Reston Library

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:cation and more than doubling it in size.

The homeless shelter should not be in Reston Fown Center at all. There are plenty of undeveloped parcels of land less than 2 miles away.

Privately owned I gather - if commercially zoned, probably very expensive land. And I doubt if it moved to a new parcel in or even near a residential area that there would not be massive opposition. Its much easier to add capacity on the site where it already exists.

But I mean, who really cares about the homeless and/or mentally ill? They aren't as good as we are, and their needs can be cavalierly dismissed.

OP here, and you're one of the "extreme liberals" by virtue of the fact that you are taking the argument to the extreme. Whoever said we don't care about the homeless? Has anyone here objecting to the location of a shelter adjacent to a library serving children suggested we abolish homeless shelters and let the people fend for themselves? NO. We are saying that we should not be giving priority to them over our children, and this PC nonsense has to stop.

And your (sarcastic) bit about them not being "as good as we are" is the problem in a nutshell. The progressives are so eager to prove that since everyone is equal, it would be just wonderful to put homeless men next to schoolchildren, like one big happy family. And what makes it even worse is that the liberal officials know full well of all the problems this has caused, but instead of acknowledging reality and relocating the shelter, they want to double down on their wonderful liberal utopia where catcalling, filthy, homeless men mingle with young teen girls.

I'm getting more disgusted - perhaps some readers note a change in tone - because my research is uncovering no groups going up against this. Apparently, there was a hearing a couple of years ago, where objections about library safety were made, but the county officials decided to proceed.

OP, if you are so afraid of homeless people then you can't let your kid go to Harvard. Lots of homeless are in the square and there is a homeless shelter near the university. I am sure they will fit in with the tiki torch wielding crowd at UVA.

People like you make wish we were staying in Reston so I can help defend the right of a homeless person to use public facilities. There are social workers who operate out of libraries as it is a place where homeless individuals can study for a GED or a certificate and/or job hunt. Everyone deserves dignity.

What's more important to you? The right of homeless men to cause disruptions at the library or the right of children to study in peace and quiet?

NP. Actually for me it would be the rights of the homeless. If need be, the children can study in peace and quiet at home. The homeless have no place else to go.

No one's rights should interfere with the rights of others. If someone is interfereing with someone's peaceful use of the facility, that should be addressed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:cation and more than doubling it in size.

The homeless shelter should not be in Reston Fown Center at all. There are plenty of undeveloped parcels of land less than 2 miles away.

Privately owned I gather - if commercially zoned, probably very expensive land. And I doubt if it moved to a new parcel in or even near a residential area that there would not be massive opposition. Its much easier to add capacity on the site where it already exists.

But I mean, who really cares about the homeless and/or mentally ill? They aren't as good as we are, and their needs can be cavalierly dismissed.

OP here, and you're one of the "extreme liberals" by virtue of the fact that you are taking the argument to the extreme. Whoever said we don't care about the homeless? Has anyone here objecting to the location of a shelter adjacent to a library serving children suggested we abolish homeless shelters and let the people fend for themselves? NO. We are saying that we should not be giving priority to them over our children, and this PC nonsense has to stop.

And your (sarcastic) bit about them not being "as good as we are" is the problem in a nutshell. The progressives are so eager to prove that since everyone is equal, it would be just wonderful to put homeless men next to schoolchildren, like one big happy family. And what makes it even worse is that the liberal officials know full well of all the problems this has caused, but instead of acknowledging reality and relocating the shelter, they want to double down on their wonderful liberal utopia where catcalling, filthy, homeless men mingle with young teen girls.

I'm getting more disgusted - perhaps some readers note a change in tone - because my research is uncovering no groups going up against this. Apparently, there was a hearing a couple of years ago, where objections about library safety were made, but the county officials decided to proceed.

OP, if you are so afraid of homeless people then you can't let your kid go to Harvard. Lots of homeless are in the square and there is a homeless shelter near the university. I am sure they will fit in with the tiki torch wielding crowd at UVA.

People like you make wish we were staying in Reston so I can help defend the right of a homeless person to use public facilities. There are social workers who operate out of libraries as it is a place where homeless individuals can study for a GED or a certificate and/or job hunt. Everyone deserves dignity.

What's more important to you? The right of homeless men to cause disruptions at the library or the right of children to study in peace and quiet?

NP. Actually for me it would be the rights of the homeless. If need be, the children can study in peace and quiet at home. The homeless have no place else to go.

NP but WOW. The homeless have more of a right to browse the internet and sleep at the library than children studying and using books?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:cation and more than doubling it in size.

The homeless shelter should not be in Reston Fown Center at all. There are plenty of undeveloped parcels of land less than 2 miles away.

