Tenleytown Library homeless issue

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the child of immigrant parents who did not speak English and worked long hours, the public library was my refuge. I spent countless afternoons there reading, studying, doing my homework, and talking to librarians about books and newspapers. It was safe, clean, and welcoming place. That experience no longer exists for many children today, and its loss is a profound social failure.

Public libraries have been radically transformed, not by accident but by deliberate policy choices that elevate the demands of the severely mentally ill, drug-addicted, and chronically homeless over the rights of the working class, poor families, students, and children who rely on libraries the most. This is not a rant about people down on their luck. It is about repeated, unchecked behavior that would be unacceptable anywhere else: aggressive public ranting, overwhelming filth and odor, public nudity, people soiling themselves and then occupying furniture that others will later use, harassment of minors, and the routine conversion of restrooms into makeshift bathing, laundry facilities, and places to inject drugs. These conditions are continually tolerated while staff stand by powerless or unwilling to act.

The result is that law-abiding patrons are effectively displaced from a public institution. No one can concentrate and people do not feel safe. Students are driven away from one of the few remaining free spaces for learning. When libraries become hostile or frightening environments, it is the poorest and most vulnerable law-abiding users who pay the price.

Defenders of this status quo often cloak themselves in the language of compassion. Librarians and outside advocates dismiss legitimate concerns as intolerance. This is not empathy; it is abdication. Compassion does not require sacrificing standards of hygiene, safety, or basic decency, nor does it require turning libraries into de facto homeless shelters or psychiatric wards.

It is a travesty that today, those who disrupt, intimidate, and degrade public spaces are afforded more practical rights than children trying to do homework, immigrants trying to learn English, or students trying to escape chaos at home. When libraries abandon standards, they do not become more inclusive they become unusable. And society is immeasurably poorer for it.

I agree. The city provides shelters and many of the unhoused decline to use them...so they can take over and render unusable any space they want, to the detriment of a much greater number of others? That makes no sense and is also a waste of taxpayer funds. Re the Tenleytown library, I've also stopped using the compost collection station on that corner because of the harassment I've experienced each time I've gone.

You are not better or more important than the smelly homeless person. There is nothing wrong with them sitting there in the warm. The library is just as much for them as it is for you.

True, but not if they're high on drugs or drunk or violent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the child of immigrant parents who did not speak English and worked long hours, the public library was my refuge. I spent countless afternoons there reading, studying, doing my homework, and talking to librarians about books and newspapers. It was safe, clean, and welcoming place. That experience no longer exists for many children today, and its loss is a profound social failure.

Public libraries have been radically transformed, not by accident but by deliberate policy choices that elevate the demands of the severely mentally ill, drug-addicted, and chronically homeless over the rights of the working class, poor families, students, and children who rely on libraries the most. This is not a rant about people down on their luck. It is about repeated, unchecked behavior that would be unacceptable anywhere else: aggressive public ranting, overwhelming filth and odor, public nudity, people soiling themselves and then occupying furniture that others will later use, harassment of minors, and the routine conversion of restrooms into makeshift bathing, laundry facilities, and places to inject drugs. These conditions are continually tolerated while staff stand by powerless or unwilling to act.

The result is that law-abiding patrons are effectively displaced from a public institution. No one can concentrate and people do not feel safe. Students are driven away from one of the few remaining free spaces for learning. When libraries become hostile or frightening environments, it is the poorest and most vulnerable law-abiding users who pay the price.

Defenders of this status quo often cloak themselves in the language of compassion. Librarians and outside advocates dismiss legitimate concerns as intolerance. This is not empathy; it is abdication. Compassion does not require sacrificing standards of hygiene, safety, or basic decency, nor does it require turning libraries into de facto homeless shelters or psychiatric wards.

It is a travesty that today, those who disrupt, intimidate, and degrade public spaces are afforded more practical rights than children trying to do homework, immigrants trying to learn English, or students trying to escape chaos at home. When libraries abandon standards, they do not become more inclusive they become unusable. And society is immeasurably poorer for it.

