3 ms·

You make it sound like having a weak bladder is a given. 'Don't wake up in the middle of the night needing to go to the toilet' is a perfectly viable option.

sanswork 9y ago
You make it sound like having a strong bladder is a given. You make it sound like having a weak bladder is required. Neither of these is true. You haven't posted a solution to the problem you've just tried to imagine a world where the problem doesn't exist.
- Trundle 9y ago
  No I don't. The solution is don't live in a van if you have a weak bladder.
  - sanswork 9y ago
    Except that isn't a solution because lots of people obviously do live in their van's without the ability to go from when they get to it to when they can get to a washroom next without having to go. So to implement your "solution" we'd need to what. Assess bladder strength in individuals then give them some sort of license to allow them to sleep in their cars?
    - Trundle 9y ago
      No, you'd attach a strong punishment to public urination/defecation and then let people be their own judges on whether or not they can handle van dwelling. If it's a problem then keep increasing the punishment or ability to catch perpetrators.
      - sanswork 9y ago
        If a strong punishment doesn't solve the problem why would increasing it help? >ability to catch perpetrators. How do you do this in a way that is affordable to local councils? See this is another non-solution from you. In a perfect world we wouldn't have a problem but a perfect world is the only place where these solutions are going to solve one too.
        Trundle 9y ago
        Where is a strong punishment not solving the problem? Increasing it creates fear of consequences. Cameras are cheap. Hell, just a slap a bounty on footage.
        sanswork 9y ago
        Because there is already punishments for it and in some places like the US they are already very high(in that they can sometimes get you on sex offender registries). But the problem still exists. Alas just increasing punishment isn't a solution. Especially when the likelihood of catching someone is low. >Cameras are cheap. Paying to have people watch them isn't cheap though and it's not like with a store where you only need to check it when there is an incident you need to watch it all the time. You need people monitoring a lot of cameras all the time.

sanswork 9y ago

You make it sound like having a strong bladder is a given. You make it sound like having a weak bladder is required. Neither of these is true. You haven't posted a solution to the problem you've just tried to imagine a world where the problem doesn't exist.

Trundle 9y ago
No I don't. The solution is don't live in a van if you have a weak bladder.
- sanswork 9y ago
  Except that isn't a solution because lots of people obviously do live in their van's without the ability to go from when they get to it to when they can get to a washroom next without having to go. So to implement your "solution" we'd need to what. Assess bladder strength in individuals then give them some sort of license to allow them to sleep in their cars?
  - Trundle 9y ago
    No, you'd attach a strong punishment to public urination/defecation and then let people be their own judges on whether or not they can handle van dwelling. If it's a problem then keep increasing the punishment or ability to catch perpetrators.
    - sanswork 9y ago
      If a strong punishment doesn't solve the problem why would increasing it help? >ability to catch perpetrators. How do you do this in a way that is affordable to local councils? See this is another non-solution from you. In a perfect world we wouldn't have a problem but a perfect world is the only place where these solutions are going to solve one too.
      - Trundle 9y ago
        Where is a strong punishment not solving the problem? Increasing it creates fear of consequences. Cameras are cheap. Hell, just a slap a bounty on footage.
        sanswork 9y ago
        Because there is already punishments for it and in some places like the US they are already very high(in that they can sometimes get you on sex offender registries). But the problem still exists. Alas just increasing punishment isn't a solution. Especially when the likelihood of catching someone is low. >Cameras are cheap. Paying to have people watch them isn't cheap though and it's not like with a store where you only need to check it when there is an incident you need to watch it all the time. You need people monitoring a lot of cameras all the time.