Overly progressive policing and prosecution simply doesn't work

[bomberfox]

There generally is not pushback until it gets so bad that average people are like "wtf?"

For example, when one of these measures went before the voters in Minneapolis, a city with a very progressive electorate, it failed: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...oposal-dismantle-department-fails/8564868002/

Why, because there few things more popular with virtually every demographic than law and order. Moreover, it's not white people in the suburbs that need law and order the most, it's minorities in inner cities. I think everyone recognizes (well everyone but the hardcore right wingers) that we are asking too much from police in that we are asking them to be both law enforcement and mental health professionals, but I think it is pretty clear that the electorate wants us to reform the system we have, not replace it.

There are just bad ideas coming out of the activists on the left in just about every city and just about everyone sees it. For example, last year here in Kansas City there was a homeless encampment in front of city hall. Normally, the city would not have allowed it to last even a few hours. However, the "woke" left protested and the city allowed the encampment to be there for months. So for months anyone having to do any business in city hall, which by the way would be disproportionately members of under represented communities in the inner city, had to wade through a homeless encampment and human feces. The agreement the city eventually reached with the "woke" left, was to pay to house the homeless from the encampment in apartments and motels, where within two weeks the homeless from the encampment utterly trashed those places, and the city (and thus local taxpayers) was on the hook for the repairs to those apartments and motels. Of course, it never occurs to these far left activists that those people were unhouseable for the same reasons they were unemployable and simply paying to house someone doesn't mean they are housable. Unfortunately, a lot of people that are homeless today are people that would have been institutionalized 50 years ago. It's sad but it's true. That is why there is no panacea for dealing with the homeless. It is a case by case basis for social workers.

This kind of crap is going on in major cities across the country and it makes us Democrats look like we are incompetent and engaging in ridiculous social experiments at the expense of the local citizenry.

U.S. incarceration rate compared to that of other founding...

graph showing the incarceration rate per 100,000 in 2021 or the most recent year available for founding members of NATO

www.prisonpolicy.org

Ive literally never seen a poll lately that has law and order as a top concern for the country.

 

[bomberfox]

The is a long way from letting police go around cracking heads, and creating a situation where open businesses board up due to lack of police protection from vandalism and even mom and pop stores have to hire security because the local prosecutor will not prosecute someone that steals right in front of you.

We are going to get destroyed as a party if don't stop letting the crazy 5% of the party on the far left set the agenda.

Democrats arent letting the far left set their agenda even. They always allow republicans to filibuster it.

 

[Peter]

I remember visiting Amsterdam with relatives who live in Holland. We drove into the city because we were going to catch a train to Prague but wanted to hang around first. All our luggage was in the car. My Dutch relative who drove brought a blanket to put over the luggage just to be safe. He said people will break the windows if they see anything they can steal.

Other than that, Amsterdam was ****ing awesome!

On a side note, Mexican food in The Netherlands sucks.

Why would you expect good Mexican food in Holland?

 

[Questerr]

My wife and I live in the Kansas City area, but right now we are up in Seattle for a short getaway. Seattle is a beautiful city in a beautiful setting, but one thing we have noticed while we are here that:

1. The city smells like shit, literally because the homeless defecate anywhere and everywhere.

2. There are areas of town where all the windows are boarded up at street level because they cannot keep people from busting the windows out. These are open businesses with boarded up windows.

3. Every store, literally every store, no matter how big or small, has a security guard. We asked some store owners why this is the case, and were told that because the local prosecutors will not prosecute shoplifting or vandalism, they have to pay security to keep people from just openly stealing from them or vandalizing their business.

This is in a city that is not a dangerous city. Seattle has a fraction of the homicide rate of our hometown, Kansas City. Yet, despite that, overly "woke", progressive ideas about law enforcement and prosecutions in Seattle have created what you could fairly describe as an almost dystopian society.

The elections this fall will likely be the biggest loss for Democrats at all levels of government in anyone's lifetime. You look at all the polling, the candidate recruitment and so on, and it will likely be a bloodbath for Democrats, and it's the far left and this overly woke stuff that will be to blame for it.

