L.A. Bans, Takes Down Tiny Houses Built for Homeless

[Dot Com]

Because only the government knows what's best for you.

Summers claims that at least 37 tiny homes were built for the homeless from Van Nuys to Inglewood. Several volunteers came together to help. Materials were purchased with the over $100,000 in donations Summers received from people around the world who were moved by his online campaign.

Summers says he’s angry. Instead of returning the homes to the builder, the city is now destroying them, putting an end to the initiative that managed to help so many homeless individuals across the city.

L.A. Bans, Takes Down Tiny Houses Built for Homeless | The Daily Liberator

did the people building the tiny homes have the right to the land they built on?

or do you think this is the days of the wild west and you put down a stake and it's yours?

^ that

Cali isn't Bundy country OP

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Because only the government knows what's best for you.

Summers claims that at least 37 tiny homes were built for the homeless from Van Nuys to Inglewood. Several volunteers came together to help. Materials were purchased with the over $100,000 in donations Summers received from people around the world who were moved by his online campaign.

Summers says he’s angry. Instead of returning the homes to the builder, the city is now destroying them, putting an end to the initiative that managed to help so many homeless individuals across the city.

L.A. Bans, Takes Down Tiny Houses Built for Homeless | The Daily Liberator

did the people building the tiny homes have the right to the land they built on?

or do you think this is the days of the wild west and you put down a stake and it's yours?

So you think these things are built on a slab or something?
They're designed to be portable. So why not find a place they can park em rather than outlawing them?

I don't have a problem with that and don't recall saying I did.

but that would also require them working with the city to arrange something acceptable and not just erecting structures.

But why destroy them?
These people are homeless and many have mental issues,do you really expect them to show up a city council meeting and plead their case?
Why wouldnt the city step up and help the most helpless?

 

[jillian]

Because only the government knows what's best for you.

Summers claims that at least 37 tiny homes were built for the homeless from Van Nuys to Inglewood. Several volunteers came together to help. Materials were purchased with the over $100,000 in donations Summers received from people around the world who were moved by his online campaign.

Summers says he’s angry. Instead of returning the homes to the builder, the city is now destroying them, putting an end to the initiative that managed to help so many homeless individuals across the city.

L.A. Bans, Takes Down Tiny Houses Built for Homeless | The Daily Liberator

did the people building the tiny homes have the right to the land they built on?

or do you think this is the days of the wild west and you put down a stake and it's yours?

So you think these things are built on a slab or something?
They're designed to be portable. So why not find a place they can park em rather than outlawing them?

I don't have a problem with that and don't recall saying I did.

but that would also require them working with the city to arrange something acceptable and not just erecting structures.

But why destroy them?
These people are homeless and many have mental issues,do you really expect them to show up a city council meeting and plead their case?
Why wouldnt the city step up and help the most helpless?

I'm not going to speak to any of that because the o/p's source is garbage.

 

[hadit]

These are 4 X 6 ft. structures are only legal if used for dog houses. These dog houses are being placed on sidewalks, streets, alleys, and parks. The Daily Liberator? Really?

Los Angeles city attorney says ‘tiny houses’ for homeless are illegal

but they don't like rules.... unless they're theocratic rules that tell others what to do with their personal decisions. otherwise they stamp their feet and cry and whine.

Is it a good thing when the rules harm instead of help? I know it lets you fell all self-righteous and stuff, but the buildings provided people a place when they had none. Now they're gone, thanks to the bureaucracy. If we can't give them everything, we won't give them anything.

what hurts in one instance, helps in another. that's life and grown ups understand that. if a rule needs to be tweaked, it should be tweaked. but again, did the people building the little houses a) have the right to use the land; and b) get an exemption (which is usually available) to the land use rules?

I'm going to bet that the answer is no to both.

Do the homeless have the right to pitch a tent on a sidewalk or an overpass?

 

[hadit]

Because only the government knows what's best for you.

Summers claims that at least 37 tiny homes were built for the homeless from Van Nuys to Inglewood. Several volunteers came together to help. Materials were purchased with the over $100,000 in donations Summers received from people around the world who were moved by his online campaign.

Summers says he’s angry. Instead of returning the homes to the builder, the city is now destroying them, putting an end to the initiative that managed to help so many homeless individuals across the city.

L.A. Bans, Takes Down Tiny Houses Built for Homeless | The Daily Liberator

did the people building the tiny homes have the right to the land they built on?

or do you think this is the days of the wild west and you put down a stake and it's yours?

