“They arrested a homeless man in a shelter for being homeless.”
Any society which in any way thinks this makes sense needs to take a good, deep look at itself and then start thinking over.
Any society which in any way thinks this makes sense needs to take a good, deep look at itself and then start thinking over.
Personally, I think the fact that so many of our homeless are veterans should be criminal. But this is a democracy, and I am out voted.
The reality is that the vast majority of the chronic homeless are both poor and physically or mentally ill (or both). It's a natural consequence of the closing of so many mental institutions (which in and of itself is not a bad thing) without providing alternative treatment and housing options (which in and of itself is a bad thing).
Add all of this to the fact that it is by and large expensive to be poor and you end up with large groups in America who are unable to shift their fortunes in any meaningful way.
Yes, there will be a few fortunate individuals that manage to claw their way out of being poor in America (and they will be held up as examples by all sides, missing the point that they are the exception for a reason!), but in general people who are poor in America stay poor in America.
[I suspect that one could substitute "Canada" or "France" or "England" or most other Western countries for "America" here, even if the problems and reasons are slightly different. Toronto has a substantial chronic homeless problem because of idiotic downloading of social programs from the province to the city and subsequent reduction of mental health programs. Note as well that I'm differentiating between chronic homeless and temporary homeless; your statement about "not destined to stay..." is true for the temporary homeless. The original article is mostly about the chronic homeless.]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deinstitutionalisation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_United_Stat...
http://www.nrchmi.samhsa.gov/Channel/View.aspx?id=18 http://www.nationalhomeless.org/factsheets/
The general impression that I've obtained in my casual reading of this over the years is that (a) there have always been "indigents", but (b) the numbers have gone way up since the 1960s and (c) a disproportionate number of "indigents"/homeless have been those with mental illnesses.
Inaccurate and sensationalist. Earlier in the same paragraph:
It turned out that Mr. Szekely, who is an ordained minister and does not drink, do drugs or curse in front of ladies, did indeed have a warrant - for not appearing in court to face a charge of "criminal trespassing"
He wasn't arrested for being homeless; he was arrested for an outstanding warrant.
You may or may not be arrested, charged, or convicted for other crimes, but one thing's for sure: law enforcement seems to take it personally when you don't appear. Anyone with an outstanding warrant risks immediate arrest at any time. The reasonableness of the original charge doesn't matter.
Yeah he got arrested for being homeless.
What do you suggest the police do? Just forget about expecting homeless people to make their court dates? Or perhaps homeless people can be exempt from certain types of crimes? Maybe we should just immediately throw them in jail, because there not going to be able to come back to court -- they're homeless.
When you're charged, you know there will be a court date, whether you have an address or not. It's your responsibility to show up for it, homeless or not. Simply because you don't get your mail doesn't mean that somehow society is punishing you for being homeless -- lots of people miss court dates and end up in jail for it.
Come on guys, use some critical thinking skills here. [Now I got sucked into this. Geesh]
Anatole France: "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
There is no natural law passed down from the heavens that decrees that you can later be arrested and jailed for not responding to a court summons in a timely fashion, regardless of circumstance, and regardless of the severity of the original charge. Just because it's the way it is doesn't mean that it is necessarily fair, just, or reasonable.
Not commenting on the rest of your post, using my critical thinking, it would seem odd at best to expect people without a home, without an address, to be able to read or respond to mail. And court-dates are rarely if ever decided at the time of apprehension.
If your primary goal is merely to stay alive, I think you will find your priorities somewhat different from the ones had by the rest of society.
But I can see this going on and on. You have your point of view, I have mine. We're obviously not going to agree, so let's leave it at that.
It sounds like there is an opportunity for people to help homeless folks by providing them with post office boxes and voice mail. Seems like I read that a lot of charities are already doing that? Wouldn't that be a cool startup idea? (if you could find a way to monetize it)
To me, this conversation has the same problem that homelessness itself has (and I speak from experience). You can either look at everything like an obstacle or like an opportunity.