But other advocates of the homeless feel that aggressive panhandling has gotten out of hand.

"I think aggressiveness is a valid concern," said Fred M. Ellis, the office manager at Spare Change News, a weekly newspaper run by the Homeless Empowerment Project.

"There's no problem in panhandling as such, but there is a problem with being super-aggressive in trying to get money," he said.

Joseph Manuel, a Spare Change vendor, also felt aggressive solicitation was unnecessary.

"I've been homeless and I know what it feels like--you don't got no job, you don't got no money," Manuel said.

"You should get fined for being aggressive about it," he said, "but you should be able to ask for money if you want."

"It ain't what you do, it's how you do it. When someone says no [to a solicitation], you don't force it," he said.

An employee at the Boston Emergency Shelter Commission (BESC), who asked not to be named, agreed aggressiveness was a problem but offered an explanation for the increase in aggressive pan-handling.

"If [panhandling has] gotten out of hand, it's because the demise of general relief has forced those with no other income to do it," the source said.

Problems with the Ordinance

Boston city councillors debated for more than 90 minutes before passing the panhandling ordinance, according to The Boston Globe.

Legislators and those active in the homeless community expressed concern over the effectiveness of the ordinance, the constitutionality of the ordinance and the possibility that police might over-extend their power.

"The police have a lot of power as it is," said the BESC source. "[Now], the police will have as much power as they want to have over the homeless--it's up to the individual [police officers]."

Although the ordinance explains that it is not intended to infringe upon any constitutional rights, some, like Donovan, are not convinced.

"I believe it's unconstitutional," he said. "It targets a group of individuals that don't need to be negatively targeted, and it's not solving the problem; it's addressing the problem in a rather misdirected way."