Thread View: scruz.general
11 messages
11 total messages
Started by dhm_at_best_dot_com
Tue, 16 Jan 2007 00:46
(fwd) Santa Cruz Homeless Update - Middle Class Councilmembers Attempt to Pit the Police Against the Poor
Author: dhm_at_best_dot_com
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 00:46
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 00:46
337 lines
18510 bytes
18510 bytes
>From Robert Norse Tue Jan 9 00:31:27 2007 Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:31:27 -0800 Subject: City Council Moves Today To Expand Police Power Against Poor - More Police Punishing the Poor in the Pogonip by Robert Norse ( rnorse3 [at] hotmail.com ) City Council is posed to rubberstamp another police state expansion of power giving NIMBY (Not-in-my-backyard) bureaucrats a green light, funds, and weapons against the poor. TUESDAY AT 3 PM--ANOTHER ATTACK ON THE POOR Coming up at the afternoon session of City Council is another expansion of police power in the Parks and Recreation Department, using street repair and park maintenance money from the increased sales tax to increase the crackdown on the homeless. Item #15, which could come up as early as 3:05 PM, describes itself as "Park, Open Space and Waterway Security Program Using Measure H Funds" "Motion to direct the Director of Parks and Recreation and the Chief of Police to work with the City Manager to create the necessary positions needed to implement Parks Security Divisions in the Parks and Recreation and Police Departments." The City of Santa Cruz's 1500-2000 homeless people have access to emergency shelter with a capacity of 160 people. The rules also exclude those who work during the day, have pets, have health problems, or who lack photo ID. Police issue $90 camping tickets for those they target, without checking whether there is any legal place they can actually go (almost always there isn't). So they violate the Federal principles laid down by the 9th Circuit Court in the Jones decision banning police arrest of the L.A. Skidrow homeless at night. (The principle was "no shelter available = no arrests permitted"). Parks and Rec ranger John Wallace has gone further. The entire SCPD only issued, according to information released under a Public Records Act request, about 30 citations per month from April to Decermber of 2006. Wallace singlehandedly has issued more citations. Further Wallace has directed Public Works teams to come in and destroy homeless property as "garbage", including usable tents, blankets, and sleeping bags, as well as personal property. A Federal judge in Fresno in the Kincaid case has found such behavior unconstitutional; a trial for damages now awaits city authorities who authorized or permitted these human rights abuses. [http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/11/23/18332519.php] Likewise in Santa Cruz, such behavior is unconstitutional, abusive, unworthy of a civilized community, and a resurgence of the War Against the Poor locally. It also threatenes homeless survival in winter. Witnesses have testified they observed Wallace's supervising workers who systematically and regularly gather and then slash homeless gear with knives and then toss the scraps into dumpsters. MORE MONEY FOR THE VANDALS Police chief Skerry, P & R czarina Shoemaker, and City Manager-for-Life Dick Wilson now propose an expansion of these vicious raids on those without shelter. Though written before December 13th (see below), the "Security Program" report was only released to the public seventy-two hours before the Council meeting. The Good Times did its part with a scare story demonizing surival campers in the downtown area. [http://www.gtweekly.com/news/story.2007-01-03.6678368356] As usual there are no crime statistics either with the Good Times article or with the Council request for more "Homeland Security" forces here against the "escalating" "illegal" activities. This mirrors the approach used by Bush nationally (more troops, whatever the cost) and by the Public Works Department last year in passing the Parking Garage Paranoia Law (which they call the Parking Garage Trespass Law). COLLATERAL ATTACKS ON THE HOMELESS AND RESTRICTIONS ON PUBLIC SPACES: Last year City Council voted to give Schumaker the power to drive the homeless from the city parking garage structures (and Parking Lot #9 across from the Elmo St. Mission feeding program) with their Parking Garage Trespass Law. This law makes it illegal to enter a parking garage unless you are parking a car or bicycle or picking one up and then allows you only 15 minutes to do so. The fine could be anywhere from $100 to $200. With the new expedited "no warrants" "speedy civil collection process", a $300 fine will be added if the fines are not immediately paid. Signs in parking lots ban "loitering" (without specifying the ridiculous 15 minutes alloted to paying customers to hustle out of their cars and out of the parking