5 ms·

I know you think this seems very logical, sane - but you have a tell "outside city limits" - you want these people rounded up and bused out. it's not a solution

I know you think this seems very logical, sane - but you have a tell "outside city limits" - you want these people rounded up and bused out. it's not a solution. Sane policing, treatment programs, and massive development is the solution.

malvosenior 7y ago
Out of curiosity why is that not a solution? Why is it inherently better for them to live on the streets of SF than someplace with running water and electricity? It's also obviously better for the citizens of SF to not have to deal with human feces, dirty needles and massive amounts of property crime (at the least). There's tons of empty space in the US, it seems reasonable to move people who are breaking the law, causing chaos and public health hazards out of highly populated areas.
- jessaustin 7y ago
  You can't keep humans in place, who don't want to stay in place. If you paid some benighted town in the Great Plains $500/head to accept your homeless, that town would just buy each transplanted San Francisco resident a sandwich and a bus ticket, pocketing the rest. It would soon become a joke on SF streets, "yeah I just got back from Nebraska!"
  - dfcagency 7y ago
    I stopped replying because it's just classic entitled NIMBY-ism happening here. You're not going to get through to them.
    - malvosenior 7y ago
      I think it's entirely reasonable to not want human feces and strung out addicts IMBY.
      - jessaustin 7y ago
        Is it reasonable to ship them to someone else's "BY"?
        danschumann 7y ago
        if you "shipped" them somewhere, they'd be in an asylum/shelter/jail facility which is set up to handle them, not in a back yard, not downtown, not IN THE STREETS.
        jessaustin 7y ago
        Sure, I suggested local jails upthread. You as thread parent suggested "outside the city limits". SF is a "city and county", so it's not possible to have a local jail outside city limits. You're going to have to bribe some other county to take care of the homeless you've charged with crimes. That's not going to be cheap! It's not cheap even if you manage to get all your jails built in Sunset or some other backwater. Jail is expensive, and the homeless have no official salaries to garnish so you can't use the Ferguson method. Besides which, there's no way the state is going to take any convicted public poopers off your hands to house in their expensive prisons, so you're going to have to keep these criminals jailed for their entire sentence. Wouldn't it be easier to open some public restrooms?
        danschumann 7y ago
        Some people "just want to watch the world burn" and will mess up anything you try to give them, and those people need law enforcement to stop them, because they won't stop themselves. It's unrealistic to think you can solve the problem with only the carrot.
        jessaustin 7y ago
        Shitting is not a voluntary activity. Public restrooms could only be considered "carrots" if they included additional amenities beyond the most basic requirements of elimination and hygiene. Is anyone suggesting that?
    - danschumann 7y ago
      It's more like "why are they downtown?" they have no good reason to be there, and many bad things they're doing which are already illegal. It's not really nimby if i live in the midwest and am just scratching my head like.. "that dude is doing drugs in front of a cop in that video, why isn't the copy arresting him?" Is that compassion? Lol
  - malvosenior 7y ago
    The suggestion was to put them in jails for defecating on the street, property damage, hard drug use and harassment. I'm not sure if you've been to SF lately or not but it's out of control. It's definitely not just innocent people sitting around, there's a large segment of the homeless population there harassing people, fighting with each other and damaging things. That's definitely breaking the law.
    - jessaustin 7y ago
      Sure, throw them in a local jail, if you've got any room there. What piqued my interest was this idea that "USA is really big". True, but beside the point. You can't imprison people 2,000 miles away for nuisance crimes. Lots of people would be really happy for SF to set aside some land in the city for new jails. Still, that seems less practical than just opening some public restrooms...
  - larnmar 7y ago
    The ideal is to solve the problem with carrot and stick. Give them free housing of a sort, so that it’s an improvement over living on the street, but not so that currently-housed people would feel tempted to downgrade their status to homeless in order to get the free house. The ideal free housing camp is (a) away from major population centres, (b) fairly basic, and (c) compulsory for those who wind up homeless in major cities.
    - lotsofpulp 7y ago
      Carrot and stick doesn’t work with someone who is mentally ill.
      - danieltillett 7y ago
        Yes it does - just not every time.
  - danschumann 7y ago
    You can't tread on the citizens of San Fran who are doing nothing wrong, but must put up with the problems caused by other people who have no reason to be there, who are doing illegal acts without punishment like drug use and public defecation.
- dzhiurgis 7y ago
  As an outsider I feel SF (and CA, HI) have this hyper-tolerance for identity and personal freedom that makes any discourse in opinion just unacceptable...
  - danschumann 7y ago
    well focus on the identity of the innocent person trying to go to their job without being harassed by people on the streets.
- raxxorrax 7y ago
  You would probably have to build a wall around SF though. Personally, I am totally fine with that. It may keep some people out and it may keep some people in.
newfriend 7y ago
Putting criminals in jail is most definitely a solution. The problem is instantly solved when offenders are no longer present. "Outside city limits" would be because of the prohibitively high cost of real estate and regulations in San Francisco. Allowing people to commit crimes with impunity is not a solution. It is effectively punishing law-abiding people.
danschumann 7y ago
"massive development" underestimates the mentally ill. "Some just want to watch the world burn", and they will do everything to mess up the world around them. It's best to simply enforce laws and ensure they cannot do that, or at least not downtown. Let them mess up the desert.

