The Bay Area Soiled/Homeless/Infested/Trashed Containment Thread (Oakland: apartment complexes, warehouse)

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by Teacher Terry

We live in Nevada and used to go to SF every year. Slowly it’s gotten disgusting with garbage everywhere and people shooting up on the street. We went last year and I don’t want to go back. I have friends that still go every year. Cities change when retirees from other states move in paying more for housing. We have had tech companies move in also with big salaries. Our housing, rents and homeless population is exploding. People that have always been able to buy a home or rent can no longer afford to. Luckily we own our house so can afford to stay. We couldn’t afford to rent. People blame Californians which I think is silly. If I had a expensive house that I could sell and retire somewhere nice why wouldn’t I do it?

Since a few years ago when Reno went on a mission to tear down all the old cheap motels and hotels I would fully expect the homeless problem there to become very visible if it's not already. When people have nowhere else to go they end up on the street, and once large numbers are there, it's almost impossible to control the problem it's like herding cats.

[DKM]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

So you are now retracting your claim about this state program in California that 'overturns' criminal penalties? I think what you might be calling a 'state program' is the policy that law enforcement and district attorneys have had for decades, claiming that we need very very tough drug possession laws that include prison sentences so that we can 'force' those people into rehab by offering it as an alternative to going to prison. That is not a state program or law, it's a tactic and a pretty shady one too.

It didn't work and it never will because the last thing law enforcement or prosecutors want is to keep people out of prison, they just throw the story of "we used to be able to get them to choose rehab" to keep the public from realizing how bizarre it is to send a person to prison for a victimless crime like having a small amount of dope in their pocket. Now that prop 47 has changed the status of personal possession of drugs to a misdemeanor LE and the DAs now are clutching their pearls and opining about how their hands are tied.

In the past offenders would sometimes be offered a suspended sentence with a stipulation that they go to some kind of rehab, but they usually failed because they inevitably relapse and part of their sentence is probation for 3-5 years with weekly drug tests which almost all of them will at some point fail and end up in prison anyway. Once they have a felony conviction they can't find landlords who will rent to them and employers will only hire them as a last resort.

You know what really reduces drug use? A job and a place to live, and having a family or friends who give a crap about you helps too.

I never claimed I worked on this in California, so I can't say for sure what it was that changed. But they did stop sending people to prison for drug offenses here due to Prop 47. I worked on the Drug Court program long ago and I worked with people who it helped, first hand. Go ahead and claim it didn't work and everything we achieved was a lie. It won't change my mind. We should arrest people for using illegal drugs in public and they should either get rehab or work camp. This does work in other states and countries. I'm not claiming it solves the problem, I am claiming it reduces it. I mean look at the places where there are no consequences for this. You got the Bay Area, Portland, Seattle... totally rundown and trashed. Its disgusting to visit those places. You'd have to be a drug user yourself to think that's okay (probably not far from the truth for the defenders of the policy).

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by DKM

I never claimed I worked on this in California, so I can't say for sure what it was that changed. But they did stop sending people to prison for drug offenses here due to Prop 47. I worked on the Drug Court program long ago and I worked with people who it helped, first hand. Go ahead and claim it didn't work and everything we achieved was a lie. It won't change my mind. We should arrest people for using illegal drugs in public and they should either get rehab or work camp. This does work in other states and countries. I'm not claiming it solves the problem, I am claiming it reduces it. I mean look at the places where there are no consequences for this. You got the Bay Area, Portland, Seattle... totally rundown and trashed. Its disgusting to visit those places. You'd have to be a drug user yourself to think that's okay (probably not far from the truth for the defenders of the policy).

Ok, but if you were talking about this 'program' being in another state, then how could Bay Area liberal do gooders have messed it up? You did write this, right?

I used to work on a state program that compelled people to seek treatment for drugs in exchange for overturning their criminal penalties for property crimes. It worked really well until liberal do gooders from the Bay Area came and "compassionately" removed penalties without them needing rehab. I worked directly with recovering drug addicts and homeless. Do you have any relevant experience or are you a citer of data and surveys found to support your point?

Now, about drug court. Drug court works great, they have fantastic outcomes but do you know why? The participants in drug court are screened to guarantee that they will succeed, otherwise the feds will quit funding drug court. You get a lot of first timers, 18 year old kids who get caught with a little cocaine or meth. Or older adults who are addicted to pills and got caught with oxy and couldn't produce a prescription for it. In other words it's a joke, the people who don't need drug court get it and the ones who need help go to jail or prison.