lot). The promised "free speech" exceptions that would allow people to leave flyers on cars, for instance, have not yet materialized. OTHER AGGRANDIZEMENTS OF POWER BY SHOEMAKER: Smoking (of cannabis or tobacco) has been banned from all city parks--without any meaningful public process or reasonable discussion (such as allotting smoking areas to addicted tobacco smokers, or considering the needs of homeless medical marijuana patients). The Parks and Recreation Commission, although usually a rubberstamping body, has been cut out of a process which now allows Shoemaker to unilaterally close down any area policed by Wallace and his associates (i.e. "set closing hours"). This includes areas along Pacific Avenue and the City Council grounds themselves. SCAPEGOATING THE HOMELESS MAY HAVE FINANCIAL CONSEQUENCES Creating new enemies for suvival camping and then criminalizing them does not pass the "straight face" test. But apparently it's business-as-usual with the City Council. Instead of designating camping areas, the City is imperiling the health and safety of the poorest by creating more police power to drive them deeper into the greenbelts. Instead of creating "safe camper" programs and acknowledging the unmet needs of our homeless population, the Reilly-Coonerty Council is pursuing a gentrification agenda which also makes the city legally vulnerable under the Jones and Kincaid decisions. COUNCIL'S DONE DEAL MAKES "WITHIN THE SYSTEM" OPPOSITION DIFFICULT. Folks can, of course, call City Council at 420-5020 and demand that more funds for thuggery be put on hold (just as more funding for additional troops in Iraq needs to be stopped). The measure is coming up at an afternoon session when most of the community can't easily attend. It's being advanced as an "administrative business" item, which limits the amount of public discussion allowed (3 minutes if you haven't talked on any other administrative item, 1 minute if you have). It's being put forward without meaningful public notice. It seems pretty clear that Mayor "Smiley" Reilly is ready to rubberstamp another police empowerment measure without considering its impact on the poor. It's becoming clear that a combination of direct action and legal attacks are probably the only effective resistance, though letting Rotkin, Robinson, Reilly, and the rest know how you feel (same phone number as above) isn't a bad idea. NIMBY-POLICE VIGILANTE COLLUSION AGAINST THE POOR? Particularly ominous in the staff report is the suggestion that neighbors should "team up" with the police in snitching on the poor as part of the war on "illegal activity" (using the Drug War, of course, as the scare justification). Not only is the whole procedure cruel, costly, coarsening, and toxic for the poor--it is useless. Last year there were more busts for marijuana than during any prior year (and Santa Cruz's Sheriff Robbins and D.A. Bob Lee continue to arrest and harass, in spite of Proposition 215), but are less people smoking marijuana. Will homeless people stop sleeping and camping because the harassment increases? Or will they simply so less safely, more secretly, and more fearfully? The Scotts Valley anti-camping law goes into effect January 20th. More people died homeless in 2006 in Santa Cruz County than in any previous year, according to the official count. ENVIRONMENTAL EXCUSES FOR EXPANDED POLICE POWER LAUGHABLE It's bitterly ironic that part of the justification for this measure is to protect the environment, when the city is refusing to put in 24-hour bathrooms downtown (and engaging in a costly upgrade of the Lighthouse Field bathroom while ignoring needs elsewhere in the city). All the downtown portapotties have been removed including the portapotty at the Farmer's Market--the last of the 5 put in under the Krohn-Sugar-Fitzmaurice administrations. The urinal in the men's room of the daytime bathroom on Soquel Avenue across from New Leaf Market has been torn out. The previously public bathroom in the Locust St. garage is due to be privatized to protect the sensibilities of Public Works parking garage workers. RESIST TWO WARS--THE WAR IN IRAQ AND THE WAR ON THE POOR Meanwhile the Council remains silent with nothing on its agenda regarding the proposed murderous "surge" of troops in Iraq. HUFF (Homeless United for Friendship & Freedom) urges community members to join the Vigil Against Two Wars--the War on Iraq and the War Against the Poor. Camping out at federal buildings like the post office, Farr's office, the FBI office downtown--would be a visible protest that would send a strong message. Contact 423-4833 if you want to support such a drive. BELOW IS THE STAFF REPORT SUPPORTING THE $700,000 POLICING MEASURE PROPOSED FOR THE PARKS (The actual cost is unclear since the report, interestingly enough, does not give specifics) ----- On-line Staff Report CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT DATE: December 13, 