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.
If someone is so mentally ill that they cannot function - pay rent and bills consistently on time, stay clear of drugs, no excessive use of alcohol, and no showing disruptive or threatening behavior in the community, etc. - they do not need to be given access to housing that will put others in danger. But cities and government should not be given a pass for doing nothing about people living on the streets either. Locking them all up? Who pays for that and how much? The thing is, no matter where you put some folks, they are not going to be able to comply and reform. So, what do you do?
Have the State department of health or the US Surgeon General declare homeless people a health hazard, and round them up.
There never has been a War on Drugs™.
You don't execute drug dealers. You don't conduct searches at ports of entry, although you legally can without a search warrant. The US Supreme Court said so. The only condition is you have to search 100% of the people 100% of the time. That means no exceptions, not even for celebrities or politicians or bigwigs. Congress can also make searches a condition of entry or re-entry to the US. That means you submit to a search or you're on the next plane or ship out of here, even if you're a citizen or legal resident alien.
You could also built a wall or ditch on the border with Mexico, which would block 90% of the drugs entering the US.
You can use herbicides to destroy poppy fields in Afghanistan and other areas the US controls, including areas in the US.
You can use sea- and air-launched cruise missiles on drug lords and cartel leaders in other foreign States. If children happen to be there, I'm real sorry about their luck, it's just collateral damage, not much different than the collateral damage from drugs we see in our communities.
The quality of surveillance equipment available and which has been available since the 1980s is quite astonishing really. You can point a laser at a window and hear everything, whether it's a car window, or window on a bus or boat or your home or office. Even works on double-pane glass, so long as it's not vacuum-sealed, since sound doesn't travel through a vacuum. Unless someone is using Sprint, you can easily pick up cell-phone conversations as well as portable land-lines.
You can read about Operation Snow White in [West] Germany. They conducted surveillance for 2 years to gather intelligence, and then based on that intelligence inserted undercover operatives, then 3 years later made the take-down. You couldn't find heroin anywhere in Germany for almost 5 years. It was a big deal, because of the junkies that came crawling out of the wood-work suffering from heroin withdraw. People you'd never suspect: celebrities, politicians, socialites, low level corporate executives and others of high standing.
It was a blood-bath in Turkey and Turkish Cyprus. The heroin cartels lost all their revenues and turned on each other. Even when heroin reappeared in Germany, it was just a trickle. It took a few more years to get back up to speed (no pun intended).
You have to wonder why the US doesn't do that. I can see why it would be difficult for the federal government, but the States shouldn't have any problem, except they never get anyone except minor players. They never get the king-pins. I suspect that's because the king-pins are wealthy White men who are politically connected.
Someone who is mentally ill and doesn't understand, or a substance abuser focused only on getting their next high.
Like I mentioned previously, if you ever interviewed them at length, you'd understand.
Your comments remind me a lot of the Nazis...
I have a very good friend who has been through rehab and now almost a year sober, currently helping others following in his footsteps. In fact, I have known more than a few people who have managed to overcome addiction problems and gone on to become successful members of society. Lots of famous people who have struggled to do the same and although many fail of course, only a fool would assume everyone is the same in these respects. All doomed and not worth a second thought or helping hand. If in fact you did interview people with these problems "at length" as you say you did, I suspect you didn't help any. Reads more you rounded up a few and just got rid of them behind some warehouse or something, like the Nazis were more inclined.
I just read the newest issue of our local neighborhood free newspaper "Northwest Examiner". There was an article about a woman and her neighbors who were fed up with the criminal, drug addicted homeless camp in their neighborhood. The "campers" were on land owned by the Dept. of Transportation. She and her neighbors regularly cleaned up trash, needles, and human feces. She planted over 50 rose bushes to beautify the lot and discourage "camping". She got in trouble with the Dept of Transportation and was ordered to remove the rose bushes. Apparently they had no problem with criminal drug addicts who regularly cooked meth on their property, and operated a "chop shop" in plain site for months. They couldn't be bothered. But the rose bushes....well, that just crosses a red line!
