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.
First off, you need to not take things so literally. No need for personal attacks Cowboy.
I am speaking to both mentally ill and criminals, but just plainly chose to use the word 'arrested' even though it's not the correct word for both instances. I have seen homeless people shoplift. I've heard stories of dog-napping. I'm sure some of the people on the street do have criminal offenses. The Seattle Is Dying documentary spoke to many being repeat offenders of assault.
arrest, detain whatever...you just can't arbitrarily take people's freedom away without a very compelling reason. I've seen people who are not homeless shoplift so what? If you want to argue that we should round up the homeless and ship them to Oakland then why not lay out your plan for doing that and show us what makes it legal, and what the penalties will be for the homeless who refuse to get on the Oakland bus?
arrest, detain whatever...you just can't arbitrarily take people's freedom away without a very compelling reason.
People who are jacked up all day lying in their own excrement or walking around screaming at imaginary people are not free. They are trapped in the hell of mental illness or drug addiction. In fact these folks are causing the rest of society to give up their freedoms.
There is a reason CA especially SF has the "homeless" issues that it does. It's people with your mindset that have enabled this to get to the level we see today.
People who are jacked up all day lying in their own excrement or walking around screaming at imaginary people are not free. They are trapped in the hell of mental illness or drug addiction. In fact these folks are causing the rest of society to give up their freedoms.
There is a reason CA especially SF has the "homeless" issues that it does. It's people with your mindset that have enabled this to get to the level we see today.
Your first paragraph is true.
Your second accusation is weird. You’ve resorted to this attack / accusation against 2sleepy, me, and several others, often in these threads. Where do you see any “mindset” in the simple statement of legal fact? There’s no advocacy in explaining existing laws. I understand you don’t agree with the laws. Do you understand that 2sleepy didn’t write them? Or me? Or others you similarly accuse of causing homelessness?
Your second accusation is weird. You’ve resorted to this attack / accusation against 2sleepy, me, and several others, often in these threads. Where do you see any “mindset” in the simple statement of legal fact? There’s no advocacy in explaining existing laws. I understand you don’t agree with the laws. Do you understand that 2sleepy didn’t write them? Or me? Or others you similarly accuse of causing homelessness?
It's not an attack. It's pointing out the obvious that you guys think the rest of society should suffer and give up their rights to live in a civilized area free from the issues the "homeless" create simply because you think the "homeless" folks right to freedom is more important than the rest of societies.
No I never stated that you or sleepy caused "homelessness". I stated that the issue (i.e. their behaviors being ignored) is where it is today in CA and SF, because of the mindset that sleepy posted about their freedom.
1. Establish a program that requires a substantial percentage of untrained labor on government bid projects be given to homeless, impoverished, etc. (“the economic disadvantaged”).
2. Require that 20% of all wages earned by the economic disadvantaged be put into a mandatory government savings account.
3. Build large-scale subsidized government housing outside of city boundaries.
4. Offer the subsidized housing at-cost or only slightly higher than at-cost, but significantly lower than market rates.
5. Allow the economic disadvantaged to apply their mandatory savings to the purchase of subsidized housing.
6. Attach strict terms and conditions to the occupancy of government housing, such as no drug use, mandatory employment, no subletting, maximum occupancy per unit requirements. Violations carry steep penalties.
Boom. Solved.
Another in the endless series of suggestions that doesn’t grasp the basics:
1. ⅔ - ¾ of the homeless are on track on their own to reintegrate and only homeless for less than a year
2. Very few of the balance of homeless, classified as “chronics”, will work at anything anytime even if given the opportunity even if semi-capable ... and can’t be forced. And many of them aren’t capable of any type of work. Period.
3. “Strict terms and conditions” is exactly what keeps most chronics from accepting help when such IS already offered. However, nearly all will accept “Housing First” shelter when offered without conditions ... and that alone will get them off the streets.
That all said above, a program such as you suggest would likely appeal to a very small number of homeless in any case, and a few might follow through and benefit.
It's not an attack. It's pointing out the obvious that you guys think the rest of society should suffer and give up their rights to live in a civilized area free from the issues the "homeless" create simply because you think the "homeless" folks right to freedom is more important than the rest of societies.
No I never stated that you or sleepy caused "homelessness". I stated that the issue (i.e. their behaviors being ignored) is where it is today in CA and SF, because of the mindset that sleepy posted about their freedom.
If you read what we write carefully and objectively, you will see nothing that we write resembles: “you guys think the rest of society should suffer and give up their rights to live in a civilized area free from the issues the "homeless" create simply because you think the "homeless" folks right to freedom is more important than the rest of societies.”
I repeat: nothing. No such things are written. None.
You simply can’t accept that we don’t write the laws we inform on. Take up your complaints with the legislatures and Constitution. in the meantime, if you are concerned with the problems, which you seem to be, try to support those who do their best to moderate the situations on the street by working with and around existing laws.
If you read what we write carefully and objectively, you will see nothing that we write resembles: “you guys think the rest of society should suffer and give up their rights to live in a civilized area free from the issues the "homeless" create simply because you think the "homeless" folks right to freedom is more important than the rest of societies.”
I repeat: nothing. No such things are written. None.
You simply can’t accept that we don’t write the laws we inform on. Take up your complaints with the legislatures and Constitution. in the meantime, if you are concerned with the problems, which you seem to be, try to support those who do their best to moderate the situations on the street by working with and around existing laws.
Thanks.
You would have a point if when you guys parrot the crap laws that are in place that you instead parrot them with a discussion on how you think these laws are bad or need to be overhauled and how these laws are not helping resolve anything.
Instead you parrot them as an attack on anyone who thinks the mentally ill and drug addicted folks need to be institutionalized.
It's clear who's side you both are on and it's not the the folks who know that the mentally ill and drug addicted folks need to be institutionalized.
Well golly gee willikers, how impressive. We'd all like to tinker away on our boat, smoke doobs out in San Diego bay, feet up on the tiller, contemplating the sunsets meanings. However, see, some of us have to work, some of us, indeed want to work, because we want to add to society through our vocation. I happen to be in tech, though now fom AZ vs SF Bay, and working to advance a certain field of technology. I can't even contemplate lounging around like you, pontificating about social policies while being exposed to exactly none of them.
Unless of course the homeless are being marine squatters on the abandoned hull mooring nearby ? No ? Yeah, I didn't think so. Oh, I know, you volunteer to help the homeless and vets, which for that I bow down to your goodness. But you don't have to deal daily with the homeless sleeping on your stoop, so to speak, so I prefer to listen to the opinion of those who actually have to live daily side side with the homeless, to see their despair and their effects on local society.
While your economy of water and electrons is impressive, so what ? Should we all move out on the Bay with you? I'll bet the wise and all gracious Tulemutt won't be so wise and gracious anymore, when the social cost of overcrowding and homeless is daily exacted on his port and starboard. The rest of society needs to eat, crap, drive and work everyday, and not out on our yacht on the Bay. BTW, do you think you are paying your fair share of 'rent' out there in beautiful Coronado Bay ? Or are you free riding off our hard earned taxes that maintain and keep California waterways in good shape ? I say raise taxes and mooring fees on all boaters by 100% to help pay for Navigation Centers.
Lol
You suggest I am “living free off society”? I didn’t work at least as much as you to earn my retirement? Too funny. Really.
I have had, and continue to have, more direct, shoulder-rubbing, grubby-handshaking, “love you man!”-hugging contact with the homeless than you will ever know in your own life ... as well as plenty of unpleasant aspects of such contact. I’ve picked them up, literally, out of the woods, off the streets, and my floor, cleaned them up at times, loaded them physically in my van, driven them hours to VA hospitals, sat with them through registration and benefits applications, led them / dragged them / shoulder-carried them into medical appointments and procedures, put them to bed in motel rooms and stayed with them, and hosted them in my home at times ... (I don’t recommend anyone else do this, by the way.)
And now: back to some retirement lounging around ... then maybe a bike ride or hike with the dog ... after lunch back to work on the boat! Enjoy your hi-tech day!
You would have a point if when you guys parrot the crap laws that are in place that you instead parrot them with a discussion on how you think these laws are bad or need to be overhauled and how these laws are not helping resolve anything.
Instead you parrot them as an attack on anyone who thinks the mentally ill and drug addicted folks need to be institutionalized.
It's clear who's side you both are on and it's not the the folks who know that the mentally ill and drug addicted folks need to be institutionalized.
You're welcome.
What’s the point of all that kvetching on an anonymous internet forum? Over and over and over repeating the same angry protests against laws you’ll never do anything about? Too funny ... you want us to jump on board the whiner’s train so we can all backslap each other and commune our righteousness ... without ever doing anything except vilify others. Great.
Sorry. I prefer to inform straight up reality to people who spread bad mythologies about what they think the problems are and what should be done (that can’t be done).
It’s only clear whose side we’re on in your own mind. Not in fact.
Cowboy is right though, the only way to get them off the sidewalks is to have them arrested and forced into treatment. Otherwise, the cops just tell them to move along, and you know what happens then? They just move a couple blocks down and create the same nuisance. Spraying the sidewalks clean is a bandaid, not a solution. Considering the amount of money we're blowing on these bandaids right now, I think a new approach wouldn't break the bank.
This whole 'the homeless issue is caused by a lack of affordable housing,' in my opinion, is complete BS. Anyone with some sense and hope would move elsewhere or find a temporary situation until the hardship passes. The ones on the street, screaming to who knows what, are drug addicts, alcoholics, and mentally ill. They need rehab and mental health treatment in a secure facility until they get clean and show the ability to return to a normal life. They're at rock bottom, they need someone to intervene for their own health and safety. They also, in my opinion, don't need to be cared for in the most expensive city in the country. Go build them a facility out of a warehouse in West Oakland or something or out in the boonies.
Maybe that's cruel? IDK, I think treatment so they can have a normal life is better than pooing on the sidewalk outside a tent?
No, they can’t have “a normal life”. Not the ones you are stereotypically referring to.
Instead of angry internet protesting, consider educating yourself about “treatment” programs you think will do the trick. Most intervention and treatment programs for various behaviors and addictions have a completely miserable success rate ....... even for voluntary participation, let alone involuntary commitment. 10-15%.
You want them off the street, as I do? Support ‘Housing First’ programs where they are willing to be housed without preconditions and where they can be medically served and medication supervised.
Have a nice day.
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.
in the meantime, if you are concerned with the problems, which you seem to be, try to support those who do their best to moderate the situations on the street by working with and around existing laws.
