Criminalizing Homelessness Can Now Cost Cities Federal Money

[Soggy in NOLA]

I know another guy who spent the last five years in prison on an unrelated charge to drugs. After he got out, he started all over again.

Thats because instead of fixing the problem which is drugs...Their "solution" to drugs isnt a solution to drug addiction.

Drug treatment and mental hygiene.... availability of both is woefully inadequate.

 

[Skylar]

Drugs and alcohol (along with mental illness) are leading causes of homelessness, your suggestion would only amplify the problem

Maybe, maybe not.

It can't help but cause more of a problem. Our Church works with the homeless, I would be willing to bet 17 out of 20 people that come to us are addicted to drugs and/or alcohol.

It would make the homeless problem more severe. But it would free up *so* much money and resources for treatment and shelters. Which does both these people and the society in general far more good that putting them in a box.

Yes, treatment is the more logical and humane way to go. They don't belong in cages with brutal murderers and rapists. They have a problem, but that doesn't make them criminals.

Sorry, but when you break our laws, yes, you are a criminal.

The question is....does it make sense to make them criminals. You could give jaywalking a mandatory minimum of 10 years. But does it make sense? Is it useful?

I'd argue fuck no. The costs to society, the costs to the individual, the costs to the tax payer are ridiculous in comparison to the crime and the harm prevented.

And that's the question with drug laws. Sure we can put someone in prison for 30 years for having a bag of weed. But does it make sense? It is its useful?

I'd again argue fuck no. For all the same reasons. When the solution causes more harm than the social ill it 'solves', you need to find a better solution.

 

[2aguy]

Good!
Criminalizing Homelessness Can Now Cost Cities Federal Money

After arguing last month that local ordinances criminalizing people for being homeless are unconstitutional, the Obama administration will now tie federal funding to whether municipalities are cracking down on criminalization measures.

Every year, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) gives out $1.9 billion in grants to local Continuums of Care, public-private partnerships that tackle homelessness in a specific area. These grants are doled out in a competitive process whereby applicants must fill out a lengthy questionnaire about how they plan to use the money, as well as their current policies.

Last week, though, HUD announced that it would begin asking applicants to describe the steps they are taking to reduce the criminalization of homelessness. Ordinances that criminalize homelessness, also known as “anti-vagrancy” or “quality of life” laws, include making it illegal to sit down on a sidewalk, ask passersby for spare change, or sleep in a public place. Applicants for the federal money will have to show they are engaging with local policymakers or law enforcement about criminalization policies, as well as implementing new community plans to ensure homelessness is not criminalized. Failing to combat such ordinances will hurt a Continuum of Care’s chances of winning new funds.

The change comes after the administration filed a brief in federal court arguing that criminalization violates the Eighth Amendment’s protections against cruel and unusual punishment.

Maria Foscarinis, Executive Director of the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty, hailed the latest move. “We welcome the federal government’s direction of tax limited dollars to the places that will most effectively use that money to address homelessness,” Foscarinis said in a statement. She also noted that HUD is giving sufficient weight to criminalization policies that the question “in many cases could be the difference between receiving funding and not.”

The Obama administration has made a pattern of connecting federal funding to desired outcomes in localities. Its signature education achievement, Race to the Top, encouraged schools across the country to raise their standards by making it a prerequisite to receive more federal funding. Obamacare ties some hospital funding to how effectively they avoid preventable infections and patient re-admissions. Homeless advocates hope that connecting HUD funding to the fight against homeless criminalization will have a similar impact.

Being homeless isn't a crime….peeing in the street is a crime, sleeping in a public park after closing is a crime, aggressively begging for money should be a crime…...

 

[auditor0007]

Most homeless people are not arrested for being homeless, they do really stupid shit and in turn get arrested. This is just more Obungles garbage

No, there are a number of cities who have made it illegal for homeless people to live on the streets of those cities. All they are doing is forcing those people to other areas outside of the city limits. Criminalization of homelessness on the rise in U.S. cities

 

[David_42]

Most homeless people are not arrested for being homeless, they do really stupid shit and in turn get arrested. This is just more Obungles garbage

No, there are a number of cities who have made it illegal for homeless people to live on the streets of those cities. All they are doing is forcing those people to other areas outside of the city limits. Criminalization of homelessness on the rise in U.S. cities

That's what this thread has been addressing, but the rabid right wing hate machine starts throwing out straw men.