She went to a local TV station and with all the publicity, the Dept of Transportation backed down. Now they are finally doing something to clean the lot up. The article mentioned how she and her family and neighbors had been victimized by the "campers"- car break ins, home break ins, threats, etc. The ringleader of the "campers" is a known violent criminal who has been arrested over 220 times. He threatened her and her son with a large tree branch. She called 911, the police came, and they didn't arrest the criminal. But, they did give him a stern warning to never do that again!
This is a complete and utter failure on the part of city government. The homeless advocates have such a powerful voice, and they fight just about anything that would hold homeless people to account. The city officials don't want to seem "mean", so they don't do anything. This is in liberal, progressive Portland. Law abiding, tax paying residents count for almost nothing. Yet they keep electing the same city officials over and over again. If anyone new gets on the city council, they are usually worse than who they replaced (Chloe Eudaly and Joann Hardesty being the latest examples). In the almost 6 years I have lived here, there was only one candidate that had sensible ideas about the homeless issue. But he had no special interest activist groups backing him, so he had no chance.
The funny thing is, when I talk to very liberal people here, they are just as fed up with the problem as I am. Yet, this never seems to translate into actually doing something about it. What is needed is for the average person who is fed up with this to organize, and use progressive tactics to push for change, i.e, massive demonstrations, sit ins, blocking streets, camping out at the homes of city officials, etc. It would need hundreds of people involved, not just small groups. And they need to use all the vocabulary of the progressives and social justice warriors in their cause. Turn their words against them. Make it a movement of "the workers" and "oppressed communities" that are being victimized by government neglect of criminal, drug addled, homeless and street people. Be a constant nuisance. Never stop, and escalate the protests. It shouldn't have to come to this, but I don't know what else will work.
If you saw the make-shift homeless encampment that grew in our town as I did up close first hand, you would have no question as to the health risk, however "huge" one might want to describe it. Several fires also required the help of the fire department. Never mind all the trash and needles. Once the camp was cleared and okay to clean up, the people working on the clean up in Hazmat suits looked like something out of a sci-fi movie...
I would be more interested in learning how THIS amount of drugs CONSISTENTLY and continually reaches its destination!!!!
Also, hard street drugs are EXPENSIVE....VERY EXPENSIVE, heroin is more valuable than gold!
I would be more interested in learning how THIS amount of drugs CONSISTENTLY and continually reaches its destination!!!!
Also, hard street drugs are EXPENSIVE....VERY EXPENSIVE, heroin is more valuable than gold!
If to suggest the flow of drugs is a significant part of the problem, well no kidding. In any case, you can always Google the answer to the question that more interests you.
I just read the newest issue of our local neighborhood free newspaper "Northwest Examiner". There was an article about a woman and her neighbors who were fed up with the criminal, drug addicted homeless camp in their neighborhood. The "campers" were on land owned by the Dept. of Transportation. She and her neighbors regularly cleaned up trash, needles, and human feces. She planted over 50 rose bushes to beautify the lot and discourage "camping". She got in trouble with the Dept of Transportation and was ordered to remove the rose bushes. Apparently they had no problem with criminal drug addicts who regularly cooked meth on their property, and operated a "chop shop" in plain site for months. They couldn't be bothered. But the rose bushes....well, that just crosses a red line!
She went to a local TV station and with all the publicity, the Dept of Transportation backed down. Now they are finally doing something to clean the lot up. The article mentioned how she and her family and neighbors had been victimized by the "campers"- car break ins, home break ins, threats, etc. The ringleader of the "campers" is a known violent criminal who has been arrested over 220 times. He threatened her and her son with a large tree branch. She called 911, the police came, and they didn't arrest the criminal. But, they did give him a stern warning to never do that again!
