ShortNews
+ + + 3 BRANDNEW NewsTickers for your Website! + + + easy configurable in less than 1 Minute + + + GET'EM NOW! + + +

   Home | Join | Submit News | MyShortNews | HighScores | FAQ'S | Forums 0 Users Online   
   
                 01/24/2018 12:50 PM  
  ShortNews Search
search all Channels
RSS feeds
  ShortNews User Poll
Are you excited about the holiday season?
  Latest Events
  3.294 Visits   2 Assessments  Show users who Rated this:
Quality:Very Good
Back to Overview  
01/17/2011 09:13 PM ID: 87496 Permalink   

Houston Blocks Couple From Feeding the Homeless

 

Bobby and Amanda Herring were forced to stop feeding the homeless in Houston, Texas. The couple fed between 60 and 120 people a day, they have been doing so for over a year in what they called "Feed a Friend".

The food program evolved from Amanda taking food left over from work and gave it to the homeless. The food was prepared and donated by individuals and local stores.

Spokeswoman for Health and Human Services Kathy Barton said that anyone serving food to the public needs a permit, and the food must be prepared in a certified kitchen with a certified food manager.

 
  Source: www.chron.com  
    WebReporter: ichi  Show Calling Card      
  Recommendation:  
ASSESS this news: BLOCK this news. Reason:
   
  16 Comments
  
  I Posted This Article  
 
Because I believe a "Good Samaritan" exemption should be made to allow individuals and groups of individuals to volunteer and help people in need.
Food safety is definitely a consideration, so are starvation and the diseases brought by hunger. A balance must be found.
 
  by: ichi     01/17/2011 09:22 PM     
  Its  
 
retarded laws like this that piss me off. I can understand having these laws for the mainstream general public stuff, but this is feeding the god damn hungry for crying out loud. If I was starving, and some jackasses pulled the plate of food out from under me because its a little "sub-par" compared to most standards, id be pretty pissed, and almost dead from starvation. If its a damn business, non-profit organization, huge operation, or whatever, then sure, but at the least if it comes down to eating probably good food vs starving then...

[ edited by joshjje ]
 
  by: joshjje   01/17/2011 10:30 PM     
  @ichi  
 
I think so too..
this is pretty retarded and I think whatever elected representative is responsible for this should move quickly to make an exemption. If Bureaucracy doesn´t work change it, it is made up anyway.
 
  by: veya_victaous     01/17/2011 10:51 PM     
  i think..  
 
just in case the food has some disease from a cook or even salmonella or food poisoning. Someone must be in a position to certify the food being served has no ill effects and if it does they need that person to take responsibility. I know the home folks could take on that responsibility like they have been... but apparently that´s what laws are for.. right?
 
  by: RAD     01/18/2011 12:14 AM     
  Yes,  
 
i understand why a permit is needed for the feeding but i think the couple undertake a responsibility for that food left over to be eatable.

[ edited by vizhatlan ]
 
  by: vizhatlan     01/18/2011 09:54 AM     
  This couple  
 
should gather up all those homelss in a bus and drop them off at the mayors home and we´ll see how quickly things change.

What kind of bastards are these people!

They rather let someone starve than bend the rules a bit!!!

Rules are meant to streamline life not to rigorously follow them like you were part of nazi germany where orders are orders.

Sick fucks!!!
 
  by: Flutje   01/18/2011 03:14 PM     
  I  
 
think Flutje when the couple obtain that permit in that i´m sure then the feeding can continue.

[ edited by vizhatlan ]
 
  by: vizhatlan     01/18/2011 03:45 PM     
  @RAD  
 
I hope you are certified to cook your own food in your kitchen, i wouldn´t want your family to catch salmonella and god forbid have no one around to sue.
 
  by: kmazzawi     01/18/2011 04:10 PM     
  This is where govt. intervention *is* needed.  
 
Ok, I´m really not a proponent of Big Govt. I´m NOT.

However, there are some times that the govt. should use its reasources to help get people compliant with the law.

Here is an opportunity to do that.

They should issue something like a Period of Compliancy, where they have so many days to get compliant. Then, through some service, allow anyone wishing to help to take a course during that time, or something of the sort, to become compliant.

You don´t need a commercial kitchen to prepare food safely, only a properly cleaned area.

 
  by: gbestwick   01/18/2011 05:26 PM     
  Seems like an easy remedy  
 
... would be a waiver system. You could have recipients sign a waiver stating something like, "I understand that the food I am accepting has not been prepared in a certified kitchen supervised by a certified food manager, and I accept all inherent risks."

It´s pretty out there, but not impossible to imagine a scenario in which a homeless person suffers food poisoning from such a charity operation and sues the city for allowing it to operate without permitting. Such a waiver system would probably keep everybody off the hook in such a situation.
 
  by: Ben_Reilly     01/18/2011 06:08 PM     
  Houston Blocks Couple From Feeding the Homeless  
   
  by: WhoBeen   01/19/2011 06:57 PM     
  No good deed  
 
shall go unpunished.
 
  by: mexicanrevolution   01/20/2011 02:24 AM     
  Just a thought  
 
If the homeless cannot get food, it is by design. That is, if the government were not to interfere they would get to eat.

This leaves me thinking. Considering all the limitations placed on people on how they can live and where they can live... are the poor by design? Is it within the structure of government to have a certain amount of its citizenship to be poor? If an opportunity arises to fix the problem, there is an obvious structure that you must overcome. But that structure is by nature the reason the problem exists.
 
  by: mexicanrevolution   01/20/2011 02:28 AM     
  Hungry  
 
The Americans did it to themselves by letting the vulture lawyers sue anyone who got a belly ache from eating food served to them by a "public" place. Let one of these people get sick and the state will have to pay the law suite. You cannot befriend anyone anymore without getting screwed......
 
  by: robbierobertson   01/20/2011 12:51 PM     
  They´re Right...  
 
God forbid these homeless people risk getting a bug from food that wasn´t prepared in a "safe" kitchen. I know the stuff they get out of the dumpsters is much safer! How come it doesn´t surprise me this is happening in Texas?
 
  by: gws1968     01/20/2011 09:30 PM     
  @story  
 
I thought most people on this site believe that government regulation is the answer to everything and now it seems regulation is bad.

You can´t "bend" a rule; you can only either be in or out of compliance with the rule. Regulations should be much more common sense but then that would reduce the number of bureaucrats needed for enforcement and lower the burden on the taxpayer.

I work in the food industry and the number of regulations and the contradictory nature of some of them make it difficult to do business. I think they should be reduced to a simple statement such as "food must be produced, stored, and shipped in a sanitary manner" and let the market figure out what that means. Of course then I would have to find something else to make my service value-added.
 
  by: morganmacleod     01/21/2011 12:21 AM     
 
 
Copyright ©2018 ShortNews GmbH & Co. KG, Contact: info@shortnews.com