+ a million
ALL OF THIS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the child of immigrant parents who did not speak English and worked long hours, the public library was my refuge. I spent countless afternoons there reading, studying, doing my homework, and talking to librarians about books and newspapers. It was safe, clean, and welcoming place. That experience no longer exists for many children today, and its loss is a profound social failure.

Public libraries have been radically transformed, not by accident but by deliberate policy choices that elevate the demands of the severely mentally ill, drug-addicted, and chronically homeless over the rights of the working class, poor families, students, and children who rely on libraries the most. This is not a rant about people down on their luck. It is about repeated, unchecked behavior that would be unacceptable anywhere else: aggressive public ranting, overwhelming filth and odor, public nudity, people soiling themselves and then occupying furniture that others will later use, harassment of minors, and the routine conversion of restrooms into makeshift bathing, laundry facilities, and places to inject drugs. These conditions are continually tolerated while staff stand by powerless or unwilling to act.

The result is that law-abiding patrons are effectively displaced from a public institution. No one can concentrate and people do not feel safe. Students are driven away from one of the few remaining free spaces for learning. When libraries become hostile or frightening environments, it is the poorest and most vulnerable law-abiding users who pay the price.

Defenders of this status quo often cloak themselves in the language of compassion. Librarians and outside advocates dismiss legitimate concerns as intolerance. This is not empathy; it is abdication. Compassion does not require sacrificing standards of hygiene, safety, or basic decency, nor does it require turning libraries into de facto homeless shelters or psychiatric wards.

It is a travesty that today, those who disrupt, intimidate, and degrade public spaces are afforded more practical rights than children trying to do homework, immigrants trying to learn English, or students trying to escape chaos at home. When libraries abandon standards, they do not become more inclusive they become unusable. And society is immeasurably poorer for it.

I agree. The city provides shelters and many of the unhoused decline to use them...so they can take over and render unusable any space they want, to the detriment of a much greater number of others? That makes no sense and is also a waste of taxpayer funds. Re the Tenleytown library, I've also stopped using the compost collection station on that corner because of the harassment I've experienced each time I've gone.

You are not better or more important than the smelly homeless person. There is nothing wrong with them sitting there in the warm. The library is just as much for them as it is for you.

DP. The library is open to the public, true. But there are reasonable expectations of good hygiene and socially acceptable behavior at play, too. The PPP beautifully lays all of this out in her post, which you clearly ignore because you have no actual rebuttal and deep down, you know she's correct. Public libraries are for ALL of us, to include women and children - the very same people who are constantly harassed by mentally ill homeless people. But it's clear you couldn't care less about all of those other people who are now unable to use the library as it was intended.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the child of immigrant parents who did not speak English and worked long hours, the public library was my refuge. I spent countless afternoons there reading, studying, doing my homework, and talking to librarians about books and newspapers. It was safe, clean, and welcoming place. That experience no longer exists for many children today, and its loss is a profound social failure.

Public libraries have been radically transformed, not by accident but by deliberate policy choices that elevate the demands of the severely mentally ill, drug-addicted, and chronically homeless over the rights of the working class, poor families, students, and children who rely on libraries the most. This is not a rant about people down on their luck. It is about repeated, unchecked behavior that would be unacceptable anywhere else: aggressive public ranting, overwhelming filth and odor, public nudity, people soiling themselves and then occupying furniture that others will later use, harassment of minors, and the routine conversion of restrooms into makeshift bathing, laundry facilities, and places to inject drugs. These conditions are continually tolerated while staff stand by powerless or unwilling to act.

The result is that law-abiding patrons are effectively displaced from a public institution. No one can concentrate and people do not feel safe. Students are driven away from one of the few remaining free spaces for learning. When libraries become hostile or frightening environments, it is the poorest and most vulnerable law-abiding users who pay the price.