Privately owned I gather - if commercially zoned, probably very expensive land. And I doubt if it moved to a new parcel in or even near a residential area that there would not be massive opposition. Its much easier to add capacity on the site where it already exists.

But I mean, who really cares about the homeless and/or mentally ill? They aren't as good as we are, and their needs can be cavalierly dismissed.

OP here, and you're one of the "extreme liberals" by virtue of the fact that you are taking the argument to the extreme. Whoever said we don't care about the homeless? Has anyone here objecting to the location of a shelter adjacent to a library serving children suggested we abolish homeless shelters and let the people fend for themselves? NO. We are saying that we should not be giving priority to them over our children, and this PC nonsense has to stop.

And your (sarcastic) bit about them not being "as good as we are" is the problem in a nutshell. The progressives are so eager to prove that since everyone is equal, it would be just wonderful to put homeless men next to schoolchildren, like one big happy family. And what makes it even worse is that the liberal officials know full well of all the problems this has caused, but instead of acknowledging reality and relocating the shelter, they want to double down on their wonderful liberal utopia where catcalling, filthy, homeless men mingle with young teen girls.

I'm getting more disgusted - perhaps some readers note a change in tone - because my research is uncovering no groups going up against this. Apparently, there was a hearing a couple of years ago, where objections about library safety were made, but the county officials decided to proceed.

OP, if you are so afraid of homeless people then you can't let your kid go to Harvard. Lots of homeless are in the square and there is a homeless shelter near the university. I am sure they will fit in with the tiki torch wielding crowd at UVA.

People like you make wish we were staying in Reston so I can help defend the right of a homeless person to use public facilities. There are social workers who operate out of libraries as it is a place where homeless individuals can study for a GED or a certificate and/or job hunt. Everyone deserves dignity.

What's more important to you? The right of homeless men to cause disruptions at the library or the right of children to study in peace and quiet?

NP. Actually for me it would be the rights of the homeless. If need be, the children can study in peace and quiet at home. The homeless have no place else to go.

NP but WOW. The homeless have more of a right to browse the internet and sleep at the library than children studying and using books?

I agree with the person who says the homeless have no where else to go. Where is your compassion for people less fortunate than you? And what are you teaching your kids by not having conversations about poverty and our duty to treat those who don't have a home with the respect that every person deserves.

[Anonymous]

There are a lot of students who also don't have any other place to go study, use the internet or access to other books.

The homeless have their shelter right next door they can use.

[Anonymous]

NP-
Yes children...
Please respect the putrid smelling man, surfing the Internet for porno and rubbing himself.
Let's not make him uncomfortable. Why don't we walk over though and see if can help him in some way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:cation and more than doubling it in size.

The homeless shelter should not be in Reston Fown Center at all. There are plenty of undeveloped parcels of land less than 2 miles away.

Privately owned I gather - if commercially zoned, probably very expensive land. And I doubt if it moved to a new parcel in or even near a residential area that there would not be massive opposition. Its much easier to add capacity on the site where it already exists.

But I mean, who really cares about the homeless and/or mentally ill? They aren't as good as we are, and their needs can be cavalierly dismissed.

OP here, and you're one of the "extreme liberals" by virtue of the fact that you are taking the argument to the extreme. Whoever said we don't care about the homeless? Has anyone here objecting to the location of a shelter adjacent to a library serving children suggested we abolish homeless shelters and let the people fend for themselves? NO. We are saying that we should not be giving priority to them over our children, and this PC nonsense has to stop.

And your (sarcastic) bit about them not being "as good as we are" is the problem in a nutshell. The progressives are so eager to prove that since everyone is equal, it would be just wonderful to put homeless men next to schoolchildren, like one big happy family. And what makes it even worse is that the liberal officials know full well of all the problems this has caused, but instead of acknowledging reality and relocating the shelter, they want to double down on their wonderful liberal utopia where catcalling, filthy, homeless men mingle with young teen girls.

I'm getting more disgusted - perhaps some readers note a change in tone - because my research is uncovering no groups going up against this. Apparently, there was a hearing a couple of years ago, where objections about library safety were made, but the county officials decided to proceed.

OP, if you are so afraid of homeless people then you can't let your kid go to Harvard. Lots of homeless are in the square and there is a homeless shelter near the university. I am sure they will fit in with the tiki torch wielding crowd at UVA.

People like you make wish we were staying in Reston so I can help defend the right of a homeless person to use public facilities. There are social workers who operate out of libraries as it is a place where homeless individuals can study for a GED or a certificate and/or job hunt. Everyone deserves dignity.

What's more important to you? The right of homeless men to cause disruptions at the library or the right of children to study in peace and quiet?

NP. Actually for me it would be the rights of the homeless. If need be, the children can study in peace and quiet at home. The homeless have no place else to go.

