The Los Angeles Homeless Containment Thread (Irvine, Beverly Hills: Koreans, firewall, segregation)

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by jm1982

She offered to sell you a candy bar ? She’s an entrepreneur! Wonder if she received the candy bar in a Garcetti gift basket . I agree , there should be an effort to locate the family members of these people . But otherwise the government needs to take over .
Florida seems to have the right idea ...

Do they? Sounds to me like the Baker act is nothing different than California's 5150 hold which has been used for decades by Police to detain the mentally ill homeless for evaluation. Like the California law it's a 72 hour hold and like the California law it has turned out to be nothing more than a revolving door: Florida's Baker Act

Using involuntary commitment laws to clear the homeless from the streets has never worked. A physician screens the person to determine if they are incapacitated to the level that would warrant involuntary commitment and if they are half way coherent and tell the physician that they would not sleep on the street if there was shelter space offered they will be sent on their merry way.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by Exitus Acta Probat

Saw a vagrant woman kick over a Bird scooter this evening -- how brilliantly productive. As I walked past her she offered to sell me a half-eaten candy bar or something. Lovely problem we have here, eh? And those of you who think putting these people in institutions isn't the solution could not be more wrong, so pound your discourse and a handful of sand down a rathole.

You can't confine someone to a mental hospital because they offered to sell you a half eaten candy bar or kicked over a scooter. They have to be in immediate danger of harming themselves or others, just offending your sensibilities isn't cause to commit someone.

I was in San Francisco yesterday and a tourist ran into me with a Bird scooter, maybe they should have been committed too? See how that works

[Veritas Vincit]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

You can't confine someone to a mental hospital because they offered to sell you a half eaten candy bar or kicked over a scooter. They have to be in immediate danger of harming themselves or others, just offending your sensibilities isn't cause to commit someone.

The threshold for institutionalization varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and has certainly shifted over time. People like that used to be institutionalized and they still are in other places.



It's apathy and lack of caring for your environment and fellow man dressed up as 'liberalism' that's a problem here. You aren't doing people who can't take care of themselves and who are habitually behaving anti-socially any favors by leaving them to their devices roaming the world. That's maybe what they say they 'want' when prompted, but that's not what they need.



I normally don't consider it my business or the public's business to make people get what they need rather than what they want, but when their behavior crosses a threshold of where it represents a permanent problem for their environment the priorities shift.



Instead we wait until they pull a knife, until they attack random people nearby...so when they're an 'immediate danger' they could end up dead on the sidewalk riddled with bullets, innocent bystanders could be hurt or dead. So who's helped by that? What liberal cause is aided? The 'freedom' to be a derelict bum on the streets is no freedom at all. It's dangerous for them, it's dangerous for us.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by Veritas Vincit

The threshold for institutionalization varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and has certainly shifted over time. People like that used to be institutionalized and they still are in other places.

Such as? Not in this state, and not any time in the past 50 years.

What is the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act? - Mental Health Division - LA Court

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by Veritas Vincit

The threshold for institutionalization varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and has certainly shifted over time. People like that used to be institutionalized and they still are in other places.

Yes and no. There is a federal standard that dictates what states can do, that is found in In O'Connor v. Donaldson, in which the Supreme Court held that a person may not be involuntarily committed if they are non-dangerous and capable of surviving safely independently or with assistance in the community. The interpretation of that varies somewhat but the SCOTUS decision still dictates policy everywhere in the US.

Another decision, In Olmstead v. L.C., the Supreme Court states that segregation of persons with disabilities from community-based programs constitutes unlawful discrimination, and persons with disabilities must receive services in integrated community settings, if appropriate to their treatment needs. Forty-nine states and D.C. mandate that a person eligible for long-term involuntary commitment receive treatment in the least restrictive setting possible, in compliance with the Olmstead decision.

Not sure why I have to say it again, but quit kidding yourself, it is not easy anywhere in the US to rid yourselves of homeless, at least not for more than 72 hours. Maybe it's time to consider building enough supportive housing and shelters, then we could deal with those who refuse to stay in housing either through the criminal justice system or with mental health interventions, dontcha think?

[TCROX]

This baker act and other existing laws are certainly an awesome tool-we have lauras law here in CA lets get the facilities built ASAP and get them off the streets -election day is coming: time to fix this-
The left wants this "homelessness" ramp up to blossom and deteriorate big time... just consider how many law enforcement, emt and fire fighting personnel can reliably budget for 50-100 k (OR MORE) in overtime since dirty jerry and friends starting letting his army out of jail ... you think a cop making 200k a year is going to rush over and endanger themselves to stop some criminal vagrant who is actually helping the cop pay for an expensive lifestyle? Just show up (if at all) and write about it--- you'll be safe cuz you have a gun and you get to safely procure that OT! You'd think the cops and firefighters would be on the front line of wanting law and order-- ahhhhh the unions.... patriots all of them.... give them medals for not taking the last maple glazed long john during a active shooter situation when five million cops show up in swat gear for one or two criminals... its takes a heck of an officer to leave a tasty long john for a fellow officer in a life or death situation like that.. anyhow - I guess we'll see how the election turns out--maybe we'll have to fight with them about that too--- lots and lots of money on the line with this homeless "program" puttting the criminals and loonies into nice, clean facilities and giving the streets and parks back to innocent people like children and the elderly is gonna mean a real economic reversal for a lot of people...
Nice safe facilities that restore law and order to our beleaguered communities are the LAST thing the piggy, inhumane left wing wants for the US or California... they like to see suffering all around for some $trange reason-- they will defend it and their army till the bettor end it seems.

[TCROX]

The more the left says fixing this and getting the secure, supervised facilities away from cities and towns can't be done - the more everyone knows its the best and right thing to do and needs to be done... wonder why nobody believes the lefties ( even themselves)--???? credibility chasm based on historical and current behaviors and results--- the laws are in place, let's insist that our hired and elected personnel get on it - NOW!

[Exitus Acta Probat]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

You can't confine someone to a mental hospital because they offered to sell you a half eaten candy bar or kicked over a scooter. They have to be in immediate danger of harming themselves or others, just offending your sensibilities isn't cause to commit someone.

I was in San Francisco yesterday and a tourist ran into me with a Bird scooter, maybe they should have been committed too? See how that works

I'm sorry that you want people who need mental help to continue to wallow in their misery. I'm a compassionate person who wants vagrants to be alleviated of their mental anguish. Furthermore, I'm extremely disheartened by your callous attitude and I'll pray that you and others with your attitude will find a way to feel compassion for those in need.

[TCROX]

YES!! We need to pray AND act!

[TCROX]

ONE innocent person that can't use clean and safe public or private areas without involuntarily feeling unclean or unsafe
OR
ONE business owner or worker that has to involuntarily deal with crime, harassment and business loss due to the deteriorating state of our communities due to
the liberals
OR
ONE "homeless" person that needs to be away from people and places they can harm
OR
ONE "homeless " person that simply wants to be somewhere safe and clean and maybe wants another chance or an education is worth whatever it takes- it's way past due and there needs to be a reliable system in place for the next ONE