2006 AGENDA OF: January 9, 2007 DEPARTMENT: Parks and Recreation Department and Police Department SUBJECT: Park, Open Space and Waterway Security Program Using Measure H Funds RECOMMENDATION: That City Council direct the Director of Parks and Recreation and the Chief of Police to work with the City Manager to create the necessary positions needed to implement Parks Security Divisions in the Parks and Recreation and Police Departments. BACKGROUND: On Tuesday, November 7, 2006, Santa Cruz City residents approved Measure H. This ballot measure made permanent the five-year ? cent sales tax rate passed by voters in 2002 and added a new ? cent sales tax rate. The City Council, in conjunction with its placement of Measure H on the ballot, adopted a resolution stating that the City Council's intent was that the City would use the additional revenue generated by the new ? cent sales tax rate for street maintenance and repairs and City Park maintenance, supervision and public safety. DISCUSSION: Over the past few years the City has experienced increasing challenges with the condition of its parks, open space and waterways. Existing City staff has tried to cope with the accumulation of garbage and camping debris and escalating illegal activities in the City's parklands by combining Parks and Recreation and Police Department resources along with contractual labor to deal with the most egregious illegal campsites. Illegal activities, including drug dealing and use, prostitution, illegal camping and garbage dumping are evident in the majority of the City's parks, open spaces and waterways. Not only do these activities pose public safety issues, they also present public health and environmental challenges. In addition, the illegal activities also discourage law-abiding citizens from using the City facilities. The problems described above have escalated over the last four years because of an actual increase in the amount of illegal activities as well as a decrease in security and maintenance staff. The model of pairing the existing park ranger with a police officer was very effective in addressing some of the illegal activities over the past several months, but due to limited resources, the illegal activity just moved from one site to another. Given the level of illegal activity in our parks, open space and waterways, staff recommends developing a staffing program that combines Park Rangers and Police Department Community Service Officers. The Community Service Officers and their supervisor will be assigned full time to parks, open space and waterways, and will be focused on curtailing illegal activities specifically in neighborhood parks and the River Levee. The Park Rangers and their supervisor will coordinate parks, open space and waterway cleanups, and provide some routine maintenance in the open space areas of the parks system. The Rangers will also provide interpretive services and work with neighbors throughout the park system. In addition to the CSO's, Rangers and supervisors hired with Measure H funds, Parks Maintenance Workers will also be hired as well as purchasing necessary equipment and supplies. Both units will work together to make our parks, open space and waterways safer and cleaner for all. Recruitment for some of the positions will take months so it is staff's intent to begin recruitment after the first of the year so that appointments can be made as soon as the funding becomes available. Staff will return to City Council with a budget adjustment and a final staffing plan. FISCAL IMPACT: Measure H funding will become available in April. The additional ? cent will generate approximately $2.4 million per year of which approximately $700,000 will be available for parks, open space and waterway security and maintenance annually. Submitted by: Dannettee Shoemaker Director of Parks and Recreation Approved by: Richard C. Wilson City Manager Submitted by: Howard Skerry Chief of Police http://www.huffsantacruz.org --------- No Surprise--Unanimous Council Kicks Down $700,000 to Cops & Rangers by Robert Norse Wednesday Jan 10th, 2007 10:23 PM With less than 15 minutes discussion, the Reilly Council rubberstamped the Skerry-Wilson- Shoemaker Bumbuster Patrols. When I spoke at the meeting, P & R boss Shoemaker freely acknowledged the matter had not been brought before a Parks and Recreation Commission. She and her staff had not heard from any significant social service provider, homeless advocate, health worker, or homeless camper. Most significant for those champeoning police solutions to "illegal camping" problems, she had no record of the alleged "illegal" activities which this huge infusion of more money was supposed to cure. Even though a line-up of police heads (Chief Skerry, Deputy Chief Vogel, and others) were in the backrow, Council didn't ask one question about the actual incidence of "illegal activities" in the Pogonip, and what percentage of the citations