What do you mean they have no place else to go? They have the shelter, open 24/7. Why do the children have to vacate and study at home so the homeless can take over the library, rather than the homeless vacating and staying in the shelter (or at least not in the library) so the children can study?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:cation and more than doubling it in size.

The homeless shelter should not be in Reston Fown Center at all. There are plenty of undeveloped parcels of land less than 2 miles away.

Privately owned I gather - if commercially zoned, probably very expensive land. And I doubt if it moved to a new parcel in or even near a residential area that there would not be massive opposition. Its much easier to add capacity on the site where it already exists.

But I mean, who really cares about the homeless and/or mentally ill? They aren't as good as we are, and their needs can be cavalierly dismissed.

OP here, and you're one of the "extreme liberals" by virtue of the fact that you are taking the argument to the extreme. Whoever said we don't care about the homeless? Has anyone here objecting to the location of a shelter adjacent to a library serving children suggested we abolish homeless shelters and let the people fend for themselves? NO. We are saying that we should not be giving priority to them over our children, and this PC nonsense has to stop.

And your (sarcastic) bit about them not being "as good as we are" is the problem in a nutshell. The progressives are so eager to prove that since everyone is equal, it would be just wonderful to put homeless men next to schoolchildren, like one big happy family. And what makes it even worse is that the liberal officials know full well of all the problems this has caused, but instead of acknowledging reality and relocating the shelter, they want to double down on their wonderful liberal utopia where catcalling, filthy, homeless men mingle with young teen girls.

I'm getting more disgusted - perhaps some readers note a change in tone - because my research is uncovering no groups going up against this. Apparently, there was a hearing a couple of years ago, where objections about library safety were made, but the county officials decided to proceed.

OP, if you are so afraid of homeless people then you can't let your kid go to Harvard. Lots of homeless are in the square and there is a homeless shelter near the university. I am sure they will fit in with the tiki torch wielding crowd at UVA.

People like you make wish we were staying in Reston so I can help defend the right of a homeless person to use public facilities. There are social workers who operate out of libraries as it is a place where homeless individuals can study for a GED or a certificate and/or job hunt. Everyone deserves dignity.

What's more important to you? The right of homeless men to cause disruptions at the library or the right of children to study in peace and quiet?

NP. Actually for me it would be the rights of the homeless. If need be, the children can study in peace and quiet at home. The homeless have no place else to go.

No one's rights should interfere with the rights of others. If someone is interfereing with someone's peaceful use of the facility, that should be addressed.

It is being addressed. The police are called to that library repeatedly. But at a certain point, you've got to acknowledge that allowing homeless men into the library to disrupt other people isn't working.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:cation and more than doubling it in size.

The homeless shelter should not be in Reston Fown Center at all. There are plenty of undeveloped parcels of land less than 2 miles away.

Privately owned I gather - if commercially zoned, probably very expensive land. And I doubt if it moved to a new parcel in or even near a residential area that there would not be massive opposition. Its much easier to add capacity on the site where it already exists.

But I mean, who really cares about the homeless and/or mentally ill? They aren't as good as we are, and their needs can be cavalierly dismissed.

OP here, and you're one of the "extreme liberals" by virtue of the fact that you are taking the argument to the extreme. Whoever said we don't care about the homeless? Has anyone here objecting to the location of a shelter adjacent to a library serving children suggested we abolish homeless shelters and let the people fend for themselves? NO. We are saying that we should not be giving priority to them over our children, and this PC nonsense has to stop.

And your (sarcastic) bit about them not being "as good as we are" is the problem in a nutshell. The progressives are so eager to prove that since everyone is equal, it would be just wonderful to put homeless men next to schoolchildren, like one big happy family. And what makes it even worse is that the liberal officials know full well of all the problems this has caused, but instead of acknowledging reality and relocating the shelter, they want to double down on their wonderful liberal utopia where catcalling, filthy, homeless men mingle with young teen girls.

I'm getting more disgusted - perhaps some readers note a change in tone - because my research is uncovering no groups going up against this. Apparently, there was a hearing a couple of years ago, where objections about library safety were made, but the county officials decided to proceed.

OP, if you are so afraid of homeless people then you can't let your kid go to Harvard. Lots of homeless are in the square and there is a homeless shelter near the university. I am sure they will fit in with the tiki torch wielding crowd at UVA.

People like you make wish we were staying in Reston so I can help defend the right of a homeless person to use public facilities. There are social workers who operate out of libraries as it is a place where homeless individuals can study for a GED or a certificate and/or job hunt. Everyone deserves dignity.

What's more important to you? The right of homeless men to cause disruptions at the library or the right of children to study in peace and quiet?

NP. Actually for me it would be the rights of the homeless. If need be, the children can study in peace and quiet at home. The homeless have no place else to go.

