3 ms·

I think his conclusion was that enforcement at least makes the city more livable for the people who do choose to be a part of society, air-gapping the problems

by aksss 2y ago

I think his conclusion was that enforcement at least makes the city more livable for the people who do choose to be a part of society, air-gapping the problems endemic to vagrancy (assault, abuse, drugs, crime), while having at least a margin deterrence effect.

mmooss 2y ago
> for the people who do choose to be a part of society That's a pretty crazy qualification: Either be go along with and be accepted by the majority or you are subject to sanctions. That is the opposite of freedom and universal rights.
- devilbunny 2y ago
  > go along with and be accepted by the majority or you are subject to sanctions. That's pretty much criminal law in a nutshell. There are expectations if you want others to tolerate your oddities, one of which is you don't get to impose on them.
  - mmooss 2y ago
    > That's pretty much criminal law in a nutshell. It's the opposite. Others liking you or not is irrelevant. > There are expectations if you want others to tolerate your oddities, one of which is you don't get to impose on them. You absolutely do get to 'impose' them. You can't cause harm to others, but their subjective distaste or apprehension or whatever is not harm. That's what freedom is about.
    - devilbunny 2y ago
      Interesting philosophy, but you do you. > You can't cause harm to others, but their subjective distaste or apprehension or whatever is not harm. You know there's a reason that there's never been a successful hyperlibertarian society, right? Some people are assholes.
      - mmooss 2y ago
        This isn't hyperlibertarian or one person's philosophy, it's the foundation of US society, law, and politics. The Declaration of Independence centers on the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Core to the Constitution is the Bill of Rights. Liberty and justice for all; Marines fight for freedom; land of the free, Statue of Liberty, etc. If freedom is only doing things other people like, it's meaningless. Causing harm is one thing. People may not like you - maybe I don't like you. Can I pass a law to jail you?
        devilbunny 2y ago
        Are you persisting in the idea that homeless tent cities are not a harm to those who are subject to them? It’s a bit meme-ish, but sidewalk poop is actually a quality of life issue.
        mmooss 2y ago
        > tent cities are not a harm to those who are subject to them Nothing inherent about tent cities harms neighbors. They could be badly located but so can lots of things. They suck as housing, but the residents wouldn't be there if they had better options. > It’s a bit meme-ish Whatever this means, who cares? We're talking about shelter and human rights, not memes. > sidewalk poop is actually a quality of life issue Yes, that could be an actual health risk, but I think people are searching for a justification. I'm dubious it's really a big problem, or one that requires taking away anyone's freedom. How about providing a bathroom? If it's ok to take away people's freedom, why don't you give up yours? We could force you to walk down a different sidewalk.
- aksss 2y ago
  Crazy? To be fair, the minimum bar in American society these days is pretty dang low. Don’t steal, don’t rape, don’t physically assault, don’t walk nude on the sidewalk, don’t poop on the floor of the grocery store, leave the kids alone. With these simple tricks you can largely be ignored to be the “you” which you want to be.
  - mmooss 2y ago
    This discussion and what happens in reality shows the opposite: Being unhoused, having a drug addiction, being perceived as having mental health issues, lack of cleanliness, etc. is all treated as deserving of hate and being a target of oppression - people here are openly calling for oppression - and being treated as a criminal.
    - aksss 2y ago
      I think you're mistaking society targeting the outcomes and behaviors of vagrancy, to which addiction and mental health can lead (theft, pooping in the wrong places). The social glare starts earlier because of a pretty reliable correlation. That's less about intentional cruelty and more about saving the ship.
      - mmooss 2y ago
        One justification after another to abuse people, is what I read. > pretty reliable correlation I have yet to see that correlation. To my eye, there is a correlation between some things and a lack of housing. For example, access to bathrooms. But the obsession with poop is becoming childish; poop - gross! In all my time in cities, I don't know that I've ever seen it. I don't know that it's a common problem, but just a dramatic example that advocates like to pull out. > That's less about intentional cruelty and more about saving the ship. First, people here are openly embracing cruelty. Second, 'unintentional cruely' would be a highly immature, irresponsible concept. I think 'saving the ship' is greatly exaggerating the risks in order to justify the abuse. It's a very serious thing to take away someone's inherent, inalienable freedom.
bediger4000 2y ago
You're forgetting all the prison related employment. That's got to count for something.

