Liberals Cause Their Own Homeless Problem

[Red Front]

What? I don't speak gibberish.

Yes, you do.

 

[Independent thinker]

Yes, you do.

Well, you obviously do.

 

[Red Front]

Well, you obviously do.

Obviously not, but you can pretend otherwise.

 

[notmyfault2020]

Getting the hard-core addicts off the streets effectively eliminates the dealers, at no extra cost. Maintaining the laws against use will help enable agencies to 'force' addicts into treatment. Many are now sentenced by Judges into 'involuntary' rehab.

well, if a drug user is dangerous, there should be involuntary requirements

But a person who is not a danger to self and ot hers.. sorry, but in a free society like we have, they should be free to be homeless is that is what they choose. i don't think they have a right to block entrances to businesses or homes but of course not all homeless people do that. A lot of them live in their (sometimes high end) vehicles. I heard of a woman living in her new Prius some time back.. Was that the story Tucker had? He had a story about a woman living in her car.. don't know for certain what kind of car..

 

[notmyfault2020]

That's not how a successful economy is measured. My maternal grandfather migrated here from Cuba in his late 40s, in 1961, and got a job at Bertram Yachts in Miami, Florida. He supported my grandmother, mother and siblings, with that one blue-collar job, and in 1965, after only four years of working and paying rent, he purchased a house in South Miami, in cash. Without a bank loan or mortgage. He paid it in cash.

Worse than trickle down economics is trickle down IMMORALITY, lawlessness, corruption, crime

which is something one needs to consider when voting. And those in the know realize tht the Ds are the ones who are responsible for those horrible things

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Criminalizing drug addiction makes the situation worse for everyone. You make it more difficult for the addicts to get the help they need to get off the drugs and become law-abiding, productive members of society. Burdening them with a criminal record comes with a host of socioeconomic problems and obstacles that will prevent them from being fully restored to normalcy. There's no benefit to anyone when we prosecute and incarcerate addicts.

There's no need to maintain the "criminal status" of drug addicts, to adjudicate them into drug rehab or psychiatric care. The authority comes by passing legislation that legally allows the authorities, law enforcement, to detain and admit these people into the institutions that will best meet their needs. I would call this, Operation Tough Love. OTL.

Providing them with what you derogatorily call "welfare" (adequate housing, food, medical care, case management, vocational-job training.etc), is cheaper and required to solve the problem. We have to create a platform or foundation upon which these people can build a new and better life for themselves, their families, and communities. To do otherwise is much more expensive.

I don't know or ever heard of any case where a person seeking help for addiction was arrested or imprisoned so that point is moot. But I have had known several addicts in my life, and not one of them was ever cured of addition long term with professional help, so my opinion is that the failure rate is extremely high and not a solution to the problem.

One of those people was the son of my cousin; addicted since a teen. They sent him to rehab on multiple occasions. A few years ago my cousin lost her son to a one of many OD's at the age of 28. She's never been the same since.

 

[Mac-7]

Criminalizing drug addiction makes the situation worse for everyone. You make it more difficult for the addicts to get the help they need to get off the drugs and become law-abiding, productive members of society. Burdening them with a criminal record comes with a host of socioeconomic problems and obstacles that will prevent them from being fully restored to normalcy. There's no benefit to anyone when we prosecute and incarcerate addicts.

There's no need to maintain the "criminal status" of drug addicts, to adjudicate them into drug rehab or psychiatric care. The authority comes by passing legislation that legally allows the authorities, law enforcement, to detain and admit these people into the institutions that will best meet their needs. I would call this, Operation Tough Love. OTL.

Providing them with what you derogatorily call "welfare" (adequate housing, food, medical care, case management, vocational-job training.etc), is cheaper and required to solve the problem. We have to create a platform or foundation upon which these people can build a new and better life for themselves, their families, and communities. To do otherwise is much more expensive.

Providing them with what you derogatorily call "welfare" (adequate housing, food, medical care, case management, vocational-job training.etc), is cheaper and required to solve the problem.

We dont owe then any of that

They are losers who screwed up their lives and are now pooping on the streets and robbing innocent citizens

 

[Red Front]

I don't know or ever heard of any case where a person seeking help for addiction was arrested or imprisoned so that point is moot. But I have had known several addicts in my life, and not one of them was ever cured of addition long term with professional help, so my opinion is that the failure rate is extremely high and not a solution to the problem.

One of those people was the son of my cousin; addicted since a teen. They sent him to rehab on multiple occasions. A few years ago my cousin lost her son to a one of many OD's at the age of 28. She's never been the same since.

Just more incoherent babble. I don't know or ever heard of any case where a person seeking help for addiction was arrested or imprisoned..blah blah blah. I never suggested that the reason we shouldn't criminalize drug addiction is that if they attempt to get help they will be arrested and imprisoned. Your point has nothing to do with anything I said. You're just disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing.