To be clear, you think homeless people should be put in prison? For the crime of being too poor to have a house?

 

[ALiberalModerate]

To be clear, you think homeless people should be put in prison? For the crime of being too poor to have a house?

No, I am saying a city with the kind of money that Seattle has ought to be able to build and maintain enough public restrooms for them. Moreover, homeless or not, a city can still enforce camping bans in public parks. What is the point of taxpayers paying for parks if the city allows homeless addicts to turn it into a landfill?

You can accept what I am telling you or not, but the fact is, most people are sick of this. They are sick of cities catering to the far left, and not maintaining even basic law and order because of it and it will be an utter bloodbath for Democrats at all levels of government come this November because of it.

Homelessness is nothing new. We have had a serious problem with homelessness ever since deinstitutionalization. What is new is prosecutors not prosecuting theft unless it involves assault. What is new is city parks looking like literal landfills because the city is no longer enforcing camping bans in them. What is new is open businesses with boarded up windows, because the city will not prosecute vandals.

If the Democrats don't stop catering to the most extreme elements of their party, that 5% to 10% of the base on the extreme left, then we may as well just give the keys to the country to the Republicans because they will run it as long as this is going on.

 

[Questerr]

No, I am saying a city with the kind of money that Seattle has ought to be able to build and maintain enough public restrooms for them. Moreover, homeless or not, a city can still enforce camping bans in public parks. What is the point of taxpayers paying for parks if the city allows homeless addicts to turn it into a landfill?

You can accept what I am telling you or not, but the fact is, most people are sick of this. They are sick of cities catering to the far left, and not maintaining even basic law and order because of it and it will be an utter bloodbath for Democrats at all levels of government come this November because of it.

Homelessness is nothing new. We have had a serious problem with homelessness ever since deinstitutionalization. What is new is prosecutors not prosecuting theft unless it involves assault. What is new is city parks looking like literal landfills because the city is no longer enforcing camping bans in them. What is new is open businesses with boarded up windows, because the city will not prosecute vandals.

If the Democrats don't stop catering to the most extreme elements of their party, that 5% to 10% of the base on the extreme left, then we may as well just give the keys to the country to the Republicans because they will run it as long as this is going on.

“Camping bans” are just a way of making homelessness illegal without using the words “Being homeless is illegal”.

Deinstitutionalization was a direct consequence of Conservatives refusing to fund institutions, leaving them as inhuman abusive hellholes.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

“Camping bans” are just a way of making homelessness illegal without using the words “Being homeless is illegal”.

Deinstitutionalization was a direct consequence of Conservatives refusing to fund institutions, leaving them as inhuman abusive hellholes.

So you are fine with public parks being turned into this?

 

[Questerr]

So you are fine with public parks being turned into this?

No, I’d much rather see affordable communal housing get built for them and for comprehensive universal healthcare including mental health and drug treatment get adopted.

But conservatives will never allow it. Anything short of those people “pulling themselves up by their bootstraps” is unacceptable.

 

[bomberfox]

No, I am saying a city with the kind of money that Seattle has ought to be able to build and maintain enough public restrooms for them. Moreover, homeless or not, a city can still enforce camping bans in public parks. What is the point of taxpayers paying for parks if the city allows homeless addicts to turn it into a landfill?

You can accept what I am telling you or not, but the fact is, most people are sick of this. They are sick of cities catering to the far left, and not maintaining even basic law and order because of it and it will be an utter bloodbath for Democrats at all levels of government come this November because of it.

Homelessness is nothing new. We have had a serious problem with homelessness ever since deinstitutionalization. What is new is prosecutors not prosecuting theft unless it involves assault. What is new is city parks looking like literal landfills because the city is no longer enforcing camping bans in them. What is new is open businesses with boarded up windows, because the city will not prosecute vandals.

If the Democrats don't stop catering to the most extreme elements of their party, that 5% to 10% of the base on the extreme left, then we may as well just give the keys to the country to the Republicans because they will run it as long as this is going on.