This is a complete and utter failure on the part of city government. The homeless advocates have such a powerful voice, and they fight just about anything that would hold homeless people to account. The city officials don't want to seem "mean", so they don't do anything. This is in liberal, progressive Portland. Law abiding, tax paying residents count for almost nothing. Yet they keep electing the same city officials over and over again. If anyone new gets on the city council, they are usually worse than who they replaced (Chloe Eudaly and Joann Hardesty being the latest examples). In the almost 6 years I have lived here, there was only one candidate that had sensible ideas about the homeless issue. But he had no special interest activist groups backing him, so he had no chance.
The funny thing is, when I talk to very liberal people here, they are just as fed up with the problem as I am. Yet, this never seems to translate into actually doing something about it. What is needed is for the average person who is fed up with this to organize, and use progressive tactics to push for change, i.e, massive demonstrations, sit ins, blocking streets, camping out at the homes of city officials, etc. It would need hundreds of people involved, not just small groups. And they need to use all the vocabulary of the progressives and social justice warriors in their cause. Turn their words against them. Make it a movement of "the workers" and "oppressed communities" that are being victimized by government neglect of criminal, drug addled, homeless and street people. Be a constant nuisance. Never stop, and escalate the protests. It shouldn't have to come to this, but I don't know what else will work.
Needless to say, civilians have no right to do as they wish on Dept. of Transportation property, be they the homeless or women planting roses, and so begins some of the basic issues very difficult to resolve when it comes to the homeless problem. Suggest the Dept. of Transportation plant roses on their property and of course there will also be the people complaining about wasting tax-payer dollars on the likes instead of improving our bridges and roads...
Another big problem is going from the magic wand that provides some sort of imaginary place for homeless people to go after they are magically moved on from wherever they were before. With the numbers growing, unless they are provided shelter, a place to go that satisfies everyone, what happens? More often than not, it's the lack of alternative shelter that only aggravates the problem of wherever the homeless will go next.
Add the fact that homeless people are already suffering a life hardly fit for animals, in some ways worse, how easy is it for anyone who isn't a Nazi to make matters even worse for them? There in lies the problem I think. If the strategy is not to make matters better for all concerned, then the problem just gets worse. More widespread, like with cancer.
Like with cancer, everyone wants a remedy, but no one seems able to come up with one...
Republican states/cities/towns don't have homeless and people openly doing drugs? Wrong.
People are still being arrested for drug offenses, sometimes, but "street" people seem to be able to do what they want where and when they want.
I see people shooting up on Main Street USA, do I ignore it? Report it, will police respond, will they arrest them? What if they are snorting something, or smoking something... What if they are urinating (indecent exposure). From what I understand, people just WALK BY and IGNORE it. Don't wear shoes in their houses because they probably walked through human excrement at some point. This is our adaptation. What the heck have we become.
Yep there's a huge meth issue and its been going on for years in many Republican rural areas..
Lets not start on the opiod issue too which is impacting many all over too
As commented before, we had an unauthorized homeless encampment that kept growing right there off the freeway as you entered our town. It grew because over time police would even suggest the spot to the homeless because it was away from downtown, but as it grew, the conditions got worse and worse, and the camp became more and more a public health concern not to mention an serious eye sore...
Took some traveling through the court system before the effort to clear the camp and move the homeless to a better location was actually allowed. The homeless were moved to a less conspicuous spot in an empty county lot in a more industrial area where they were provided with fresh new tents on pallets to keep them off the ground. No drugs allowed, a few porto-potties set up and an information table of support services to help them move out of homelessness.
Not ideal and no "magic silver bullet" to end the problem, but compared to the prior campsite that looked like an absolute dump site, just about everyone is happy about the vast improvement and that it was managed in a legal, humane and sensible manner.
And this is my exact thinking when I state to move these homeless into the former internment camps used in WWII,
Those camps housed thousands, and thousands of people during the war, and they could again, but no one wants to hear a common sense idea like I have proposed.
Bob.
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.
