9 ms·

Anti-homeless spikes:Sleeping rough opened my eyes to the city’s barbed cruelty

42 points by infruset 10y ago

Chris2048 10y ago
I don't see it reasonable that the homeless sleep around shops, public structures etc. Someone bought land and developed it, why should anyone be allowed to use it against their wishes? I don't consider sleeping rough reasonable: "Your council must help if you’re legally homeless" - https://www.gov.uk/emergency-housing-if-homeless https://www.gov.uk/emergency-housing-if-homeless http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/london-boroughs-spent-630m-on-putting-homeless-people-in-emergency-housing-like-hotels-and-bbs-9079089.html http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/london-boroughs-spent-...
- Avshalom 10y ago
  public structures
  - EpicEng 10y ago
    Opening a space to the public does not grant the public rights to do whatever they wish on said property. For example a mall.
    - devoply 10y ago
      These are not malls. They are places owned by the local governments. They are not private places. They are public places. We have a duty to house homeless people. Why? Because we can afford to do so and it's the right and humane thing to do. If we don't and they can't do it themselves. We treat animals better than human beings.
      - EpicEng 10y ago
        Sounds nice until you have twelve homeless people sleeping in the park your kid plays at after school. I can empathize, but let's not pretend there is no appreciable downside here.
        eliaspro 10y ago
        So what's the deal? How does hiding homeless people from your kids help anyone?
        devoply 10y ago
        I am not saying accommodate homeless people in public, I am saying give them housing. Everyone should have at least a small room to sleep in with an attached bathroom, and a small kitchenette.
        barneygale 10y ago
        What are those downsides, sorry? Sleeping homeless people are surely less of a risk to your kids than awake people with a postal address.
      - Chris2048 10y ago
        "Public" does not imply members of the public can use these structures as they wish, a structure not provided for sleeping on, should not be slept on.
      - Chris2048 10y ago
        > We treat animals better than human beings. Animals can be owned, people are responsible for themselves. Tell me how well animals do in the wild.
  - Chris2048 10y ago
    Taxes are also public
- alimw 10y ago
  From this page http://www.crisis.org.uk/pages/homeless-def-numbers.html http://www.crisis.org.uk/pages/homeless-def-numbers.html: "Local authorities do not have to provide housing for all homeless people. Instead, they have a duty to house 'statutory' homeless people and, every year, tens of thousands of people apply to their local authority for homelessness assistance. "To be legally defined as homeless you must either lack a secure place in which you are entitled to live or not reasonably be able to stay in your current accommodation. However, in order for your local authority to have a duty to find you housing, there are further strict criteria that you have to meet. The housing a local authority provides to households who meet these criteria, mainly families with children, may initially be temporary accommodation. "If you don't have dependent children (known as ‘single homelessness') and you are not deemed to be more vulnerable than other homeless people, you probably won't be entitled to housing."
  - Chris2048 10y ago
    Is there more information on why "single homeless" would "probably won't be entitled to housing."? "Your council must help if you’re legally homeless, but how much depends on your eligibility, your level of need and if your homelessness is your fault."
- barneygale 10y ago
  >I don't see it reasonable that the homeless sleep around shops, public structures etc. So where then?
- hprotagonist 10y ago
  >Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?
  - candiodari 10y ago
    I know you're joking but that's exactly the avenue some homeless take. Steal from a liquor store or so and you have free housing and food for 6 months. Maybe even some liquor. I know several cities where prosecutors are essentially refusing to convict homeless people because of this.
    - hprotagonist 10y ago
      Not a joke; it's a quote from one Ebenezer Scrooge.
      - Chris2048 10y ago
        Thanks..
- ablation 10y ago
  > I don't consider sleeping rough reasonable Well, when you put it like that, I'm sure the homeless would understand. Why not go and tell them to their faces? I'm sure they've never considered any alternative options at all.
  - Chris2048 10y ago
    And you'd appreciate that? Why not provide some facts rather than snarky anecdotes?
- DanBC 10y ago
  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/homeless-helpline-appeal-centrepoint-youth-homelessness-christmas-charity-campaign-one-in-three-a7424256.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/homeless-help... > Up to a third of homeless young people turned away when they seek help from their local council, research reveals Young people here means 16-24 year olds.
  - Chris2048 10y ago
    That's the title, yet the first paragraph: "homeless or about to become homeless" So which is it? And why? Unless that detail can be provided, I'm not impressed by this reporting...
    - DanBC 10y ago
      Do you know what "homeless" means? I don't care if you don't, but it's weird that you'd aggressively push a position if you don't understand what you're talking about, which you clearly don't if you don't understand the differences between people who are statutorily homeless and people who are actually homeless.
      - Chris2048 10y ago
        What was "aggressive" about the position that I'm "pushing"? The title of the article did not state "statutorily homeless", nor "facing homelessness", hence I am not impressed by this reporting. I'm supposed to assume this is what is "actually" means, rather than "actual homeless[ness]"?
- zaccus 10y ago
  Here are your options: 1) accept that homeless people will sleep on property you developed or support with your taxes, and get over it 2) move them to someone else's property or some other city so it's someone else's problem 3[a]) put them in jail or 3[b]) expand and improve public shelters, thus costing even more of your tax money 4) kill them, which is obviously not really an option Am I missing something? Do you have any other ideas?
  - Chris2048 10y ago
    > thus costing even more of your tax money Better the commons than individual landlords
Teever 10y ago
Those spikes look like a tripping hazard and also something that would be very painful and potentially lethal if you tripped and landed on these. I wonder about the liability concerning such events.
xkcd-sucks 10y ago
Nothing a few layers of cardboard won't fix
wundersoy 10y ago
If you're homeless you fucked up, that doesn't happen over night.

