Published

STEVE RINGMAN / THE SEATTLE TIMES

Update: My letter was printed in the Sunday edition, September 20th, of the Seattle Times.

I am happy to report that I had my first published piece today. I know what you’re thinking, and no it’s not my eagerly anticipated memoir. It is a lowly letter to the editor in the Seattle Times, but it is a start.

The context of the letter is that one of our councilmembers, Tim Burgess, is proposing a law that would limit panhandling in Seattle. It would prohibit panhandling 25 feet from cash machines, people getting in and out of his/her car, at intersections and on-ramps, and after dark.

It is part of his Safe Streets Initiative that will provide people the feeling of safety by affectively removing that face of visible poverty and make it a crime to engage in activities associated with extreme poverty. Albeit it doesn’t outright ban panhandling because that would be unconstitutional. However, it does make things more difficult for the poor, and provides an additional tool that the police can use to harass the homeless.

The Seattle Times editorial board has fully endorsed his proposal. The editorial can be found here. Which is one of the things that led me to write in the first place.

That’s enough of the soap box. You can find my letter here. For some reason the direct link doesn’t work so you need to scroll down to ‘City councilman’s panhandling proposal’ and my letter ‘Feeling safer is not being safer.’ If you want to read something more from the soap box, and perhaps develop some righteous anger, you can read my blog entry on the RCOP Blog. I encourage you to comment on the Seattle Times site so we can build support against Burgess’ initiative.

Update: Since the Seattle Times website didn’t seem to want to link to my story here is the text from my letter:

The Seattle Times on Sunday endorsed a proposal by Councilmember Tim Burgess to limit panhandling [“Proposed rules would make streets feel safer,” Opinion, Sept. 13]. These well-intentioned proposals are only good for eliminating the face of visible poverty and limiting the sole means that the poorest of Seattle have to survive. The outcomes will create a false sense of security further disenfranchise the poor by causing unnecessary fines and prison times for those who can ill afford them.

Laws already exist that restrict aggressive panhandling. New regulations will only invite more laws that would restrict poor people’s rights and their ability to survive.

Calling panhandlers “street toughs” only stigmatizes the homeless; putting increased restrictions on panhandling won’t curtail a rise in violent crime as the editorial states. Making streets feel safer does not actually make them safer. Of course no one wants to be harassed getting out of his/her car, but that’s no reason to impose a “restraining order” on the poor.

Advertisement

Tags: Letter, Panhandling, Published, Seattle Times, Tim Burgess