Austin Plan to Ban Beggers

The issue of panhandling for money on street corners has arisen recently within the Texas legislature. Many issues can be found within this problem from the city's personal beauty to finding legitimate help for the destitute doing the panhandling; but what about the freedom of speech?

The editorial board at the Austin American Statesman believes that passing an ordinance to remove panhandlers from the streets would be impinging upon their rights granted under the First Amendment. Now, I'm honestly rather conflicted on this issue, as there seem to me to be positives and negatives to be found on both sides. One of the central issues that concerns me is that the people who panhandle on the streets could probably find better help elsewhere (at one of Austin's homeless shelters.) To tell people what they can and cannot do though (while still being lawful,) is a dangerous line to tamper with, with the slippery slope theory always just a step away. Perhaps instead of a city ordinance, the organizations providing care for the homeless could become more active in their efforts to get people off the street with incentives and advertising.

Another issue brought up in the article was the effectiveness of such an ordinance. How would it be enforced, and would it really be worth it with more serious crimes happening that need attending to? As long as the person doing the panhandling does not impinge upon the rights of the people they ask from, the actual criminality of their actions is next to none. Police could be of much better use elsewhere in the city dealing the bank robbers or drug dealer etc.

Though I could really go either way on the issue, I agree with the Austin American Statesman in saying that I lean towards not passing the ordinance. It would just be another stuffy government rule set that would ultimately be more trouble than it's worth, wasting both the time and money of city officials. When someone on the street begs for money, there's always the option to just ignore them.