The Los Angeles Homeless Containment Thread (diet, performance, anniversary)

[skygazer1]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Lmfao. Skygazer, YOU selected the sample size from an unknown pool size you arbitrarily defined. You can’t make this stuff up. Once again: we don’t have a definition of “Alerts”; and you have selected a single month to use for a categorical accusation, based on knowing there were fires attributed to homeless ... and are blowing off using stats from other months. Since you fancy yourself an expert in statistics, you should know that one month means nothing unless compared with others.

No, any reasonable person would ask for investigative information before assuming source.

I don’t speculate much on “odds”. I look for facts.

My source was the NBC4 article, where they listed these three homeless-caused fires in respect to the ongoing Woolsey fire, a span of 2 weeks, as a comparison. I could have counted only 2 weeks of fires, in which case the homeless rate would have been double, but was conservative to counted the whole month span.

I'm not blowing off other months. If another source is found, with specific data on homeless-caused fires in another month, I am happy to include it.

What data on homeless fires have you presented? Nothing. You steadfastly state there is no data, and therefore it is not an issue to be addressed. Such point of view is very irresponsible and akin to "putting your head in the sand" and pretending the problem doesn't exist, when everyone living in proximity of these homeless camps knows the real danger.

Facts are the best, but in absence of absolutes, its perfectly reasonable and accepted to use common sense judgment to estimate likelihood of fire causes, based on the best available evidence.

You float around on the water, with no fear, but try putting yourself in other's shoes, the thousands of homeowners who live in proximity to these homeless camps, and risk losing their homes at any time from the scumbags behaviors.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

But you are just continuing your campaign of “homeless shaming” a highly heterogenous population without due specificity.

Exactly.

From the Guardian article on post #6372,

"It is not Stafford’s remit – or, you suspect, his way – to linger on the wider questions like what makes someone do that, or how attitudes towards the poor and vulnerable are shaped by our own experiences, by what we are told by the government, by the portraits painted in the media."

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by skygazer1

My source was the NBC4 article, where they listed these three homeless-caused fires in respect to the ongoing Woolsey fire, a span of 2 weeks, as a comparison. I could have counted only 2 weeks of fires, in which case the homeless rate would have been double, but was conservative to counted the whole month span.

I'm not blowing off other months. If another source is found, with specific data on homeless-caused fires in another month, I am happy to include it.

What data on homeless fires have you presented? Nothing. You steadfastly state there is no data, and therefore it is not an issue to be addressed. Such point of view is very irresponsible and akin to "putting your head in the sand" and pretending the problem doesn't exist, when everyone living in proximity of these homeless camps knows the real danger.

Facts are the best, but in absence of absolutes, its perfectly reasonable and accepted to use common sense judgment to estimate likelihood of fire causes, based on the best available evidence.

You float around on the water, with no fear, but try putting yourself in other's shoes, the thousands of homeowners who live in proximity to these homeless camps, and risk losing their homes at any time from the scumbags behaviors.

Skygazer, I don’t know if you are deliberately avoiding the flaw in your analysis that I have pointed out in each post - or if you really don’t understand it. I’ll restate, again, with an analogy.

If a city has 3 murders in one month, and none, or 1, in any other month(s), the murder rate is 3 for the one month only. A one month murder rate is meaningless on its own when evaluating the danger of violent crime for a city. In the world of criminology, in fact, even a one year average is not considered a policy rate. It’s a function known as “outlier” status - until it becomes a measurable trend.

You read that there were some fire incidents in Nov. of ‘18, that were associated with homelessness. You then selected that one month to parse and identified 3 events that fit your agenda ... which agenda was defined as “significant” (Alert level) by YOU.

You present yourself as knowledgable about statistics. Yet you defy the principles of statistics by doing what you have presented as conclusive. And if you had “presented only 2 weeks” data you would not have been “more conservative”, you would have been even more disingenuous and statistically vacuous.

Now, I didn’t state there is no data on homeless-caused fires. I pointed out there doesn’t appear to be any data category for tracking such. Since you like speculation so much, you might consider why there doesn’t appear to be any data category for something you feel is so prevalent and dangerous. If the danger is as you and Exitus suggest, wouldn’t you expect there to be some tracking methodology? In recent years the LA PD has instituted new reporting protocols for tracking crime associated with homelessness. Why not fire?

I haven’t posed any “head in the sand” denial of the danger. I am confronting the notion that “the homeless”, broadly identified, are uniquely a dangerous population with regard to fire. The homeless population broadly defined by the term, is hugely heterogenous. If you two want to discuss the segment of that broad demographic that are the chronic homeless who set camps in the bush, and the fire danger of those camps, I wouldn’t have corrected you. But what you are doing in demonizing the broad category is preaching hate, fear, and revulsion of all homeless which results in qualities of public opinion that are both false and counterproductive to solutions.