Defenders of this status quo often cloak themselves in the language of compassion. Librarians and outside advocates dismiss legitimate concerns as intolerance. This is not empathy; it is abdication. Compassion does not require sacrificing standards of hygiene, safety, or basic decency, nor does it require turning libraries into de facto homeless shelters or psychiatric wards.

It is a travesty that today, those who disrupt, intimidate, and degrade public spaces are afforded more practical rights than children trying to do homework, immigrants trying to learn English, or students trying to escape chaos at home. When libraries abandon standards, they do not become more inclusive they become unusable. And society is immeasurably poorer for it.

I agree. The city provides shelters and many of the unhoused decline to use them...so they can take over and render unusable any space they want, to the detriment of a much greater number of others? That makes no sense and is also a waste of taxpayer funds. Re the Tenleytown library, I've also stopped using the compost collection station on that corner because of the harassment I've experienced each time I've gone.

You are not better or more important than the smelly homeless person. There is nothing wrong with them sitting there in the warm. The library is just as much for them as it is for you.

DP. The library is open to the public, true. But there are reasonable expectations of good hygiene and socially acceptable behavior at play, too. The PPP beautifully lays all of this out in her post, which you clearly ignore because you have no actual rebuttal and deep down, you know she's correct. Public libraries are for ALL of us, to include women and children - the very same people who are constantly harassed by mentally ill homeless people. But it's clear you couldn't care less about all of those other people who are now unable to use the library as it was intended.

The poster who thinks anyone in an any condition should be able to be in the library apparently does not care about children's safety.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the child of immigrant parents who did not speak English and worked long hours, the public library was my refuge. I spent countless afternoons there reading, studying, doing my homework, and talking to librarians about books and newspapers. It was safe, clean, and welcoming place. That experience no longer exists for many children today, and its loss is a profound social failure.

Public libraries have been radically transformed, not by accident but by deliberate policy choices that elevate the demands of the severely mentally ill, drug-addicted, and chronically homeless over the rights of the working class, poor families, students, and children who rely on libraries the most. This is not a rant about people down on their luck. It is about repeated, unchecked behavior that would be unacceptable anywhere else: aggressive public ranting, overwhelming filth and odor, public nudity, people soiling themselves and then occupying furniture that others will later use, harassment of minors, and the routine conversion of restrooms into makeshift bathing, laundry facilities, and places to inject drugs. These conditions are continually tolerated while staff stand by powerless or unwilling to act.

The result is that law-abiding patrons are effectively displaced from a public institution. No one can concentrate and people do not feel safe. Students are driven away from one of the few remaining free spaces for learning. When libraries become hostile or frightening environments, it is the poorest and most vulnerable law-abiding users who pay the price.

Defenders of this status quo often cloak themselves in the language of compassion. Librarians and outside advocates dismiss legitimate concerns as intolerance. This is not empathy; it is abdication. Compassion does not require sacrificing standards of hygiene, safety, or basic decency, nor does it require turning libraries into de facto homeless shelters or psychiatric wards.

It is a travesty that today, those who disrupt, intimidate, and degrade public spaces are afforded more practical rights than children trying to do homework, immigrants trying to learn English, or students trying to escape chaos at home. When libraries abandon standards, they do not become more inclusive they become unusable. And society is immeasurably poorer for it.

I agree. The city provides shelters and many of the unhoused decline to use them...so they can take over and render unusable any space they want, to the detriment of a much greater number of others? That makes no sense and is also a waste of taxpayer funds. Re the Tenleytown library, I've also stopped using the compost collection station on that corner because of the harassment I've experienced each time I've gone.

You are not better or more important than the smelly homeless person. There is nothing wrong with them sitting there in the warm. The library is just as much for them as it is for you.

True, but not if they're high on drugs or drunk or violent.

None of that happened to op. She was offended by the smell

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the child of immigrant parents who did not speak English and worked long hours, the public library was my refuge. I spent countless afternoons there reading, studying, doing my homework, and talking to librarians about books and newspapers. It was safe, clean, and welcoming place. That experience no longer exists for many children today, and its loss is a profound social failure.

Public libraries have been radically transformed, not by accident but by deliberate policy choices that elevate the demands of the severely mentally ill, drug-addicted, and chronically homeless over the rights of the working class, poor families, students, and children who rely on libraries the most. This is not a rant about people down on their luck. It is about repeated, unchecked behavior that would be unacceptable anywhere else: aggressive public ranting, overwhelming filth and odor, public nudity, people soiling themselves and then occupying furniture that others will later use, harassment of minors, and the routine conversion of restrooms into makeshift bathing, laundry facilities, and places to inject drugs. These conditions are continually tolerated while staff stand by powerless or unwilling to act.

The result is that law-abiding patrons are effectively displaced from a public institution. No one can concentrate and people do not feel safe. Students are driven away from one of the few remaining free spaces for learning. When libraries become hostile or frightening environments, it is the poorest and most vulnerable law-abiding users who pay the price.

Defenders of this status quo often cloak themselves in the language of compassion. Librarians and outside advocates dismiss legitimate concerns as intolerance. This is not empathy; it is abdication. Compassion does not require sacrificing standards of hygiene, safety, or basic decency, nor does it require turning libraries into de facto homeless shelters or psychiatric wards.

It is a travesty that today, those who disrupt, intimidate, and degrade public spaces are afforded more practical rights than children trying to do homework, immigrants trying to learn English, or students trying to escape chaos at home. When libraries abandon standards, they do not become more inclusive they become unusable. And society is immeasurably poorer for it.

I agree. The city provides shelters and many of the unhoused decline to use them...so they can take over and render unusable any space they want, to the detriment of a much greater number of others? That makes no sense and is also a waste of taxpayer funds. Re the Tenleytown library, I've also stopped using the compost collection station on that corner because of the harassment I've experienced each time I've gone.

You are not better or more important than the smelly homeless person. There is nothing wrong with them sitting there in the warm. The library is just as much for them as it is for you.

DP. The library is open to the public, true. But there are reasonable expectations of good hygiene and socially acceptable behavior at play, too. The PPP beautifully lays all of this out in her post, which you clearly ignore because you have no actual rebuttal and deep down, you know she's correct. Public libraries are for ALL of us, to include women and children - the very same people who are constantly harassed by mentally ill homeless people. But it's clear you couldn't care less about all of those other people who are now unable to use the library as it was intended.

The poster who thinks anyone in an any condition should be able to be in the library apparently does not care about children's safety.

Spare me your bs. I raised my kid in DC. We basically lived in various public libraries. Encountered plenty of homeless with my kid with me. Never had an issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the child of immigrant parents who did not speak English and worked long hours, the public library was my refuge. I spent countless afternoons there reading, studying, doing my homework, and talking to librarians about books and newspapers. It was safe, clean, and welcoming place. That experience no longer exists for many children today, and its loss is a profound social failure.

Public libraries have been radically transformed, not by accident but by deliberate policy choices that elevate the demands of the severely mentally ill, drug-addicted, and chronically homeless over the rights of the working class, poor families, students, and children who rely on libraries the most. This is not a rant about people down on their luck. It is about repeated, unchecked behavior that would be unacceptable anywhere else: aggressive public ranting, overwhelming filth and odor, public nudity, people soiling themselves and then occupying furniture that others will later use, harassment of minors, and the routine conversion of restrooms into makeshift bathing, laundry facilities, and places to inject drugs. These conditions are continually tolerated while staff stand by powerless or unwilling to act.

The result is that law-abiding patrons are effectively displaced from a public institution. No one can concentrate and people do not feel safe. Students are driven away from one of the few remaining free spaces for learning. When libraries become hostile or frightening environments, it is the poorest and most vulnerable law-abiding users who pay the price.

Defenders of this status quo often cloak themselves in the language of compassion. Librarians and outside advocates dismiss legitimate concerns as intolerance. This is not empathy; it is abdication. Compassion does not require sacrificing standards of hygiene, safety, or basic decency, nor does it require turning libraries into de facto homeless shelters or psychiatric wards.

