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.
You're absolutely right. Some people are so partisan that they'll twist every news story to try to make the opposite side look bad. If San Francisco repealed the law, they'd say, "Look at those extreme liberals. They're against having simple law and order in their city."
Exactly! Then we'd be anarchist liberals, who were too "PC" to complain about (literally) stepping over the homeless. It's a lose-lose situation, which is why I hate to label myself politically... I just know what I believe in, and half the time I'll have no idea which "side" that opinion leans towards. I think our society would benefit from this mindset, rather than focusing so much on hating conservatives or liberals.
No doubt, san fran has homeless people everywhere. I wouldn't mind seeing that ban enacted everywhere, but according to the main post those rootin' tootin' republicans love their panhandlers and bums.
They are well on their way to creating millions more homeless.
They need to go live on Nancy, Jerry and Barbara's properties. They will take care of them with their own charity from their pockets, not someone else's money.
So nonbums can't sit on sidewalks either? Maybe I am tired, or ill, or just lament the lack of benches in SF.
So the actual smelly bums they'll sit on your car's hood/trunk. The problem is the just enourmous amount of 'street people' in SF. They pee and poo all over the city, BART trains, hustle and mug tourists here and there, do some crime, etc...
The SF board of stupidvisors (like SF police) in their infinite wisdom go for the low hanging fruit and just disallow sitting on a sidewalk FOR ANYONE. They are mentally incapable of tackling the actual festering problem underneath, and just whack their axe around at taxpaying citizens at random.
SF: just walk, don't smoke, don't buy a happy meal, don't talk, don't interact, don't even dare to enjoy life, just move along...
I agree. Tackling the underlying problem would be much more effective than just making a blanket policy about nobody being allowed to sit on a sidewalk.
They need to go live on Nancy, Jerry and Barbara's properties. They will take care of them with their own charity from their pockets, not someone else's money.
Jerry refused to live in the Governors Mansion in his first term as Governor, he drove a 72 Chevy nova the whole time. When he was Mayor of Oakland he lived in one of those CoOp Loft deals. Keep Dreaming
If people were really interested in reducing the inconvenience of the homeless, they could make legislation that would lead them into a job, where they could support themselves and freedom would not be limited.
But yeah, why turn this into the usual "look what those wacky liberals did in San Francisco" when this is one of the more conservative laws to be proposed recently in the city.
It's because overall, liberals want big gov't while conservatives want smaller gov't. Telling a person they can't sit on a sidewalk is another law that serves to control people for no reason at all. If they're not on private property and if they're not blocking a driveway or the sidewalk itself (and then it becomes a public safety issue), who cares where the bums sit?
The OP has clearly never been to SF. It's way past time they finally started to do something about the super aggressive homeless there.
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.
Then we'd be anarchist liberals, who were too "PC" to complain about (literally) stepping over the homeless. It's a lose-lose situation, which is why I hate to label myself politically... I just know what I believe in, and half the time I'll have no idea which "side" that opinion leans towards. I think our society would benefit from this mindset, rather than focusing so much on hating conservatives or liberals.
