Tent at military and western ?

[Anonymous]

Five months later and the tent is still there.

Last weekend I saw someone lying under a blanket near the entry to Whole Foods around the corner from there. They stretched so I am sure it was not a corpse.

Where are the social services? It will be winter soon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Five months later and the tent is still there.

Last weekend I saw someone lying under a blanket near the entry to Whole Foods around the corner from there. They stretched so I am sure it was not a corpse.

Where are the social services? It will be winter soon.

Tell us please what you think social services would do. Like, specifically, what steps would they take?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is a fortified tent?

Does it have gun emplacements? A keep? Moat? Is it defended by Knights? Surrounded by a stockade?

Curious as to what constitutes a “fortification” to a heap of fabric and aluminum poles.

I guess if you want everyone to know you don’t know that term, this is one way to do it.

Yeah, Einstein- that’s what I was implying.

I don’t know WTH a “fortified” tent IS. I goggled it. Google doesn’t know either.

Congrats. You’re smarter than me AND Google.

That Ivy degree was worth it all along I guess.

Maybe spend a weekend off the computer. A 10 year old Boy Scout knows what that means.

There's no such thing as a "fortified tent".

OP made up the term in an attempt to explain/describe what they are seeing/saw.

So, only they know what it is exactly or what the definition is since it's something they completely made up.

I can make assumptions and guesses as to what they may mean and if I had seen it, I would have some additional information to go on but I haven't so here we are - only OP knows exactly what a "fortified tent" is. You think you know, but you'd only be guessing.

OP could post a picture but to be honest, I'm OK if they are the only one who knows what a "fortified tent" is.

DP. You must have a really hard time in the real world communicating with people.

When we use language there are words and descriptors. When we don’t know the precise word that something is called, we try to use descriptors based on words that most people commonly understand so that they can create their own mental image.

In linguistics, this can be sometimes called the sign and signifier.

Still no picture or better definition - I can only conclude you don't know and would be guessing too -- moat and a taunting frenchman? Got it!

Okay, I got you fam. Here is a *non-reinforced* tent that is in question.



Okay and then here we have a fortified version of it, mmkay?



I mean, from the picture it clearly has a moat, a small wall with barbed wire, and even some flames being shot up in the air! This is clearly a FORTIFIED tent.

The OP should be too embarrassed to post in this cesspool again

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Five months later and the tent is still there.

Last weekend I saw someone lying under a blanket near the entry to Whole Foods around the corner from there. They stretched so I am sure it was not a corpse.

Where are the social services? It will be winter soon.

It's a political protest. Surely you support the First Amendment?

[Anonymous]

Compassion is important, but there are limits. Nobody has the right to public property by adverse possession. There are enough vacant office buildings in this town that could be converted to emergency shelters. Allowing endless homeless encampments in residential areas is a public health and safety issue.

[Anonymous]

Just get a few people and dispose of this garbage heap, if D.C. is too inept to do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Compassion is important, but there are limits. Nobody has the right to public property by adverse possession. There are enough vacant office buildings in this town that could be converted to emergency shelters. Allowing endless homeless encampments in residential areas is a public health and safety issue.

DC has lots of shelter beds. But they won’t let patrons do drugs and other activities there. For some reason, the D.C. government has no problem then if druggies and deviants carry on such activities on public space.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Compassion is important, but there are limits. Nobody has the right to public property by adverse possession. There are enough vacant office buildings in this town that could be converted to emergency shelters. Allowing endless homeless encampments in residential areas is a public health and safety issue.

DC has lots of shelter beds. But they won’t let patrons do drugs and other activities there. For some reason, the D.C. government has no problem then if druggies and deviants carry on such activities on public space.

.

The tag wags the dog in DC. It’s completely dystopian. There has been a mentality ill homeless guy in our Ward 3 neighborhood for two months and our councilman doesn’t seem the least but interested in getting him out. He’s contacted a nonprofit to make he’s “comfortable”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Compassion is important, but there are limits. Nobody has the right to public property by adverse possession. There are enough vacant office buildings in this town that could be converted to emergency shelters. Allowing endless homeless encampments in residential areas is a public health and safety issue.

DC has lots of shelter beds. But they won’t let patrons do drugs and other activities there. For some reason, the D.C. government has no problem then if druggies and deviants carry on such activities on public space.

.

The tag wags the dog in DC. It’s completely dystopian. There has been a mentality ill homeless guy in our Ward 3 neighborhood for two months and our councilman doesn’t seem the least but interested in getting him out. He’s contacted a nonprofit to make he’s “comfortable”.