there were for survival camping (where there was no alternative shelter). At City Council, Shoemaker bragged about teaming up cops with the ticket-happy Ranger John Wallace. How they had successfully run "problems" out of San Lorenzo Park, Grant St. Park, and the other parks, though there was the troublesome admission that the problems then popped up elsewhere. It was interesting to note, as mentioned in the main post, that during the same period of time Pastor Dennis Adams's Sunday morning homeless meal was driven out of San Lorenzo Park and then Grant St. [Adams is currently struggling to return the meal to the basement of the Vet's Hall, whose management reportedly is under the control of a management more concerned with making money by renting out the space to outside groups like Yoga classes and has told Adams that his homeless clients "dirty up" the bathrooms. Adams claims his clients actually leave the place spotless and clean up the mess that the profit-making Saturday night events leave behind. When he tried to feed people in the Vet's Parking Lot, Officer Brandt threatened to arrest them for trespass. In December when Adams moved his meal to the City Parking Garage because of the rain and no place else to go, Adams was threatened with arrest under Councilmember Coonerty's Parking Garage Paranoia Law] Porter chided critics for not "coming to the process earlier" (though advocates have been at the few difficult-to-attend afternoon sessions where this issue had some attention last year). He insisted the issue had been given adequate process, even though the citizen advisory commission specifically charged with examining the matter had not been approached for a formal vote. Reilly refused HUFF the five minutes usually allowed for organizations discussing agenda items (though she said that if approached in advance in future, it would be allowed). Neither Ken Cole, Paul Brindel, nor any social service provider apbothered to show at the Council meeting to discuss the impact of intensifying the criminalization of those without shelter. I shall be playing the City Council's "discussion" of the issue Thursday January 11 around 7 PM on Free Radio Santa Cruz (101.1 FM, http://www.freakradio.org). It'll be archived at http://www.huffsantacruz.org under the Bathrobespierre's Broadside show of the same date.
Re: (fwd) Santa Cruz Homeless Update - Middle Class Councilmembers Attempt to Pit the Police Against the Poor
Author: Rudy Canoza
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 03:08
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 03:08
22 lines
2443 bytes
2443 bytes
dhm_at_best_dot_com@yahoo.com wrote: > >From Robert Norse Tue Jan 9 00:31:27 2007 > > Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:31:27 -0800 > Subject: City Council Moves Today To Expand Police Power Against Poor > - > More Police Punishing the Poor in the Pogonip This massive and massively incoherent load of SHIT perfectly illustrates, again, the big myths of homelessness, mostly in its lumping of all the homeless together as people "just like you and me" who happen only to be poor. It's crap. It is dishonest to talk about "the homeless" as an undifferentiated class of people. Most homeless are seriously mentally ill, have major subtance abuse problems, or both. VERY FEW homeless people are "just like you and me." Santa Cruz is one of those places infected with a naive form of liberalism that makes a mockery of true compassion. The answer to the plight of homeless people is not to try to keep them homeless, as this idiot seems to think.
Re: (fwd) Santa Cruz Homeless Update - Middle Class Councilmembers Attempt to Pit the Police Against the Poor
Author: dhm_at_best_dot_com
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 10:13
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 10:13
26 lines
2646 bytes
2646 bytes
Rudy Canoza wrote: > dhm_at_best_dot_com@yahoo.com wrote: > > >From Robert Norse Tue Jan 9 00:31:27 2007 > > > > Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:31:27 -0800 > > Subject: City Council Moves Today To Expand Police Power Against Poor > > - > > More Police Punishing the Poor in the Pogonip > > This massive and massively incoherent load of SHIT perfectly > illustrates, again, the big myths of homelessness, mostly in its > lumping of all the homeless together as people "just like you and me" > who happen only to be poor. It's crap. > > It is dishonest to talk about "the homeless" as an undifferentiated > class of people. Most homeless are seriously mentally ill, have major > subtance abuse problems, or both. VERY FEW homeless people are "just > like you and me." > > Santa Cruz is one of those places infected with a naive form of > liberalism that makes a mockery of true compassion. The answer to the > plight of homeless people is not to try to keep them homeless, as this > idiot seems to think. Which robot factory did you come out of?