NP but WOW. The homeless have more of a right to browse the internet and sleep at the library than children studying and using books?

OP here, and that's the "extreme liberalism" I'm talking about. They would rather kick the children out of the library so the homeless can sleep there all day. Crazy.

[Anonymous]

Guys guys guys...

Those vagrants are all just trying to get their GED's. Truly. None of them are just opting out of society and looking for handouts.

[Anonymous]

I think what people don't get is that most homeless aren't down on their luck. They are mentally ill or drug users.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:cation and more than doubling it in size.

The homeless shelter should not be in Reston Fown Center at all. There are plenty of undeveloped parcels of land less than 2 miles away.

Privately owned I gather - if commercially zoned, probably very expensive land. And I doubt if it moved to a new parcel in or even near a residential area that there would not be massive opposition. Its much easier to add capacity on the site where it already exists.

But I mean, who really cares about the homeless and/or mentally ill? They aren't as good as we are, and their needs can be cavalierly dismissed.

OP here, and you're one of the "extreme liberals" by virtue of the fact that you are taking the argument to the extreme. Whoever said we don't care about the homeless? Has anyone here objecting to the location of a shelter adjacent to a library serving children suggested we abolish homeless shelters and let the people fend for themselves? NO. We are saying that we should not be giving priority to them over our children, and this PC nonsense has to stop.

And your (sarcastic) bit about them not being "as good as we are" is the problem in a nutshell. The progressives are so eager to prove that since everyone is equal, it would be just wonderful to put homeless men next to schoolchildren, like one big happy family. And what makes it even worse is that the liberal officials know full well of all the problems this has caused, but instead of acknowledging reality and relocating the shelter, they want to double down on their wonderful liberal utopia where catcalling, filthy, homeless men mingle with young teen girls.

I'm getting more disgusted - perhaps some readers note a change in tone - because my research is uncovering no groups going up against this. Apparently, there was a hearing a couple of years ago, where objections about library safety were made, but the county officials decided to proceed.

OP, if you are so afraid of homeless people then you can't let your kid go to Harvard. Lots of homeless are in the square and there is a homeless shelter near the university. I am sure they will fit in with the tiki torch wielding crowd at UVA.

People like you make wish we were staying in Reston so I can help defend the right of a homeless person to use public facilities. There are social workers who operate out of libraries as it is a place where homeless individuals can study for a GED or a certificate and/or job hunt. Everyone deserves dignity.

What's more important to you? The right of homeless men to cause disruptions at the library or the right of children to study in peace and quiet?

NP. Actually for me it would be the rights of the homeless. If need be, the children can study in peace and quiet at home. The homeless have no place else to go.

NP but WOW. The homeless have more of a right to browse the internet and sleep at the library than children studying and using books?

I agree with the person who says the homeless have no where else to go. Where is your compassion for people less fortunate than you? And what are you teaching your kids by not having conversations about poverty and our duty to treat those who don't have a home with the respect that every person deserves.

This is the liberal utopia I'm talking about. (OP here.) Why are you saying they have no place else to go? They go everywhere - to the Harris Teeter, to the Panera, sleeping in the RTC park - and of course they have the shelter available to them 24/7. (And I've been accosted at the Harris Teeter, and the employee told me they have problems with the homeless there, too.) But the library, where our young children and pre-teens gather, is where I put my foot down. The library should be OFF-LIMITS (unless they are using it for its intended purpose, which they are not).

And as far as compassion, we as a society are housing them, feeding them, and counseling them. That is what we do as a compassionate society, rather than let them fend for themselves in the street. That doesn't mean they are entitled to go anywhere they want, causing disruptions and interfering with other people's enjoy of the public facilities their taxes support.

And finally, it is less important for me to teach my pre-teen daughter to have respect for the poor, homeless person who is ogling her and whistling at her than it is for me to teach her to keep her distance, not make eye contact, and if he does initiate anything with her, to ignore him and move a safe distance away. When she gets older, I can talk to her about dignity. Right now, I'm concerned for her safety.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think what people don't get is that most homeless aren't down on their luck. They are mentally ill or drug users.

No, we get that they are mentally ill and drug users. Does that somehow make them safer to be around our children?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think what people don't get is that most homeless aren't down on their luck. They are mentally ill or drug users.

Yep.
Just some mentally ill addicts, doing a little light reading on the presidency of James K Polk, or perhaps entomology. Don't see the big deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think what people don't get is that most homeless aren't down on their luck. They are mentally ill or drug users.

No, we get that they are mentally ill and drug users. Does that somehow make them safer to be around our children?

I think we're arguing the same thing...

[Anonymous]

Is Reston is folks' view of a utopia, please don't show me your dystopia. Reston is a dump.