Bowser’s Shelters

[Anonymous]

Mayor Bowser has closed DC General shelter (the site is being redeveloped for condos and mixed-use) and is building replacement shelters in each ward. While there may be some benefits to the plan (besides the benefits, of course, to the crony developers who get the rights to the DC General site), there will me other, spillover impacts on areas like Cathedral Heights and McLean Gatdens. From WaPo:

“Maurice ____ stepped out of a minivan at the D.C. General shelter for homeless families, opened the trunk and announced his wares — free syringes, condoms and Narcan, a brand of naloxone nasal inhaler — in a hoarse shout. Among the dozens who lined up was Renee ____, a resident of Southeast Washington.? ____ said she no longer uses heroin but has friends who do.”

[Anonymous]

Google "harm reduction," OP. It's actually a good thing.

#TheMoreYouKnow

Separate, but related: I have a question for all you people who claim you love DC and constantly throw rocks at the suburbs. How can you claim to love the city/be a city person and then be shocked and appalled by the fact that DC has issues with people living in poverty, people battling addiction, etc.? If you want a white bread lifestyle, then move to a gated community outside of Cleveland. Note: you'll still have addicts living among you, but they will be upperclass and do it behind closed doors with their own supplies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mayor Bowser has closed DC General shelter (the site is being redeveloped for condos and mixed-use) and is building replacement shelters in each ward. While there may be some benefits to the plan (besides the benefits, of course, to the crony developers who get the rights to the DC General site), there will me other, spillover impacts on areas like Cathedral Heights and McLean Gatdens. From WaPo:

“Maurice ____ stepped out of a minivan at the D.C. General shelter for homeless families, opened the trunk and announced his wares — free syringes, condoms and Narcan, a brand of naloxone nasal inhaler — in a hoarse shout. Among the dozens who lined up was Renee ____, a resident of Southeast Washington.? ____ said she no longer uses heroin but has friends who do.”

I think Maurice and Renee are doing the Lord’s work.

[Anonymous]

Bowser is all for equity and inclusion, so she’s sending Ward 3 (or more precisely, one neighborhood in Ward 3) a “fair share” of street addicts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mayor Bowser has closed DC General shelter (the site is being redeveloped for condos and mixed-use) and is building replacement shelters in each ward. While there may be some benefits to the plan (besides the benefits, of course, to the crony developers who get the rights to the DC General site), there will me other, spillover impacts on areas like Cathedral Heights and McLean Gatdens. From WaPo:

“Maurice ____ stepped out of a minivan at the D.C. General shelter for homeless families, opened the trunk and announced his wares — free syringes, condoms and Narcan, a brand of naloxone nasal inhaler — in a hoarse shout. Among the dozens who lined up was Renee ____, a resident of Southeast Washington.? ____ said she no longer uses heroin but has friends who do.”

I fully support bringing homeless persons and drug users to shelters in the better neighborhoods of the city.

It allows the residents of those neighborhoods get a better understanding of how their actions with regard to opposing taxes, gentrification, white privilege and institutional racism all work together to devastate the poor of this city.

Sometimes people need to have their noses rubbed in the messes they make, lest they be unaware of it. Keeping most of the homeless at DC general or 2nd and D concentrates them in areas where the people responsible for them being homeless never have to see the results of their handiwork. Far better those shelters be moved to Cleveland Park, Glover Park, Palisades, Foxhall, AU park and Chevy Chase.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mayor Bowser has closed DC General shelter (the site is being redeveloped for condos and mixed-use) and is building replacement shelters in each ward. While there may be some benefits to the plan (besides the benefits, of course, to the crony developers who get the rights to the DC General site), there will me other, spillover impacts on areas like Cathedral Heights and McLean Gatdens. From WaPo:

“Maurice ____ stepped out of a minivan at the D.C. General shelter for homeless families, opened the trunk and announced his wares — free syringes, condoms and Narcan, a brand of naloxone nasal inhaler — in a hoarse shout. Among the dozens who lined up was Renee ____, a resident of Southeast Washington.? ____ said she no longer uses heroin but has friends who do.”

I fully support bringing homeless persons and drug users to shelters in the better neighborhoods of the city.

It allows the residents of those neighborhoods get a better understanding of how their actions with regard to opposing taxes, gentrification, white privilege and institutional racism all work together to devastate the poor of this city.

Sometimes people need to have their noses rubbed in the messes they make, lest they be unaware of it. Keeping most of the homeless at DC general or 2nd and D concentrates them in areas where the people responsible for them being homeless never have to see the results of their handiwork. Far better those shelters be moved to Cleveland Park, Glover Park, Palisades, Foxhall, AU park and Chevy Chase.

At least they’re putting the shelter next to the police station so that the cops can ride herd. Hopefully the police will vigorously enforce the loitering and panhandling laws.

[Anonymous]

Using police to intimidate poor people is disgusting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bowser is all for equity and inclusion, so she’s sending Ward 3 (or more precisely, one neighborhood in Ward 3) a “fair share” of street addicts.

Family shelter =/= 'street addicts'

Get over yourselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bowser is all for equity and inclusion, so she’s sending Ward 3 (or more precisely, one neighborhood in Ward 3) a “fair share” of street addicts.

Family shelter =/= 'street addicts'

Get over yourselves.

I’ve encountered a fair number of people being housed in family shelters that had serious substance abuse problems. I interviewed Relisha Rudd’s mother, father, maternal grandmother and several “aunts”. Literally every one of them - every one- had an active substance abuse issue. They were being housed at the dc general facility. If you’ve ever been to it back when it was open, you’d know it fairly reeked of marijuana. So yes, in many cases, family shelter does equal street addicts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bowser is all for equity and inclusion, so she’s sending Ward 3 (or more precisely, one neighborhood in Ward 3) a “fair share” of street addicts.

Family shelter =/= 'street addicts'

Get over yourselves.

I’ve encountered a fair number of people being housed in family shelters that had serious substance abuse problems. I interviewed Relisha Rudd’s mother, father, maternal grandmother and several “aunts”. Literally every one of them - every one- had an active substance abuse issue. They were being housed at the dc general facility. If you’ve ever been to it back when it was open, you’d know it fairly reeked of marijuana. So yes, in many cases, family shelter does equal street addicts.

If I were a business owner st Cathedral Commons, I would be a bit nervous about the Cathedral Commons shelter opening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Using police to intimidate poor people is disgusting

Law enforcement is only “intimidation” to those who would break the law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Using police to intimidate poor people is disgusting

Law enforcement is only “intimidation” to those who would break the law.

+1.

To the rest of us it's prevention and public safety -- exactly why we have a government to begin with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Using police to intimidate poor people is disgusting

Law enforcement is only “intimidation” to those who would break the law.

I’m sorry, I couldn’t hear you over the deafening sound of your white privilege.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Using police to intimidate poor people is disgusting

Law enforcement is only “intimidation” to those who would break the law.

I’m sorry, I couldn’t hear you over the deafening sound of your white privilege.

I don’t understand that metaphor at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Using police to intimidate poor people is disgusting

Law enforcement is only “intimidation” to those who would break the law.

It’s also intimidation to people who get stereotyped by the police as looking like someone who committed a crime, even if they did nothing wrong.

The “white privilege” comment was pointing out that your view is pretty one-sided and doesn’t reflect the experiences of many of the people you’re talking about.