 

[paulitician]

In a Police State, most things become Criminalized. Our rapidly expanding Police State will be no different.

 

[jknowgood]

No, it seems you don't. You never see the truth. You see what you are fed only, or want to see only. Over, and over, and over again, ever since you hit the scene, here. How much are you getting paid?

It seems you fools don't understand what is happening:
The criminalization of homelessness refers to measures that prohibit life-sustaining activities such as sleeping/camping, eating, sitting, and/or asking for money/resources in public spaces. These ordinances include criminal penalties for violations of these acts.

Criminalization of homelessness is occurring, it's real, get over it.

How many homeless people do you have living in your yard. How many do you feed daily? I swear if every liberal took care of three homeless people. The problem would be solved. So put your money where your mouth is, or shut up. Let me know when you personally do this, then you can talk.

 

[jknowgood]

What gets me is liberals say that criminalizing homelessness isn't right. But if you can't afford health insurance you could end up in jail. The liberal war on working people.

 

[jknowgood]

What happens when a homeless bum is arrested? They are taken to a facility that is clean and safe. They get a bed, a meal, a shower. They have access to medical care, psychologists, counseling, therapy, etc..You'd think the homeless would be grateful to spend a few nights in jail.

But it's never enough for the bleeding hearts, they want the homeless to get a free house!! a new car!!! and a no-show job with benefits!! FREE!! FREE!! FREEEEEEE!!!!

Wow, I'd like to hear more about this taking away someones freedom and how happy they should be about it. Its facinating, really

How many homeless people do you let loiter in your yard? How many do you feed with your own money everyday?

 

[ClosedCaption]

What happens when a homeless bum is arrested? They are taken to a facility that is clean and safe. They get a bed, a meal, a shower. They have access to medical care, psychologists, counseling, therapy, etc..You'd think the homeless would be grateful to spend a few nights in jail.

But it's never enough for the bleeding hearts, they want the homeless to get a free house!! a new car!!! and a no-show job with benefits!! FREE!! FREE!! FREEEEEEE!!!!

Wow, I'd like to hear more about this taking away someones freedom and how happy they should be about it. Its facinating, really

How many homeless people do you let loiter in your yard? How many do you feed with your own money everyday?

HUNDREDS

 

[jknowgood]

What happens when a homeless bum is arrested? They are taken to a facility that is clean and safe. They get a bed, a meal, a shower. They have access to medical care, psychologists, counseling, therapy, etc..You'd think the homeless would be grateful to spend a few nights in jail.

But it's never enough for the bleeding hearts, they want the homeless to get a free house!! a new car!!! and a no-show job with benefits!! FREE!! FREE!! FREEEEEEE!!!!

Wow, I'd like to hear more about this taking away someones freedom and how happy they should be about it. Its facinating, really

How many homeless people do you let loiter in your yard? How many do you feed with your own money everyday?

HUNDREDS

Daily?

 

[ClosedCaption]

What happens when a homeless bum is arrested? They are taken to a facility that is clean and safe. They get a bed, a meal, a shower. They have access to medical care, psychologists, counseling, therapy, etc..You'd think the homeless would be grateful to spend a few nights in jail.

But it's never enough for the bleeding hearts, they want the homeless to get a free house!! a new car!!! and a no-show job with benefits!! FREE!! FREE!! FREEEEEEE!!!!

Wow, I'd like to hear more about this taking away someones freedom and how happy they should be about it. Its facinating, really

How many homeless people do you let loiter in your yard? How many do you feed with your own money everyday?

HUNDREDS

Daily?

Yep

 

[jknowgood]

What happens when a homeless bum is arrested? They are taken to a facility that is clean and safe. They get a bed, a meal, a shower. They have access to medical care, psychologists, counseling, therapy, etc..You'd think the homeless would be grateful to spend a few nights in jail.

But it's never enough for the bleeding hearts, they want the homeless to get a free house!! a new car!!! and a no-show job with benefits!! FREE!! FREE!! FREEEEEEE!!!!

Wow, I'd like to hear more about this taking away someones freedom and how happy they should be about it. Its facinating, really

How many homeless people do you let loiter in your yard? How many do you feed with your own money everyday?