It is a travesty that today, those who disrupt, intimidate, and degrade public spaces are afforded more practical rights than children trying to do homework, immigrants trying to learn English, or students trying to escape chaos at home. When libraries abandon standards, they do not become more inclusive they become unusable. And society is immeasurably poorer for it.

I agree. The city provides shelters and many of the unhoused decline to use them...so they can take over and render unusable any space they want, to the detriment of a much greater number of others? That makes no sense and is also a waste of taxpayer funds. Re the Tenleytown library, I've also stopped using the compost collection station on that corner because of the harassment I've experienced each time I've gone.

You are not better or more important than the smelly homeless person. There is nothing wrong with them sitting there in the warm. The library is just as much for them as it is for you.

True, but not if they're high on drugs or drunk or violent.

None of that happened to op. She was offended by the smell

PP here. A smelly person doesn't offend me at all; I'm just concerned about the safety of children trying to study and read books.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the child of immigrant parents who did not speak English and worked long hours, the public library was my refuge. I spent countless afternoons there reading, studying, doing my homework, and talking to librarians about books and newspapers. It was safe, clean, and welcoming place. That experience no longer exists for many children today, and its loss is a profound social failure.

Public libraries have been radically transformed, not by accident but by deliberate policy choices that elevate the demands of the severely mentally ill, drug-addicted, and chronically homeless over the rights of the working class, poor families, students, and children who rely on libraries the most. This is not a rant about people down on their luck. It is about repeated, unchecked behavior that would be unacceptable anywhere else: aggressive public ranting, overwhelming filth and odor, public nudity, people soiling themselves and then occupying furniture that others will later use, harassment of minors, and the routine conversion of restrooms into makeshift bathing, laundry facilities, and places to inject drugs. These conditions are continually tolerated while staff stand by powerless or unwilling to act.

The result is that law-abiding patrons are effectively displaced from a public institution. No one can concentrate and people do not feel safe. Students are driven away from one of the few remaining free spaces for learning. When libraries become hostile or frightening environments, it is the poorest and most vulnerable law-abiding users who pay the price.

Defenders of this status quo often cloak themselves in the language of compassion. Librarians and outside advocates dismiss legitimate concerns as intolerance. This is not empathy; it is abdication. Compassion does not require sacrificing standards of hygiene, safety, or basic decency, nor does it require turning libraries into de facto homeless shelters or psychiatric wards.

It is a travesty that today, those who disrupt, intimidate, and degrade public spaces are afforded more practical rights than children trying to do homework, immigrants trying to learn English, or students trying to escape chaos at home. When libraries abandon standards, they do not become more inclusive they become unusable. And society is immeasurably poorer for it.

I agree. The city provides shelters and many of the unhoused decline to use them...so they can take over and render unusable any space they want, to the detriment of a much greater number of others? That makes no sense and is also a waste of taxpayer funds. Re the Tenleytown library, I've also stopped using the compost collection station on that corner because of the harassment I've experienced each time I've gone.

You are not better or more important than the smelly homeless person. There is nothing wrong with them sitting there in the warm. The library is just as much for them as it is for you.

DP. The library is open to the public, true. But there are reasonable expectations of good hygiene and socially acceptable behavior at play, too. The PPP beautifully lays all of this out in her post, which you clearly ignore because you have no actual rebuttal and deep down, you know she's correct. Public libraries are for ALL of us, to include women and children - the very same people who are constantly harassed by mentally ill homeless people. But it's clear you couldn't care less about all of those other people who are now unable to use the library as it was intended.

The poster who thinks anyone in an any condition should be able to be in the library apparently does not care about children's safety.

