Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Disappearance of the Public Bench

placesjournal.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 261 posts

Re: The Disappearance of the Public Bench

#171

Post by cucumber3732842 »

fortran77 wrote: post #126
cucumber3732842 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>We eliminated benches to reduce the presence of the problematic homeless, which has a much higher rate of drug abuse and mental illness. We eliminated benches to reduce the rate at which the problematic homeless cross paths with the complainers. The DPW as an organization doesn't give a shit about how many commuter's asses a bench serves from 6am to 8pm. It just knows that every day when Karen sees a homeless man sl…

You use disparaging slurs ("Karen") to refer to a woman who just wants to ride the bus to get to work and earn an living, and you politely call a person who is a public nuisance a "homeless man".

Karen isn't a name in the same way that Boommer isn't an age. It's a state of mind.

We're not talking about the people who have been genuinly victimized. We're talking about the people who wring their hands over some smelly guy in some corner on the subway. Because they dominate the stats.

Re: The Disappearance of the Public Bench

#172

Post by Loughla »

mx7zysuj4xew wrote: post #156
0xBA5ED wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not a great solution, honestly. Long term drug abuse is almost never a victimless habit. I'm tempted to say never.

This isn't the 1980s anymore. Using drugs is perfectly fine. A ton of people here on HN take drugs regularly, but few think it's worth to rock the boat against this kind of nonsense you're spreading

Have you ever interacted with a heroine or meth user?

Sometimes using drugs is fine, depending on the drug, the reason, and the person. For example, I did cocaine once and immediately knew I needed to cut ties with those friends because if I had access to it regularly, I would ruin my life. Others can do coke recreationally and not have an issue. Others can't form the insight I had until their lives are in shambles, and maybe not even then.

Re: The Disappearance of the Public Bench

#174

Post by KingMachiavelli »

zdragnar wrote: post #17
JoshTriplett wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a strange false dichotomy. Either we do absolutely nothing to help people, or we involuntarily incarcerate them? The actually progressive option is to provide meaningful public support programs , and also make housing affordable (by building enough housing). The US mostly doesn't do either of those, but it should.

These programs exist, but they are underutilized to a significant degree. From a partner who used to work in one, people: - didn't trust the program and wouldn't sign up - didn't actually want to quit using so they avoided it - wanted to get the benefits from the program without changing anything (i.e. showed up to get free food etc) - tried but didn't like it and went back to using Very few people actually went all…

Frankly, I think we need to bring back corporal punishment for specific crimes. The process to arrest, prosecute, and then imprison people for "public space crimes" is basically flawed.

Arresting and prosecuting is slow and expensive, prisons are full. A prison sentence destroys whatever remaining support system a person has and a conviction like that makes getting a job in the future nearly impossible.

We should just have a quick path to short and non-damaging corporal punishment. A quick video recording, an instant review by a judge via zoom, then immediate punishment. This would deter theft, damaging public property, etc. while not costing a lot to taxpayers and not causing long term damage to the individual. Crime is never on the record at all so does not affect background checks. Treatment programs are always offered instead of the corporal punishment.

(Of course mental health conditions complicate this, it's difficult to solve that without forced institutionalizing them).

Re: The Disappearance of the Public Bench

#175

Post by [deleted] »

mx7zysuj4xew wrote: post #156
0xBA5ED wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not a great solution, honestly. Long term drug abuse is almost never a victimless habit. I'm tempted to say never.

This isn't the 1980s anymore. Using drugs is perfectly fine. A ton of people here on HN take drugs regularly, but few think it's worth to rock the boat against this kind of nonsense you're spreading

[deleted]

Re: The Disappearance of the Public Bench

#176

Post by 0xBA5ED »

mx7zysuj4xew wrote: post #156
0xBA5ED wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not a great solution, honestly. Long term drug abuse is almost never a victimless habit. I'm tempted to say never.

This isn't the 1980s anymore. Using drugs is perfectly fine. A ton of people here on HN take drugs regularly, but few think it's worth to rock the boat against this kind of nonsense you're spreading

You actually changed what I said then declared it nonsense. I said abuse, not use.

Re: The Disappearance of the Public Bench

#177

Post by User23 »

TheBlight wrote: post #3

I also like clean safe unobstructed sidewalks and parks but along with benches, we've made a decision. We've decided that putting the mentally ill in a facility and arresting people for public drug use is not something we're comfortable with at the expense of those other things. I don't personally ageee with this decision but it is apparently the consensus.

This postulates that policy is set by consensus.

Now I haven't done any scientific polling, but my informal anecdotal experience is so overwhelmingly to the contrary that I'm comfortable believing that consensus isn't determining policy here.

Re: The Disappearance of the Public Bench

#178

Post by User23 »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #14
strictnein wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it is apparently the consensus And what a strange consensus it is. The prevailing belief seems to be that preventing people from slowly/quickly killing themselves on the street (or, more accurately, dying from addiction) is somehow not "progressive" and the moral thing to do is to pretend like these people have made the choice of their own volition and that we cannot judge them for this choice. In reality, the peop…

What a strange false dichotomy. Either we do absolutely nothing to help people, or we involuntarily incarcerate them? The actually progressive option is to provide meaningful public support programs , and also make housing affordable (by building enough housing). The US mostly doesn't do either of those, but it should.

You should read a little book called Games People Play. Focus particular attention on the section on the game "Indigent."

This isn't a resource allocation problem, or rather, it isn't a resource allocation problem the way you seem to think it is.

Re: The Disappearance of the Public Bench

#179

Post by CSSer »

KingMachiavelli wrote: post #174
zdragnar wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These programs exist, but they are underutilized to a significant degree. From a partner who used to work in one, people: - didn't trust the program and wouldn't sign up - didn't actually want to quit using so they avoided it - wanted to get the benefits from the program without changing anything (i.e. showed up to get free food etc) - tried but didn't like it and went back to using Very few people actually went all…

Frankly, I think we need to bring back corporal punishment for specific crimes. The process to arrest, prosecute, and then imprison people for "public space crimes" is basically flawed. Arresting and prosecuting is slow and expensive, prisons are full. A prison sentence destroys whatever remaining support system a person has and a conviction like that makes getting a job in the future nearly impossible. We should jus…

I suppose you really enjoyed Leviathan…

Re: The Disappearance of the Public Bench

#180

Post by charcircuit »

pessimizer wrote: post #125
charcircuit wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I believe it will just take it off of the streets and out of the public consciousness. If antisocial people do not exist in the public consciousness, then that means the problem is fixed. Even you never have to worry about locking your front door, then the problem of burglars has been fixed even if technically would be burglars may exist in prison.

Drug addicts and the mentally ill don't have the problem of being "antisocial." They have drug addiction and mental illness. "Antisocial" is the problem that you have when you see them, and is the problem that is solved when you don't see them. It's a completely narcissistic way of looking at things. For example, putting you in prison would also solve the problem of your objection to them. You would still be surround…

I think you are underestimating how few bad actors it takes to ruin a system, but I do agree with your point that you can also remove the people who think they are negatively impacted. For example in Counter Strike you can either ban the small percentage of cheaters or you could cultivate the community to not care if people are cheating.
Post reply on HN