121–130 of 291 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On property they own or property they have been granted permission to occupy.
Do you realize we are discussing people who own no property at all?
This is insane, so you are at your lowest in life and it is now illegal for you to exist.
This is quite horrifying, but not particularly surprising. Most Americans have dehumanized homeless people, because if we truly saw them as equal humans, we would have to acknowledge that we all exist in a system where our humanity is contingent on the contents of our bank account. Programmers today can feel the angst caused by this dehumanization when they look at LLMs generating code. We can see that our humanity c…
Or they can just look out the window of the former SRO apartment they took over in the Tenderloin.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On property they own or property they have been granted permission to occupy.
> On property they own or property they have been granted permission to occupy. By definition, the homeless don't have that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think its more about regulating where you can do certain things vs making it illegal to exist. For example its illegal to urinate and defecate in public despite these being automatic functions, sometimes involuntary and demanding release right then and there wherever you are. Despite this biological reality, we also understand that there are sanitation issues to allowing the body to relieve itself wherever it happe…
So where do you suggest homeless people sleep
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It makes it, not just de facto, but de jure illegal to be poor. If someone can't afford a home, where are they meant to go? Just fuck off and die?
I know you're not actually asking for answer but the US spends trillions of dollars a year supporting homeless and otherwise disadvantaged people. There are public programs that exist solely to provide these people the help they need. In most cities something like half the homeless refuse free shelter.
And on top of that, there's almost always a drastic shortage in shelter beds, so even people who jump through all the hoops only have a small chance of getting a spot. For example, Portland here, which is considered pretty homeless-friendly by a lot of people, only has enough shelter beds for about 1/5th of the homeless population.
For a lot of people, even perfectly functional, non-mentally-ill people, this makes it a perfectly logical move to look at shelters as only a measure of last resort and otherwise sleep in a car or find somewhere out of the way that will let them put their energy into trying to improve their situation rather than into trying to satisfy a new shelter's rules every day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Dumb decision Well, what's the alternative? Do you believe all local laws such as "FooBar park closes at dusk" are federally unconstitutional , and that actually enforcing any of them is "cruel and unusual punishment" against people who desire to camp there overnight? Remember: It's perfectly possible to say that certain situations are unlawful/unjust/immoral for other reasons, it's not like "I think it violates th…
Yeah man. Punishing someone for being is poor and living outside of society by making them poorer and pushing them further outside society is cruel and unusual. The majority’s justification that it is fair because it applies to those whom it will never apply to is particularly craven.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So where do you suggest homeless people sleep
In shelters the city state or federal government sets up. To me we are essentially hosting a concert with no bathrooms. The answer isn't to let people pee and poop without bathrooms at the concert, the answer is to police that behavior while also providing bathrooms.
*Correction: the cities can ban camps. It would still be a violation to ban "homeless" camps, and the decision was very clear that homelessness is a protected status, but just because you have a protected status does not mean you get to break laws that do not target you. "Under the city’s laws, it makes no difference whether the charged defendant is homeless, a backpacker on vacation passing through town, or a studen…
I really don't see the mens rea of someone sleeping outside because they have no where else to sleep instead.
As it is said, "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think its more about regulating where you can do certain things vs making it illegal to exist. For example its illegal to urinate and defecate in public despite these being automatic functions, sometimes involuntary and demanding release right then and there wherever you are. Despite this biological reality, we also understand that there are sanitation issues to allowing the body to relieve itself wherever it happe…
> regulating where you can do certain things If people who don't have a home can't sleep on public land, where can they sleep?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a charity run homeless shelter in the town where they were camping on public grounds.
Which requires people staying there to attend religious services.