In the 1972 case of Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville, 405 U.S. 156, the US Supreme Court held Jacksonville's Ordinance Code § 26-57 was unconstitutionally vague. I posit that SCOTUS was in error, and that the ordinance is supra-constitutionally dope for its use of quaint troublemaker synonyms:
Rogues and vagabonds, or dissolute persons who go about begging, common gamblers, persons who use juggling or unlawful games or plays, common drunkards, common night walkers, thieves, pilferers or pickpockets, traders in stolen property, lewd, wanton and lascivious persons, keepers of gambling places, common railers and brawlers, persons wandering or strolling around from place to place without any lawful purpose or object, habitual loafers, disorderly persons, persons neglecting all lawful business and habitually spending their time by frequenting houses of ill fame, gaming houses, or places where alcoholic beverages are sold or served, persons able to work but habitually living upon the earnings of their wives or minor children shall be deemed vagrants and, upon conviction in the Municipal Court shall be punished as provided for Class D offenses [punishable by 90 days' imprisonment, $500 fine, or both].I'll also add that the logic of fining homeless people is just airtight. Yeah... we'll fine 'em. That'll show them homelessness doesn't pay!