If democrats cant stop catering to 5% why is that 5% rarely getting what it wants?

Why would you throw a camper in jail? Thats kinda all they have, if you do that, they will likely move into an abandoned building or hotel.

 

[bomberfox]

So you are fine with public parks being turned into this?

Why do you think they do that? Part of being progressive is understanding the underlying issues behind something. Laws against littering im fine with, but its either there or inside an abandoned building or a homeless shelter.

The public has no understanding of what its done in the name of law and order because they dont thinks something will happen to them.

We cant just keep competing with the republicans on who is most tough on crime unless you want a police state.

Most cities do nothing about the increasing unaffordability of housing.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

No, I’d much rather see affordable communal housing get built for them and for comprehensive universal healthcare including mental health and drug treatment get adopted.

But conservatives will never allow it. Anything short of those people “pulling themselves up by their bootstraps” is unacceptable.

It's not that simple. The same factors that make many homeless unemployable also make them unhousable. What do you think someone that does that to a park would do to a house you built for them?

 

[ALiberalModerate]

If democrats cant stop catering to 5% why is that 5% rarely getting what it wants?

Why would you throw a camper in jail? Thats kinda all they have, if you do that, they will likely move into an abandoned building or hotel.

No one is saying throw them in jail, but trashing parks is a new thing. Homelessness is not new, allowing homeless addicts to trash a park is new.

 

[Questerr]

It's not that simple. The same factors that make many homeless unemployable also make them unhousable. What do you think someone that does that to a park would do to a house you built for them?

If they were also being treated for substance abuse and/or mental illness at the same time without condescending patronizing from conservatives telling them how lazy and evil they are? Pretty well as other countries have shown.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Why do you think they do that? Part of being progressive is understanding the underlying issues behind something. Laws against littering im fine with, but its either there or inside an abandoned building or a homeless shelter.

The public has no understanding of what its done in the name of law and order because they dont thinks something will happen to them.

We cant just keep competing with the republicans on who is most tough on crime unless you want a police state.

Most cities do nothing about the increasing unaffordability of housing.

This is going on in cities that are expensive to live in and cities that are inexpensive to live in. Housing costs has nothing to do with it.

People that simply cannot afford rent are crashing on friend's sofas or sleeping in their car. They aren't turning public parks into landfills. A heroin addict that has burned through every friend and family member they have, that is more the kind of person trashing a park. Now, yes, I get it, often people have untreated mental disorders that they are self medicating for it. However, if you have ever dealt with many people that are seriously mentally ill, often the problem was not that treatment was not available to them. Often the case was their families tried to get them in treatment for years, they didn't want it. Often their families tried to get them clean for years, again they didn't want to get clean. Unfortunately, there are people out there with mental issues that they simply don't want treatment for and unfortunately, there are also a lot of pieces of shit out there. Point being, there are people that are homeless that are just down on their luck and need a leg up. There are people that are homeless that are severely mentally ill that want and need treatment. However, there are also people that are homeless that are just pieces of shit that have burned through everyone in their lives and that is just all they are ever going to be.

However, in any case, the solution should not be to allow people to parks and greenspaces. One cannot pretend to care about the environment and at the same time turn a blind eye to parks and greenspace being turn into open landfills.

And btw, I am saying all this as someone that was homeless for a while when I was growing up. My brother, mom, and I spent months in a battered women's shelter - homeless and destitute.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

If they were also being treated for substance abuse and/or mental illness at the same time without condescending patronizing from conservatives telling them how lazy and evil they are? Pretty well as other countries have shown.

Again it is not that simple. Often the case was their families tried to get them in treatment for years, they didn't want it. Often their families tried to get them clean for years, again they didn't want to get clean. Unfortunately, there are people out there with mental issues that they simply don't want treatment for and unfortunately, there are also a lot of pieces of shit out there. Point being, there are people that are homeless that are just down on their luck and need a leg up. There are people that are homeless that are severely mentally ill that want and need treatment. However, there are also people that are homeless that are just pieces of shit that have burned through everyone in their lives and that is just all they are ever going to be.