HUNDREDS

Daily?

Yep

Yeah right.

 

[auditor0007]

What gets me is liberals say that criminalizing homelessness isn't right. But if you can't afford health insurance you could end up in jail. The liberal war on working people.

It's pretty difficult not to be able to afford health insurance considering the subsidies for lower income earners.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What gets me is liberals say that criminalizing homelessness isn't right. But if you can't afford health insurance you could end up in jail. The liberal war on working people.

It's pretty difficult not to be able to afford health insurance considering the subsidies for lower income earners.

Yes, because not only does government decide what you make isn't enough, they decide how you should be spending your own money as well.

So how does government decide on my subsidy? Do they know how much I pay for rent or mortgage? Do they know what kind of medical bills I currently have? Do they know how much I spend on gasoline every month to get to work and back? Do they know how much property tax I have to pay? Do they know what my car payments are?

Government doesn't know any of these things. That's besides the fact the cost of living is different all over the country. Earning $3,000 a month here is not the same as earning $3,000 a month in places like California, New York City, or much of the NE states.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Maybe, maybe not.

It can't help but cause more of a problem. Our Church works with the homeless, I would be willing to bet 17 out of 20 people that come to us are addicted to drugs and/or alcohol.

It would make the homeless problem more severe. But it would free up *so* much money and resources for treatment and shelters. Which does both these people and the society in general far more good that putting them in a box.

Yes, treatment is the more logical and humane way to go. They don't belong in cages with brutal murderers and rapists. They have a problem, but that doesn't make them criminals.

Sorry, but when you break our laws, yes, you are a criminal.

The question is....does it make sense to make them criminals. You could give jaywalking a mandatory minimum of 10 years. But does it make sense? Is it useful?

I'd argue fuck no. The costs to society, the costs to the individual, the costs to the tax payer are ridiculous in comparison to the crime and the harm prevented.

And that's the question with drug laws. Sure we can put someone in prison for 30 years for having a bag of weed. But does it make sense? It is its useful?

I'd again argue fuck no. For all the same reasons. When the solution causes more harm than the social ill it 'solves', you need to find a better solution.

Nobody is spending 30 years in jail because they had a bag of weed.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Maybe, maybe not.

It can't help but cause more of a problem. Our Church works with the homeless, I would be willing to bet 17 out of 20 people that come to us are addicted to drugs and/or alcohol.

It would make the homeless problem more severe. But it would free up *so* much money and resources for treatment and shelters. Which does both these people and the society in general far more good that putting them in a box.

Yes, treatment is the more logical and humane way to go. They don't belong in cages with brutal murderers and rapists. They have a problem, but that doesn't make them criminals.

Sorry, but when you break our laws, yes, you are a criminal.

And that's the real problem. Doing drugs shouldn't be considered a criminal act any more than consuming alcohol is. The act itself is not criminal. It may be unwise, but it's not criminal. Our Justice System needs to evolve. Non-violent drug users should not be thrown in cages in brutal prisons. That's barbaric.

So you make it legal and have many more families torn apart, more people committing suicide or overdosing, more people experimenting with narcotics because they are now legal, and then getting hooked on them?

 

[Skylar]

It can't help but cause more of a problem. Our Church works with the homeless, I would be willing to bet 17 out of 20 people that come to us are addicted to drugs and/or alcohol.

It would make the homeless problem more severe. But it would free up *so* much money and resources for treatment and shelters. Which does both these people and the society in general far more good that putting them in a box.

Yes, treatment is the more logical and humane way to go. They don't belong in cages with brutal murderers and rapists. They have a problem, but that doesn't make them criminals.

Sorry, but when you break our laws, yes, you are a criminal.

And that's the real problem. Doing drugs shouldn't be considered a criminal act any more than consuming alcohol is. The act itself is not criminal. It may be unwise, but it's not criminal. Our Justice System needs to evolve. Non-violent drug users should not be thrown in cages in brutal prisons. That's barbaric.

So you make it legal and have many more families torn apart, more people committing suicide or overdosing, more people experimenting with narcotics because they are now legal, and then getting hooked on them?

Yup. Drug legalization does come with social costs. Most of which we're already paying.

And with the enormous resources we used to spend on enforcement, incarceration and ajudication of millions of drug cases, we can offer comprehensive drug treatment plans, public awareness campaigns, and mental health services.