+1
Or women, to include the librarians who are often women. No one's rights matter as much as the mentally ill, homeless person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the child of immigrant parents who did not speak English and worked long hours, the public library was my refuge. I spent countless afternoons there reading, studying, doing my homework, and talking to librarians about books and newspapers. It was safe, clean, and welcoming place. That experience no longer exists for many children today, and its loss is a profound social failure.

Public libraries have been radically transformed, not by accident but by deliberate policy choices that elevate the demands of the severely mentally ill, drug-addicted, and chronically homeless over the rights of the working class, poor families, students, and children who rely on libraries the most. This is not a rant about people down on their luck. It is about repeated, unchecked behavior that would be unacceptable anywhere else: aggressive public ranting, overwhelming filth and odor, public nudity, people soiling themselves and then occupying furniture that others will later use, harassment of minors, and the routine conversion of restrooms into makeshift bathing, laundry facilities, and places to inject drugs. These conditions are continually tolerated while staff stand by powerless or unwilling to act.

The result is that law-abiding patrons are effectively displaced from a public institution. No one can concentrate and people do not feel safe. Students are driven away from one of the few remaining free spaces for learning. When libraries become hostile or frightening environments, it is the poorest and most vulnerable law-abiding users who pay the price.

Defenders of this status quo often cloak themselves in the language of compassion. Librarians and outside advocates dismiss legitimate concerns as intolerance. This is not empathy; it is abdication. Compassion does not require sacrificing standards of hygiene, safety, or basic decency, nor does it require turning libraries into de facto homeless shelters or psychiatric wards.

It is a travesty that today, those who disrupt, intimidate, and degrade public spaces are afforded more practical rights than children trying to do homework, immigrants trying to learn English, or students trying to escape chaos at home. When libraries abandon standards, they do not become more inclusive they become unusable. And society is immeasurably poorer for it.

I agree. The city provides shelters and many of the unhoused decline to use them...so they can take over and render unusable any space they want, to the detriment of a much greater number of others? That makes no sense and is also a waste of taxpayer funds. Re the Tenleytown library, I've also stopped using the compost collection station on that corner because of the harassment I've experienced each time I've gone.

You are not better or more important than the smelly homeless person. There is nothing wrong with them sitting there in the warm. The library is just as much for them as it is for you.

True, but not if they're high on drugs or drunk or violent.

None of that happened to op. She was offended by the smell

DP. Definitely happened to me at our local library. The men who hang out there tweak in the bathrooms and then come out to lounge with the general public, high as a kite. Oh, and they often smell terrible too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the child of immigrant parents who did not speak English and worked long hours, the public library was my refuge. I spent countless afternoons there reading, studying, doing my homework, and talking to librarians about books and newspapers. It was safe, clean, and welcoming place. That experience no longer exists for many children today, and its loss is a profound social failure.

Public libraries have been radically transformed, not by accident but by deliberate policy choices that elevate the demands of the severely mentally ill, drug-addicted, and chronically homeless over the rights of the working class, poor families, students, and children who rely on libraries the most. This is not a rant about people down on their luck. It is about repeated, unchecked behavior that would be unacceptable anywhere else: aggressive public ranting, overwhelming filth and odor, public nudity, people soiling themselves and then occupying furniture that others will later use, harassment of minors, and the routine conversion of restrooms into makeshift bathing, laundry facilities, and places to inject drugs. These conditions are continually tolerated while staff stand by powerless or unwilling to act.

The result is that law-abiding patrons are effectively displaced from a public institution. No one can concentrate and people do not feel safe. Students are driven away from one of the few remaining free spaces for learning. When libraries become hostile or frightening environments, it is the poorest and most vulnerable law-abiding users who pay the price.

Defenders of this status quo often cloak themselves in the language of compassion. Librarians and outside advocates dismiss legitimate concerns as intolerance. This is not empathy; it is abdication. Compassion does not require sacrificing standards of hygiene, safety, or basic decency, nor does it require turning libraries into de facto homeless shelters or psychiatric wards.