by aksss 2y ago

mmooss 2y ago

> for the people who do choose to be a part of society That's a pretty crazy qualification: Either be go along with and be accepted by the majority or you are subject to sanctions. That is the opposite of freedom and universal rights.

devilbunny 2y ago
> go along with and be accepted by the majority or you are subject to sanctions. That's pretty much criminal law in a nutshell. There are expectations if you want others to tolerate your oddities, one of which is you don't get to impose on them.
- mmooss 2y ago
  > That's pretty much criminal law in a nutshell. It's the opposite. Others liking you or not is irrelevant. > There are expectations if you want others to tolerate your oddities, one of which is you don't get to impose on them. You absolutely do get to 'impose' them. You can't cause harm to others, but their subjective distaste or apprehension or whatever is not harm. That's what freedom is about.
  - devilbunny 2y ago
    Interesting philosophy, but you do you. > You can't cause harm to others, but their subjective distaste or apprehension or whatever is not harm. You know there's a reason that there's never been a successful hyperlibertarian society, right? Some people are assholes.
    - mmooss 2y ago
      This isn't hyperlibertarian or one person's philosophy, it's the foundation of US society, law, and politics. The Declaration of Independence centers on the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Core to the Constitution is the Bill of Rights. Liberty and justice for all; Marines fight for freedom; land of the free, Statue of Liberty, etc. If freedom is only doing things other people like, it's meaningless. Causing harm is one thing. People may not like you - maybe I don't like you. Can I pass a law to jail you?
      - devilbunny 2y ago
        Are you persisting in the idea that homeless tent cities are not a harm to those who are subject to them? It’s a bit meme-ish, but sidewalk poop is actually a quality of life issue.
        mmooss 2y ago
        > tent cities are not a harm to those who are subject to them Nothing inherent about tent cities harms neighbors. They could be badly located but so can lots of things. They suck as housing, but the residents wouldn't be there if they had better options. > It’s a bit meme-ish Whatever this means, who cares? We're talking about shelter and human rights, not memes. > sidewalk poop is actually a quality of life issue Yes, that could be an actual health risk, but I think people are searching for a justification. I'm dubious it's really a big problem, or one that requires taking away anyone's freedom. How about providing a bathroom? If it's ok to take away people's freedom, why don't you give up yours? We could force you to walk down a different sidewalk.
aksss 2y ago
Crazy? To be fair, the minimum bar in American society these days is pretty dang low. Don’t steal, don’t rape, don’t physically assault, don’t walk nude on the sidewalk, don’t poop on the floor of the grocery store, leave the kids alone. With these simple tricks you can largely be ignored to be the “you” which you want to be.
- mmooss 2y ago
  This discussion and what happens in reality shows the opposite: Being unhoused, having a drug addiction, being perceived as having mental health issues, lack of cleanliness, etc. is all treated as deserving of hate and being a target of oppression - people here are openly calling for oppression - and being treated as a criminal.
  - aksss 2y ago
    I think you're mistaking society targeting the outcomes and behaviors of vagrancy, to which addiction and mental health can lead (theft, pooping in the wrong places). The social glare starts earlier because of a pretty reliable correlation. That's less about intentional cruelty and more about saving the ship.
    - mmooss 2y ago
      One justification after another to abuse people, is what I read. > pretty reliable correlation I have yet to see that correlation. To my eye, there is a correlation between some things and a lack of housing. For example, access to bathrooms. But the obsession with poop is becoming childish; poop - gross! In all my time in cities, I don't know that I've ever seen it. I don't know that it's a common problem, but just a dramatic example that advocates like to pull out. > That's less about intentional cruelty and more about saving the ship. First, people here are openly embracing cruelty. Second, 'unintentional cruely' would be a highly immature, irresponsible concept. I think 'saving the ship' is greatly exaggerating the risks in order to justify the abuse. It's a very serious thing to take away someone's inherent, inalienable freedom.

bediger4000 2y ago

You're forgetting all the prison related employment. That's got to count for something.