3 ms·

The article only specifies that one player is homeless. I don't see why that is relevant, beyond society pushing those at the brink further over it.

• patio11 16y ago
  For what it's worth, I was just making an observation, because it struck me as unlikely beyond all speaking off it that somebody would actually be issued a summons for playing chess in a park. That set my brain down the path of "What happens in parks that we don't arrest people for but don't want to encourage?" Oh yeah, that. I could go either way on the justice/prudential aspect of it. On the one hand, there are a lot of laws that condemn the homeless to essentially permanent low-level conflict with the police. There are justice issues with that. ("The law, in all its majestic equality, forbids the rich and poor alike from sleeping under bridges.") On the other hand, I know of public spaces which welcome the homeless with open arms and I know of public spaces which I would enjoy spending time at, and those are disjoint sets. To the extent that the general public being able to enjoy parks is important (which is very, very low on my list of priorities), I (mildly) sympathize with their desires for them to not have homeless people in them.
• jonah 16y ago
  It's the same as no loitering or no sitting laws in many towns. Heck in my town, it's not legal to sit on the main street, yet there are benches all along. Selective enforcement.