deal...
Premium

No, Houston has not made it a crime to feed the homeless

Jeff Lewis/AP Images for AIDS Healthcare Foundation

With these VIP posts, I think now and then it would be good occasionally to slay a misunderstanding of the law I see on Twitter. Sometimes they are common, sometimes they are not.

It started the other day with this video:

And a libertarian leaning guy I follow wrote this in response:

This led to an argument where someone claimed that this was somehow Biden’s fault (it isn’t, except in the vaguest sense of “leadership,” maybe):

But let’s back up a bit. Is it illegal to feed the homeless in blue Houston? I did a little digging and here’s what I am seeing, in Houston’s ordinances.

First, in Sec. 20-252 it says:

It shall be unlawful for any organization or individual to sponsor or conduct a food service event on public or private property without the advance written consent of the public or private property owner or other individual with lawful control of the property.

So that says you just need written consent. But its even thinner than that. If you scroll to Sec. 20-251, you see it defines the terms of that ordinance. I won’t go over every term defined, but let’s start with this definition: 

Food service event means each instance in which charitable food services are provided to more than five individuals.

Thus the statute requires that you are giving to at least six persons at the event. Therefore, handing a random homeless guy a hot dog isn’t a problem. But handing out hot dog to more than five people, and you might have a problem. But it gets dumber than that. The same definitional statute says:

Charitable food services means providing food without charge, payment or other compensation to benefit those in need at an outdoor location not owned, leased or controlled by the individual or organization providing the food.

So, you could 1) take it indoors, or 2) just do it on property you own, rent or otherwise control. Now from a little reading it appears that basically the city refuses this permission on every public property except for a police station. But nothing stops these people from buying or renting a property and handing out food for free. What Houston bans is these kinds of events on other people’s property, including public property, without permission.

And it is worth noting that this is also not a rule specifically tied to a person being homeless. Anyone who thinks only homeless people take advantage of programs at churches and the like where free food is provided has no experience with that. I have helped such organizations and many of the people who get free food this way have homes, but are still poor.

Honestly, I don’t know why this organization feels so strongly that it has to go onto public property and do this sort of thing, except maybe for the publicity of crying that they are being oppressed.

So really, none of the initial statement is true.

Finally, I am faintly irritated with the term “unhoused.” Of course, the purpose of always coming up with new terms for old concepts appears to be nothing more than indicating group identity. It’s like saying “see? We are using the newest terms so you know I am one of you.” And it’s a pretty terrible term as such terms go.

In any case, the next time you see this claim being made, you can know it is a myth. 

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement