Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The majority are drug addicts. Studies have shown those places that have legalized Marijuana have seen an increase in homelessness and the use of more drugs in general. Addiction is a real problem these states will need to address.
It reminds me when the states that made gambling legal had to start programs for gambling addicts because they grew rapidly.
The thread is about the homeless. Why is it done in the open? There is nowhere to keep simply homeless users. Go ahead and promote the idea of higher taxes to pay for more prisons. See how far you get.
Solutions that are never going to happen are not solutions.
People like you believe most homeless are “good people down on their luck” and are entitled to “permanent supportive housing”
Criminal drug riddled street zombies who have burned every bridge with family and friends are not “good people down on their luck” and if they want a free house it’s called jail and not a nice apartment for them to trash and terrorize nearby neighbors.
Our only hope is this eventually gets so bad and society gets so angry that the pendulum swings the other way. However at that point the rage level will drive the passage of ruthless laws that will be far more harsh on these people than if we would have just dealt with this correctly now (law/order/jail).
The mentally ill still have the same Constitutional protections as the rest of the people and you can't forcibly hold someone that is not a risk to others simply because they decide to live in a tent.
This is a problem and the law should be changed.
Also, street zombie terrorists are a threat to others, soooo...
YEP - and how do those "working class neighborhoods" really feel about be a dumping ground?
Nothing shows distain more for Tax Paying worker citizens more than dumping the homeless into their parks and neighborhoods.
Are they actually doing this dumping of humans? If people can be so easily moved, they can be re-dumped to more affluent areas which can afford to give them more change.
The mentally ill still have the same Constitutional protections as the rest of the people and you can't forcibly hold someone that is not a risk to others simply because they decide to live in a tent.
Where do the mentally ill go?
I am thinking of a massive low rise apartment complex in a nice suburban area. About 5 years ago, it was acquired by an investment fund that made the business decision to form an alliance with the behavioral health department of a local hospital. It now houses a majority of mentally/ emotionally disabled tenants with rents paid by a combination of federal and state funds. They are able to walk to outpatient facilities at the hospital.
There’s a nice park in the area with a huge playground. The disabled monopolize the park with their presence.
Schizophrenia is the most common disability. Presumably, all are medicated crept many choose not to take their medications. What was once decent housing for self paying renters, now has turned into public areas where feces is common. Someone or another is always going off the rails and Police are involved. The sounds, TVs, music and screaming, are deafening.
Come summer, the drama moves to the outdoor pool. Alcohol flows. People openly smoke medical marijuana. Fights ensue. Poop is tossed about. Someone sets a fire. And life goes on.
My point here is that you can take some of the people off the streets and when you do, their issues don’t go away. Medication, taken as directed, MAY reduce symptoms. And maybe, not.
It is obviously cheaper to house these sick people in private properties than an institution with around the clock supervision and security.
The property values of the nice single family homes in the area have declined as the number of disabled tenants in this complex has increased. Most buyers don’t want to put their families in close proximity to several hundred disabled people, when they can buy elsewhere.
Sad that some people prefer to view homelessness through a partisan lens.
People like you believe most homeless are “good people down on their luck” and are entitled to “permanent supportive housing”
I'm not interested in your generalizations.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