So you think these things are built on a slab or something?
They're designed to be portable. So why not find a place they can park em rather than outlawing them?

I don't have a problem with that and don't recall saying I did.

but that would also require them working with the city to arrange something acceptable and not just erecting structures.

But why destroy them?
These people are homeless and many have mental issues,do you really expect them to show up a city council meeting and plead their case?
Why wouldnt the city step up and help the most helpless?

In a sane world, the government would leap at the chance to let private citizens bear a large part of the cost of helping the homeless. Like I said, in a sane world.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

Because only the government knows what's best for you.

Summers claims that at least 37 tiny homes were built for the homeless from Van Nuys to Inglewood. Several volunteers came together to help. Materials were purchased with the over $100,000 in donations Summers received from people around the world who were moved by his online campaign.

Summers says he’s angry. Instead of returning the homes to the builder, the city is now destroying them, putting an end to the initiative that managed to help so many homeless individuals across the city.

L.A. Bans, Takes Down Tiny Houses Built for Homeless | The Daily Liberator

did the people building the tiny homes have the right to the land they built on?

or do you think this is the days of the wild west and you put down a stake and it's yours?

So you think these things are built on a slab or something?
They're designed to be portable. So why not find a place they can park em rather than outlawing them?

I don't have a problem with that and don't recall saying I did.

but that would also require them working with the city to arrange something acceptable and not just erecting structures.

Under any L.A. freeway and in the culverts and along the freeways there are many homeless in camps, some building with whatever material they can utilize.

More so now than in the past. It has been a fruitless effort to eliminate them.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

Because only the government knows what's best for you.

Summers claims that at least 37 tiny homes were built for the homeless from Van Nuys to Inglewood. Several volunteers came together to help. Materials were purchased with the over $100,000 in donations Summers received from people around the world who were moved by his online campaign.

Summers says he’s angry. Instead of returning the homes to the builder, the city is now destroying them, putting an end to the initiative that managed to help so many homeless individuals across the city.

L.A. Bans, Takes Down Tiny Houses Built for Homeless | The Daily Liberator

did the people building the tiny homes have the right to the land they built on?

or do you think this is the days of the wild west and you put down a stake and it's yours?

So you think these things are built on a slab or something?
They're designed to be portable. So why not find a place they can park em rather than outlawing them?

I don't have a problem with that and don't recall saying I did.

but that would also require them working with the city to arrange something acceptable and not just erecting structures.

But why destroy them?
These people are homeless and many have mental issues,do you really expect them to show up a city council meeting and plead their case?
Why wouldnt the city step up and help the most helpless?

The city can't eliminate them, and have no intention of helping them.

No matter how many programs we have and how much money we spend nothing seems to work to address it.

 

[Iceweasel]

What they need to do is write and enforce vagrancy laws. If you are too insane to work you need to be locked up. Everybody else has to get a job, make a job or leave.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Because only the government knows what's best for you.

did the people building the tiny homes have the right to the land they built on?

or do you think this is the days of the wild west and you put down a stake and it's yours?

So you think these things are built on a slab or something?
They're designed to be portable. So why not find a place they can park em rather than outlawing them?

I don't have a problem with that and don't recall saying I did.

but that would also require them working with the city to arrange something acceptable and not just erecting structures.

But why destroy them?
These people are homeless and many have mental issues,do you really expect them to show up a city council meeting and plead their case?
Why wouldnt the city step up and help the most helpless?

The city can't eliminate them, and have no intention of helping them.

No matter how many programs we have and how much money we spend nothing seems to work to address it.

I say open up some acreage near the city dump and let em park the damn things there. Or maybe an abandoned warehouse parking lot.

 

[Katzndogz]

These houses didn't help anyone. All they did was guarantee that the homeless were going to shit in front of the building right next door.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

did the people building the tiny homes have the right to the land they built on?

or do you think this is the days of the wild west and you put down a stake and it's yours?

So you think these things are built on a slab or something?
They're designed to be portable. So why not find a place they can park em rather than outlawing them?

I don't have a problem with that and don't recall saying I did.

but that would also require them working with the city to arrange something acceptable and not just erecting structures.

But why destroy them?
These people are homeless and many have mental issues,do you really expect them to show up a city council meeting and plead their case?
Why wouldnt the city step up and help the most helpless?

The city can't eliminate them, and have no intention of helping them.

No matter how many programs we have and how much money we spend nothing seems to work to address it.

I say open up some acreage near the city dump and let em park the damn things there. Or maybe an abandoned warehouse parking lot.