Also, I think it is worth pointing out, that I am not a big fan of conservative evangelicals, but if you look at the aid groups out working with the homeless, most often, it's church groups.

 

[bomberfox]

This is going on in cities that are expensive to live in and cities that are inexpensive to live in. Housing costs has nothing to do with it.

People that simply cannot afford rent are crashing on friend's sofas or sleeping in their car. They aren't turning public parks into landfills. A heroin addict that has burned through every friend and family member they have, that is more the kind of person trashing a park. Now, yes, I get it, often people have untreated mental disorders that they are self medicating for it. However, if you have ever dealt with many people that are seriously mentally ill, often the problem was not that treatment was not available to them. Often the case was their families tried to get them in treatment for years, they didn't want it. Often their families tried to get them clean for years, again they didn't want to get clean. Unfortunately, there are people out there with mental issues that they simply don't want treatment for and unfortunately, there are also a lot of pieces of shit out there. Point being, there are people that are homeless that are just down on their luck and need a leg up. There are people that are homeless that are severely mentally ill that want and need treatment. However, there are also people that are homeless that are just pieces of shit that have burned through everyone in their lives and that is just all they are ever going to be.

However, in any case, the solution should not be to allow people to parks and greenspaces. One cannot pretend to care about the environment and at the same time turn a blind eye to parks and greenspace being turn into open landfills.

And btw, I am saying all this as someone that was homeless for a while when I was growing up. My brother, mom, and I spent months in a battered women's shelter - homeless and destitute.

Cities in california are insanely expensive. I dont know a thing about you or even if you are actually representative of a homeless person so i cant make heads or tails based purely on what you are saying. You are not making a good argument for your claim about the homelessness problem in other places you likely know nothing about.

You had friends which makes you a step ahead of many people. Again your only solution appears to be locking people up and maybe bathrooms. Where are they going to go?

 

[bomberfox]

Again it is not that simple. Often the case was their families tried to get them in treatment for years, they didn't want it. Often their families tried to get them clean for years, again they didn't want to get clean. Unfortunately, there are people out there with mental issues that they simply don't want treatment for and unfortunately, there are also a lot of pieces of shit out there. Point being, there are people that are homeless that are just down on their luck and need a leg up. There are people that are homeless that are severely mentally ill that want and need treatment. However, there are also people that are homeless that are just pieces of shit that have burned through everyone in their lives and that is just all they are ever going to be.

Also, I think it is worth pointing out, that I am not a big fan of conservative evangelicals, but if you look at the aid groups out working with the homeless, most often, it's church groups.

Again we can make vague generalities all day but in terms of policy that doesnt really give us anything to go on.

Then again ive tried explaining things to you before only to have it rudely shoved in my face so. Have a rant, just dont blame us for your loss :/.

 

[Court Jester]

Because policing and incarceration was working fine as it was?

So, the answer to fixing the system, is to just throw the whole system out and give up?

Penal codes are created to PUNISH offenders, not rehabilitate or restore them, criminal laws are created to be punitive. So, if the offenders don't change their behavor, then don't stop enforcing the laws, make the laws stronger, make the punishments longer, and build even more prisons if necessary. Then eventually some people actually do come to realize that crime does not pay.

Defund police, remove bail, refuse to prosecute, and crime and chaos spreads like a wildfire. Most people are bad by nature, but most will also be disincentivized from bad behavior with strict laws and punishment. In Singapore you can get 6 months in jail and 10 whacks with a cane for a single act of vandalism And guess what? Vandalism is not much of a problem in Singapore.... what a surprise.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Cities in california are insanely expensive. I dont know a thing about you or even if you are actually representative of a homeless person so i cant make heads or tails based purely on what you are saying. You are not making a good argument for your claim about the homelessness problem in other places you likely know nothing about.