And we'll eliminate pointless incarceration as the cause of millions of families torn apart. And reduce the horrific social costs of enforcement. Plus strip many of the illegal cartels of one of their primary funding sources. And reduce violence between gangs funded by drugs. And reduce violence between those gangs and police. We can also start to role back the 'war on drugs' erosion of civil liberties,

And we can tax the shit out of drugs. Plus, all those incarcerated people can actually contribute to our economy now and be taxed.

So yes, there are social costs to drug legalization. Most of which we're already paying. There are also social costs to enforcement. Most of which we don't need to pay when it comes to non-violent drug offenses.

 

[David_42]

It can't help but cause more of a problem. Our Church works with the homeless, I would be willing to bet 17 out of 20 people that come to us are addicted to drugs and/or alcohol.

It would make the homeless problem more severe. But it would free up *so* much money and resources for treatment and shelters. Which does both these people and the society in general far more good that putting them in a box.

Yes, treatment is the more logical and humane way to go. They don't belong in cages with brutal murderers and rapists. They have a problem, but that doesn't make them criminals.

Sorry, but when you break our laws, yes, you are a criminal.

The question is....does it make sense to make them criminals. You could give jaywalking a mandatory minimum of 10 years. But does it make sense? Is it useful?

I'd argue fuck no. The costs to society, the costs to the individual, the costs to the tax payer are ridiculous in comparison to the crime and the harm prevented.

And that's the question with drug laws. Sure we can put someone in prison for 30 years for having a bag of weed. But does it make sense? It is its useful?

I'd again argue fuck no. For all the same reasons. When the solution causes more harm than the social ill it 'solves', you need to find a better solution.

Nobody is spending 30 years in jail because they had a bag of weed.

Really now?
The 10 Most Outrageous Marijuana Prison Sentences

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It would make the homeless problem more severe. But it would free up *so* much money and resources for treatment and shelters. Which does both these people and the society in general far more good that putting them in a box.

Yes, treatment is the more logical and humane way to go. They don't belong in cages with brutal murderers and rapists. They have a problem, but that doesn't make them criminals.

Sorry, but when you break our laws, yes, you are a criminal.

The question is....does it make sense to make them criminals. You could give jaywalking a mandatory minimum of 10 years. But does it make sense? Is it useful?

I'd argue fuck no. The costs to society, the costs to the individual, the costs to the tax payer are ridiculous in comparison to the crime and the harm prevented.

And that's the question with drug laws. Sure we can put someone in prison for 30 years for having a bag of weed. But does it make sense? It is its useful?

I'd again argue fuck no. For all the same reasons. When the solution causes more harm than the social ill it 'solves', you need to find a better solution.

Nobody is spending 30 years in jail because they had a bag of weed.

Really now?
The 10 Most Outrageous Marijuana Prison Sentences

Yes really. I didn't have time to go through all of them, but since this case was first, it's probably the best they have.

I said that nobody is in prison for a bag of pot, and you bring me this:


No. 1 John Knock
Age: 67. Prison: Federal. Release date: Death.

John is my brother, so let’s start with this kind, calm and humorous man. He’s serving life without parole for a non-violent first offense.

Our father was Presbyterian minister in a small Midwestern town. Our mom was a homemaker. John moved to San Francisco in the late 1960s and joined the Good Earth commune in Haight Ashbury. He was out of the business and living in Hawaii in 1994 with his wife (then completing her Ph.D. in biology) and his son (now 23) when he was indicted as part of a loose group of entrepreneurs who imported marijuana in the 1970s and 1980s.

That's not a bag of pot. That's drug trafficking. You don't know the difference?

So I went to find out a little more about this case, and here is what I found from CBS News:

Knock, now 67, was indicted in 1994 in the Northern District of Florida on charges of conspiracy to money launder and conspiring to import and distribute marijuana as part of a reverse sting. He was sentenced in 2000 following a trial. Knock was a first time offender with no history of violence or drug abuse, according to Curtis, who started the website LifeForPot.com in 2010 to bring attention to her brother's case and identify similar cases.

Life in prison for pot? As laws ease, some remain behind bars without parole, for non-violent pot crimes

Sting operation? Money laundering? Importing narcotics for distribution?

This guy is a criminal and right where he belongs.......in jail.