It is a travesty that today, those who disrupt, intimidate, and degrade public spaces are afforded more practical rights than children trying to do homework, immigrants trying to learn English, or students trying to escape chaos at home. When libraries abandon standards, they do not become more inclusive they become unusable. And society is immeasurably poorer for it.

I agree. The city provides shelters and many of the unhoused decline to use them...so they can take over and render unusable any space they want, to the detriment of a much greater number of others? That makes no sense and is also a waste of taxpayer funds. Re the Tenleytown library, I've also stopped using the compost collection station on that corner because of the harassment I've experienced each time I've gone.

You are not better or more important than the smelly homeless person. There is nothing wrong with them sitting there in the warm. The library is just as much for them as it is for you.

True, but not if they're high on drugs or drunk or violent.

None of that happened to op. She was offended by the smell

PP here. A smelly person doesn't offend me at all; I'm just concerned about the safety of children trying to study and read books.

DP. I would say sitting in a chair after someone who hasn't bathed in weeks is not hygienic. Also, using a study carrel after someone has just jerked off in it is not hygienic or pleasant either. Our library no longer lets *anyone* use the study carrels because of exactly those reasons. So now we have far fewer places to sit quietly and read, and students have no private areas to study.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the child of immigrant parents who did not speak English and worked long hours, the public library was my refuge. I spent countless afternoons there reading, studying, doing my homework, and talking to librarians about books and newspapers. It was safe, clean, and welcoming place. That experience no longer exists for many children today, and its loss is a profound social failure.

Public libraries have been radically transformed, not by accident but by deliberate policy choices that elevate the demands of the severely mentally ill, drug-addicted, and chronically homeless over the rights of the working class, poor families, students, and children who rely on libraries the most. This is not a rant about people down on their luck. It is about repeated, unchecked behavior that would be unacceptable anywhere else: aggressive public ranting, overwhelming filth and odor, public nudity, people soiling themselves and then occupying furniture that others will later use, harassment of minors, and the routine conversion of restrooms into makeshift bathing, laundry facilities, and places to inject drugs. These conditions are continually tolerated while staff stand by powerless or unwilling to act.

The result is that law-abiding patrons are effectively displaced from a public institution. No one can concentrate and people do not feel safe. Students are driven away from one of the few remaining free spaces for learning. When libraries become hostile or frightening environments, it is the poorest and most vulnerable law-abiding users who pay the price.

Defenders of this status quo often cloak themselves in the language of compassion. Librarians and outside advocates dismiss legitimate concerns as intolerance. This is not empathy; it is abdication. Compassion does not require sacrificing standards of hygiene, safety, or basic decency, nor does it require turning libraries into de facto homeless shelters or psychiatric wards.

It is a travesty that today, those who disrupt, intimidate, and degrade public spaces are afforded more practical rights than children trying to do homework, immigrants trying to learn English, or students trying to escape chaos at home. When libraries abandon standards, they do not become more inclusive they become unusable. And society is immeasurably poorer for it.

I agree. The city provides shelters and many of the unhoused decline to use them...so they can take over and render unusable any space they want, to the detriment of a much greater number of others? That makes no sense and is also a waste of taxpayer funds. Re the Tenleytown library, I've also stopped using the compost collection station on that corner because of the harassment I've experienced each time I've gone.

You are not better or more important than the smelly homeless person. There is nothing wrong with them sitting there in the warm. The library is just as much for them as it is for you.

True, but not if they're high on drugs or drunk or violent.

None of that happened to op. She was offended by the smell

PP here. A smelly person doesn't offend me at all; I'm just concerned about the safety of children trying to study and read books.

DP. I would say sitting in a chair after someone who hasn't bathed in weeks is not hygienic. Also, using a study carrel after someone has just jerked off in it is not hygienic or pleasant either. Our library no longer lets *anyone* use the study carrels because of exactly those reasons. So now we have far fewer places to sit quietly and read, and students have no private areas to study.

PP here. You make some good points about situations I hadn't considered. I agree with what you're saying.