*tail

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Compassion is important, but there are limits. Nobody has the right to public property by adverse possession. There are enough vacant office buildings in this town that could be converted to emergency shelters. Allowing endless homeless encampments in residential areas is a public health and safety issue.

DC has lots of shelter beds. But they won’t let patrons do drugs and other activities there. For some reason, the D.C. government has no problem then if druggies and deviants carry on such activities on public space.

.

The tag wags the dog in DC. It’s completely dystopian. There has been a mentality ill homeless guy in our Ward 3 neighborhood for two months and our councilman doesn’t seem the least but interested in getting him out. He’s contacted a nonprofit to make he’s “comfortable”.

*tail

Frumin is going to be the first Ward 3 CM to leave the ward worse than he found it. He had to be dragged kicking and screaming into voting for the crime legislation. He mistakenly thinks he is earning goodwill with his progressive colleagues but they consistently make him look silly and approve legislation that hursts his constituents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Compassion is important, but there are limits. Nobody has the right to public property by adverse possession. There are enough vacant office buildings in this town that could be converted to emergency shelters. Allowing endless homeless encampments in residential areas is a public health and safety issue.

DC has lots of shelter beds. But they won’t let patrons do drugs and other activities there. For some reason, the D.C. government has no problem then if druggies and deviants carry on such activities on public space.

Look, I know not everyone understands municipal government, or the specific challenges of the unhoused community, but maybe don't comment if you don't understand?

There are fewer than 700 "low barrier" beds available in Washington, DC. Most fill up by 8 pm, and then folks need to be out again by 7 am. On an average night in DC, 99% of beds are full. No, they don't allow drugs, but that's not actually what stops (most) people from using the shelter. It's that you cannot secure your personal items, and you only have secure housing for one night. For most unhoused individuals, a tent is a better option because they don't need to pack up and move every night.

There are programs and systems that work for long-term intervention, but they are expensive and politically unpalatable. But the idea that nice, accessible, shelters are available in DC and folks just aren't using them is a fallacy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Compassion is important, but there are limits. Nobody has the right to public property by adverse possession. There are enough vacant office buildings in this town that could be converted to emergency shelters. Allowing endless homeless encampments in residential areas is a public health and safety issue.

DC has lots of shelter beds. But they won’t let patrons do drugs and other activities there. For some reason, the D.C. government has no problem then if druggies and deviants carry on such activities on public space.

Look, I know not everyone understands municipal government, or the specific challenges of the unhoused community, but maybe don't comment if you don't understand?

There are fewer than 700 "low barrier" beds available in Washington, DC. Most fill up by 8 pm, and then folks need to be out again by 7 am. On an average night in DC, 99% of beds are full. No, they don't allow drugs, but that's not actually what stops (most) people from using the shelter. It's that you cannot secure your personal items, and you only have secure housing for one night. For most unhoused individuals, a tent is a better option because they don't need to pack up and move every night.

There are programs and systems that work for long-term intervention, but they are expensive and politically unpalatable. But the idea that nice, accessible, shelters are available in DC and folks just aren't using them is a fallacy.

What could be more politically unpalatable than allowing an adult mentally ill man camp in a residential neighborhood filled with children? What is wrong with this city!

[Anonymous]

This is life in the open air free range insane asylum that most cities have become.

In past times, society would house and treat mentally ill people in places where they would not only be safe themselves, but not impose their mental illness on the public.

But now, we allow them to live freely among us, self-medicating with alcohol and drugs, and making us all part of their altered reality, whether we want to or not. And we call this “humane”.

This is the America we have created. We caused this. We can’t complain. We all made this possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is life in the open air free range insane asylum that most cities have become.

In past times, society would house and treat mentally ill people in places where they would not only be safe themselves, but not impose their mental illness on the public.

But now, we allow them to live freely among us, self-medicating with alcohol and drugs, and making us all part of their altered reality, whether we want to or not. And we call this “humane”.

This is the America we have created. We caused this. We can’t complain. We all made this possible.

Thank you, Russian Troll Bot. I appreciate your daily dose of anti-American rhetoric!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is life in the open air free range insane asylum that most cities have become.

In past times, society would house and treat mentally ill people in places where they would not only be safe themselves, but not impose their mental illness on the public.

But now, we allow them to live freely among us, self-medicating with alcohol and drugs, and making us all part of their altered reality, whether we want to or not. And we call this “humane”.

This is the America we have created. We caused this. We can’t complain. We all made this possible.

100% correct.