malvosenior 7y ago

Out of curiosity why is that not a solution? Why is it inherently better for them to live on the streets of SF than someplace with running water and electricity? It's also obviously better for the citizens of SF to not have to deal with human feces, dirty needles and massive amounts of property crime (at the least). There's tons of empty space in the US, it seems reasonable to move people who are breaking the law, causing chaos and public health hazards out of highly populated areas.

jessaustin 7y ago
You can't keep humans in place, who don't want to stay in place. If you paid some benighted town in the Great Plains $500/head to accept your homeless, that town would just buy each transplanted San Francisco resident a sandwich and a bus ticket, pocketing the rest. It would soon become a joke on SF streets, "yeah I just got back from Nebraska!"
- dfcagency 7y ago
  I stopped replying because it's just classic entitled NIMBY-ism happening here. You're not going to get through to them.
  - malvosenior 7y ago
    I think it's entirely reasonable to not want human feces and strung out addicts IMBY.
    - jessaustin 7y ago
      Is it reasonable to ship them to someone else's "BY"?
      - danschumann 7y ago
        if you "shipped" them somewhere, they'd be in an asylum/shelter/jail facility which is set up to handle them, not in a back yard, not downtown, not IN THE STREETS.
        jessaustin 7y ago
        Sure, I suggested local jails upthread. You as thread parent suggested "outside the city limits". SF is a "city and county", so it's not possible to have a local jail outside city limits. You're going to have to bribe some other county to take care of the homeless you've charged with crimes. That's not going to be cheap! It's not cheap even if you manage to get all your jails built in Sunset or some other backwater. Jail is expensive, and the homeless have no official salaries to garnish so you can't use the Ferguson method. Besides which, there's no way the state is going to take any convicted public poopers off your hands to house in their expensive prisons, so you're going to have to keep these criminals jailed for their entire sentence. Wouldn't it be easier to open some public restrooms?
        danschumann 7y ago
        Some people "just want to watch the world burn" and will mess up anything you try to give them, and those people need law enforcement to stop them, because they won't stop themselves. It's unrealistic to think you can solve the problem with only the carrot.
        jessaustin 7y ago
        Shitting is not a voluntary activity. Public restrooms could only be considered "carrots" if they included additional amenities beyond the most basic requirements of elimination and hygiene. Is anyone suggesting that?
  - danschumann 7y ago
    It's more like "why are they downtown?" they have no good reason to be there, and many bad things they're doing which are already illegal. It's not really nimby if i live in the midwest and am just scratching my head like.. "that dude is doing drugs in front of a cop in that video, why isn't the copy arresting him?" Is that compassion? Lol
- malvosenior 7y ago
  The suggestion was to put them in jails for defecating on the street, property damage, hard drug use and harassment. I'm not sure if you've been to SF lately or not but it's out of control. It's definitely not just innocent people sitting around, there's a large segment of the homeless population there harassing people, fighting with each other and damaging things. That's definitely breaking the law.
  - jessaustin 7y ago
    Sure, throw them in a local jail, if you've got any room there. What piqued my interest was this idea that "USA is really big". True, but beside the point. You can't imprison people 2,000 miles away for nuisance crimes. Lots of people would be really happy for SF to set aside some land in the city for new jails. Still, that seems less practical than just opening some public restrooms...
- larnmar 7y ago
  The ideal is to solve the problem with carrot and stick. Give them free housing of a sort, so that it’s an improvement over living on the street, but not so that currently-housed people would feel tempted to downgrade their status to homeless in order to get the free house. The ideal free housing camp is (a) away from major population centres, (b) fairly basic, and (c) compulsory for those who wind up homeless in major cities.
  - lotsofpulp 7y ago
    Carrot and stick doesn’t work with someone who is mentally ill.
    - danieltillett 7y ago
      Yes it does - just not every time.
- danschumann 7y ago
  You can't tread on the citizens of San Fran who are doing nothing wrong, but must put up with the problems caused by other people who have no reason to be there, who are doing illegal acts without punishment like drug use and public defecation.
dzhiurgis 7y ago
As an outsider I feel SF (and CA, HI) have this hyper-tolerance for identity and personal freedom that makes any discourse in opinion just unacceptable...
- danschumann 7y ago
  well focus on the identity of the innocent person trying to go to their job without being harassed by people on the streets.
raxxorrax 7y ago
You would probably have to build a wall around SF though. Personally, I am totally fine with that. It may keep some people out and it may keep some people in.

newfriend 7y ago

Putting criminals in jail is most definitely a solution. The problem is instantly solved when offenders are no longer present. "Outside city limits" would be because of the prohibitively high cost of real estate and regulations in San Francisco. Allowing people to commit crimes with impunity is not a solution. It is effectively punishing law-abiding people.

danschumann 7y ago

"massive development" underestimates the mentally ill. "Some just want to watch the world burn", and they will do everything to mess up the world around them. It's best to simply enforce laws and ensure they cannot do that, or at least not downtown. Let them mess up the desert.