Log In


Reset Password
Opinion Editorial Cartoons Op-Ed Editorials Letters to the Editor

Proposed panhandling laws go too far

The ACLU of Colorado agrees with many of the sentiments expressed in the editorial (Herald, April 29) regarding proposed anti-panhandling ordinances, but we would draw the line differently when it comes to free speech, “captive audiences” and public spaces such as medians.

We fully agree that panhandlers are fellow Americans with the same rights as the rest of us, including free speech, even if they are unkempt and their speech is a request for money. We also agree that there are legitimate laws protecting safety. But laws that restrict speech merely to shield us from feeling uncomfortable or annoyed are another matter.

Living in a society that honors and protects free speech means sometimes encountering unwanted speech, but that is not enough reason to criminalize speech that is not actually threatening.

This is the main trouble with the growing number of laws that criminalize even polite requests for charity in certain situations. These laws often have absurd applications. In certain locations, bell-ringing for the Salvation Army would become criminal.

One proposal to be considered by the City Council would render all medians off-limits if they are not used to cross the street in a reasonable amount of time. Joggers and dog walkers on the center of East Third Avenue would be subject to a hefty fine or a court date.

Of course, no one expects the police to enforce these laws in those ways or in those situations. It’s clear that these laws would be exclusively used to target and harass people who rely on charity.

Some of us might prefer not to see or hear impoverished or homeless people whose very existence makes us uncomfortable, but there is nothing dangerous about being uncomfortable. Violating constitutional protections of free speech to avoid discomfort or annoyance is worse.

The Herald has the right idea about how we should think about people in poverty, but not about the scope of acceptable limitations on what they can say. The proposed ordinances before the Durango City Council go too far in limiting basic rights.

Nathan Woodliff-Stanley, executive director, ACLU of Colorado

Denver



Reader Comments