Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're *public* libraries. They serve *the public*.

I knew someone would pipe in with that.

Well it's true. NP here. How could you justify keeping the homeless out?

Haven't you been reading? The justification is based on the proposed Aesthetically and Aromatically Appealing Compliance Code (pronounced AAACK!!)



It's a new law that previous posters are trying to implement that would ban anybody who doesn't look or smell appealing from all public places.
Totally Constitutional (sarcasm).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It seems to me that policies that address mental illness, addiction, and homelessness would be a more effective and cost-effective use of public money than incarcerating people who are mentally ill, addicted, or homeless. And better for libraries, too.

I would be all for the "nice" approach to addressing the problem if there was evidence that it worked. As evidence to the contrary, I offer you San Francisco and Seattle.

Oh? What policies addressing mental illness, addiction, and homelessness have San Francisco and Seattle implemented?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're *public* libraries. They serve *the public*.

I knew someone would pipe in with that.

Well it's true. NP here. How could you justify keeping the homeless out?

Anonymous wrote:

It seems to me that policies that address mental illness, addiction, and homelessness would be a more effective and cost-effective use of public money than incarcerating people who are mentally ill, addicted, or homeless. And better for libraries, too.

I would be all for the "nice" approach to addressing the problem if there was evidence that it worked. As evidence to the contrary, I offer you San Francisco and Seattle.

‘If I can do it, so can you’: At D.C. libraries, the formerly homeless help those currently struggling
August 29, 2019

https://www.washingtonpost.com/express/2019/08/29/if-i-can-do-it-so-can-you-dc-libraries-formerly-homeless-help-those-currently-struggling/

Excerpt:
In 2014, the D.C. Public Library system hired Jean Badalamenti as assistant manager of health and human services to help the city’s 25 libraries better serve as a resource for the city’s roughly 6,500 homeless residents.
Early last year, she pulled three “peer specialists,” including Renee Hines, from D.C.’s Department of Behavioral Health. The agency since 2004 has assembled a network of people certified to apply their experience with homelessness, substance abuse and other challenges to help people in similar circumstances.
Roughly a year and a half later, Badalamenti estimates the library system’s peer outreach specialists have helped between 10 and 15 homeless residents secure transitional or permanent housing, and 30 more clients have gone to stay in shelters.

Anonymous wrote:

Using 2018 statistics from the US Interagency Council on Homelessness, DC has a 38x higher rate of chronic homelessness than Indiana. California has almost a 13x higher rate of chronic homelessness than Indiana. I don't know where the ICPH is getting its info. Not seeing much evidence here of "reduced homelessness in many urban areas", thus our discussion of their impact on libraries. I have an idea. Have DC, Maryland and Virginia adopt and enforce Indiana's public intoxication laws for two years. Let's see if the libraries become useful again.

It seems to me that policies that address mental illness, addiction, and homelessness would be a more effective and cost-effective use of public money than incarcerating people who are mentally ill, addicted, or homeless. And better for libraries, too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not follow the example of states that have been successful in combating homelessness? Indiana has the second lowest rate of chronic homelessness in the country, after Ohio. DC's rate was 38 times higher in 2018. That is 1 in 394 people compared to Indiana at 1 in 14,900. Indiana has a law against public intoxication that allows for jail time of up to 180 days. You could argue that this is too harsh. I would argue that it sends the message to people that there is a steep price to pay for throwing your life away to drugs, and the state will not sit idly by and watch you do it.

Me thinks it’s no coincidence that Indiana has that “steep price” and is one of the states with the highest percentage of for-profit-prisons in the country.

It seems to be working, whatever they are doing. Here in DC, instead of punishing public intoxication, we provide them the needles to make it happen.

No, it’s not working. A new study from the Institute for Children, Poverty, and Homelessness (ICPH) suggests that while the state and federal governments have reduced homelessness in many urban areas, the crisis of the hidden homeless in rural America is getting worse. You know what Indiana has that DC doesn’t? A lot of rural homeless people and they’re increasing and unsurprisingly neither you nor anyone else bothers to mention their increasing numbers in Indiana because they are unseen.

Using 2018 statistics from the US Interagency Council on Homelessness, DC has a 38x higher rate of chronic homelessness than Indiana. California has almost a 13x higher rate of chronic homelessness than Indiana. I don't know where the ICPH is getting its info. Not seeing much evidence here of "reduced homelessness in many urban areas", thus our discussion of their impact on libraries. I have an idea. Have DC, Maryland and Virginia adopt and enforce Indiana's public intoxication laws for two years. Let's see if the libraries become useful again.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since when have the homeless saints been revered on a par with religious hermits?

