The San Francisco Trash/Needles/Poop in the Streets Containment Thread (Montclair: medical, ticket)

[CorporateCowboy]

Originally Posted by BlakeJones

It's related in the sense that SF is a bastion of ultra wealth with a heavily left leaning population. Those with prosperous lives feel guilt about it and act out by letting those less fortunate do whatever they want.

I'm telling you the root of the SF problem is self guilt, because in their view enforcing laws on public nuisance would make the homeless worse off even if they are actively damaging their own public quality of life.

It has nothing to do with ‘acting out’ - and to suggest SF isn’t ‘babysitting’ the homeless well enough is idiotic. It has to do with addressing mental illness (and ‘forced’ treatment vs. civil rights) and housing (despite land costs and other restrictions). The dude walking down the street screaming at the demons in his head while defacating in the street is not ‘acting out’ (and has nothing to do with ‘guilt’ - lol.

[BlakeJones]

Originally Posted by CorporateCowboy

It has nothing to do with ‘acting out’ - and to suggest SF isn’t ‘babysitting’ the homeless well enough is idiotic. It has to do with addressing mental illness (and ‘forced’ treatment vs. civil rights) and housing (despite land costs and other restrictions). The dude walking down the street screaming at the demons in his head while defacating in the street is not ‘acting out’.

I would consider your argument except that myself looking in as an outsider in NYC, and having been to many US cities recently including San Francisco, I can corroborate what the national media has been writing about which is that the problem in San Francisco is especially bad by an order of magnitude. The main difference is that there is no enforcement, not because the police won't do it but because the higher ups and the population that elect them do not want the police to arrest or threaten the homeless.

We can only speculate on the reasons for that lack of will to clean up the streets, but I believe it's liberal self-guilt and I think it's a very plausible argument.

[skygazer1]

Originally Posted by BlakeJones

I would consider your argument except that myself looking in as an outsider in NYC, and having been to many US cities recently including San Francisco, I can corroborate what the national media has been writing about which is that the problem in San Francisco is especially bad by an order of magnitude. The main difference is that there is no enforcement, not because the police won't do it but because the higher ups and the population that elect them do not want the police to arrest or threaten the homeless.

We can only speculate on the reasons for that lack of will to clean up the streets, but I believe it's liberal self-guilt and I think it's a very plausible argument.

Well, most of my neighbors and friends here are in favor of enforcing the nuisance laws and evicting them from the City. If the majority of residents want this, then the SFPD must enforce the laws. If the majority want to leave it a status-quo mess, I am quite disappointed.

[CorporateCowboy]

Originally Posted by BlakeJones

The main difference is that there is no enforcement, not because the police won't do it but because the higher ups and the population that elect them do not want the police to arrest or threaten the homeless.

Increasing the ‘criminalization’ of the homeless removes the focus from the real problem - housing affordability and treatment centers, the opiod epidemic and addressing mental illness (and the ongoing battle for decades as to whether we should ‘force’ treatment - ever since the passage of the Lanterman Petris Act in the 60’s). Many of the homeless currently on the streets today are people who would have been ‘institutionalized’ years ago.

[BlakeJones]

Originally Posted by CorporateCowboy

Increasing the ‘criminalization’ of the homeless removes the focus from the real problem

Who gives a **** about removing the focus, you protect your streets FIRST then worry about the homeless. That's what any functional city does which San Francisco is NOT

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by BlakeJones

Who gives a **** about removing the focus, you protect your streets FIRST then worry about the homeless. That's what any functional city does which San Francisco is NOT

“Protect” the streets how?

Oh I know I know ... you’re going to “enforce the existing ordinances”, right? Brilliant! Why didn’t the powers figure out what Blake figured out? Oh, I know I know: they’re all stupid, guilt-ridden libs ...

March ‘em off to jail! Nevermind they’ll be out and back on the streets in a few hours ... like herding cats.

No, more like trying to get a wheelbarrow full of frogs away from the pond.

And heck, the more the authorities harass them the sooner they get shaves and haircuts and suits and cars and jobs, right? They won’t just turn increasingly to bad behavior and crime. Oh no sir. That won’t happen.

Blake said so. And Blake is an expert in the field!

[CorporateCowboy]

Originally Posted by BlakeJones

Who gives a **** about removing the focus, you protect your streets FIRST then worry about the homeless. That's what any functional city does which San Francisco is NOT

Let’s be real. You aren’t talking about ‘protecting’ the streets or addressing the homeless issue - you are fearful of having to ‘see it’. The irony is - focusing of the problem at its core IS how you protect the streets. Processing the homeless in and out of jail is a costly band-aid - and a revolving door (to those it even applies to).

[BlakeJones]

Originally Posted by CorporateCowboy

Let’s be real. You aren’t talking about ‘protecting’ the streets or addressing the homeless issue - you are fearful of having to ‘see it’. The irony is - focusing of the problem at its core IS how you protect the streets. Processing the homeless in and out of jail is a costly band-aid - and a revolving door (to those it even applies to).

No I am being 100% real, you do not let homeless defecate on the streets, spit on people's face, aggressively panhandle. Warn them first and then arrest them when they don't comply. This is what every other functional city does. You 'protect' the quality of life for the public at large, not run a 'what can you do' apologist policy

[CorporateCowboy]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

And heck, the more the authorities harass them the sooner they get shaves and haircuts and suits and cars and jobs, right?

Haha!

[BlakeJones]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

And heck, the more the authorities harass them the sooner they get shaves and haircuts and suits and cars and jobs, right?

That's what you're not understanding - you don't enforce laws so homeless can get their act together, you enforce them to maintain quality of life for the ones that are functional. It's fine if you want to help the homeless with their issues but that must be secondary.

Your problem is you care more about the homeless than the tax paying citizens