[DKM]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

Ok, but if you were talking about this 'program' being in another state, then how could Bay Area liberal do gooders have messed it up? You did write this, right?

Are you aware of the number of people who move away from the Bay Area? The anti housing policies (which also contribute to homeless) having been driving the excess population out for decades now. Which brings up another point, why don't they allow housing to build out into the southern Santa Clara valley? But its the same where I live so I don't need to go there.

I don't see any reason not to commit the looneys to the looney bin and the people who refuse to get off drugs can spend their time incarcerated for their offenses. It would help a great deal. But nope, we have to have compassion and let things happen here that no other civilized place puts up with. It's weird to me that this concept originates from areas like SF and Portland where most locals think they are forward thinkers.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by DKM

Are you aware of the number of people who move away from the Bay Area? The anti housing policies (which also contribute to homeless) having been driving the excess population out for decades now. Which brings up another point, why don't they allow housing to build out into the southern Santa Clara valley? But its the same where I live so I don't need to go there.

I don't see any reason not to commit the looneys to the looney bin and the people who refuse to get off drugs can spend their time incarcerated for their offenses. It would help a great deal. But nope, we have to have compassion and let things happen here that no other civilized place puts up with. It's weird to me that this concept originates from areas like SF and Portland where most locals think they are forward thinkers.

What “concept originates” from areas like SF and Portland? Compassion? The fact you think compassion is responsible for rampant homelessness is effing hilarious. You really are a piece of work

Ever hear of ‘Housing First’? If not, look it up. It’s without question the most successful approach to issues of homelessness. Saves money too. Lots of money. And guess where this “compassionate” program originated: conservative Republican Salt Lake City.

Your posts are among the most remarkably uninformed in this thread. Absolutely clueless from first words to last.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by DKM

Are you aware of the number of people who move away from the Bay Area? The anti housing policies (which also contribute to homeless) having been driving the excess population out for decades now. Which brings up another point, why don't they allow housing to build out into the southern Santa Clara valley? But its the same where I live so I don't need to go there.

I don't see any reason not to commit the looneys to the looney bin and the people who refuse to get off drugs can spend their time incarcerated for their offenses. It would help a great deal. But nope, we have to have compassion and let things happen here that no other civilized place puts up with. It's weird to me that this concept originates from areas like SF and Portland where most locals think they are forward thinkers.

Addiction is not a crime. Housing is expensive, people leave areas where housing gets too expensive and I don't know anything about the southern Santa Clara Valley

[DKM]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

What “concept originates” from areas like SF and Portland? Compassion? The fact you think compassion is responsible for rampant homelessness is effing hilarious. You really are a piece of work

Ever hear of ‘Housing First’? If not, look it up. It’s without question the most successful approach to issues of homelessness. Saves money too. Lots of money. And guess where this “compassionate” program originated: conservative Republican Salt Lake City.

Your posts are among the most remarkably uninformed in this thread. Absolutely clueless from first words to last.

Remarkable huh? Yes, enabling drug addiction and legalizing public camping leads to rampant homelessness. Portland and SF are excellent case studies in this. If you live in one of these places, you tend to normalize it. If you don't, its sheer idiocy when you observe what they did to themselves. I was in the former and glad to be the latter now.

[Tulemutt]

Homeless Oaklanders were tired of the housing crisis. So they built a ‘miracle’ village
Under a highway, beautiful structures offer food, healthcare, showers and a free ‘store’ – as well as a strong sense of community
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...n-wood-village

[sav858]

Major Bay Area art festival canceled over homeless camp controversy

In February, the City Council decided Marinship Park — which, unlike Dunphy Park, has bathrooms and is regularly visited by a shower truck — would make a better location for the encampment. But when the city attempted to move the encampment, camp residents, backed by the California Homeless Union, sued. So far, a federal judge has sided with the camp residents, blocking the city from forcing them to relocate during the pandemic.


Apparently the homeless are unionized now lol

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by sav858

Major Bay Area art festival canceled over homeless camp controversy

In February, the City Council decided Marinship Park — which, unlike Dunphy Park, has bathrooms and is regularly visited by a shower truck — would make a better location for the encampment. But when the city attempted to move the encampment, camp residents, backed by the California Homeless Union, sued. So far, a federal judge has sided with the camp residents, blocking the city from forcing them to relocate during the pandemic.


Apparently the homeless are unionized now lol

Why is that funny?