Thank you! Wtf! I’ve noticed this trend too. Why the heck are we putting their rights above children, seniors, etc. They make libraries stinky and unsafe ruining it for everyone.

In our bizarro-inverted world, the old hierarchy has been turned on its head: Behaviors, traits, qualities once esteemed are now condemned, and those once condemned are now esteemed. So, what once were bums and druggies are now "our most vulnerable citizens"...

You can thank Marxist radical egalitarianism...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not follow the example of states that have been successful in combating homelessness? Indiana has the second lowest rate of chronic homelessness in the country, after Ohio. DC's rate was 38 times higher in 2018. That is 1 in 394 people compared to Indiana at 1 in 14,900. Indiana has a law against public intoxication that allows for jail time of up to 180 days. You could argue that this is too harsh. I would argue that it sends the message to people that there is a steep price to pay for throwing your life away to drugs, and the state will not sit idly by and watch you do it.

Me thinks it’s no coincidence that Indiana has that “steep price” and is one of the states with the highest percentage of for-profit-prisons in the country.

It seems to be working, whatever they are doing. Here in DC, instead of punishing public intoxication, we provide them the needles to make it happen.

Do you not know about the rural hiv epidemic in Indiana?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why? Please explain the justification for a ban on sleeping (or the appearance of sleeping!) in public libraries.

To ensure appropriate use of the library, which is reading and using information sources. Not sleeping or other activities of daily living, like bathing, eating, or doing drugs.

So if I'm sitting there, reading a book while waiting for my kid to finish her dance class next door, and I droop off for a quick nap, then the librarians should throw me out? Because that's an inappropriate use of the library?

How about if I'm sitting there playing Candy Crush on my phone while waiting for my kid to finish her dance class next door. Is that an inappropriate use of the library, since I'm neither reading nor using information sources?

By your account, you would be using the library appropriately. Perhaps a librarian would rouse you and offer a more exciting book?

PP you're responding to. I consider myself talented at reading, but even I am unable to read a book while I am asleep.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not follow the example of states that have been successful in combating homelessness? Indiana has the second lowest rate of chronic homelessness in the country, after Ohio. DC's rate was 38 times higher in 2018. That is 1 in 394 people compared to Indiana at 1 in 14,900. Indiana has a law against public intoxication that allows for jail time of up to 180 days. You could argue that this is too harsh. I would argue that it sends the message to people that there is a steep price to pay for throwing your life away to drugs, and the state will not sit idly by and watch you do it.

Me thinks it’s no coincidence that Indiana has that “steep price” and is one of the states with the highest percentage of for-profit-prisons in the country.

It seems to be working, whatever they are doing. Here in DC, instead of punishing public intoxication, we provide them the needles to make it happen.

No, it’s not working. A new study from the Institute for Children, Poverty, and Homelessness (ICPH) suggests that while the state and federal governments have reduced homelessness in many urban areas, the crisis of the hidden homeless in rural America is getting worse. You know what Indiana has that DC doesn’t? A lot of rural homeless people and they’re increasing and unsurprisingly neither you nor anyone else bothers to mention their increasing numbers in Indiana because they are unseen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not follow the example of states that have been successful in combating homelessness? Indiana has the second lowest rate of chronic homelessness in the country, after Ohio. DC's rate was 38 times higher in 2018. That is 1 in 394 people compared to Indiana at 1 in 14,900. Indiana has a law against public intoxication that allows for jail time of up to 180 days. You could argue that this is too harsh. I would argue that it sends the message to people that there is a steep price to pay for throwing your life away to drugs, and the state will not sit idly by and watch you do it.

Me thinks it’s no coincidence that Indiana has that “steep price” and is one of the states with the highest percentage of for-profit-prisons in the country.

It seems to be working, whatever they are doing. Here in DC, instead of punishing public intoxication, we provide them the needles to make it happen.

What pisses me off is that laws aren't applied consistently. If a normal looking middle class person was ranting and raving in the streets, or is in a library smelling of vomit and piss or even sleeping on park benches, they'd be arrested. Homeless get away with a lot more than average people do.

I have a family member who works at a library in another part of the country. They have had major, on-going problems with homeless patrons disposing of improperly. Providing sharps disposal has done little to help. To me, that is a legitimate concern although it’s hard to see how to address it without unfairly excluding or stigmatizing people who aren’t leaving their needles around.

Anonymous wrote:So if you’ve got a Louis Vuitton purse and designer jeans you’re free to loiter in the library all day. But if you’re carrying a plastic bag and wearing dirty jeans you got 5 minutes to pick up a book or you get kicked out.

Yay social equality!!

Btw, if the lady in designer jeans and LV purse washed herself in the bathroom, smelled like booze and urine, and asked for money, I would object.