You had friends which makes you a step ahead of many people. Again your only solution appears to be locking people up and maybe bathrooms. Where are they going to go?

When have I proposed locking anyone up? Ordinances against camping in parks does not result in people being locked up, but rather people being told they cannot camp in a park.

Yes, cities in California are insanely expensive, so if you are not someone of great means, perhaps choose to live somewhere else other than California. However, places like Memphis and Oklahoma City have had problems with homeless addicts trashing parks, those are not expensive places to live.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

So, the answer to fixing the system, is to just throw the whole system out and give up?

Penal codes are created to PUNISH offenders, not rehabilitate or restore them, criminal laws are created to be punitive. So, if the offenders don't change their behavor, then don't stop enforcing the laws, make the laws stronger, make the punishments longer, and build even more prisons if necessary. Then eventually some people actually do come to realize that crime does not pay.

Defund police, remove bail, refuse to prosecute, and crime and chaos spreads like a wildfire. Most people are bad by nature, but most will also be disincentivized from bad behavior with strict laws and punishment. In Singapore you can get 6 months in jail and 10 whacks with a cane for a single act of vandalism And guess what? Vandalism is not much of a problem in Singapore.... what a surprise.

I think it's worth pointing out that longer and harsher punishments does not dissuade criminal activity. What does is increasing the likelihood of getting caught and punished. For example, let's say that in Country A murder resulted in a 30 year prison sentence and you had a 98% likelihood of being caught and convicted. In country B, murder resulted in the death penalty, but you only had a 30% chance of being caught and convicted, which country do you think would have more murders?

 

[bomberfox]

When have I proposed locking anyone up? Ordinances against camping in parks does not result in people being locked up, but rather people being told they cannot camp in a park.

Yes, cities in California are insanely expensive, so if you are not someone of great means, perhaps choose to live somewhere else other than California. However, places like Memphis and Oklahoma City have had problems with homeless addicts trashing parks, those are not expensive places to live.

Lots of people cannot simply move, that also would require the means to move. In the meantime we still have homeless people that cannot even afford that. Installing bathrooms wont solve this.

If you are not suggesting to lock someone up then this thread seems all the more silly.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Lots of people cannot simply move, that also would require the means to move. In the meantime we still have homeless people that cannot even afford that. Installing bathrooms wont solve this.

If you are not suggesting to lock someone up then this thread seems all the more silly.

FFS, from the point of deinstitutionalization until 2 years ago, we had homeless, but we did not allow them to camp in parks and greenspaces and thus we did not have parks and greenspaces trashed by homeless addicts. That did not involve locking people up. All it involved was enforcing ordinances that cities have had on the books a century or more, that prevented people from camping in parks and public greenspaces.

This is a city park:

Allowing people to do this to parks is new. Homelessness is not new. Allowing people to do this, this is new.

 

[bomberfox]

FFS, from the point of deinstitutionalization until 2 years ago, we had homeless, but we did not allow them to camp in parks and greenspaces and thus we did not have parks and greenspaces trashed by homeless addicts. That did not involve locking people up. All it involved was enforcing ordinances that cities have had on the books a century or more, that prevented people from camping in parks and public greenspaces.

This is a city park:

Allowing people to do this to parks is new. Homelessness is not new. Allowing people to do this, this is new.

Still havnt given many solutions to where they need to be taken. Perhaps we just need the appropriate slogan . I know! NIMBY short and sweet! Will go nicely on a bumper sticker.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Still havnt given many solutions to where they need to be taken. Perhaps we just need the appropriate slogan . I know! NIMBY short and sweet! Will go nicely on a bumper sticker.

It seems like your argument is that until we can solve housing affordability, addiction treatment, and provide affordable mental health treatment to everyone, we just have to allow homeless encampments in city parks no matter how bad they trash them.

 

[bomberfox]

It seems like your argument is that until we can solve housing affordability, addiction treatment, and provide affordable mental health treatment to everyone, we just have to allow homeless encampments in city parks no matter how bad they trash them.

Maybe i should have just used a slogan. My bad.