42 points by infruset 10y ago

Chris2048 10y ago

I don't see it reasonable that the homeless sleep around shops, public structures etc. Someone bought land and developed it, why should anyone be allowed to use it against their wishes? I don't consider sleeping rough reasonable: "Your council must help if you’re legally homeless" - https://www.gov.uk/emergency-housing-if-homeless https://www.gov.uk/emergency-housing-if-homeless http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/london-boroughs-spent-630m-on-putting-homeless-people-in-emergency-housing-like-hotels-and-bbs-9079089.html http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/london-boroughs-spent-...

Avshalom 10y ago
public structures
- EpicEng 10y ago
  Opening a space to the public does not grant the public rights to do whatever they wish on said property. For example a mall.
  - devoply 10y ago
    These are not malls. They are places owned by the local governments. They are not private places. They are public places. We have a duty to house homeless people. Why? Because we can afford to do so and it's the right and humane thing to do. If we don't and they can't do it themselves. We treat animals better than human beings.
    - EpicEng 10y ago
      Sounds nice until you have twelve homeless people sleeping in the park your kid plays at after school. I can empathize, but let's not pretend there is no appreciable downside here.
      - eliaspro 10y ago
        So what's the deal? How does hiding homeless people from your kids help anyone?
      - devoply 10y ago
        I am not saying accommodate homeless people in public, I am saying give them housing. Everyone should have at least a small room to sleep in with an attached bathroom, and a small kitchenette.
      - barneygale 10y ago
        What are those downsides, sorry? Sleeping homeless people are surely less of a risk to your kids than awake people with a postal address.
    - Chris2048 10y ago
      "Public" does not imply members of the public can use these structures as they wish, a structure not provided for sleeping on, should not be slept on.
    - Chris2048 10y ago
      > We treat animals better than human beings. Animals can be owned, people are responsible for themselves. Tell me how well animals do in the wild.
- Chris2048 10y ago
  Taxes are also public
alimw 10y ago
From this page http://www.crisis.org.uk/pages/homeless-def-numbers.html http://www.crisis.org.uk/pages/homeless-def-numbers.html: "Local authorities do not have to provide housing for all homeless people. Instead, they have a duty to house 'statutory' homeless people and, every year, tens of thousands of people apply to their local authority for homelessness assistance. "To be legally defined as homeless you must either lack a secure place in which you are entitled to live or not reasonably be able to stay in your current accommodation. However, in order for your local authority to have a duty to find you housing, there are further strict criteria that you have to meet. The housing a local authority provides to households who meet these criteria, mainly families with children, may initially be temporary accommodation. "If you don't have dependent children (known as ‘single homelessness') and you are not deemed to be more vulnerable than other homeless people, you probably won't be entitled to housing."
- Chris2048 10y ago
  Is there more information on why "single homeless" would "probably won't be entitled to housing."? "Your council must help if you’re legally homeless, but how much depends on your eligibility, your level of need and if your homelessness is your fault."
barneygale 10y ago
>I don't see it reasonable that the homeless sleep around shops, public structures etc. So where then?
hprotagonist 10y ago
>Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?
- candiodari 10y ago
  I know you're joking but that's exactly the avenue some homeless take. Steal from a liquor store or so and you have free housing and food for 6 months. Maybe even some liquor. I know several cities where prosecutors are essentially refusing to convict homeless people because of this.
  - hprotagonist 10y ago
    Not a joke; it's a quote from one Ebenezer Scrooge.
    - Chris2048 10y ago
      Thanks..
ablation 10y ago
> I don't consider sleeping rough reasonable Well, when you put it like that, I'm sure the homeless would understand. Why not go and tell them to their faces? I'm sure they've never considered any alternative options at all.
- Chris2048 10y ago
  And you'd appreciate that? Why not provide some facts rather than snarky anecdotes?
DanBC 10y ago
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/homeless-helpline-appeal-centrepoint-youth-homelessness-christmas-charity-campaign-one-in-three-a7424256.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/homeless-help... > Up to a third of homeless young people turned away when they seek help from their local council, research reveals Young people here means 16-24 year olds.
- Chris2048 10y ago
  That's the title, yet the first paragraph: "homeless or about to become homeless" So which is it? And why? Unless that detail can be provided, I'm not impressed by this reporting...
  - DanBC 10y ago
    Do you know what "homeless" means? I don't care if you don't, but it's weird that you'd aggressively push a position if you don't understand what you're talking about, which you clearly don't if you don't understand the differences between people who are statutorily homeless and people who are actually homeless.
    - Chris2048 10y ago
      What was "aggressive" about the position that I'm "pushing"? The title of the article did not state "statutorily homeless", nor "facing homelessness", hence I am not impressed by this reporting. I'm supposed to assume this is what is "actually" means, rather than "actual homeless[ness]"?
zaccus 10y ago
Here are your options: 1) accept that homeless people will sleep on property you developed or support with your taxes, and get over it 2) move them to someone else's property or some other city so it's someone else's problem 3[a]) put them in jail or 3[b]) expand and improve public shelters, thus costing even more of your tax money 4) kill them, which is obviously not really an option Am I missing something? Do you have any other ideas?
- Chris2048 10y ago
  > thus costing even more of your tax money Better the commons than individual landlords

Teever 10y ago

Those spikes look like a tripping hazard and also something that would be very painful and potentially lethal if you tripped and landed on these. I wonder about the liability concerning such events.

xkcd-sucks 10y ago

Nothing a few layers of cardboard won't fix

wundersoy 10y ago

If you're homeless you fucked up, that doesn't happen over night.