Criminalizing addicts makes it difficult if not impossible for them to get the assistance they need, like food, housing, pell grants for vocational-job training, federal financial aid for college..etc, because a drug related conviction disqualifies people from receiving that help. It makes one ineligible for those programs. It also undermines their ability to find employment, because they have a criminal record. Criminalizing substance abuse isn't the solution, but rather makes everything more difficult to solve.

I know many people who are former addicts and have been clean and sober for decades. They got back on their feet and would've gotten there much faster if not for the negative burden and stigma of their drug-addiction-related criminal record. It made things more difficult for them to get out of that life, not easier. The dealers should be severely punished but the addicts should be helped, in the way that I detailed in my earlier posts.

Even from a Biblical standpoint, there isn't one verse in the Bible where God commands the Israelites or Christians, to throw drunks or addicts into dungeons. Not one verse. So even Biblically, criminalizing addicts isn't warranted. It's just bad policy.

 

[Red Front]

Providing them with what you derogatorily call "welfare" (adequate housing, food, medical care, case management, vocational-job training.etc), is cheaper and required to solve the problem.

We dont owe then any of that

They are losers who screwed up their lives and are now pooping on the streets and robbing innocent citizens

People become losers and screw-ups for many different reasons. The answer is to get them off the streets and help them recover their lives. If not the situation gets even worse and more expensive for everyone. As members of society, we have social-contractual obligations and civic duties towards one another. That's what makes a society civil and functional.

"And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?" (Genesis 4:9)

​

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Just more incoherent babble. I don't know or ever heard of any case where a person seeking help for addiction was arrested or imprisoned..blah blah blah. I never suggested that the reason we shouldn't criminalize drug addiction is that if they attempt to get help they will be arrested and imprisoned. Your point has nothing to do with anything I said. You're just disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing.

Criminalizing addicts makes it difficult if not impossible for them to get the assistance they need, like food, housing, pell grants for vocational-job training, federal financial aid for college..etc, because a drug related conviction disqualify people from receiving that help. It makes one ineligible for those programs. It also undermines their ability to find employment, because they have a criminal record. Criminalizing substance abuse isn't the solution, but rather makes everything more difficult to solve.

I know many people who are former addicts and have been clean and sober for decades. They got back on their feet and would've gotten there much faster if not for the negative burden and stigma of their drug-addiction-related criminal record. It made things more difficult for them to get out of that life, not easier. The dealers should be severely punished but the addicts should be helped, in the way that I detailed in my earlier posts.

Even from a Biblical standpoint, there isn't one verse in the Bible where God commands the Israelites or Christians, to throw drunks or addicts into dungeons. Not one verse. So even Biblically, criminalizing addicts isn't warranted. It's just bad policy.

You didn't make that point very clear. You said

Criminalizing drug addiction makes the situation worse for everyone. You make it more difficult for the addicts to get the help they need to get off the drugs and become law-abiding, productive members of society.

There are only two ways to do this: criminalizing drugs or decriminalizing drugs. If you decriminalize drugs, you're going to end up with more drug users and additcs. There have been many problems in states that decriminalized pot. As for locking up sellers, I totally agree with you. Selling dangerous drugs should be a capital offense. At the very least 20 years minimum prison sentence.

 

[Red Front]

You didn't make that point very clear. You said



There are only two ways to do this: criminalizing drugs or decriminalizing drugs. If you decriminalize drugs, you're going to end up with more drug users and additcs. There have been many problems in states that decriminalized pot. As for locking up sellers, I totally agree with you. Selling dangerous drugs should be a capital offense. At the very least 20 years minimum prison sentence.

Well good, at least we agree on something.

We will only end up with more drug addicts if we don't educate people on the dangers of drug use and if authorities don't have available a system in place to force addicts into the proper mental-health programs and institutions. You don't send them to jail or prison where they will just continue using drugs, but to the psyche-ward. A mental institution, where they can get the help they need. If they keep testing positive and screwing up, they might end up permanently institutionalized, as a person who is unable to function and take care of themselves.

In a way, they're still being separated from society, but without the criminal stigma that only hurts their ability to function and get back on their feet.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Well good, at least we agree on something.

We will only end up with more drug addicts if we don't educate people on the dangers of drug use and if authorities don't have available a system in place to force addicts into the proper mental-health programs and institutions. You don't send them to jail or prison where they will just continue using drugs, but to the psyche-ward. A mental institution, where they can get the help they need. If they keep testing positive and screwing up, they might end up permanently institutionalized, as a person who is unable to function and take care of themselves.

In a way, they're still being separated from society, but without the criminal stigma that only hurts their ability to function and get back on their feet.