Re: (fwd) Santa Cruz Homeless Update - Middle Class Councilmembers Attempt to Pit the Police Against the Poor
Author: Rudy Canoza
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 15:00
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 15:00
41 lines
3384 bytes
3384 bytes
dhm_at_best_dot_com@yahoo.com wrote: > Rudy Canoza wrote: >> dhm_at_best_dot_com@yahoo.com wrote: >>> >From Robert Norse Tue Jan 9 00:31:27 2007 >>> >>> Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:31:27 -0800 >>> Subject: City Council Moves Today To Expand Police Power Against Poor >>> - >>> More Police Punishing the Poor in the Pogonip >> This massive and massively incoherent load of SHIT perfectly >> illustrates, again, the big myths of homelessness, mostly in its >> lumping of all the homeless together as people "just like you and me" >> who happen only to be poor. It's crap. >> >> It is dishonest to talk about "the homeless" as an undifferentiated >> class of people. Most homeless are seriously mentally ill, have major >> subtance abuse problems, or both. VERY FEW homeless people are "just >> like you and me." >> >> Santa Cruz is one of those places infected with a naive form of >> liberalism that makes a mockery of true compassion. The answer to the >> plight of homeless people is not to try to keep them homeless, as this >> idiot seems to think. > > Which robot factory did you come out of? Nice whiff-off, asshole. You are full of shit about homelessness and the "virtues" of homeless people. Normal people don't like them congregating around parks and business districts, shitting and pissing wherever and whenever, haranguing people, degrading the quality of life in neighborhoods. Normal people are sick of them, and they're even more sick of jackballs like you who don't really give a fuck about the homeless, but instead are merely using them as pawns in order to lash out at good, normal, productive citizens. You really are an asshole. You are USING homeless people for a really juvenile, misanthropic agenda.
Re: (fwd) Santa Cruz Homeless Update - Middle Class Councilmembers Attempt to Pit the Police Against the Poor
Author: dhm_at_best_dot_com
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 01:31
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 01:31
20 lines
2394 bytes
2394 bytes
Rudy Canoza wrote: > Nice whiff-off, asshole. > > You are full of shit about homelessness and the > "virtues" of homeless people. Normal people don't like > them congregating around parks and business districts, > shitting and pissing wherever and whenever, haranguing > people, degrading the quality of life in neighborhoods. > Normal people are sick of them, and they're even more > sick of jackballs like you who don't really give a fuck > about the homeless, but instead are merely using them > as pawns in order to lash out at good, normal, > productive citizens. > > You really are an asshole. You are USING homeless > people for a really juvenile, misanthropic agenda. Are you a normal person?
Re: (fwd) Santa Cruz Homeless Update - Middle Class Councilmembers Attempt to Pit the Police Against the Poor
Author: Rudy Canoza
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 01:45
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 01:45
29 lines
2791 bytes
2791 bytes
dhm_at_best_dot_com@yahoo.com wrote: > Rudy Canoza wrote: > > > Nice whiff-off, asshole. > > > > You are full of shit about homelessness and the > > "virtues" of homeless people. Normal people don't like > > them congregating around parks and business districts, > > shitting and pissing wherever and whenever, haranguing > > people, degrading the quality of life in neighborhoods. > > Normal people are sick of them, and they're even more > > sick of jackballs like you who don't really give a fuck > > about the homeless, but instead are merely using them > > as pawns in order to lash out at good, normal, > > productive citizens. > > > > You really are an asshole. You are USING homeless > > people for a really juvenile, misanthropic agenda. > > Are you a normal person? Yes. I don't have a substance abuse problem, I'm not psychotic and I'm not homeless. How about you? Why do you think encouraging defectives to congregate and foul public areas is a good thing? It isn't a good thing, but I'm curious to know why you think it is.
