3 ms·

I don't think speaking of 'treating people as actual humans' is productive. It's a rhetorical device to paint people who disagree with your policy proposals as

I don't think speaking of 'treating people as actual humans' is productive. It's a rhetorical device to paint people who disagree with your policy proposals as evil. It will get people who already agree with you to give you a pat on the back but it won't convince anyone who doesn't already agree. I say that as someone who probably mostly agrees with your position on this issue Maybe you think your policy proposals flow directly from 'treating people as actual humans', but they don't. There are lot of (obviously true, from your perspective) assumptions there that will not be shared by people who disagree with you.

Mithaldu 10y ago
Here's the problem though. They aren't being treated as such. They get the same treatment as pigeons. http://imgur.com/Jp16eNN http://imgur.com/Jp16eNN And yes, i'm not gonna sweet-talk anyone into "seeing the light". But i'm not looking for headpats either. I'm just tired of this shit where people pretend this is an unsolvable problem. Anyhow, you have a good head. Please use it better than i do.
- BHSPitMonkey 10y ago
  Okay, they're getting the same treatment as pigeons. By that logic you could also say they're getting the same treatment as all other humans, since the spikes do not distinguish between homeless and non-homeless people in performing their task. It's also worth differentiating public and private uses of these methods (for instance, city-funded public spaces vs. private areas where sleeping should obviously not be allowed, like in the photo you linked). I can't blame an establishment for treating the symptom rather than solving the larger problem.