[Anonymous]

Where else should homeless people be allowed to congregate? Can they take over buses? They'd be warm and get to see the city. What about the Hirschhorn? Our indoor pools are pretty warm. Can they gather at Wilson Pool? What about the emergency room at Children's National? What about the Takoma Rec Center? What about the Quad at Georgetown? Are the courthouses fair game?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the child of immigrant parents who did not speak English and worked long hours, the public library was my refuge. I spent countless afternoons there reading, studying, doing my homework, and talking to librarians about books and newspapers. It was safe, clean, and welcoming place. That experience no longer exists for many children today, and its loss is a profound social failure.

Public libraries have been radically transformed, not by accident but by deliberate policy choices that elevate the demands of the severely mentally ill, drug-addicted, and chronically homeless over the rights of the working class, poor families, students, and children who rely on libraries the most. This is not a rant about people down on their luck. It is about repeated, unchecked behavior that would be unacceptable anywhere else: aggressive public ranting, overwhelming filth and odor, public nudity, people soiling themselves and then occupying furniture that others will later use, harassment of minors, and the routine conversion of restrooms into makeshift bathing, laundry facilities, and places to inject drugs. These conditions are continually tolerated while staff stand by powerless or unwilling to act.

The result is that law-abiding patrons are effectively displaced from a public institution. No one can concentrate and people do not feel safe. Students are driven away from one of the few remaining free spaces for learning. When libraries become hostile or frightening environments, it is the poorest and most vulnerable law-abiding users who pay the price.

Defenders of this status quo often cloak themselves in the language of compassion. Librarians and outside advocates dismiss legitimate concerns as intolerance. This is not empathy; it is abdication. Compassion does not require sacrificing standards of hygiene, safety, or basic decency, nor does it require turning libraries into de facto homeless shelters or psychiatric wards.

It is a travesty that today, those who disrupt, intimidate, and degrade public spaces are afforded more practical rights than children trying to do homework, immigrants trying to learn English, or students trying to escape chaos at home. When libraries abandon standards, they do not become more inclusive they become unusable. And society is immeasurably poorer for it.

I agree. The city provides shelters and many of the unhoused decline to use them...so they can take over and render unusable any space they want, to the detriment of a much greater number of others? That makes no sense and is also a waste of taxpayer funds. Re the Tenleytown library, I've also stopped using the compost collection station on that corner because of the harassment I've experienced each time I've gone.

You are not better or more important than the smelly homeless person. There is nothing wrong with them sitting there in the warm. The library is just as much for them as it is for you.

True, but not if they're high on drugs or drunk or violent.

None of that happened to op. She was offended by the smell

PP here. A smelly person doesn't offend me at all; I'm just concerned about the safety of children trying to study and read books.

DP. I would say sitting in a chair after someone who hasn't bathed in weeks is not hygienic. Also, using a study carrel after someone has just jerked off in it is not hygienic or pleasant either. Our library no longer lets *anyone* use the study carrels because of exactly those reasons. So now we have far fewer places to sit quietly and read, and students have no private areas to study.

Why aren't the librarians trained to clean up after these people? We should also train librarians to be mental health counselors. And have them prepare delicious, hot meals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where else should homeless people be allowed to congregate? Can they take over buses? They'd be warm and get to see the city. What about the Hirschhorn? Our indoor pools are pretty warm. Can they gather at Wilson Pool? What about the emergency room at Children's National? What about the Takoma Rec Center? What about the Quad at Georgetown? Are the courthouses fair game?

Why wouldn’t they be able to use any of those facilities. They are allowed, just like you and me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where else should homeless people be allowed to congregate? Can they take over buses? They'd be warm and get to see the city. What about the Hirschhorn? Our indoor pools are pretty warm. Can they gather at Wilson Pool? What about the emergency room at Children's National? What about the Takoma Rec Center? What about the Quad at Georgetown? Are the courthouses fair game?

Why wouldn’t they be able to use any of those facilities. They are allowed, just like you and me.

Georgetown is private property so not up to you.