Los Angeles is city of Homeless (work, drive, tower)

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Howiester

Typical lib, commenting from a distance. The homeless ARE a major threat to safety we face in Los Angeles in our daily lives.

The events are not isolated. People are getting murdered. By homeless. Often. It's ok though, go back to your yacht and keep commenting.

How funny Howiester.

First you assume I am a liberal - because, I suppose, what I wrote makes sense. But, even so, you couldn't be further from the truth. In your world, of course, everything is judged by ideology rather than on intelligence (or lack thereof) of individual merits.

Second, you say I comment from a distance. Interesting especially here since, in this case, the story jm has posted and I am responding to, occurred four months ago in SAN DIEGO, um, where I live. In fact, it happened on the waterfront in San Diego. Where I live. In fact, it happened on a day when I was walking on that waterfront in San Diego, where I live. So, um, this story wasn't any threat to you in Los Angeles where you do not live on the waterfront.

People are getting murdered far more often, by any metric, by the non-homeless. Furthermore, the point I just made in the previous post was that the second leading cause of preventable death in the nation - prescription drug misuse - is caused by the irresponsible and amoral world of pharmaceuticals which isn't conceived of or run by the homeless, last I checked.

As for my "yacht" - lmao. It is a 22', 45-year-old sailboat with about 64 square feet of living space. Likely not much more interior room than your master bathroom.

You bet I'll keep commenting

[Cream1]

You seem upset people aren't blindly agreeing with your drivel like had been common in the past. What do you even get out of posting in an LA Homeless thread in the LA forum if you don't and haven't lived in LA?

[NyWriterdude]

Originally Posted by Finper

I'll be interested to see where those houses will be. Not many people will want to live next to a house full of schizophrenics me included. They also don't seem to want to live with each other. I'm not against it on the whole just don't know how it will be accomplished. It's a horrible problem country wide

You already have homes for them, and some of them are in nice areas.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Howiester

You seem upset people aren't blindly agreeing with your drivel like had been common in the past. What do you even get out of posting in an LA Homeless thread in the LA forum if you don't and haven't lived in LA?

I don't worry about people agreeing with me. I focus on being correct and logical, pointing out severe ignorance on the part of certain posters.

And I guess you missed the parts about me having an apartment in the past in Hollywood and about having close relatives and friends I visit in LA still when I drive through frequently between my homes in San Diego and Morro Bay.

You also obviously missed the part about you commenting on a story, posted by jm, about a nasty incident in a city where YOU DON'T live - and I DO live.

As I've said, Howiester: too funny!

[LuvSouthOC]

Originally Posted by Howiester

You seem upset people aren't blindly agreeing with your drivel like had been common in the past. What do you even get out of posting in an LA Homeless thread in the LA forum if you don't and haven't lived in LA?

He lived in Frisco where everyone has a tambourine, burns incense and prays to the God of homeless teens from Iowa and drunks from Ohio.

But say what you will about 'mutt, he is kinda cool

[jm1982]

also wonder how many of the homeless attacks are under reported by the liberal media

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by jm1982

also wonder how many of the homeless attacks are under reported by the liberal media

Why would they "under-report? A conspiracy, jm?

The "Media", on the whole, is FAR more driven by avarice than liberalism, and not a bit inclined to cooperatively conspire with each other. That is, media thrives and profits on sensationalizing anything that is a popular theme. Like homelessness. And every media wants to report first. "Breaking news!" Ring a bell, jm?

[LuvSouthOC]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Why would they "under-report? A conspiracy, jm?

The "Media", on the whole, is FAR more driven by avarice than liberalism, and not a bit inclined to cooperatively conspire with each other. That is, media thrives and profits on sensationalizing anything that is a popular theme. Like homelessness. And every media wants to report first. "Breaking news!" Ring a bell, jm?

Uh, there is huge under-reporting or obfuscating when the media reports on crime in this country. For example, the identities, and, most specifically, the ethnicities (or immigration status) of the perpetrator(s) is all too often omitted, blurred, or even obscured ALL THE TIME. Various government agencies, both state and federal, are complicit with this situation. This is not helping since people become aware of it and see the fraud for what it is. Better to face the truth and work on improving the situation.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by LuvSouthOC

Uh, there is huge under-reporting or obfuscating when the media reports on crime in this country. For example, the identities, and, most specifically, the ethnicities (or immigration status) of the perpetrator(s) is all too often omitted, blurred, or even obscured ALL THE TIME. Various government agencies, both state and federal, are complicit with this situation. This is not helping since people become aware of it and see the fraud for what it is. Better to face the truth and work on improving the situation.

uh.. no there is not. That's absurd, clearly you don't even understand how crime data makes it's way to the media, do you? Let me try to explain a few things to you.

1. Local news media monitor police /fire scanner traffic and if something sounds newsworthy they respond. There is limited information available from scanners, i.e. they don't usually give names but refer to females as X and crimes according to the penal code section. Until a report is taken there is no way to fill in the missing data. In the past it was more common to hear suspect names on the scanner but now most warrant, criminal history checks are done right on the computer in the Police car.
2. The media checks daily crime /fire logs and pursue incidents that they deem newsworthy, logs might give names of persons arrested but do not typically include the name of a victim, also they do not contain information regarding race or ethnicity. In order to 'chase down' information on a case reported on a crime log the reporter has to find someone in the agency to get more details, or they have to wait sometimes a week to get the report that was filed, even then they probably will not be given names and addresses of victims and witnesses.
3. Booking logs - these generally contain the name and dob of an arrested person the criminal code they were arrested for and sometimes their bail,without data from another source they rarely provide newsworthy information
4. Anecdotal information phoned into them or told to them by a police or fire employee. It may or may not be accurate and is usually not reported until further follow up is done.

Now with that in mind, do some due diligence and prove your point - find ONE example of a crime that was reported where pertinent information was intentionally withheld or obfuscated. I dare you, no I double dare you

[LuvSouthOC]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

uh.. no there is not. That's absurd, clearly you don't even understand how crime data makes it's way to the media, do you? Let me try to explain a few things to you.

1. Local news media monitor police /fire scanner traffic and if something sounds newsworthy they respond. There is limited information available from scanners, i.e. they don't usually give names but refer to females as X and crimes according to the penal code section. Until a report is taken there is no way to fill in the missing data. In the past it was more common to hear suspect names on the scanner but now most warrant, criminal history checks are done right on the computer in the Police car.
2. The media checks daily crime /fire logs and pursue incidents that they deem newsworthy, logs might give names of persons arrested but do not typically include the name of a victim, also they do not contain information regarding race or ethnicity. In order to 'chase down' information on a case reported on a crime log the reporter has to find someone in the agency to get more details, or they have to wait sometimes a week to get the report that was filed, even then they probably will not be given names and addresses of victims and witnesses.
3. Booking logs - these generally contain the name and dob of an arrested person the criminal code they were arrested for and sometimes their bail,without data from another source they rarely provide newsworthy information
4. Anecdotal information phoned into them or told to them by a police or fire employee. It may or may not be accurate and is usually not reported until further follow up is done.

Now with that in mind, do some due diligence and prove your point - find ONE example of a crime that was reported where pertinent information was intentionally withheld or obfuscated. I dare you, no I double dare you

Go take a nap 2Sleepy or prove me wrong.