In the “absence of facts” it is NOT appropriate for YOU, an anonymous non-professional, to define “common sense.”

As for me “floating around” in my boat out of touch, I’d estimate that I am tied to a dock a good 90% of my time, and out circulating on the streets more than most. I live nearly all my waking hours outside and active. My marinas are / have been in urban areas heavily populated by homeless. As a war veteran myself, I have assisted a sub-population of homeless, veterans, on and off over 30 years. I pass by, greet, and often interact with those vets and with street homeless at large on a near daily basis. You clearly live a more fearful, insulated life than I do. And therein are far less aware of the realities of danger and street life than I am.

[pacific2]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

And: IF a toad had wings it wouldn’t bump its ass every time it hopped.

Since you have ZERO basis for your meaningless speculation ... you should keep it to yourself rather than try to use it to fear-monger. Whereas MY toady speculation, above, is at least based in biological fact and physics.

Dang, there goes my coffee onto the keyboard again.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by pacific2

Dang, there goes my coffee onto the keyboard again.

I owe you one. Another one.

May I suggest one ‘o them plastic key covers? Better than avoiding my humor, no?

[maduro lonsdale]

This thread reminds me of the very early discussions about global warming, in a way.

Science was saying one thing (as recently as my middle school years we were taught about the coming ice age) while other things were happening but not really being noticed by the masses and science hadn't caught up yet.

[jm1982]

A Los Angeles business owner says she is at her wits’ end as local streets are piled with garbage and flooded with “raw sewage” by homeless people and squatters while lawmakers turn a blind eye.

https://www.newswars.com/los-angeles...health-crisis/

[skygazer1]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

You read that there were some fire incidents in Nov. of ‘18, that were associated with homelessness. You then selected that one month to parse and identified 3 events that fit your agenda ... which agenda was defined as “significant” (Alert level) by YOU.

You present yourself as knowledgable about statistics. Yet you defy the principles of statistics by doing what you have presented as conclusive. And if you had “presented only 2 weeks” data you would not have been “more conservative”, you would have been even more disingenuous and statistically vacuous.

Yes I found that story, and you can read numerous other incidents in the news too, like this very recent 4-plex fire destroyed and displace many families, people made newly homeless now, normal people who shouldn't be homeless, due to a fire started in the back by some bonafide homeless scum. https://abc7.com/pico-union-fourplex...eless/5196161/

The residents said many fires had occurred in the back of their building before, and the police didn't do anything about it. So, yes Tule, the problem is big and real and being ignored by officials. A potentially explosive conflagaration can happen at any time, any where. Yet, you just ignorantly "stand up" for homeless, based on some impression you think some of them are real "nice people", down on their luck, but totally ignore and look the other way of the disgusting and dangerous ways the majority behave, and how they endanger innocent people on a daily basis.

And no, I didn't "identify 3 events that fit my agenda", those 3 events were proven to be caused by homeless and they showed up in the alerts list, along with the 55 total alerts that month. Nor did I make a more conservative calculation based on only 2 weeks of alerts, I did it based on one month of alerts. If I had stuck to the time period of the Woolsey fire, which that article was about, it would be a two week comparison, where 11% of the fires were proven to be caused by homeless, not to mention at least as much that were LIKELY to be caused by homeless. So its more like its fair to estimate that 25% of fires are caused by homeless.

Well, the "bad" homeless that is. But can you provide any evidence to show that most homeless are really nice, responsible people, not scumbags? I'm waiting to see that.

Its just a short matter of time before another Skirball breaks out and devastates vast areas of the city, because people like you just push this fake agenda that homeless-caused fires are indeterminate, nothing to worry about, and it is "not nice" to "discriminate" against homeless, even for a legitimate reason. Arghhh.

[Exitus Acta Probat]

Originally Posted by jm1982

A Los Angeles business owner says she is at her wits’ end as local streets are piled with garbage and flooded with “raw sewage” by homeless people and squatters while lawmakers turn a blind eye.

https://www.newswars.com/los-angeles...health-crisis/

I saw her interviewed last night. Rather pathetic that her pleas for help have gone unanswered. Like many people, she may lose her business due to the street crazies.

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by Exitus Acta Probat

I saw her interviewed last night. Rather pathetic that her pleas for help have gone unanswered. Like many people, she may lose her business due to the street crazies.

I wonder how much business has been lost due the homeless situation . Of course they’ll never do a study on it.

I always feel bad for businesses that have street crazies right in front.