Homeless tents creeping into the nice/residential part of DC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is legal not to be treated for mental health issues.

Maybe so but I believe there are also no legal requirements to be accomodating to those who refuse treatment for mental health issues.

Make camping illegal. Offer housing and shelter but conditioned on treatment for any mental health or substance abuse issues. If they aren't interested, send them south to someplace warm.

I think they should do the opposite. Designate an area where it's okay to live in tents. Bonus points if they build a simple bathhouse with running water and toilets. Put in some trash cans. Problem solved.

These people need a place to pitch their tents. They can't hack it in normal housed society. Give them someplace safe to live and then leave them alone for God's sake.

They are mentally ill and drug addicts. They want to be close to where their addiction is fulfilled and where they can beg for money.

[Anonymous]

A layman’s definition of homelessness is usually “a person that has no permanent home”. However, many scholars have divided the broad group of people characterized as homeless into three (or more) categories:

-
People without a place to reside;
-
People in persistent poverty, forced to move constantly, and who are homeless for even brief periods of time;
-
People who have lost their housing due to personal, social, or environmental circumstances.
While this definition refers specifically to homeless individuals, it is equally applicable to homeless families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is legal not to be treated for mental health issues.

Maybe so but I believe there are also no legal requirements to be accomodating to those who refuse treatment for mental health issues.

Make camping illegal. Offer housing and shelter but conditioned on treatment for any mental health or substance abuse issues. If they aren't interested, send them south to someplace warm.

I think they should do the opposite. Designate an area where it's okay to live in tents. Bonus points if they build a simple bathhouse with running water and toilets. Put in some trash cans. Problem solved.

These people need a place to pitch their tents. They can't hack it in normal housed society. Give them someplace safe to live and then leave them alone for God's sake.

They are mentally ill and drug addicts. They want to be close to where their addiction is fulfilled and where they can beg for money.

DC has zero obligation to provide for any of that.

[Anonymous]

Seriously, DC has no obligation whatsoever to feed drug habits or to put up with mentally ill people who refuse treatment.

I do think DC should provide supervised housing contingent on drug rehab and/or mental health treatment, with case workers who can transition them into independent living if they are capable of doing so. I would also put a condition on it that they either need to have been from DC originally or have resided in the District for some number of years. No free housing for randos being dumped here by other states. Send them back home.

But for those who refuse to give up the drugs or who refuse treatment and are a potential danger to themselves or others, who harass people on the street, I think the PP is on to something, regarding designating areas where they can camp, far enough away such that they aren't causing havoc on residents and businesses. Don't like it? Give them a one-way bus ticket to someplace warm where they can camp year-round.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read sanfransicko - how progressive policies ruin cities.

"San Fransicko reveals that the underlying problem isn’t a lack of housing or money for social programs. The real problem is an ideology that designates some people, by identity or experience, as victims entitled to destructive behaviors. The result is an undermining of the values that make cities, and civilization itself, possible."

Ding ding ding!

+1000

I’m a Dem, but we need to turn this ship around. The woke BLM crowd has made it impossible to enforce any laws at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Seriously, DC has no obligation whatsoever to feed drug habits or to put up with mentally ill people who refuse treatment.

I do think DC should provide supervised housing contingent on drug rehab and/or mental health treatment, with case workers who can transition them into independent living if they are capable of doing so. I would also put a condition on it that they either need to have been from DC originally or have resided in the District for some number of years. No free housing for randos being dumped here by other states. Send them back home.

But for those who refuse to give up the drugs or who refuse treatment and are a potential danger to themselves or others, who harass people on the street, I think the PP is on to something, regarding designating areas where they can camp, far enough away such that they aren't causing havoc on residents and businesses. Don't like it? Give them a one-way bus ticket to someplace warm where they can camp year-round.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read sanfransicko - how progressive policies ruin cities.

"San Fransicko reveals that the underlying problem isn’t a lack of housing or money for social programs. The real problem is an ideology that designates some people, by identity or experience, as victims entitled to destructive behaviors. The result is an undermining of the values that make cities, and civilization itself, possible."

Ding ding ding!

+1000

I’m a Dem, but we need to turn this ship around. The woke BLM crowd has made it impossible to enforce any laws at all.

This quote also speaks to the soft bigotry of low expectations and how some people think other groups of (usually non-white) people are not fully formed people capable of acting like socially integrated, responsible adults and should be looked down upon and treated like small children instead. It’s really a sick form of racism and white supremacy when you think about it, cloaked in a BS facade of “tolerance for diversity.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Leave the homeless alone. You all sound like the ghost of Marley but you haven't learned any lessons yet. Horrible people.

Give them someplace they can pitch their tents in peace.

How many tents are pitched on your block? Zero. Lol.

