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.
Oh, I think about everyone knows and has commented that many of those homeless people there (and most places) are not actually even from the area, thus the entire COL debate is moot in this regards.
I think possession of heroin continues to be a crime in California.
Reportedly, there were 1,63 million arrests for possession in the US last year. It is not possible to incarcerate our way out of the epidemic.
The countries with the least recreational drug challenges impose the harshest consequences. That’s not going to happen in the US.
All recreational drugs, including marijuana, are illegal in Portugal. Possession of a quantity for personal use is not however a crime. Instead, it is viewed as a health challenge. People are required to submit to treatment which is primarily Methadone Maintenance. While Methadone and Suboxone are used in the US, the objective tends to be short term, not lifetime maintenance. That does not work out well for most opiate/ opioid addicts.
A ( Crystal) Meth addict trying to kick is more likely to substitute the drug of choice for another illegal substance.
My main issue with not enforcing the laws on drugs like heroin is that the people are just left to flounder until they die. The trouble is we have no other way to force them to submit to treatment here. If we did what Portugal did maybe it would work, but we don’t. I’m not sure we could force treatment without a criminal charge because it would be unconstitutional.
LOL reminds me of the Burners here. The Burning Man Festival people. Only, all sorts go to that, even rich celebrities have gone to experience it. But I feel like the "traveler" kids who are basically poverty tourists, that's the vibe they are looking for. A barter system, lots of expression, trying to live life outside of the mainstream, somehow. They'd probably be pretty happy setting up a compound in the woods somewhere, but no matter where you go, somebody owns the land. And even if you had some wealthy contributors in your weirdo group to buy some land, if there's anyone anywhere near enough to find out about it, the "neighbors" will have hissyfits over a bunch of oddball hippies living up in the hills somewhere, up to who-knows-what.
I find it funny that some folks talk about how the government should create planned communities for the homeless, with tiny houses and rules to follow and work to be done... It's like if the hippies wanted to do this for themselves, there would be horrified screeching to the heavens, but if some authoritative entity were to FORCE them to live a certain way, grow food, be productive...well that would be fine. Just so long as they feel a proper boot on their necks, it's all good. Ironically some of the same folks who love to spout the word, "freedom" are truly most comfortable with the highest possible levels of authority, conformity, and control.
Meh. Well, we've got issues with homelessness here in Colorado since we legalized weed. We got a bunch of people wandered in here with no plan other than "I just really love to get high, there are like...jobs in the...weed industry...right?" Surprise, surprise, when growers expect somebody to have I dunno...experience with agriculture? When just loving to be high, doesn't actually cut it or get them work? When we don't all invite them to crash on our couches? They're all over the place with cardboard signs now. Personally, I like the street performers, but I don't like the cardboard sign people. They could at least get a bucket and bang on it or something, I don't care. Play the freaking spoons.
When we were in the French Quarter in New Orleans, people would put bottle caps on their shoes or their child’s shoes and tap dance for donations. I liked that. At least it is fun and entertaining. The people doing it did not look homeless, just very enterprising.
red states are just a homeless creating machines, once the trailer gets destroyed by a tornado, there is no other option to come to a blue state to live on public shelters (red states do not provide services). this has been an issue in NYC for decades.
other states dumping their homeless into NYC. Sometimes giving them one way tickets to the city.
The population of homeless swells in summer and drops in winter, as they tend to migrate to warmer climates.
The large-scale deinstitutionalization of the disabled (including the mentally ill) began in the 1970s, probably in response to various statutes and Court decisions. Least-restrictive-care.
Legal implications aside, setting up the large state institutions would be enormously expensive. Prohibitively so. Back in the day many institutions were hell-holes with minimal staffing that could not exist today. Potentially combative inmates were drugged until they became zombies.
Care burdens for the profoundly disabled falls on families, who may receive minor assistance through Medicaid waiver programs - with even that adding substantially to Federal/State budgets. Once parents die, the state will step in providing care through group homes etc. The less profoundly disabled often find themselves on the street.
I do know why they are gone and I remember seeing them closed. Throughout the 70s 80s and into the early 90s most of them disappeared. I also know that we began to deal with far more problems on our streets with the homeless and begging as they closed, it is also when the mass shootings began (1990s). Your right when you say that the intention was for families to care for them but clearly most do not. Many of them are violent, addicted and impossible to help.
Expensive? No doubt they are. Still is it cheaper to leave them on the streets tearing things up and committing crimes? Should Joe citizen have to endure this crime and poop on the streets? Do liberal court decisions get in the way? Yes they do, but congress can change the law. I would still argue that building but houses is cheaper than the cost of the damage they do and cheaper than a prison. Camps for homeless who are not mentally ill would be even cheaper and it would get these individuals out of sight and clean up the streets.
So you want to imprison people and put them in camps for being poor.
Yes if you are so poor that you burden society by living in the street you should be picked up and put in a homeless camp against your will. Your desire to be on the street so you can use drugs rather than use the shelters in your area makes you a dangerous problem for everyone else. You are not entitled to squat in the streets in spite of what the left says.
I am not sure why the OP would think that Haight Street kids typify the homeless in San Francisco. They are one call to mommy away from being back home with mommy and daddy. They have been around ever since the 60's but for the past 30 or 40 years they are just wanna be flower children who read a book or watched a movie about hippies.
Most homeless people whether in San Francisco or Houston last resided in the city they became homeless in. The reasons they are homeless vary from economic homelessness to mental illness. Attempts to call them all drug addicts or to think that most are on the streets for long periods of time are not accurate. The average length of homelessness is 142 days, so most people are not on the streets for years. Within 18 months of aging out of foster care, 40-50% of foster youth become homeless. There are elderly and disabled people who are homeless because they got priced out of affordable housing, there are people who started using drugs or alcohol after they became homeless.
There are also scammers and scoundrels, but not all homeless are.
I'm currently trying to find a woman on SSI a place to live. She rented a room from a guy who failed to tell her that his home was in foreclosure. When the bank sold the house her 'landlord' moved out and she was told she had to vacate the house. She's 55 she's a little weird in that she's always in a state of panic but she's not a drug addict or an alcoholic. She lives on $900 a month and doesn't drive. She has two yappy little dogs that she won't give up. I'm out of ideas I can't find a room for her to rent or even a shelter for her, I'm quite sure that her story is not unique.
Yes if you are so poor that you burden society by living in the street you should be picked up and put in a homeless camp against your will. Your desire to be on the street so you can use drugs rather than use the shelters in your area makes you a dangerous problem for everyone else. You are not entitled to squat in the streets in spite of what the left says.
And if the homeless person doesn't do drugs, then what? Or would the concept of due process simply be tossed by the wayside altogether in this dystopian fantasy of yours?
And if the homeless person doesn't do drugs, then what? Or would the concept of due process simply be tossed by the wayside altogether in this dystopian fantasy of yours?
When you are squatting on the streets you are breaking the law, yes there are laws against squatting and loitering. When you break the law you can be picked up and your life and freedom are at the mercy of a judge and the justice system. Nothing dystopian about the rule of law.
Problem is, liberals let homeless people camp out on the streets and shoot up drugs
So to get the homeless off the streets and off drugs, liberals should put them in jail for free room and board courtesy the taxpayers?
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.
