30 ms·
If you are unable to take care of yourself, then the state has a responsibility to take care of you. However, with freedom comes responsibility, so if you cann
by sankyo 16y ago
If you are unable to take care of yourself, then the state has a responsibility to take care of you.
However, with freedom comes responsibility, so if you cannot be responsible to take care of yourself then it follows that you should lose some freedoms too. They should not be free to mill around corners drinking and doing drugs, using the sidewalk and street as a toilet.
Here in San Francisco we have many street people and most of them are not capable of taking care of themselves. Most have mental illness, drinking and/or drug problems. It would be nice if someone could triage the ones who have potential to be rehabilitated. As for the ones who cannot be rehabilitated, they should be warehoused somewhere where they are not a danger to themselves or others. As of today, they are warehoused in the streets, and it is lose-lose for everyone. Everyone seems to blame Reagan for shutting down most of the mental hospitals. I do not know to what extent that is true.
Overall I fear that there are now too many people in the wagon and not enough pulling it.
- gnosis 16y ago"they should be warehoused somewhere" I've heard there was once a proposal to round up all the homeless in San Francisco and ship them off to Treasure Island.[1] Does anyone know if that's true, and if so, what the history of that proposal was? [1] - https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Treasure_Island_(California) https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Treasure_Isla...
- blueben 16y agoWarehoused? How do we prevent them from leaving the warehouse? Maybe we need some fences and armed guards. And now that we've prevented them from leaving, how do we keep them from fighting and misbehaving? Maybe we put them all in separate rooms so they can't get at each other. Congratulations, we've just created a prison and made it a de facto crime to be homeless.