And I don't want any on my block, either. I'm the poster who thinks they should have a designated campground somewhere.

Sure. Like where?

I’m sure that the members of the unhoused advocacy groups will welcome them on their property.

You keep posting this crap like you're a sarcastic adolescent. Do you not see how mean and bitter and impotent you sound?

I’m serious, not sarcastic. Why don’t these folks organize to offer private space for the homeless? This way they would be helping them directly.

Where did you go? I would be interested in hearing about why you have or haven’t offered to host the homeless on your property.

[Anonymous]

Modest proposal. Take a cruise liner - provide unlimited drugs, food. Sail to warm island somewhere. Continue to provide unlimited drugs and food. Have on-site detox and mental health services. Allow return journey back only if drug-free 365 days and clear positive contribution to running of the island society. Cost would be perhaps 5-10k/person/year (cheaper than prison). Economic and societal benefits (including lower crime) to mainland higher. Paired with strict enforcement of vagrancy laws on mainland could change incentives by push and pull factors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read sanfransicko - how progressive policies ruin cities.

"San Fransicko reveals that the underlying problem isn’t a lack of housing or money for social programs. The real problem is an ideology that designates some people, by identity or experience, as victims entitled to destructive behaviors. The result is an undermining of the values that make cities, and civilization itself, possible."

Ding ding ding!

+1000

I’m a Dem, but we need to turn this ship around. The woke BLM crowd has made it impossible to enforce any laws at all.

This is such BS. No one starts living in a tent, in an urban area, because of someone else's ideology. It's mental illness and drug addiction. What really undermines civilization is people who don't care about civilization. We need to take care of the weakest among us. "Civilization" isn't survival of the fittest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read sanfransicko - how progressive policies ruin cities.

"San Fransicko reveals that the underlying problem isn’t a lack of housing or money for social programs. The real problem is an ideology that designates some people, by identity or experience, as victims entitled to destructive behaviors. The result is an undermining of the values that make cities, and civilization itself, possible."

Ding ding ding!

+1000

I’m a Dem, but we need to turn this ship around. The woke BLM crowd has made it impossible to enforce any laws at all.

This quote also speaks to the soft bigotry of low expectations and how some people think other groups of (usually non-white) people are not fully formed people capable of acting like socially integrated, responsible adults and should be looked down upon and treated like small children instead. It’s really a sick form of racism and white supremacy when you think about it, cloaked in a BS facade of “tolerance for diversity.”

Idiotic take.

[Anonymous]

I heard all of DC's shelters are full because of the busloads of illegals that Greg Abbott has been sending to DC.

DC also has zero obligation to take in migrants shipped here from Texas.

When is DC's AG going to take legal action against Texas?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Modest proposal. Take a cruise liner - provide unlimited drugs, food. Sail to warm island somewhere. Continue to provide unlimited drugs and food. Have on-site detox and mental health services. Allow return journey back only if drug-free 365 days and clear positive contribution to running of the island society. Cost would be perhaps 5-10k/person/year (cheaper than prison). Economic and societal benefits (including lower crime) to mainland higher. Paired with strict enforcement of vagrancy laws on mainland could change incentives by push and pull factors.

Maybe Australia is available.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Modest proposal. Take a cruise liner - provide unlimited drugs, food. Sail to warm island somewhere. Continue to provide unlimited drugs and food. Have on-site detox and mental health services. Allow return journey back only if drug-free 365 days and clear positive contribution to running of the island society. Cost would be perhaps 5-10k/person/year (cheaper than prison). Economic and societal benefits (including lower crime) to mainland higher. Paired with strict enforcement of vagrancy laws on mainland could change incentives by push and pull factors.

Maybe Australia is available.

I tip my hat to you. Unfortunately that one in now taken, and is actually an upgrade from us in many ways. What about Horn Island in Mississippi? Or some uninhabited island off coast of Taxas? We are probably only talking about 100-200,000 people from across entire US at steady state so around 5 square miles would be plenty of room.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There needs to be a real solution.

Re-open good mental institutions long term for people that need them.

I have a mentally ill family member who has been institutionalized many times. We had to fight like hell to get her into the hospital. It shouldn't be that way.

Our mental health care system needs an overhaul.

The on ramp for long term mental health care should be MUCH easier to access. The problems we see with homelessness are largely a result of poor services for mentally ill people.

Since opening mental health institutions and forcing the homeless into them would be seen as racist and bogged down in litigation from the DC homeless advocacy machine, the only option is to bulldoze these camps or just allow the encampments to grow

Forcing the homeless into them is not what anyone is proposing. Just offering good care in a humane setting will be enough to draw them in. Appropriate care in a humane setting that is accessible doesn't currently exist.