Homeless Assaulted in St Petersburg
It is amazing how many Tampa bloggers consider Rachel Moran a great writer. Considering she is most famous for this paragraph.
We are thinking about proving this nuisance and need for civil action by making a short film called “Eddie Rolls on the Homeless,” whereby Mark secretly videotapes me and Lil Sis in a variety of situations to see how many homeless people approach us and, then, how many of these situations escalate into harrassment. Then, he’s gonna videotape Eddie in the same scenarios, only Eddie is going to beat up every homeless person who escalates the contact after being told that his panhandling is illegal and annoying.
It seems there are St. Petersburg residents who share Moran's sentiment.
Ira Gumm, a wispy old man with a trembling voice, was panhandling outside a liquor store last Sunday evening when a young man punched him.
The blow blackened the left half of Gumm's wrinkled face, so it looks covered in soot. His left eye is completely red. When he blows his nose or sneezes, blood spills out.
But Gumm, 60, hasn't reported the assault or sought medical help.
"I don't see what the point is of telling anyone," Gumm said. "It was just one of those young guys who like to beat up on people."
St. Petersburg police have eight reported attacks on the homeless. Considering how leery homeless people are of law enforcement there is probaby more undocumented. This is an example of Rachel Moran-style justice.
A few weeks ago, St. Petersburg police said, two men cut a 51-year-old homeless man's thumbs with a razor, apparently because he refused to give them money or cigarettes.
The homeless are also being robbed. Taking from someone who has nothing has about as lame as it gets. Sometimes it's just for kicks.
- On Jan. 3, police came to the 3100 block of 37th Avenue N after a resident called to report that two homeless men sleeping at a train station were being beaten by four young men with metal rods and stick. Both homeless men were seriously injured and taken to Northside Hospital.
- A few weeks later, another homeless man was beaten by young people. J.W. James, 61, said two teenagers walked up and asked if he had anything to give. When James said he had nothing, one of them punched him in the face. One of the teenagers also threw a brick at James, police said.
- A week after that incident, a 36-year-old homeless man named Derrick Davis was attacked by three teenagers in the 1500 block of 22nd Street S. They punched Davis, kicked him, beat him with a folding chair, and threw rocks at him, police said. They only ran away after a woman who saw the attack began yelling.
Rachel's idea isn't that original. Attacks on the homeless have already been posted on Youtube. Sticks of Fire webmaster Tommy Duncan tried to weasal out of Rachel's post with a disclaimer. His remark that the post was " a blunt assessment of an ongoing issue in St. Pete and everywhere," is laughable.
For those of you who think Rachel is a great writer, you need to read Alon Levy's hysterical literary critique of Rachel's post.
5 Comments:
Dude, I agree that Moran's writing is vacuous and uninspired, and her material fluff. However, your fixation with her is quite unhealthy and becoming tiresome as well. It reeks of a desperate grab for attention. The result will be something akin to the fundie's bitching about Marilyn Manson, or Grand Theft Auto, more press and credibility for your target.
I disagree driveby.
I also appreciate Michael turning me on to lindsay beyerstein at majik thise and many other pertinent bloggers which are too numerous to list.
As well, if you read Michael and I'm new to him but it jumps right out at you that his concern for the homeless is genuine. Since the article was published that he refers to -- two homeless men have been murdered and several assaulted and that's only in St.Pete.
I don't know if any of that can be attributed to Rachel. I DO KNOW that he is right to be concerned.
I read Rachel at first in disbelief that someone could find humor in that.
Here's my take: (without revealing personal feelings)
She sometimes has her blog comments out of order so it's possible she doesn't have the time to devote to her blog or uses her friends of like mind to bounce her writing off.
In one she talks of breaking up with her boyfriend and in another she is with him and then back again -- and it's easy to see the blog posts were written at differing times and are not issued in order.
When she writes about the homeless, one can see that not much time was invested, leading one to wonder if she is just relating conversations which a fifth grader can do. So, she and a few others thought it was funny. In a bar-room context almost anything can be funny. BUT, the story is not even really believable ... I've never seen hair so mesmerizing I HAVE to touch it. I don't think any homeless guy is more worried about someone's hair than eating or finding a place to sleep. That's my experience with homeless folks: they need food, they need a safe, dry (and hopefully warm) place to sleep.
I've never thought anything that I discussed while having a martini was as funny the next day. I would never foist it upon the world as ... a column.
She needs to define herself better.
When you go to her blog she defines herself as 'the american dream, etc..' I don't dislike Rachel -- I don't KNOW her -- she makes me laugh. I don't take her seriously but I think it was seriously wrong to speak of beating up helpless people and she has never retracted it. There is room for her humor but perhaps it is better spent on other subjects.
Human wreckage created by other humans is just not funny....
I think Michael is correct to keep calling attention to the plight of the homeless and I am sorry if this comment is too long.
The homeless are still there. Why shouldn't attention still be drawn to them??
I am critiquing not the attention given the homeless, as it is deserving, but the renewed focus on said blogger. One can certainly do the former with no need to further illuminate the latter.
I thought some about this comment to you while driving .... and I agree with you; perhaps michael has dual purpose with this.
This is purely my conjecture: (i don't 'know' michael, either)
He likes the truth and he has a problem with people using humor in dire circumstances which might cause some of the 'slow seats' to perform spurious acts. Because an author made them think it's okay, if that's possible, and who's to say?
He may just have a problem with Rachel, herself. It seems that many in the blogosphere do and they are people I have grown to respect. So, while I find Rachel humorous and I empathize with some of her life struggles, when I am looking for a 'take' on a subject that I am pursuing, I wouldn't refer to her.
I agree that he could focus on the homeless without bringing her up and maybe he has his reasons ....\
(killing two birds with one stone kinda thing)
I tend to do that myself cause there's only so much time in the day.
So, I should say that I see your point.
Rachel is a perfect example of the people that find beating up homeless people funny.
We get get on why Atrios and Glenn Reynolds have an obession with dissing each other. Short answer: they disagree with each other.
Drive By Blogger, I write one of the most popular lefty blogs in Florida. I can do just fine without writing about Moran. She is a St Pete resident who wrote a cruel post about planning to beat up homeless people. Several homeless people have been assaulted in the city. I'm not exactly going off-topic.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home