But that's been decided by the courts years ago. You can't institutionalize anybody that didn't commit a crime. Everybody has constitutional rights including homeless people and drug addicts. Years ago we took these people to court and had them committed by a judge. They put a stop to that. It's one of the reasons we have so many homeless people today. There is nothing we can do to them unless they break some kind of law.

When you have a problem the first thing you do is go to the source. In this case, that source is the southern border. The problem we have now is we stupidly elected an open-border President and he's letting them in, with drugs, by the millions.

We can't get rid of him for at least another two years, and judging by how stupid and ignorant voters have become, there's a chance this joker could get re-elected or somebody from the same cut of cloth. What we are doing is letting the rats in the house and then trying to figure out how to catch them.

 

[Mac-7]

People become losers and screw-ups for many different reasons. The answer is to get them off the streets and help them recover their lives. If not the situation gets even worse and more expensive for everyone. As members of society, we have social-contractual obligations and civic duties towards one another. That's what makes a society civil and functional.

View attachment 740494​

"And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?" (Genesis 4:9)

​

I want to get them off the streets

Set up a hospital far away in the wilderness 100 miles from anywhere

Furnish the basic needs but no frills and no drugs

Give them 6-9 months to dry out and if there are no crimes pending against them let them go

And repeat as often as necessary

 

[Mac-7]

I don't know or ever heard of any case where a person seeking help for addiction was arrested or imprisoned so that point is moot. But I have had known several addicts in my life, and not one of them was ever cured of addition long term with professional help, so my opinion is that the failure rate is extremely high and not a solution to the problem.

One of those people was the son of my cousin; addicted since a teen. They sent him to rehab on multiple occasions. A few years ago my cousin lost her son to a one of many OD's at the age of 28. She's never been the same since.

One person on the insane washington swamp knew what to do

Her name was Nancy Reagan and her advice was just say no

 

[Red Front]

I want to get them off the streets

Set up a hospital far away in the wilderness 100 miles from anywhere

Furnish the basic needs but no frills and no drugs

Give them 6-9 months to dry out and if there are no crimes pending against them let them go

And repeat as often as necessary

Let them go where? You're not making any sense.

 

[Red Front]

One person on the insane washington swamp knew what to do

Her name was Nancy Reagan and her advice was just say no

Not everyone says NO for whatever reason and they're now homeless:



Homelessness and drug addiction are more expensive than the solution.

 

[Red Front]

But that's been decided by the courts years ago. You can't institutionalize anybody that didn't commit a crime. Everybody has constitutional rights including homeless people and drug addicts. Years ago we took these people to court and had them committed by a judge. They put a stop to that. It's one of the reasons we have so many homeless people today. There is nothing we can do to them unless they break some kind of law.

When you have a problem the first thing you do is go to the source. In this case, that source is the southern border. The problem we have now is we stupidly elected an open-border President and he's letting them in, with drugs, by the millions.

We can't get rid of him for at least another two years, and judging by how stupid and ignorant voters have become, there's a chance this joker could get re-elected or somebody from the same cut of cloth. What we are doing is letting the rats in the house and then trying to figure out how to catch them.

What's been decided in the past can be changed. The constitution itself makes provision for the American people to amend it to meet their needs. However, we're not even going to have to alter the constitution, because the courts can overturn past decisions and allow people to be adjudicated "insane" and institutionalized when they insist on using drugs, hurting themselves and everyone else around them. The drug addict would be forced into drug-rehab or a mental institution until they're able to be released and function, without being a public health hazard.

Blaming Mexicans is just stupid.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What's been decided in the past can be changed. The constitution itself makes provision for the American people to amend it to meet their needs. However, we're not even going to have to alter the constitution, because the courts can overturn past decisions and allow people to be adjudicated "insane" and institutionalized when they insist on using drugs, hurting themselves and everyone else around them. The drug addict would be forced into drug-rehab or a mental institution until they're able to be released and function, without being a public health hazard.

Blaming Mexicans is just stupid.

Never blamed the Mexicans, I blame people that vote Democrat and this clown of a President in particular.

Good luck trying to get somebody to change that ruling or a constitutional amendment.

 

[Woodznutz]

well, if a drug user is dangerous, there should be involuntary requirements

But a person who is not a danger to self and ot hers.. sorry, but in a free society like we have, they should be free to be homeless is that is what they choose. i don't think they have a right to block entrances to businesses or homes but of course not all homeless people do that. A lot of them live in their (sometimes high end) vehicles. I heard of a woman living in her new Prius some time back.. Was that the story Tucker had? He had a story about a woman living in her car.. don't know for certain what kind of car..

One of the many problems with drug use is the crime associated with it. The only way to reduce the crime is to reduce the flow of money coming from the users.

 

[Woodznutz]

One person on the insane washington swamp knew what to do

Her name was Nancy Reagan and her advice was just say no

It works. I have never used narcotics of any kind (I do imbibe in alcohol however).

*While typing this I'm enjoying a 'Tom 'n Jerry'.