City Can Continue Taking Homeless People's Stuff During Sweeps, Federal Judge Rules

Comments

1
It stinks.
It stinks to high heaven.
2
Shit
3
If tents count as as vital personal belongings (and they do) then banning removal of vital personal belongings from public land is a de facto legalization of permanent personal seizure of public land.

There might be other ways to mitigate or even fix the homelessness crisis in America, but we're never going to hear any of them from ACLU-WA. They've put all their resources into fighting for the right to squat on your public lands, and it's that or nothing for them now.
4
There might be other ways to mitigate or even fix the homelessness crisis in America,

I'm still waiting for advocates of these camps (and of the live-in RVs parked on our streets) to describe how they are steps on paths up from homelessness. Looks like I'll be waiting awhile longer.

They've put all their resources into fighting for the right to squat on your public lands, and it's that or nothing for them now.

Oh, the hilarity:

"There is no way I can afford housing in Seattle and also pursue my goals I have in my life," Sidwell said.

[...]

...I leave to go sell the paper, speak on homeless issues, or advocate on homeless issues.

Is it possible to be professionally homeless?

5
Tl;dr -- Court allows city to maintain public safety and health; gives city one less distraction from BUILDING SHELTERS NOW.

Seattle political leadership, after more than a decade of failure, have lost the privilege of asking us to "trust them" with tactics unsupported by experts and evidence. Sweeps are a nasty by-product of a city/county/state/federal cabal that has NO WILL to spend what needs to be spent on the Hydra of homelessness: foster reform, education, shelter, mental health care and substance abuse care. They're afraid to be bold, so people decay along the roads. Reallllll nice.
6
If only all of our parks and public lands could look as beautiful as that picture. What a utopia that would be.
7
by "stuff" we are largely talking about heaps of filthy junk - lice infested blankets, soggy sleeping bags, a pallet - their solution should be to accept shelter space and stop trespassing. oh, you say you don't like shelters, huh? too many pesky rules (what? no shooting up? i'm out) or maybe a bit crowded? sorry, but the answer is not to continue people to camp wherever they want, park their barely drivable RV wherever they want, etc. every vehicle needs working brakes, insurance, current tabs, emissions check, etc no matter what goofy mike o'brien thinks.
8
May I suggest that those who think it is "okay" to camp on public property.....simply put a sign in their yard inviting the homeless to "camp on their property".

Then when you have had enough of the filth, feces, garbage, crime, drugs, discarded needles and complaints from your neighbor, you can go through a 90 to 120 day eviction process and be vilified by The Stranger.

Enough already.

The City needs to simply create a large, offsite facility....think 100 acres,...attach a WPA sign above the entrance and offer the homeless a choice:

a) Sleep under a viaduct, subject to raids and removal of their meager possessions.

b) Go to the WPA camp, (visualize the 1930's) get help, showers, have decent facilities, three squares a day, get clean, get sober, get mental health and live in an organized arrangement of army tents, mess facilities and have medical/mental health access.
9
Shorter U.S. District Court Judge Ricardo S. Martinez:
Poor people are not human. Fuck them up & keep them down as much as possible. Go!
10
@7, et. al..--

So everyone here is in favor of a Universal Basic Income, right? A measure that would eliminate poverty, and virtually eliminate homelessness.

Once upon a time a man or a woman could simply homestead on unoccupied land and make a life for themselves. Now that is impossible. There is no land to homestead on. Where are economic refugees supposed to go? There aren't enough shelters or beds.

The way to make people drug-addicted and violent is to give them no hope. Keep destroying their stuff. Keep jailing them. For God's sake, keep treating them inhumanely! Because that works.
11
@8 - Not a terrible idea.
How about each P-Patch in the city gets a tiny house, and allows someone to live there, guard/take care of the P-Patch, and give people some hope, a home, and a step up. Obviously there aren't enough P-Patches in the city to address the needs of all our economic refugees, but let's look at all options.
12
What's an economic refugee? The homeless just want to live in a place they can't afford. Hell, maybe I should go squat in Broadmoor or the Highlands...see how long that lasts. I like number 8's idea...I've been crowing to whomever will listen (which turns out is nobody..) about T-5. It has space, infrastructure (bathrooms/showers/covered area) and is near a bus line. It sits empty and unused.
13
Once upon a time a man or a woman could simply homestead on unoccupied land and make a life for themselves.

Well, once the US Army had forcibly removed all of the original dwellers of that land to reservations so white people could have free homesteads, yes. Sadly, there is no more such land to take via policies of lebensraum and genocide.

Also, if you believe the occupants of our homeless camps -- or their defenders here -- could ever make it as farming pioneers, I have a bridge back home in New York to sell you.
14
@13 - Yes, obviously after the Army virtually wiped out the indigenous inhabitants to make room for white 'Manifest Destiny' (so manifest!). I was working within the mythology of "western civilization" to make a point.
And the other point about "farming pioneers", no I don't believe that. But the greater point is --to Sertinsa's red herring-- that if homeless people simply wanted to live free somewhere, there is no where to do that. We can't "drop out" of society, there's no where to go. We're stuck living in the ruleset of this society: work a job to earn money to eat and shelter yourself. No one can simply collect food and build their own dwelling any more.You have to have money. Just to survive. That goes against aeons of human experience. Money has only been around for a few thousand years, at most.

But, @12, to your other point: "what's an economic refugee", answer this question: Why did the country's --and our county's-- homeless population skyrocket after the 2008 "Great Recession"? Surely it wasn't just a bunch more people saying, "Fuck it, I want to live in a tent! for free!" right?
15
@Treacle There are winners and losers in life and it is a just thing to care for those who are "losers" but allowing them to live in infested and unsafe camps on public property is not the right thing for anyone.