Re: (fwd) Santa Cruz Homeless Update - Middle Class Councilmembers Attempt to Pit the Police Against the Poor
Author: Chip Flintknapper
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 07:45
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 07:45
48 lines
3666 bytes
3666 bytes
Rudy Canoza wrote: > dhm_at_best_dot_com@yahoo.com wrote: > >>>From Robert Norse Tue Jan 9 00:31:27 2007 >> >>Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:31:27 -0800 >>Subject: City Council Moves Today To Expand Police Power Against Poor >>- >>More Police Punishing the Poor in the Pogonip > > > This massive and massively incoherent load of SHIT perfectly > illustrates, again, the big myths of homelessness, mostly in its > lumping of all the homeless together as people "just like you and me" > who happen only to be poor. It's crap. > > It is dishonest to talk about "the homeless" as an undifferentiated > class of people. Most homeless are seriously mentally ill, have major > subtance abuse problems, or both. VERY FEW homeless people are "just > like you and me." > I see you are well caught up on your propaganda. > > Santa Cruz is one of those places infected with a naive form of > liberalism that makes a mockery of true compassion. The answer to the > plight of homeless people is not to try to keep them homeless, as this > idiot seems to think. > First of all, separate the homeless from the poor, and the homeless will stop getting blamed for the crimes that are usually committed by the poor, such as drug use and prostitution. Secondly, nothing much has changed about the homeless population since it's creation in 1981; it is a handy dumping ground, and a money-maker for many. That is, the politicians, the shelters, and the charities all have a stake in maintaining the homeless population just as it is. The charities are especially bad about it, collecting money for the homeless, and then helping the poor instead. Of course they keep 90% of it for themselves; they can't afford to risk the old Cadillac. The only way to change things is for the homeless to start breaking the bones of their muggers, as well as the assholes who destroy their property. I do mean that it's time for them to get violent. Hell, it's been time for years; the people who put them there in the first place are nothing but dirty Fascists anyway.
Re: (fwd) Santa Cruz Homeless Update - Middle Class Councilmembers Attempt to Pit the Police Against the Poor
Author: Chip Flintknapper
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 08:03
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 08:03
77 lines
4966 bytes
4966 bytes
Rudy Canoza wrote: > dhm_at_best_dot_com@yahoo.com wrote: > >> Rudy Canoza wrote: >> >>> dhm_at_best_dot_com@yahoo.com wrote: >>> >>>> >From Robert Norse Tue Jan 9 00:31:27 2007 >>>> >>>> Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:31:27 -0800 >>>> Subject: City Council Moves Today To Expand Police Power Against Poor >>>> - >>>> More Police Punishing the Poor in the Pogonip >>> >>> This massive and massively incoherent load of SHIT perfectly >>> illustrates, again, the big myths of homelessness, mostly in its >>> lumping of all the homeless together as people "just like you and me" >>> who happen only to be poor. It's crap. >>> >>> It is dishonest to talk about "the homeless" as an undifferentiated >>> class of people. Most homeless are seriously mentally ill, have major >>> subtance abuse problems, or both. VERY FEW homeless people are "just >>> like you and me." >>> >>> Santa Cruz is one of those places infected with a naive form of >>> liberalism that makes a mockery of true compassion. The answer to the >>> plight of homeless people is not to try to keep them homeless, as this >>> idiot seems to think. >> >> >> Which robot factory did you come out of? > > > Nice whiff-off, asshole. > > You are full of shit about homelessness and the "virtues" of homeless > people. Normal people don't like them congregating around parks and > business districts, shitting and pissing wherever and whenever, > haranguing people, degrading the quality of life in neighborhoods. > Normal people are sick of them, and they're even more sick of jackballs > like you who don't really give a fuck about the homeless, but instead > are merely using them as pawns in order to lash out at good, normal, > productive citizens. > > You really are an asshole. You are USING homeless people for a really > juvenile, misanthropic agenda. You're right, they never should have been there in the first place. There weren't any in 1980, but there were hundreds of thousands in 1981. So let's figure out just exactly who is responsible for it, and put them in the public light. If it turns out to be some failed social experiment, then the responsible parties should be called to task and prosecuted. How about this; we take every homeless person off the street, and put them in an apartment or some old house for say, three months rent free, and give them $100 a month plus food stamps. Not together as a group, but spread out, and not in contact with one another. In the meantime, we close down all the shelters, and other social service programs that depend on them. Most of all, we do not supervise the people that we have removed from the street, we just leave them on their own. If, after the end of the three months, they don't have their rent, then they would be SOL, but, I'll just bet that most of them would have found another way by then, and the remainder really would be the one's who rate a mental hospital. In the long run, this would be the most prudent way out, since after that final expense, it would all be over. Of course, in order for this to work, we would have to exclude the poor, who would doubtless be at forefront, as they always are when they think that something is free. We can take care of the poor later. These are people, not animals.
