Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously this is what the council cares about more than crime

“Discriminatory practices can include restrictions from public or private areas, such as asking people experiencing homelessness to leave restaurants or businesses.”

So basically Starbucks can’t boot out a homeless person who is causing problems? We have massive increases in violent crime, but we’re focused on basically letting homeless people get bigger vouchers and letting them loiter without issue and we are spending tons of money of nonsense sensitivity training? Why does this city hate tax payers and businesses?

https://dcist.com/story/22/07/05/homeless-anti-discrimination-dc-human-rights/

They do this because they won't invest in the infrastructure necessary to keep people properly housed. They push it on businesses that they help kill.

At what point does protecting the homeless turn in to policies that preserve and protect homelessness? Also, in the history of time, has there ever been a time where all people are “properly housed”? That’s a pretty amorphous goal. Also, legally, we don’t institutionalize people anymore against their will. Many homeless people have mental health or drug addiction, so should we just give them a condo? Or how do you propose fixing things? We’ve thrown millions at the problem over the years, put the homeless up in motel rooms and all kinds of things…I guess we can just follow the model of whatever San Francisco seems to be doing and expect the same great results. Either way, we have tons of tent encompamnebts at union station and over where I lived on 11th street se…now they’re a protected class.

I hate the Antiabortion people, but democrats are going to lose if they keep pushing Uber progressive woke liberal bs like this.

Troll Mad Libs:

[Branch of government] is working on [thing I don't like] instead of [thing I do like], which shows their priorities are all messed up because they can only do one thing at a time.

Anonymous wrote:Seriously this is what the council cares about more than crime

“Discriminatory practices can include restrictions from public or private areas, such as asking people experiencing homelessness to leave restaurants or businesses.”

So basically Starbucks can’t boot out a homeless person who is causing problems? We have massive increases in violent crime, but we’re focused on basically letting homeless people get bigger vouchers and letting them loiter without issue and we are spending tons of money of nonsense sensitivity training? Why does this city hate tax payers and businesses?

https://dcist.com/story/22/07/05/homeless-anti-discrimination-dc-human-rights/

They do this because they won't invest in the infrastructure necessary to keep people properly housed. They push it on businesses that they help kill.

Ok, I will bite. This doesn't mean a homeless person can set up camp in Starbucks. It also doesn't mean that Starbucks (or a better coffee shop) can't kick someone out.

The fear you expressed is akin to the wildly incorrect idea that the government cannot fire someone.

Seriously this is what the council cares about more than crime

“Discriminatory practices can include restrictions from public or private areas, such as asking people experiencing homelessness to leave restaurants or businesses.”

So basically Starbucks can’t boot out a homeless person who is causing problems? We have massive increases in violent crime, but we’re focused on basically letting homeless people get bigger vouchers and letting them loiter without issue and we are spending tons of money of nonsense sensitivity training? Why does this city hate tax payers and businesses?

https://dcist.com/story/22/07/05/homeless-anti-discrimination-dc-human-rights/