They won't go far from their source of existence.

Those that they panhandle from.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

These houses didn't help anyone. All they did was guarantee that the homeless were going to shit in front of the building right next door.

Thats true.
There would be some serious sanitation issues if you were to park em all in a lot somewhere.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

So you think these things are built on a slab or something?
They're designed to be portable. So why not find a place they can park em rather than outlawing them?

I don't have a problem with that and don't recall saying I did.

but that would also require them working with the city to arrange something acceptable and not just erecting structures.

But why destroy them?
These people are homeless and many have mental issues,do you really expect them to show up a city council meeting and plead their case?
Why wouldnt the city step up and help the most helpless?

The city can't eliminate them, and have no intention of helping them.

No matter how many programs we have and how much money we spend nothing seems to work to address it.

I say open up some acreage near the city dump and let em park the damn things there. Or maybe an abandoned warehouse parking lot.

They won't go far from their source of existence.

Those that they panhandle from.

The only reason to put em all in one place would be to make it easier to deal with them as far as help goes.
But from what I've seen of the homeless they dont want the structure in their lives.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

I don't have a problem with that and don't recall saying I did.

but that would also require them working with the city to arrange something acceptable and not just erecting structures.

But why destroy them?
These people are homeless and many have mental issues,do you really expect them to show up a city council meeting and plead their case?
Why wouldnt the city step up and help the most helpless?

The city can't eliminate them, and have no intention of helping them.

No matter how many programs we have and how much money we spend nothing seems to work to address it.

I say open up some acreage near the city dump and let em park the damn things there. Or maybe an abandoned warehouse parking lot.

They won't go far from their source of existence.

Those that they panhandle from.

The only reason to put em all in one place would be to make it easier to deal with them as far as help goes.
But from what I've seen of the homeless they dont want the structure in their lives.

Drug addicts, the mentally ill, alcoholics...

No they don't want structure. They are off the radar.

Even through charities and attempting to get them in one place will not be accepted by them.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Because only the government knows what's best for you.

Summers claims that at least 37 tiny homes were built for the homeless from Van Nuys to Inglewood. Several volunteers came together to help. Materials were purchased with the over $100,000 in donations Summers received from people around the world who were moved by his online campaign.

Summers says he’s angry. Instead of returning the homes to the builder, the city is now destroying them, putting an end to the initiative that managed to help so many homeless individuals across the city.

L.A. Bans, Takes Down Tiny Houses Built for Homeless | The Daily Liberator

But why let them buy a small house when the government can force banks to give them cheap loans to buy great big huge starter Castles?

/sarc

Again we have politicians working for the corporations and not the people.

 

[hadit]

It's one thing when the government fails to address a problem. It's quite another when it prevents the private sector from doing so.

 

[Skull Pilot]

These are 4 X 6 ft. structures are only legal if used for dog houses. These dog houses are being placed on sidewalks, streets, alleys, and parks. The Daily Liberator? Really?

Los Angeles city attorney says ‘tiny houses’ for homeless are illegal

Yeah we all know it's better to have these people sleeping on the ground where they belong

And in NYC you better not give a homeless person a bagel because the government says it's too high in sodium

Bloomberg Strikes Again: NYC Bans Food Donations To The Homeless

Better to let them starve

 

[hadit]

These are 4 X 6 ft. structures are only legal if used for dog houses. These dog houses are being placed on sidewalks, streets, alleys, and parks. The Daily Liberator? Really?

Los Angeles city attorney says ‘tiny houses’ for homeless are illegal

Yeah we all know it's better to have these people sleeping on the ground where they belong

And in NYC you better not give a homeless person a bagel because the government says it's too high in sodium

Bloomberg Strikes Again: NYC Bans Food Donations To The Homeless

Better to let them starve

I'd appreciate a really big dog house with human furniture if I had nowhere else to go and needed some shelter for the night. Wouldn't complain about it at all. I sure as heck would complain at the unelected bureaucrat who had it towed away the next morning and told me I had to have better accomodations or nothing at all.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

The unelected bureaucrats are nothing but brownshirts on a power trip.

They could care less about any of them or us.

Not that I'm expecting them to care, I just want them get out of our lives.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

These are 4 X 6 ft. structures are only legal if used for dog houses. These dog houses are being placed on sidewalks, streets, alleys, and parks. The Daily Liberator? Really?

Los Angeles city attorney says ‘tiny houses’ for homeless are illegal

But when homeless people are lying in those same places in sleeping bags, shopping carts, and make shift tents that's less of an eye sore?