3 ms·

Especially because a number of these RV dwellers are permanently-nomadic drug-addicts who engage in property crime to fuel their habits. Property crime is alre

Especially because a number of these RV dwellers are permanently-nomadic drug-addicts who engage in property crime to fuel their habits. Property crime is already a crime, hence the term. Assuming your stereotype is accurate, the police will arrest them for their actual crimes soon enough. Until then, the pre-crime of living in an RV isn't sufficient cause.

throwawaysea 7y ago
> Assuming your stereotype is accurate, the police will arrest them for their actual crimes soon enough. No this does not happen. Property crime ends up being the bottom priority in many cities because of limited staffing/resources/competing priorities. > Until then, the pre-crime of living in an RV isn't sufficient cause. Sure it is. Should a city allow everyone to do whatever they want? If not, why is it out of scope for them to create rules that minimize the likelihood of crimes in the first place? You are asking tax-paying law-abiding residents to rely on a low-probability outcome when there are better ways to avoid being in that position in the first place. The city government exists to support its tax-paying, law-abiding residents. Otherwise why would those residents live there and pay taxes?
Keverw 7y ago
Yeah. There's some professionals that do this lifestyle. There's some guy who's a web developer from Tennessee who works remotely and his wife home schools the kids... But trying to balance both work and play sounds like a challenge since not a daily schedule. Also there's some accountant who does this lifestyle too. Very jealous of the lifestyle. I know I rather be somewhere warm right now like Orlando or Texas haha. They go to Disney World ever year too. Seems like some people RV by choice, and some people are forced into it. Like in some expensive places some people might take their last paycheck and buy a RV that barely runs so they still have some sort of shelter, still working locally, etc. I guess it's stereotyped for being homeless, or being retired while there are normal families who decided on this lifestyle. Some people even live on boats too. Some do it to try to save money, while some end up spending more than living in a house or apartment. Then the experience part, more of a adventure than the same boring same over and over. I think if I did it, I'd probably stay a week or two in a area as I think moving every day would be stressful but a lot of neat stuff to see. Some people try and see every state in their first year... but if doing this full time can always come back to a place. But I guess planning and deciding on things can be hard since so much to see and do in this country. But I'd probably stick to campgrounds, rv parks, approved spots for boondocking... Sleeping on random streets just seemed odd to me, and I'd want the peace of mind of not being woken up by someone in the middle of the night. Even some of the national forests seem to not be friendly towards people camping anymore. Coconino national forest I've heard complaints of, and as someone who studied a bit about civil rights I seen one story which I suspect the forest ranger totally broke the law, and not sure what the PC was... Someone had a truck camper, not the prettiest thing but he said the ranger was banging on his door and demanding all his info questioning him even though it was a legal spot on the map, sounds like the ranger was super rude and aggressive even though no law was broken he just wanted to know who was in "his forest" before leaving them alone. but apparently that forest is full of homeless people and not just people on vacation too. Then some forests are understaffed, was reading reviews for one forest not too far from here and someone got their car broken in at a trailhead and no one even came to take a report, not sure what they did in that case since you need a report for insurance company. Then the forest fires out west has been a big drain on the budget too. Some people want to privatize the national forests and parks. I'm kinda conflicted on that idea though. I feel like private companies would manage things better with more services, better hospitality, better made websites with information but probably be more expensive too. Then commercializing things take a bit away from nature, relaxing and disconnecting... I guess one of the ideas is to add WiFi, food trucks and same day Amazon package deliveries to the national parks as one of the proposed plans by the new administration to modernize the parks, which does seem convenience but I know people are against it too. Can see both the pros and cons of that idea. I do feel the focus is more on the national parks though, seems like the national forests are being abandoned and some even want them shutdown or sold off completely which is pretty sad since some are being neglected. I guess the National Parks get higher priority when it comes to funding, probably since more popular too compared to the National Forests.
asdff 7y ago
Property crime de facto is only a crime if you commit felony theft. Cops in CA don't care if you have a pile of bike parts and pieces of rideshare scooters.

throwawaysea 7y ago

> Assuming your stereotype is accurate, the police will arrest them for their actual crimes soon enough. No this does not happen. Property crime ends up being the bottom priority in many cities because of limited staffing/resources/competing priorities. > Until then, the pre-crime of living in an RV isn't sufficient cause. Sure it is. Should a city allow everyone to do whatever they want? If not, why is it out of scope for them to create rules that minimize the likelihood of crimes in the first place? You are asking tax-paying law-abiding residents to rely on a low-probability outcome when there are better ways to avoid being in that position in the first place. The city government exists to support its tax-paying, law-abiding residents. Otherwise why would those residents live there and pay taxes?

Keverw 7y ago

Yeah. There's some professionals that do this lifestyle. There's some guy who's a web developer from Tennessee who works remotely and his wife home schools the kids... But trying to balance both work and play sounds like a challenge since not a daily schedule. Also there's some accountant who does this lifestyle too. Very jealous of the lifestyle. I know I rather be somewhere warm right now like Orlando or Texas haha. They go to Disney World ever year too. Seems like some people RV by choice, and some people are forced into it. Like in some expensive places some people might take their last paycheck and buy a RV that barely runs so they still have some sort of shelter, still working locally, etc. I guess it's stereotyped for being homeless, or being retired while there are normal families who decided on this lifestyle. Some people even live on boats too. Some do it to try to save money, while some end up spending more than living in a house or apartment. Then the experience part, more of a adventure than the same boring same over and over. I think if I did it, I'd probably stay a week or two in a area as I think moving every day would be stressful but a lot of neat stuff to see. Some people try and see every state in their first year... but if doing this full time can always come back to a place. But I guess planning and deciding on things can be hard since so much to see and do in this country. But I'd probably stick to campgrounds, rv parks, approved spots for boondocking... Sleeping on random streets just seemed odd to me, and I'd want the peace of mind of not being woken up by someone in the middle of the night. Even some of the national forests seem to not be friendly towards people camping anymore. Coconino national forest I've heard complaints of, and as someone who studied a bit about civil rights I seen one story which I suspect the forest ranger totally broke the law, and not sure what the PC was... Someone had a truck camper, not the prettiest thing but he said the ranger was banging on his door and demanding all his info questioning him even though it was a legal spot on the map, sounds like the ranger was super rude and aggressive even though no law was broken he just wanted to know who was in "his forest" before leaving them alone. but apparently that forest is full of homeless people and not just people on vacation too. Then some forests are understaffed, was reading reviews for one forest not too far from here and someone got their car broken in at a trailhead and no one even came to take a report, not sure what they did in that case since you need a report for insurance company. Then the forest fires out west has been a big drain on the budget too. Some people want to privatize the national forests and parks. I'm kinda conflicted on that idea though. I feel like private companies would manage things better with more services, better hospitality, better made websites with information but probably be more expensive too. Then commercializing things take a bit away from nature, relaxing and disconnecting... I guess one of the ideas is to add WiFi, food trucks and same day Amazon package deliveries to the national parks as one of the proposed plans by the new administration to modernize the parks, which does seem convenience but I know people are against it too. Can see both the pros and cons of that idea. I do feel the focus is more on the national parks though, seems like the national forests are being abandoned and some even want them shutdown or sold off completely which is pretty sad since some are being neglected. I guess the National Parks get higher priority when it comes to funding, probably since more popular too compared to the National Forests.

asdff 7y ago

Property crime de facto is only a crime if you commit felony theft. Cops in CA don't care if you have a pile of bike parts and pieces of rideshare scooters.