> It is if the arrest is pretextual I wasn't aware that arresting someone for stealing or illegal drug use was pretextual. Oh wait, it isn't. People committed

> It is if the arrest is pretextual I wasn't aware that arresting someone for stealing or illegal drug use was pretextual. Oh wait, it isn't. People committed a legitimate crime. > nobody who lives in a van, tent, or even on the street meets the standard for forced institutionalization by those conditions alone Then you give them a choice: go to treatment or go to jail. It is a strictly better outcome than only giving them the choice to go to jail. > “move them somewhere else” is not a sustainable solution It's a fully sustainable solution for many cities in SoCal, like I've said. Go to Newport Beach some time and you'll see. If you want your city to spend billions supporting people who don't want to be supported, you can do that with your own money and vote. > due process You're not entitled to violate local laws without consequences. Notice I never said to specifically go after people for being homeless, but to go after people for violating actual laws. Illegal drug use, illegal trash dumping, stealing, etc. Just because those actions are associated with homeless people does not make them any less illegal. > supported living (including mental institutions) The entire point is that the political will does not exist to force people who should be in mental institutions but don't want to be, into those institutions. If you steam bug spray into someone's eyes or chase them with a metal pipe, you are a danger to others around you.