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

L.A. to declare 'state of emergency' on homelessness

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 105 posts

Re: L.A. to declare 'state of emergency' on homelessness

#81

Post by sandworm101 »

anon4 wrote: post #48
sandworm101 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jail and/or prison. That is where many of them end up. Some judges would rather see someone get "treatment" in custody than get nothing on the street.

Jail is different from prison how?

Jail is for pre-trial sentencing and sentences under one year. So many of the people have not been convicted. Jails spend most of their energies sorting people into various risk categories. There are few if any 'treatment' programs in jails.

Prisons are where people actually serve meaningful time. Everyone is in for at least a year and everyone is an actually convicted criminal, not just someone awaiting trial.

Re: L.A. to declare 'state of emergency' on homelessness

#82

Post by dragonwriter »

anon4 wrote: post #48
sandworm101 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jail and/or prison. That is where many of them end up. Some judges would rather see someone get "treatment" in custody than get nothing on the street.

Jail is different from prison how?

Depends on the jurisdiction, but generally (there may be some variation even in these high-level descriptions) in the US:

Jails are operated by counties, prisons by the State or Federal government.

Jails are for pre-trial detention and serving sentences for less-serious crimes, prisons for sentences for more serious crimes.

Re: L.A. to declare 'state of emergency' on homelessness

#83

Post by dragonwriter »

sandworm101 wrote: post #81
anon4 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jail is different from prison how?

Jail is for pre-trial sentencing and sentences under one year. So many of the people have not been convicted. Jails spend most of their energies sorting people into various risk categories. There are few if any 'treatment' programs in jails. Prisons are where people actually serve meaningful time. Everyone is in for at least a year and everyone is an actually convicted criminal, not just someone awaiting trial.

> Jail is for pre-trial sentencing and sentences under one year.

In California, specifically, since the recent prison realignment adopted to address Federal court orders with regard to California's overcrowded state prisons, that is substantially less true than it used to be; many non-serious, non-violent, non-sex offenders sentenced to more than one year are now sent to county jails, and population pressure resulting from that has reduced pre-trial detention in many county jails, as well.

Re: L.A. to declare 'state of emergency' on homelessness

#84

Post by laserDinosaur »

akshatpradhan wrote: post #75
DanBC wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rates of mental illness are higher in the homeless population than the general population. But it's important to recognise that most homeless or vulnerably housed people do not have a mental illness; and that sometimes it's the homelessness that has caused the mental health problem. I totally agree that the solution is not "just build more homes", but needs to include better access to debt management; better access t…

>But it's important to recognise that most homeless or vulnerably housed people do not have a mental illness This can't be right. A previous HN discussed how "almost half of homeless men had traumatic brain injury in their lifetime" Source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7648933

His next sentence was "and that sometimes it's the homelessness that has caused the mental health problem." so I'm assuming he meant previously existing mental health issues.

Re: L.A. to declare 'state of emergency' on homelessness

#86

Post by MaxScheiber »

Axsuul wrote: post #2

I'm really glad to see this issue on the front page. I live in downtown LA and I'm on the front lines of this epidemic. It does seem like the situation is getting worse. I wonder if technology can somehow play a role here. I would gladly fund some of the "regulars" around here via some type of Watsi-esque solution.

Palantir's philanthropy engineering team works with an organization called Community Solutions to help shelter the homeless.[0][1] (Full disclosure, I interned on this team last year.)

[0] http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2015/01/da...

[1] https://www.palantir.com/2015/01/housing-homeless-veterans-w...

Re: L.A. to declare 'state of emergency' on homelessness

#87

Post by schoen »

alkonaut wrote: post #63
jakeogh wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it ethical to put people in cadges who don't agree with you (or your group) on property redistribution? If you get enough people together can they own the minority's things? Does bringing up a controversial author mean anything?

> Is it ethical to put people in cages who don't agree with you (or your group) on property redistribution? (Fixed some typos ^) Short answer: Yes. Longer answer: Tax law is just like any other law. The fact that it affects property ownership doesn't make it different in any way than, say, differing views on spanking children or driving without a seat belt. Person A doesn't go to jail because he doesn't agree with pe…

Your account is very clear, but "a law he agreed on together with B and C" is doing a lot of work here in terms of smuggling in assumptions, or conclusions, about political authority (since in your account people "agreed on" policies they explicitly object to, so long as those policies were created in particular participatory ways).

Re: L.A. to declare 'state of emergency' on homelessness

#88

Post by a3n »

6t6t6 wrote: post #30

Is there any way a person with a mental illness get a proper treatment in US? I mean, for some one who is unable to work because he has, for instance, schizophrenia, clinical depression or alcoholism, is there any option apart from indigence?

I think it's all but impossible.

Anecdote of one: I went through a period of un/underemployment a few years ago. So I had no health insurance. My state, Colorado, has an indigent medical care program. I went to their office, filled out the forms, and I qualified.

But in the six months that I tried, I was never seen (and I had an issue, not mental health, but it could have been anything). You cannot get any issue seen to until you've first seen an intake GP. There are not enough GPs available in the system. And there's no wait list, you have to call every day to see if there's an opening. After some months I gave up.

Fast forward, another anecdote of one: I'm in a great job with great benefits. I got depressed. I found a doctor immediately, made an appointment for the next day, and I'm now being treated. Easy peasy.

After money, the most important reason to have a job is health insurance. The ACA makes this a little easier, but you still need money to pay for your affordable policy.

Money.

Re: L.A. to declare 'state of emergency' on homelessness

#89

Post by sandworm101 »

dragonwriter wrote: post #83
sandworm101 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jail is for pre-trial sentencing and sentences under one year. So many of the people have not been convicted. Jails spend most of their energies sorting people into various risk categories. There are few if any 'treatment' programs in jails. Prisons are where people actually serve meaningful time. Everyone is in for at least a year and everyone is an actually convicted criminal, not just someone awaiting trial.

> Jail is for pre-trial sentencing and sentences under one year. In California , specifically, since the recent prison realignment adopted to address Federal court orders with regard to California's overcrowded state prisons, that is substantially less true than it used to be; many non-serious, non-violent, non-sex offenders sentenced to more than one year are now sent to county jails, and population pressure resulti…

There is some wiggle room. The one-year thing is more to do with how much time one is expected to serve, rather than the sentence. Time already served can also alter the math. So someone spending 6-months in jail pre-trial and then sentenced to 14 months would normally be sent back to jail as they only have 8 months remaining. And to your point, where it is very unlikely that someone will server their entire sentence prior to parol, they will normally do that time in a jail.

This isn't always a bad thing. Some convicts would rather not be moved to a new facility. Jails are normally closer to the place of arrest (usually near home) and by the point sentencing happens families have already developed some sort of routine for visitation. Sending them out of town, even if to a better facility, is not always in the inmate's best interest.

Post reply on HN