Re: (fwd) Santa Cruz Homeless Update - Middle Class Councilmembers Attempt to Pit the Police Against the Poor
Author: Tim May
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 08:04
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 08:04
24 lines
2353 bytes
2353 bytes
In article <tukrh.12257$yx6.549@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>, Chip Flintknapper <nobody@home.us> wrote: > The only way to change things is for the homeless to start breaking the > bones of their muggers, as well as the assholes who destroy their > property. I do mean that it's time for them to get violent. > > Hell, it's been time for years; the people who put them there in the > first place are nothing but dirty Fascists anyway. You bums and winos and beggars and drifters and scum want war with we property owners? Fine, you got war. And we have the lighter fluid we used in 1982 to set the bums on fire. Fuck the so-called "homeless" dead. --Tim May
Re: (fwd) Santa Cruz Homeless Update - Middle Class Councilmembers Attempt to Pit the Police Against the Poor
Author: dhm_at_best_dot_com
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 11:30
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 11:30
33 lines
2971 bytes
2971 bytes
Rudy Canoza wrote: > dhm_at_best_dot_com@yahoo.com wrote: > > Rudy Canoza wrote: > > > > > Nice whiff-off, asshole. > > > > > > You are full of shit about homelessness and the > > > "virtues" of homeless people. Normal people don't like > > > them congregating around parks and business districts, > > > shitting and pissing wherever and whenever, haranguing > > > people, degrading the quality of life in neighborhoods. > > > Normal people are sick of them, and they're even more > > > sick of jackballs like you who don't really give a fuck > > > about the homeless, but instead are merely using them > > > as pawns in order to lash out at good, normal, > > > productive citizens. > > > > > > You really are an asshole. You are USING homeless > > > people for a really juvenile, misanthropic agenda. > > > > Are you a normal person? > > Yes. I don't have a substance abuse problem, I'm not psychotic and I'm > not homeless. > > How about you? > > Why do you think encouraging defectives to congregate and foul public > areas is a good thing? It isn't a good thing, but I'm curious to know > why you think it is. Do you know what I think?
Re: (fwd) Santa Cruz Homeless Update - Middle Class Councilmembers Attempt to Pit the Police Against the Poor
Author: Rudy Canoza
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 15:08
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 15:08
72 lines
4097 bytes
4097 bytes
Chip Flintknapper wrote: > Rudy Canoza wrote: >> dhm_at_best_dot_com@yahoo.com wrote: >> >>> >From Robert Norse Tue Jan 9 00:31:27 2007 >>> >>> Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:31:27 -0800 >>> Subject: City Council Moves Today To Expand Police Power Against Poor >>> - >>> More Police Punishing the Poor in the Pogonip >> >> This massive and massively incoherent load of SHIT perfectly >> illustrates, again, the big myths of homelessness, mostly in its >> lumping of all the homeless together as people "just like you and me" >> who happen only to be poor. It's crap. >> >> It is dishonest to talk about "the homeless" as an undifferentiated >> class of people. Most homeless are seriously mentally ill, have major >> subtance abuse problems, or both. VERY FEW homeless people are "just >> like you and me." >> > I see you are well caught up on your propaganda. That would be you. It is a myth - in other words, false - that many homeless are just ordinary people who have either had uncommonly bad luck or are "victims" of an eeeeeeeeeevil "system". Most homeless are substance abusers, seriously mentally ill, or both. >> Santa Cruz is one of those places infected with a naive form of >> liberalism that makes a mockery of true compassion. The answer to the >> plight of homeless people is not to try to keep them homeless, as this >> idiot seems to think. >> > > First of all, separate the homeless from the poor, and the homeless will > stop getting blamed for the crimes that are usually committed by the > poor, such as drug use and prostitution. The homeless *are* poor, you idiot. > Secondly, nothing much has changed about the homeless population since > it's creation in 1981; There was no such "creation", and Reagan had nothing to do with it. That's another element of the myth of homelessness. > it is a handy dumping ground, and a money-maker > for many. That is, the politicians, the shelters, and the charities all > have a stake in maintaining the homeless population just as it is. Some sure do. > The charities are especially bad about it, collecting money for the > homeless, and then helping the poor instead. You have no evidence of this, of course; it's just another whiny malcontent's unsubstantiated allegation. > Of course they keep 90% of > it for themselves; they can't afford to risk the old Cadillac. Of course you have no support for any of this shrill rant. > [snip remaining rabid foam]
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads