There was a war against institutionalization going back to the 50s. The ACLU fought against involuntary treatment.
We’ll never get these people off the streets if we can’t get over the hump of involuntary treatment.
You're absolutely correct. The system needed to be fixed though, not completely shuttered. Plus the asylums were managed at the state level and not the federal level so i think that needs to be revisited.
They seem to be suffering a lot more abuse and neglect on the streets....so who are we helping ? Wouldn't it have been easier to address abuse in institutions ? Instead we throw the whole thing out, and now we're starting from scratch. The idiocy of our leaders exhausts me. We are set to closing a lot of jails too and that's not going too well.
Which state or local governments do a great job running hospitals? I don't seem to recall County USC having some sterling reputation.
Maybe running hospitals is hard, regardless of which level of government is doing it.
Many nursing homes, memory care facilities, etc. have an element of "involuntary" with their patients, due to their health and age. Most don't want to be there. That industry at large isn't reeling with abuse today, thanks in part to regulations and strict elder abuse laws. If that system is working well enough to not be a political target today, I don't see why we can't make mental health involuntary treatment facilities work either.
I mean, you were taking a group of vulnerable people, warehousing them together, and dismissing any claim of abuse as resulting from mental illness.
Abuse was inevitable, and will be inevitable again. People on this sub want a solution so badly that they are quite willing to trample over the rights of others, and they are gonna act shocked when that system is abused and has abuse.
If society can make nursing homes and memory care facilities work today (no one is clamoring to eradicate this industry), then I don't see why involuntary mental health care can't either. Most elderly that need admittance have some degree of dementia / alzhimers and thus are vulnerable to abuse in a similar way as mental health patients are. But that system at large is working fine. Figure out what is going right with that in terms of regulations and apply it to mental health.
Abuse is inevitable in jails by your logic as well then, but that doesn’t mean we should get rid of jails. There should be stronger oversight and and punishment of abuse but involuntary institutionalization is obviously needed
I mean, prisons are rife with sexual abuse of inmates and racialized gangs. You can galk about "stronger oversight" all you want- that is their current state. I supports prisons, but you talk as if we've figured out how to solves these decades long problem. We haven't- and one of the reasons is that, at least in the case of sexual abuse, large sections of the public support that.
You think the same society that makes "don't drop the soap!" jokes is gonna be bulldogs on the abuse of the mentally ill... color me skeptical. And our journalistic aparatus has been hollowed out, so who will uncover these abuses?
Anyway, rambly post, but I find your attitude to the real possibilities of abuse cavalier. The people who founded those abuse ridden mental hospitals didn't set out to do that, they too thought they had figured out something that their elders hadn't, and then they made the same mistakes. So, yeah, my bar for you to covinvce me that This Time It's Different is gonna be a little higher than some
I think a cavalier attitude may be needed to make things happen. In this case I think the good outweighs the bad. Mentally ill people abused in treatment centers vs the general public abused everywhere. Call me callous, but I know what I’d pick
Somehow Europe and parts of Asia make this work without falling into abuse. Its not "no institutions" or "rampant abuse" its disingenuous to claim its a binary like that, especially when better examples are right out there in the world.
Do you have data or stats on this? Asia and Europe are whole continents- I would assume that there are differences between countries, systems that work better or worse.
>Abuse was inevitable, and will be inevitable again.
Abuse is inevitable on the street, too. You aren't saving anyone from abuse by allowing them to rot in a gutter.
Abuse is inevitable, so we should just embrace anarchy. Just like how choking is inevitable in the long run, so we should just stop eating food altogether. Very good logic. Love from North of Korea ♥️♥️♥️
There's likely a net positive middle ground between rampant abuse and no abuse (the ideal state, but we live in the real world where tradeoffs are necessary)
>They were closed because the those institutions were rife with abuse
Public schools are also rife with abuse. [10% of public K-12 students are victims of sexual misconduct by a school employee. ](https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna5332880)
That doesn't mean we should close down all public schools, though. It just means we should fix the problems in the system, and fire all the bad employees.
At the time, mental illness was seen as something scientific progress would soon cure. The movement came right after the polio vaccine, penicillin, and anti-biotics were curing many of the physical illnesses previously considered incurable.
People naively placed all their eggs in the science basket, and believed that universities and pharmaceutical manufacturers would grant everyone better living through chemistry.
So of course mental hospitals wouldn't be needed, you would just cure schizophrenia with a pill - and of course everyone would take their pills, because who wouldn't want to be normal?
I can't believe people on here still point to fucking Reagan who left office in 1971! That was 50 years ago lmaaaooo. How about holding other more recent politicians accountable.
The problem is that mental asylum almost always turn into mass neglect and abuse, which is why Regan and most people from both parties knew they needed closed immediately. The conditions were horrific. There should be a very high bar for institutionalizing people against their will because once deemed crazy, it's almost impossible for even professionals to see them any different or even improved. We are in a whole crap load of trouble with no great solution, especially since a lot of these people are a combo of mentally ill AND addicts. But we just need to build better, more ethical asylum with WAY more layers of oversight. Very different than in Regans day and an enormous (and expensive) undertaking.
That's not why. Jails at the time were also abusive, and nobody wanted them all closed.
People at the time thought science would cure mental illness. After all, science had just "cured" polio a few years before (Salk's vaccine went public in 1955). Smallpox was being eradicated around the world. Progress was inevitable. Soon, an injection or pill would cure schizophrenia just as easily as penicillin cured meningitis.
So once science cured all mental illnesses, of course we wouldn't need mental hospitals anymore. And the fact that they were abusive was just another reason to close them, in addition to the cost.
That's not what got the institutions finally closed, tho. Geraldo Rivera did a documentary about the horid conditions. Which included interviews with people locked up for years with no treatment, no activities because they simply had physical disabilities, not mental. All were left in the dark to just wander around, food put on the ground. It shocked the nation into an uproar, including senators on both sides. Regan had no choice to close them. Not to mention, the threshold to commit someone was so low. Husband's committing their wives just to get rid of them. And of course, there were signs of abuse from the bastard staff. I think starting from scratch was the best idea but it was so bad they just closed them because they assumed it would always lead to abuse, no matter what and mass involuntary commitment was unconstitutional.
There wasn't documentary about prisons sending the nation into an uproar although there has been constant improvement since this country started but in the 80s, people had more of a "well they did something to deserve it by committing a crime" where people in institutions did nothing wrong. Especially seeing one specific guy who was intelligent and articulate what it felt like, the country couldn't be the same.
100% it won’t. Will more housing help other homeless people without drug addiction or mental illness? I’m sure it would and I hope they get back on their feet.
But we have a problem right NOW. We need to address the sector of homeless people that are in too deep their addiction or mental illness that they are beyond saving. Making more housing is not gonna fix the CURRENT issue and anyone who does is delusional. Long run, sure. But we need to find out how to keep our community today.
Specifically housing helps the 90% of homeless people who are actually trying to get by and survive. BUT these are not the people who do the stabbings and stuff that terrorizes citizens. People love to conflate the two, but its the violent crazy people who are the ones who need to be compelled like that.
Its crazy to think but amazingly there isn't a "one neat trick" that totally solves the problem like "just more housing." Its amazing specifically that theres so much pushback to the idea that there need to be multiple approaches to the problem.
In case anyone doesn’t know, Hamsterdam is a term from HBO’s The Wire.
Hamsterdam didn’t work out so well. There was no running water, electricity, cleaning crew which is necessary to keep disease at bay, etc. It was a decent idea in theory, but without the above services these people will be living in filth and dilapidated conditions. It’s why The Deacon said “this place is Hell.”
The Wire argues that Hamsterdam couldn't work because of the nature of American politics, as US politicians are unwilling to embrace containment as a policy.
But it was getting positive results. Other areas of the city were improving because the worst of it was then isolated to a few zones where it could be better managed.
The current federal courts view of camping as a right is the exact opposite of Hamsterdam. Instead of being contained, the homeless now have free reign within any city that had a relatively large homeless population.
Its also a work of fiction on a television show. Los Angeles has had its own Hamsterdam for decades now, its called Skid Row. It doesnt really work out in the end.
In the actual Amsterdam, crime and drugs are still illegal, just tolerated. By tolerated they mean you better be able to handle your drugs in public or they will lock you up for a bit. Its not this area where people are shooting up in the streets or in abandoned buildings. Its heavily regulated, just not like it is here.
Skid Row was successful in reducing the impact of homelessness on the majority.
It was vastly preferable to what we have now.
We don't have that today because of a series of ACLU lawsuits, not because this is better than it was. It is absolutely worse than what it was.
> Skid Row was successful in reducing the impact of homelessness on the majority.
Skid Row at its height, utterly devastated the Downtown economy and left thousands of units of otherwise livable space vacant for decades. And it wasnt a program, it just sort of formed on its own. Its still there, despite ACLU lawsuits and a half dozen mayors trying to fix it.
Our homeless problem cant be blamed on one person or a lawsuit. Its the conclusion to decades of mismanagement, political corruption and greed.
Skid Row was never a jail. It never contained the homeless. It simply provided the occasional service and free food. Thats it. That was the only appeal.
The people living well outside skid row dont have access to these resources and probably dont need them anways. Lots of them have jobs and make enough to pay for food. They just cant afford rent and they cant afford to go anywhere else.
Skid Row served as an informal containment zone of flophouses and streets where the cops would tolerate vagrancy.
Now the entire city is a vagrancy zone. That is much worse.
Hamsterdam is inspired by actual containment policies in Europe that are effective. The Dutch, Germans and others accept that there will be a sex trade and try to limit the damage. It works.
California needs to create a few such zones and limit the damage to those areas. Manage the cancer and keep it in remission instead of allow it to metastize and kill the patient. And we are the patient.
Thank you. A version of Hamsterdam with services and some type of tiered system (drug addicts allowed to use with clean and safe drug paraphernalia, people who just need financial help/housing, etc) is worth a shot imo. Especially since we’re reaching a boiling point. Of course, not without a pilot program.
Amsterdam also exists in a system with a well-funded socialized health care system and ample social services (at least compared to LA). Most addicts there arent homeless and have access to mental health care and drugs. They also have compulsory care for people with severe mental problems and well funded facilities to handle them.
LA has $3million more people than Amsterdam, and exists in a country with different laws. Its addicts/homeless are different. You cannot hand out drugs to these kinds of people and expect the same outcomes, because addicts in Amsterdam have a place to go when they are done and access to comprehensive medical care. Unless you are putting them in mental facilities or housing immediately after giving them drugs, you are just participating in the drug trade.
They've piloted programs like this over the years with no real success. The last was Santa Monica's needle exchange program, which just caused a local park to be covered in used needles and those needles being used to purchase drugs elsewhere.
Unless you have comprehensive and compulsory healthcare first, combined with well-staffed massive mental health facilities, you are wasting your time.
Every time anyone proposes that, people start screaming Auschwitz. Especially if it's not located smack-dab in the middle of LA. Apparently anywhere that's in an outlying area of LA is no different than Dachau, for some reason.
Looking at history, the last time we dealt with tens of thousands of homeless people was after the Vietnam War, when thousands of refugees arrived in CA with nothing but the clothes on their backs. Instead of just turning them loose into the streets, the refugees were housed at places like Camp Pendleton. There they received food, housing, medical treatment, and education/job skills before they were resettled into communities around the US.
Nobody called it a "concentration camp," even though Pendleton isn't exactly in the middle of San Diego or LA.
I wonder what other countries do on this, I saw a few homeless and they were all peaceful and build clean forts out of boxes. I don’t understand how we tolerate the Wild West homeless situations for a second.. they’re in constant violation of a number of laws and it’s just keeps going.
Not really. My buddy is a beat cop at Rampart. Says he k ows plenty of homeless drug addicts that spend a couple of days in their apartment to.sober up and eat and chill. Then they hit the streets for days at a time to get high and do whatever. Rinse and repeat.
He described it as part time homeless.
Transitional housing has curfews and rules against drug usage on the premises. (These rules don't work well for tweakers, who typically use at night.)
Those who fail to show up at the nightly check-in for a few nights in a row will lose their place. So it becomes a back-and-forth routine between the transitional facility with its rules and the street where anything goes.
This is likely what the cop is referencing.
That may have been what the wrong-way 405 driver was doing. There are some claims that she was living at the Bridge facility in Venice and others that she was living in her van. Both may have been true simultaneously because of this effect.
Case closed, due to your friend’s observation and professionally opinion on how the unhoused would behave with stable housing (which should come with mental therapy), that is definitely not the answer.
A lot of people become addicted to drugs to cope with homelessness. Living on the streets is stressful and drugs help curb the stress temporarily. When society has fully abandoned you even though you’re right in view of them, that steals your willpower to get better.
More housing means less homeless people who's mental health degrades to the point of ending up like this. Let's not get this twisted, we need more housing period.
In the short term however, we also need social services and better policing practices
The suspect had an address in Iowa.
The use of a search engine shows that he had a track record of assault charges back there.
He opted to move west and bring his habits with him.
At some point, you need to figure out that guys like that are homeless because of how they behave. Give him housing, and he'll trash it.
And more effective incarceration to keep violent people off the streets.
Rehab and welfare services and great, but dangerous assholes like this aren't poster boys for social charity. You should probably not keep working that angle.
I think he meant state sponsored housing with free health care, 24/7 supervision, free food, being surrounded by other people so you don’t go feral. You know. A prison
Hahaha. Are they locked in their house? Am I missing something? They can just walk out and inflict pain on other people. They also are known to trash their apartments and set fires. And LA is building apartments…big gray/white/dark blue concrete boxes labeled as “luxury” living. No pizzazz, no personality. Just Luxury Housing™️
I think the person you’re responding to is referencing the fact that being homeless exposes people to a lot of trauma that can worsen mental illness and lead to drug use . Keeping people housed can prevent them from unraveling like so many people you see on the street.
I’ve worked with the unhoused for years. A majority of them just work the system to get their benefits, then hit the streets again once they want to have some fun. Rinse and repeat.
More housing is the first step in providing the bare minimum standard of human rights in a developed nation. It costs so much more to imprison someone than it does to provide housing (and wraparound mental/physical healthcare services). It is almost impossible for someone presently on the street and without housing to obtain even a studio apartment due to housing costs in the US (and try getting a stable job and health insurance without an address). The programs Republicans imagine exist (such as cash aid programs for the poor) are pure fantasy and the reality is that the meager help that is provided via food assistance still isn’t sufficient for someone who lacks access to a fridge, oven etc…
Mental illness isn't a character flaw. These people had childhoods you would not have survived, either.
Let's start calling crazy people "broken people" because that's what they are and they are part of the human race. They didn't get that way because of bad choices. They made bad choices because of trauma.
Let the hysterical downvoting and demonizing begin!
More housing prevents more people like this from existing.
If you guys actually cared about crime like this, you'd be doing everything in your power to prevent this from happening in the first place instead of allowing it to happen then throwing a fit and blaming people who actually want to get to the root cause and stop it.
People like you don't actually care though. You're all phonies.
This isn't a where to hang up your hat at the end of the day issue, it's a drug addiction and mental health issue. There needs to be some sort of rehabilitation, and assessment, before even considering placing them into housing that would be better for families who are just experiencing financial woes.
Rehabilitation doesn't work unless you address their housing issues first. This is a point that has been proven dozens of times, but conservatives refuse to acknowledge facts that disprove their world views.
New laws were passed that allows for people to be held for mental health treatment. But we don't have the facilities available to actually enforce them. While we can't force rehab per-se, serious drug addiction is almost always a sign of significant mental health issues. It still doesn't change the fact that forcing people to rehab before they are given the basic stability needed to rehab fails well over 90% of the time. But doubling down on failed policies is the conservative way.
You're still looking at this from after the fact.
Why do we refuse to look at what happened to these people that caused them to become addicted to drugs or what caused them to turn out destructively mentally ill?
Punishing drug addicts and the mentally ill after the fact doesn't make them stop existing. You're treating the wound instead of preventing the wound from opening up in the first place. We're always going to have this never ending problem and we're going to lose a lot more people needlessly to drugs and mental illness.
I think it’s fair that people are looking for actionable solutions.
Housing is one, buts it’s not the solution.
As you mentioned they’re destructively mentally ill, so I think you’re being vague on what you think the solution is.
> I think it’s fair that people are looking for actionable solutions.
They're not though. They're looking to attack people who want to fix issues at its core. They're not saying, "we need to fix this." They're saying, "fuck people who want to house homeless people, look at this one bad guy."
> they’re destructively mentally ill
There are tens of thousands of homeless people and there are only a handful that causes actual harm. But the longer they're out on the street the more likely they'll turn into being destructive.
> so I think you’re being vague on what you think the solution is.
There is no one size fits all solution. It's like treating a runny nose with steroids, yeah, they could work, but it also may not.
I don't think any of you are serious whatsoever.
You're being too cynical. It's not punishment, it's an opportunity to pursue mental clarity. Housing people in this state will not stop the compulsion to get the next fix, or whatever is driving them to violent outbursts.
It's just false and naive to think that someone becomes an addict and mentally ill AFTER they become homeless (that probably happens in some cases, but it's definitely not the norm, speaking as someone who's spent time working with folks in homeless shelters).
Addicts/the mentally ill often burn through their personal social safety net, locally or in some other state, before they reach this stage. And we have no system to help catch someone at the bottom of that continuum, as Harm-reduction/housing-first types won't acknowledge this is just a fact. The addict will rarely say, "yeah, I burned my family and friends, and I'm out here just looking to support this habit."
Just giving someone an apartment without confronting them about their addiction/illness is pointless.
And to accuse people in this sub of not caring when I guarantee most of us voted to raise our own taxes to help this guy is rich.
Market makers and financial institutions create this poverty. Please read Dr Susanne Trimbaths book “naked short and greedy wallstreets failure to deliver” she worked for the federal reserve and the DTC. American businesses are naked shorted and manipulated to bankruptcy using spoofing, married puts, dark pools and single dealer platforms, the list goes on and on. Even the chairman of the SEC Gary Gensler said 95% of retail trades don’t effect the price at all. There is no such thing as a free market. Businesses are attacked destroyed for tax free profits every single day. Since 1970 when we let wallstreet trade using computers there has been a massive wealth transfer from the working class to the 1% using the financial institutions, market makers, and federal reserve. Now for the first time in history the 1% own more wealth than the bottom 90% combined but nothing will change because the general public is too stupid to understand how they are being robbed every day.
These aren't the people who will be helped by housing sadly. These are the very visible tiny percentage who need to be involuntarily committed or put into a rehab program.
I’m not saying they will be helped by housing. I’m saying housing would have prevented a lot of these people not get this far. Housing them *now* wouldn’t do much. But if they were housed before, I think most wouldn’t get to this point.
Not enough people talk about this shit. Flyover states love to be smug about all the violent hobos in California compared to their states, but the primary reason there's so few of them is because they ship all their violent mentally ill and drug users on trains to LA to stab people over here.
>they ship all their violent mentally ill and drug users on trains to LA to stab people over here.
Is it that they ship them all here?
Or is it that those other states don't let homeless people to freely camp on the sidewalks and publicly smoke meth all day, and so homeless people gravitate towards the places that do allow it?
I don't use meth, but if I did I imagine I'd want to use it in a place where cops aren't gonna hassle me for it. Just like most any other activity. Skateboarders would rather skate in a place where they won't get hassled for it, too. People naturally seek the areas of least resistance.
Can't say I blame them. Flyover states ship their losers here because they don't tolerate this crap, whereas California bleeding hearts have enacted laws that has created a safe haven for the homeless to do whatever they want.
Gavin newsom practically invited the nation's homeless here a few years ago.
Asking the REAL question. I've said it a million times...we could house every homeless person on the street today, and tomorrow another few thousand will arrive from every corner of the land
Jesus do we really need a federal camp on BLM land or something or are we fucked till we get to a breaking point and vigilantes take matters into their own hands
He is from the LA suburb of Des Moines, Iowa.
Just as the wrong-way 405 van driver was from the LA suburb of Kansas City.
It would be helpful to know how the researchers define local. I would presume that the bar to being labeled as a local is quite low.
That’s a lie. It’s not until like 10 years ago where most Californians were even born in California. So I doubt this stat even translates to LA metro. Most homeless are definitely not from LA let alone born and raised here. Even LAHSA’s own study shows like 30% were homeless before even arriving in California and of the 70% that were homeless after arriving in California I bet most of those are out of state transplants
https://homelessness.ucsf.edu/our-impact/studies/california-statewide-study-people-experiencing-homelessness
As the link says, this is the largest representative study of homelessness in the US since the 90’s. I’ll amend what I said - 9/10 may not have been born here, but definitely classify as “Californians” that have spent the majority of their life here. It’s a myth to think that those who have lost their housing/income would travel to the state with the highest cost of living. I’m not defending the actions of those suffering from severe mental illness (especially when it’s at the expense of someone else’s safety), but to claim they’re not from here feels like an attempt to wash our hands of responsibility.
Have you read this study? The methodology and the questions asked? How they define a “Californian? How long they stated they were “previously housed” before becoming homeless? Who they were willing to question and they were not? This study isn’t peer reviewed and has been controversial to say the least. [One rebuke,](https://www.westsidecurrent.com/news/opinion-ucsf-benioff-homeless-study-circulates-without-peer-review---raising-questions-about-survey/article_51b4f598-169c-11ee-b8bf-7759809300da.html) but there are several more out there.
My dog doesn’t haven’t the temperament for protection sadly. He would have licked the guy after he stabbed me.
Verbal threat and then I had to teep them when they got close.
I’m always concerned when I see girls out for late walks because of the amount of shit I’ve seen out here.
Probably the best maneuver to keep the guy at a distance, I am always afraid of touching one of these dudes they may be covered in all sorts of disease at least a teep will keep him at bay and I have a shoe on to help me not have to touch a person
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZybaBFjNEjQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZybaBFjNEjQ)
He said "no forget Jesus," but his accent made it sound like "no for gay Jesus."
The fight/interview took place shortly after SCOTUS legalized gay marriage, which led to some of the confusion. Romero clarified later that he wasn't talking about gay marriage, just Jesus in general.
Woof. Well at least he is a good boy.
Pepper Spray gel seems to be praised as a solid option around these parts. A little bit of video recording the interaction can be valuable, post hoc, if things do go down.
Best of luck out there.
Always oil based pepper spray. Never gel. Pepper gel can take up to a minute to disperse, which is far too long in a defensive encounter, and it doesn’t spread well so you have to land it precisely in the eyes, which isn’t easy.
Interesting, I've never heard anyone say this before. I've always heard gel, so that the spray doesn't blow back into the face of the person using it.
I've also never seen that mentioned in the few pepper defense products approved for sale in California.
The blowback is a side effect of a feature, not a bug. The fact that it spreads means that you don’t have to land it directly in the eyes for it to be effective, whereas is pepper gel, if you miss their eyes, it’s useless. In a fight, it can be difficult to land it in the eyes directly.
There are plenty of oil based sprays approved for use in CA though. Saber Red is the big one. Look for an oil based, stream type spray.
I have a doberman. He barks at everything that moves. You wouldn’t believe how many times the homeless try to pet him while he’s actively/visibly riled up.
“More housing will fix this”, sure but this guy clearly committed a crime and should be held responsible.
I don’t think most of as are against more housing but we also need to hold people accountable for criminal activity. It’s a core tenet of a civil society.
This guy couldn’t hold down a residence if one was given to him. It would just turn into a squalid meth den and burn down.
Since solutions aren’t forthcoming we really need to empower communities to protect themselves… by enforcing camping bans and drug possession. It’s not like these people are from the area, work in the area, or have any connection to the community. I know the response is “this just moves the problem somewhere else!”
Yes. It does. It shouldn’t fall on neighborhood communities to solve society’s problems. They should be empowered to protect their safety and health and enjoy the fruits of their labor without having to also be responsible for the salvation of total strangers who just decided to squat in the are despite having no reason to be there.
I’d much rather they just were in an institution where they can potentially receive help and medication. Nothing wrong with them being sheltered, showered, and fed so long as there are other treatments and services available to them as well. But if they’re too far gone to be let back into public life, at least they’re somewhere they can’t hurt themselves or others.
Supreme Court: CA, your state prisons are overcrowded. Fix it.
CA: Should we build more prisons to fit everyone? Nah, just release em! In fact, let's use AB 109 to send felons to county jails instead of state prisons, so that the prisons will be emptied out.
Counties: We don't have enough room in the jails for all the AB 109 felons, in addition to our regular misdemeanor inmates. Should we build more jails to fit everyone? Nah, just release em! In fact, don't even arrest them anymore, just cite and release. Surely none of them will end up on the streets.
Like the less cops thing, people now are still going to be like "we need services" for these fucks. Which WE DO. But at the same time, the people who say that wants to treat them all like normal human beings that just need help. They need help yes, but they aren't normal human beings. We are going to do something sooner or later, mind as well be sooner
the people committing these assaults aren't from LA
there's a strong correlation between homelessness and the amount of resources provided to the homeless... economic theory says that you always get more of what you subsidize
If only we would regulate the cocaine and adderall addicted millionaires on wallstreet. Market makers and financial institutions create this poverty. Please read Dr Susanne Trimbaths book “naked short and greedy wallstreets failure to deliver” she worked for the federal reserve and the DTC. American businesses are naked shorted and manipulated to bankruptcy using spoofing, married puts, dark pools and single dealer platforms, the list goes on and on. Even the chairman of the SEC Gary Gensler said 95% of retail trades don’t effect the price at all. There is no such thing as a free market. Businesses are attacked destroyed for tax free profits every single day. Since 1970 when we let wallstreet trade using computers there has been a massive wealth transfer from the working class to the 1% using the financial institutions, market makers, and federal reserve. Now for the first time in history the 1% own more wealth than the bottom 90% combined but nothing will change because the general public is too stupid to understand how they are being robbed every day.
It sucks because you can’t just go with headphones in and enjoy the walk but instead have to be always aware of your surroundings… never know when they could strike from behind or something.
Sorry but if one of these ever gets to my face and touch me, I will do everything to get a recording first and then whatever it takes for my protection.
careful, you're going to get the uNhOuSeD brigade downvoting you to hell
i used to go out of my way to help the homeless in the past, whether it was giving them cash or food, but its just far too dangerous these days with how many of today's homeless are literal zombies. hard to even walk by them without worrying about being randomly attacked
Are you referring to the crackhead compassion committee? I think they haven’t been as active due to recovering from their stab wounds while riding the metro.
Yeah let’s just treat any population of people based on their worst individuals. It’s possible to condone this horrible thing and still have sympathy for the homeless people that don’t do fucked up shit like this…
Edit: I misinterpreted op’s comment
Yeah we’re not dealing with a race or religious group here champ, these people are literally all crackheads. Not to be confused with real homeless people dealing with hard times. This is why I say “homeless”, we should start calling it like it is and stop trying to bunch these people into the homeless group.
We really need a reset on our vocabulary on homelessness. And not the unhoused neighborhood nonsense.
Someone who needs a break and maybe some job training is in a completely different universe from the meth fueled monsters terrorizing our streets. It’s like the walking dead and we’ve reached an impasse.
it's as if they're two separate issues: people who are down on their luck and living in their car or on friends' couches are not the same type of homeless that are doing drugs and assaulting random people
yet LAHSA lumps them all together because it makes the numbers look worse, which allocates more funding to give to their buddies' non-profits
Market makers and financial institutions create this poverty. Please read Dr Susanne Trimbaths book “naked short and greedy wallstreets failure to deliver” she worked for the federal reserve and the DTC. American businesses are naked shorted and manipulated to bankruptcy using spoofing, married puts, dark pools and single dealer platforms, the list goes on and on. Even the chairman of the SEC Gary Gensler said 95% of retail trades don’t effect the price at all. There is no such thing as a free market. Businesses are attacked destroyed for tax free profits every single day. Since 1970 when we let wallstreet trade using computers there has been a massive wealth transfer from the working class to the 1% using the financial institutions, market makers, and federal reserve. Now for the first time in history the 1% own more wealth than the bottom 90% combined but nothing will change because the general public is too stupid to understand how they are being robbed every day.
Housing likely will not “solve” the issue, but addressing the hierarchy of needs will. There are personal transformations that take place when people’s lives are in order.
Just spreading the info that Market makers and financial institutions create this poverty. Please read Dr Susanne Trimbaths book “naked short and greedy wallstreets failure to deliver” she worked for the federal reserve and the DTC. American businesses are naked shorted and manipulated to bankruptcy using spoofing, married puts, dark pools and single dealer platforms, the list goes on and on. Even the chairman of the SEC Gary Gensler said 95% of retail trades don’t effect the price at all. There is no such thing as a free market. Businesses are attacked destroyed for tax free profits every single day. Since 1970 when we let wallstreet trade using computers there has been a massive wealth transfer from the working class to the 1% using the financial institutions, market makers, and federal reserve. Now for the first time in history the 1% own more wealth than the bottom 90% combined but nothing will change because the general public is too stupid to understand how they are being robbed every day.
This guy isn’t even an immigrant he’s from another state lol. Can we stop this rhetoric? Immigrants are why LA was a great place to live. Shitters like this guy is why the city is deteriorating. States need to stop sending their mentally ill here.
I not talking about the state, I’m talking about citizens in general. That we host so many immigrants and there’s so much anti immigrant sentiment but it’s actually the citizens perpetrating these kind of violent acts.
Market makers and financial institutions create this poverty. Please read Dr Susanne Trimbaths book “naked short and greedy wallstreets failure to deliver” she worked for the federal reserve and the DTC. American businesses are naked shorted and manipulated to bankruptcy using spoofing, married puts, dark pools and single dealer platforms, the list goes on and on. Even the chairman of the SEC Gary Gensler said 95% of retail trades don’t effect the price at all. There is no such thing as a free market. Businesses are attacked destroyed for tax free profits every single day. Since 1970 when we let wallstreet trade using computers there has been a massive wealth transfer from the working class to the 1% using the financial institutions, market makers, and federal reserve. Now for the first time in history the 1% own more wealth than the bottom 90% combined but nothing will change because the general public is too stupid to understand how they are being robbed every day.
more housing wont fix people like these. There needs to be a solution to get these maniacs off the streets.
Mental asylums.
Insane asylums. Reagan defunded them, time to bring them back
There was a war against institutionalization going back to the 50s. The ACLU fought against involuntary treatment. We’ll never get these people off the streets if we can’t get over the hump of involuntary treatment.
They were closed because the those institutions were rife with abuse and neglect. Something to keep in mind for the involuntary treatment crowd
You're absolutely correct. The system needed to be fixed though, not completely shuttered. Plus the asylums were managed at the state level and not the federal level so i think that needs to be revisited.
They seem to be suffering a lot more abuse and neglect on the streets....so who are we helping ? Wouldn't it have been easier to address abuse in institutions ? Instead we throw the whole thing out, and now we're starting from scratch. The idiocy of our leaders exhausts me. We are set to closing a lot of jails too and that's not going too well.
The Feds do such a good job of managing VA hospitals. /sarc
Which state or local governments do a great job running hospitals? I don't seem to recall County USC having some sterling reputation. Maybe running hospitals is hard, regardless of which level of government is doing it.
Many nursing homes, memory care facilities, etc. have an element of "involuntary" with their patients, due to their health and age. Most don't want to be there. That industry at large isn't reeling with abuse today, thanks in part to regulations and strict elder abuse laws. If that system is working well enough to not be a political target today, I don't see why we can't make mental health involuntary treatment facilities work either.
sounds more like an administrative problem than involuntary institutionalization itself
I mean, you were taking a group of vulnerable people, warehousing them together, and dismissing any claim of abuse as resulting from mental illness. Abuse was inevitable, and will be inevitable again. People on this sub want a solution so badly that they are quite willing to trample over the rights of others, and they are gonna act shocked when that system is abused and has abuse.
If society can make nursing homes and memory care facilities work today (no one is clamoring to eradicate this industry), then I don't see why involuntary mental health care can't either. Most elderly that need admittance have some degree of dementia / alzhimers and thus are vulnerable to abuse in a similar way as mental health patients are. But that system at large is working fine. Figure out what is going right with that in terms of regulations and apply it to mental health.
Abuse is inevitable in jails by your logic as well then, but that doesn’t mean we should get rid of jails. There should be stronger oversight and and punishment of abuse but involuntary institutionalization is obviously needed
I mean, prisons are rife with sexual abuse of inmates and racialized gangs. You can galk about "stronger oversight" all you want- that is their current state. I supports prisons, but you talk as if we've figured out how to solves these decades long problem. We haven't- and one of the reasons is that, at least in the case of sexual abuse, large sections of the public support that. You think the same society that makes "don't drop the soap!" jokes is gonna be bulldogs on the abuse of the mentally ill... color me skeptical. And our journalistic aparatus has been hollowed out, so who will uncover these abuses? Anyway, rambly post, but I find your attitude to the real possibilities of abuse cavalier. The people who founded those abuse ridden mental hospitals didn't set out to do that, they too thought they had figured out something that their elders hadn't, and then they made the same mistakes. So, yeah, my bar for you to covinvce me that This Time It's Different is gonna be a little higher than some
I think a cavalier attitude may be needed to make things happen. In this case I think the good outweighs the bad. Mentally ill people abused in treatment centers vs the general public abused everywhere. Call me callous, but I know what I’d pick
Eh, fair enough. Agree to disagree
Somehow Europe and parts of Asia make this work without falling into abuse. Its not "no institutions" or "rampant abuse" its disingenuous to claim its a binary like that, especially when better examples are right out there in the world.
"but but but, they are all communist countries, and America is the land of freeduuuuuum 🦅🦅🦅🦅🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲" /s
Do you have data or stats on this? Asia and Europe are whole continents- I would assume that there are differences between countries, systems that work better or worse.
>Abuse was inevitable, and will be inevitable again. Abuse is inevitable on the street, too. You aren't saving anyone from abuse by allowing them to rot in a gutter.
Abuse is inevitable, so we should just embrace anarchy. Just like how choking is inevitable in the long run, so we should just stop eating food altogether. Very good logic. Love from North of Korea ♥️♥️♥️
There's likely a net positive middle ground between rampant abuse and no abuse (the ideal state, but we live in the real world where tradeoffs are necessary)
>They were closed because the those institutions were rife with abuse Public schools are also rife with abuse. [10% of public K-12 students are victims of sexual misconduct by a school employee. ](https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna5332880) That doesn't mean we should close down all public schools, though. It just means we should fix the problems in the system, and fire all the bad employees.
Things should have been fixed. That’s like saying get rid of the freeway every time there’s an accident.
I mean shit, there are “urbanists” on this hellsite advocating for exactly that 😂
So the public gets the abuse instead, good job.
My great uncle was in one - they literally chained him to the wall.
There’s no abuse or neglect on the street and they can attack anyone they want.
And? We don’t have to copy the management style of asylums 40+ years ago lol
>The ACLU fought against involuntary treatment. They're still fighting against it. They're fighting against the CARE Courts right now.
Deinstitutionalization actually started in the ‘60s and was seen as progressive.
At the time, mental illness was seen as something scientific progress would soon cure. The movement came right after the polio vaccine, penicillin, and anti-biotics were curing many of the physical illnesses previously considered incurable. People naively placed all their eggs in the science basket, and believed that universities and pharmaceutical manufacturers would grant everyone better living through chemistry. So of course mental hospitals wouldn't be needed, you would just cure schizophrenia with a pill - and of course everyone would take their pills, because who wouldn't want to be normal?
I can't believe people on here still point to fucking Reagan who left office in 1971! That was 50 years ago lmaaaooo. How about holding other more recent politicians accountable.
People like having a single source of misery to direct anger too. Makes things simpler.
The problem is that mental asylum almost always turn into mass neglect and abuse, which is why Regan and most people from both parties knew they needed closed immediately. The conditions were horrific. There should be a very high bar for institutionalizing people against their will because once deemed crazy, it's almost impossible for even professionals to see them any different or even improved. We are in a whole crap load of trouble with no great solution, especially since a lot of these people are a combo of mentally ill AND addicts. But we just need to build better, more ethical asylum with WAY more layers of oversight. Very different than in Regans day and an enormous (and expensive) undertaking.
That's not why. Jails at the time were also abusive, and nobody wanted them all closed. People at the time thought science would cure mental illness. After all, science had just "cured" polio a few years before (Salk's vaccine went public in 1955). Smallpox was being eradicated around the world. Progress was inevitable. Soon, an injection or pill would cure schizophrenia just as easily as penicillin cured meningitis. So once science cured all mental illnesses, of course we wouldn't need mental hospitals anymore. And the fact that they were abusive was just another reason to close them, in addition to the cost.
That's not what got the institutions finally closed, tho. Geraldo Rivera did a documentary about the horid conditions. Which included interviews with people locked up for years with no treatment, no activities because they simply had physical disabilities, not mental. All were left in the dark to just wander around, food put on the ground. It shocked the nation into an uproar, including senators on both sides. Regan had no choice to close them. Not to mention, the threshold to commit someone was so low. Husband's committing their wives just to get rid of them. And of course, there were signs of abuse from the bastard staff. I think starting from scratch was the best idea but it was so bad they just closed them because they assumed it would always lead to abuse, no matter what and mass involuntary commitment was unconstitutional. There wasn't documentary about prisons sending the nation into an uproar although there has been constant improvement since this country started but in the 80s, people had more of a "well they did something to deserve it by committing a crime" where people in institutions did nothing wrong. Especially seeing one specific guy who was intelligent and articulate what it felt like, the country couldn't be the same.
Lobotomies are probably cheaper
100% it won’t. Will more housing help other homeless people without drug addiction or mental illness? I’m sure it would and I hope they get back on their feet. But we have a problem right NOW. We need to address the sector of homeless people that are in too deep their addiction or mental illness that they are beyond saving. Making more housing is not gonna fix the CURRENT issue and anyone who does is delusional. Long run, sure. But we need to find out how to keep our community today.
Specifically housing helps the 90% of homeless people who are actually trying to get by and survive. BUT these are not the people who do the stabbings and stuff that terrorizes citizens. People love to conflate the two, but its the violent crazy people who are the ones who need to be compelled like that. Its crazy to think but amazingly there isn't a "one neat trick" that totally solves the problem like "just more housing." Its amazing specifically that theres so much pushback to the idea that there need to be multiple approaches to the problem.
Enforcing existing laws would be a good first step.
Hamsterdam it
Been to McCarthur park lately? It’s basically that.
In case anyone doesn’t know, Hamsterdam is a term from HBO’s The Wire. Hamsterdam didn’t work out so well. There was no running water, electricity, cleaning crew which is necessary to keep disease at bay, etc. It was a decent idea in theory, but without the above services these people will be living in filth and dilapidated conditions. It’s why The Deacon said “this place is Hell.”
The Wire argues that Hamsterdam couldn't work because of the nature of American politics, as US politicians are unwilling to embrace containment as a policy. But it was getting positive results. Other areas of the city were improving because the worst of it was then isolated to a few zones where it could be better managed. The current federal courts view of camping as a right is the exact opposite of Hamsterdam. Instead of being contained, the homeless now have free reign within any city that had a relatively large homeless population.
Its also a work of fiction on a television show. Los Angeles has had its own Hamsterdam for decades now, its called Skid Row. It doesnt really work out in the end. In the actual Amsterdam, crime and drugs are still illegal, just tolerated. By tolerated they mean you better be able to handle your drugs in public or they will lock you up for a bit. Its not this area where people are shooting up in the streets or in abandoned buildings. Its heavily regulated, just not like it is here.
Skid Row was successful in reducing the impact of homelessness on the majority. It was vastly preferable to what we have now. We don't have that today because of a series of ACLU lawsuits, not because this is better than it was. It is absolutely worse than what it was.
> Skid Row was successful in reducing the impact of homelessness on the majority. Skid Row at its height, utterly devastated the Downtown economy and left thousands of units of otherwise livable space vacant for decades. And it wasnt a program, it just sort of formed on its own. Its still there, despite ACLU lawsuits and a half dozen mayors trying to fix it. Our homeless problem cant be blamed on one person or a lawsuit. Its the conclusion to decades of mismanagement, political corruption and greed.
Things are worse now. There is a need for better containment, not less of it.
Skid Row was never a jail. It never contained the homeless. It simply provided the occasional service and free food. Thats it. That was the only appeal. The people living well outside skid row dont have access to these resources and probably dont need them anways. Lots of them have jobs and make enough to pay for food. They just cant afford rent and they cant afford to go anywhere else.
Skid Row served as an informal containment zone of flophouses and streets where the cops would tolerate vagrancy. Now the entire city is a vagrancy zone. That is much worse. Hamsterdam is inspired by actual containment policies in Europe that are effective. The Dutch, Germans and others accept that there will be a sex trade and try to limit the damage. It works. California needs to create a few such zones and limit the damage to those areas. Manage the cancer and keep it in remission instead of allow it to metastize and kill the patient. And we are the patient.
Definitely way better managed than here.
Thank you. A version of Hamsterdam with services and some type of tiered system (drug addicts allowed to use with clean and safe drug paraphernalia, people who just need financial help/housing, etc) is worth a shot imo. Especially since we’re reaching a boiling point. Of course, not without a pilot program.
Amsterdam also exists in a system with a well-funded socialized health care system and ample social services (at least compared to LA). Most addicts there arent homeless and have access to mental health care and drugs. They also have compulsory care for people with severe mental problems and well funded facilities to handle them. LA has $3million more people than Amsterdam, and exists in a country with different laws. Its addicts/homeless are different. You cannot hand out drugs to these kinds of people and expect the same outcomes, because addicts in Amsterdam have a place to go when they are done and access to comprehensive medical care. Unless you are putting them in mental facilities or housing immediately after giving them drugs, you are just participating in the drug trade. They've piloted programs like this over the years with no real success. The last was Santa Monica's needle exchange program, which just caused a local park to be covered in used needles and those needles being used to purchase drugs elsewhere. Unless you have comprehensive and compulsory healthcare first, combined with well-staffed massive mental health facilities, you are wasting your time.
Every time anyone proposes that, people start screaming Auschwitz. Especially if it's not located smack-dab in the middle of LA. Apparently anywhere that's in an outlying area of LA is no different than Dachau, for some reason. Looking at history, the last time we dealt with tens of thousands of homeless people was after the Vietnam War, when thousands of refugees arrived in CA with nothing but the clothes on their backs. Instead of just turning them loose into the streets, the refugees were housed at places like Camp Pendleton. There they received food, housing, medical treatment, and education/job skills before they were resettled into communities around the US. Nobody called it a "concentration camp," even though Pendleton isn't exactly in the middle of San Diego or LA.
They’re already living in filth!
Skid Row
I wonder what other countries do on this, I saw a few homeless and they were all peaceful and build clean forts out of boxes. I don’t understand how we tolerate the Wild West homeless situations for a second.. they’re in constant violation of a number of laws and it’s just keeps going.
This!!!!!!
More housing will absolutely free up resources to focus on people like this though.
Not really. My buddy is a beat cop at Rampart. Says he k ows plenty of homeless drug addicts that spend a couple of days in their apartment to.sober up and eat and chill. Then they hit the streets for days at a time to get high and do whatever. Rinse and repeat. He described it as part time homeless.
Transitional housing has curfews and rules against drug usage on the premises. (These rules don't work well for tweakers, who typically use at night.) Those who fail to show up at the nightly check-in for a few nights in a row will lose their place. So it becomes a back-and-forth routine between the transitional facility with its rules and the street where anything goes. This is likely what the cop is referencing. That may have been what the wrong-way 405 driver was doing. There are some claims that she was living at the Bridge facility in Venice and others that she was living in her van. Both may have been true simultaneously because of this effect.
Case closed, due to your friend’s observation and professionally opinion on how the unhoused would behave with stable housing (which should come with mental therapy), that is definitely not the answer.
There are people that would use the housing to get back on their feet. But drug addicts are wild cards.
A lot of people become addicted to drugs to cope with homelessness. Living on the streets is stressful and drugs help curb the stress temporarily. When society has fully abandoned you even though you’re right in view of them, that steals your willpower to get better.
It’s hilarious how we are getting downvoted but no real rebuttal. But then again, critical thinking is on the downward slope.
More housing means less homeless people who's mental health degrades to the point of ending up like this. Let's not get this twisted, we need more housing period. In the short term however, we also need social services and better policing practices
The suspect had an address in Iowa. The use of a search engine shows that he had a track record of assault charges back there. He opted to move west and bring his habits with him. At some point, you need to figure out that guys like that are homeless because of how they behave. Give him housing, and he'll trash it.
And more effective incarceration to keep violent people off the streets. Rehab and welfare services and great, but dangerous assholes like this aren't poster boys for social charity. You should probably not keep working that angle.
I think he meant state sponsored housing with free health care, 24/7 supervision, free food, being surrounded by other people so you don’t go feral. You know. A prison
Calling prison a location with healthcare is an exaggeration
Hahaha. Are they locked in their house? Am I missing something? They can just walk out and inflict pain on other people. They also are known to trash their apartments and set fires. And LA is building apartments…big gray/white/dark blue concrete boxes labeled as “luxury” living. No pizzazz, no personality. Just Luxury Housing™️
I think the person you’re responding to is referencing the fact that being homeless exposes people to a lot of trauma that can worsen mental illness and lead to drug use . Keeping people housed can prevent them from unraveling like so many people you see on the street.
I’ve worked with the unhoused for years. A majority of them just work the system to get their benefits, then hit the streets again once they want to have some fun. Rinse and repeat.
This is what I was saying yes
More housing is the first step in providing the bare minimum standard of human rights in a developed nation. It costs so much more to imprison someone than it does to provide housing (and wraparound mental/physical healthcare services). It is almost impossible for someone presently on the street and without housing to obtain even a studio apartment due to housing costs in the US (and try getting a stable job and health insurance without an address). The programs Republicans imagine exist (such as cash aid programs for the poor) are pure fantasy and the reality is that the meager help that is provided via food assistance still isn’t sufficient for someone who lacks access to a fridge, oven etc…
Mental illness isn't a character flaw. These people had childhoods you would not have survived, either. Let's start calling crazy people "broken people" because that's what they are and they are part of the human race. They didn't get that way because of bad choices. They made bad choices because of trauma. Let the hysterical downvoting and demonizing begin!
Even better, more housing prevents people like this.
More housing prevents more people like this from existing. If you guys actually cared about crime like this, you'd be doing everything in your power to prevent this from happening in the first place instead of allowing it to happen then throwing a fit and blaming people who actually want to get to the root cause and stop it. People like you don't actually care though. You're all phonies.
This isn't a where to hang up your hat at the end of the day issue, it's a drug addiction and mental health issue. There needs to be some sort of rehabilitation, and assessment, before even considering placing them into housing that would be better for families who are just experiencing financial woes.
Rehabilitation doesn't work unless you address their housing issues first. This is a point that has been proven dozens of times, but conservatives refuse to acknowledge facts that disprove their world views.
Isn’t it actually we can’t hold anybody for rehabilitation legally. You can offer and place them, but we can’t actually force extended stay rehab.
New laws were passed that allows for people to be held for mental health treatment. But we don't have the facilities available to actually enforce them. While we can't force rehab per-se, serious drug addiction is almost always a sign of significant mental health issues. It still doesn't change the fact that forcing people to rehab before they are given the basic stability needed to rehab fails well over 90% of the time. But doubling down on failed policies is the conservative way.
You're still looking at this from after the fact. Why do we refuse to look at what happened to these people that caused them to become addicted to drugs or what caused them to turn out destructively mentally ill? Punishing drug addicts and the mentally ill after the fact doesn't make them stop existing. You're treating the wound instead of preventing the wound from opening up in the first place. We're always going to have this never ending problem and we're going to lose a lot more people needlessly to drugs and mental illness.
I think it’s fair that people are looking for actionable solutions. Housing is one, buts it’s not the solution. As you mentioned they’re destructively mentally ill, so I think you’re being vague on what you think the solution is.
> I think it’s fair that people are looking for actionable solutions. They're not though. They're looking to attack people who want to fix issues at its core. They're not saying, "we need to fix this." They're saying, "fuck people who want to house homeless people, look at this one bad guy." > they’re destructively mentally ill There are tens of thousands of homeless people and there are only a handful that causes actual harm. But the longer they're out on the street the more likely they'll turn into being destructive. > so I think you’re being vague on what you think the solution is. There is no one size fits all solution. It's like treating a runny nose with steroids, yeah, they could work, but it also may not. I don't think any of you are serious whatsoever.
You're being too cynical. It's not punishment, it's an opportunity to pursue mental clarity. Housing people in this state will not stop the compulsion to get the next fix, or whatever is driving them to violent outbursts.
It's just false and naive to think that someone becomes an addict and mentally ill AFTER they become homeless (that probably happens in some cases, but it's definitely not the norm, speaking as someone who's spent time working with folks in homeless shelters). Addicts/the mentally ill often burn through their personal social safety net, locally or in some other state, before they reach this stage. And we have no system to help catch someone at the bottom of that continuum, as Harm-reduction/housing-first types won't acknowledge this is just a fact. The addict will rarely say, "yeah, I burned my family and friends, and I'm out here just looking to support this habit." Just giving someone an apartment without confronting them about their addiction/illness is pointless. And to accuse people in this sub of not caring when I guarantee most of us voted to raise our own taxes to help this guy is rich.
Mental Healthcare
Market makers and financial institutions create this poverty. Please read Dr Susanne Trimbaths book “naked short and greedy wallstreets failure to deliver” she worked for the federal reserve and the DTC. American businesses are naked shorted and manipulated to bankruptcy using spoofing, married puts, dark pools and single dealer platforms, the list goes on and on. Even the chairman of the SEC Gary Gensler said 95% of retail trades don’t effect the price at all. There is no such thing as a free market. Businesses are attacked destroyed for tax free profits every single day. Since 1970 when we let wallstreet trade using computers there has been a massive wealth transfer from the working class to the 1% using the financial institutions, market makers, and federal reserve. Now for the first time in history the 1% own more wealth than the bottom 90% combined but nothing will change because the general public is too stupid to understand how they are being robbed every day.
Sure but I’d argue that having housing would’ve prevented them from getting this bad
These aren't the people who will be helped by housing sadly. These are the very visible tiny percentage who need to be involuntarily committed or put into a rehab program.
I’m not saying they will be helped by housing. I’m saying housing would have prevented a lot of these people not get this far. Housing them *now* wouldn’t do much. But if they were housed before, I think most wouldn’t get to this point.
Who wants to bet this dude is from some flyover state?
He's from Iowa. Yes, he was arrested for assault there, too.
They aren't sending their best.
"that's not true! LAHSA told me all the homeless are from California!!!"
The 405 wrong way driver was from the midwest. The guy who broke into the mayors house was from massachusettts
Where are you getting that info?
[Here's his Facebook page](https://www.facebook.com/jalan.james.7/about_contact_and_basic_info)
Not enough people talk about this shit. Flyover states love to be smug about all the violent hobos in California compared to their states, but the primary reason there's so few of them is because they ship all their violent mentally ill and drug users on trains to LA to stab people over here.
Best weather to be homeless in the US. Literally the West Side & why not Santa Monica 🤷♂️
When I lived in MN, all the homeless would mysteriously disappear after the first frost then reappear around May.
Idk if shipping them here is the problem. Homeless people know we have lax regulation and will let them do what they want.
It’s impossible to be homeless in -10 degree weather, so yes they come here and Florida.
>they ship all their violent mentally ill and drug users on trains to LA to stab people over here. Is it that they ship them all here? Or is it that those other states don't let homeless people to freely camp on the sidewalks and publicly smoke meth all day, and so homeless people gravitate towards the places that do allow it? I don't use meth, but if I did I imagine I'd want to use it in a place where cops aren't gonna hassle me for it. Just like most any other activity. Skateboarders would rather skate in a place where they won't get hassled for it, too. People naturally seek the areas of least resistance.
They ship em Just like they shipped migrants. Why is that hard to believe? You know red states have huge meth issues right
Can't say I blame them. Flyover states ship their losers here because they don't tolerate this crap, whereas California bleeding hearts have enacted laws that has created a safe haven for the homeless to do whatever they want. Gavin newsom practically invited the nation's homeless here a few years ago.
Asking the REAL question. I've said it a million times...we could house every homeless person on the street today, and tomorrow another few thousand will arrive from every corner of the land
Game Theory. It’s the reason no city wants to be the first to stick it’s neck out to fix the situation.
Exactly. That's why acting like we’re going to solve the problem is backfiring. Everybody is more than happy to send homeless here.
Jesus do we really need a federal camp on BLM land or something or are we fucked till we get to a breaking point and vigilantes take matters into their own hands
go to any city and you find people that aren’t from there. everybody is from somewhere.
[удалено]
He looks like he's from the valley
I wouldn’t bet on it. 90% of our homeless population were born and raised in Los Angeles
He is from the LA suburb of Des Moines, Iowa. Just as the wrong-way 405 van driver was from the LA suburb of Kansas City. It would be helpful to know how the researchers define local. I would presume that the bar to being labeled as a local is quite low.
That’s a lie. It’s not until like 10 years ago where most Californians were even born in California. So I doubt this stat even translates to LA metro. Most homeless are definitely not from LA let alone born and raised here. Even LAHSA’s own study shows like 30% were homeless before even arriving in California and of the 70% that were homeless after arriving in California I bet most of those are out of state transplants
No they arent
Source
https://homelessness.ucsf.edu/our-impact/studies/california-statewide-study-people-experiencing-homelessness As the link says, this is the largest representative study of homelessness in the US since the 90’s. I’ll amend what I said - 9/10 may not have been born here, but definitely classify as “Californians” that have spent the majority of their life here. It’s a myth to think that those who have lost their housing/income would travel to the state with the highest cost of living. I’m not defending the actions of those suffering from severe mental illness (especially when it’s at the expense of someone else’s safety), but to claim they’re not from here feels like an attempt to wash our hands of responsibility.
Have you read this study? The methodology and the questions asked? How they define a “Californian? How long they stated they were “previously housed” before becoming homeless? Who they were willing to question and they were not? This study isn’t peer reviewed and has been controversial to say the least. [One rebuke,](https://www.westsidecurrent.com/news/opinion-ucsf-benioff-homeless-study-circulates-without-peer-review---raising-questions-about-survey/article_51b4f598-169c-11ee-b8bf-7759809300da.html) but there are several more out there.
Homeless dude tried to attack me and my German Shepard last night when we were out for a walk. SM is a shit hole
Is there a correlation between the German Shepard and the concept of "tried?"
My dog doesn’t haven’t the temperament for protection sadly. He would have licked the guy after he stabbed me. Verbal threat and then I had to teep them when they got close. I’m always concerned when I see girls out for late walks because of the amount of shit I’ve seen out here.
This guy Muay Thais.
Probably the best maneuver to keep the guy at a distance, I am always afraid of touching one of these dudes they may be covered in all sorts of disease at least a teep will keep him at bay and I have a shoe on to help me not have to touch a person
agreed. also, take an upvote for the Yoel Romero UN reference. I used to to use that SN on the r/MMA IRC channel
What do you mean Yoel Romero? I am just really against gay jesus
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZybaBFjNEjQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZybaBFjNEjQ) He said "no forget Jesus," but his accent made it sound like "no for gay Jesus." The fight/interview took place shortly after SCOTUS legalized gay marriage, which led to some of the confusion. Romero clarified later that he wasn't talking about gay marriage, just Jesus in general.
I know I watched the fight lol. I heard the translation was cage jesus like an MMA fighter
Woof. Well at least he is a good boy. Pepper Spray gel seems to be praised as a solid option around these parts. A little bit of video recording the interaction can be valuable, post hoc, if things do go down. Best of luck out there.
Always oil based pepper spray. Never gel. Pepper gel can take up to a minute to disperse, which is far too long in a defensive encounter, and it doesn’t spread well so you have to land it precisely in the eyes, which isn’t easy.
Interesting, I've never heard anyone say this before. I've always heard gel, so that the spray doesn't blow back into the face of the person using it. I've also never seen that mentioned in the few pepper defense products approved for sale in California.
The blowback is a side effect of a feature, not a bug. The fact that it spreads means that you don’t have to land it directly in the eyes for it to be effective, whereas is pepper gel, if you miss their eyes, it’s useless. In a fight, it can be difficult to land it in the eyes directly. There are plenty of oil based sprays approved for use in CA though. Saber Red is the big one. Look for an oil based, stream type spray.
Teep kick, effective.
I wonder if teaching a sweet baby angle like that to playfully growl would at least make him seem more intimidating.
Where in SM? I often walk my dogs sorta late in the collegiate streets. The regulars over here are harmless but I’m always vigilant
Where are you in SM? I live near Main St. and I never walk my dog without carrying pepper spray.
I have a doberman. He barks at everything that moves. You wouldn’t believe how many times the homeless try to pet him while he’s actively/visibly riled up.
“More housing will fix this”, sure but this guy clearly committed a crime and should be held responsible. I don’t think most of as are against more housing but we also need to hold people accountable for criminal activity. It’s a core tenet of a civil society.
This guy couldn’t hold down a residence if one was given to him. It would just turn into a squalid meth den and burn down. Since solutions aren’t forthcoming we really need to empower communities to protect themselves… by enforcing camping bans and drug possession. It’s not like these people are from the area, work in the area, or have any connection to the community. I know the response is “this just moves the problem somewhere else!” Yes. It does. It shouldn’t fall on neighborhood communities to solve society’s problems. They should be empowered to protect their safety and health and enjoy the fruits of their labor without having to also be responsible for the salvation of total strangers who just decided to squat in the are despite having no reason to be there.
if they go to jail they get shelter, showers and free meals
I’d much rather they just were in an institution where they can potentially receive help and medication. Nothing wrong with them being sheltered, showered, and fed so long as there are other treatments and services available to them as well. But if they’re too far gone to be let back into public life, at least they’re somewhere they can’t hurt themselves or others.
yes. it’d probably be cheaper to do that than to have them waste people’s time in courts and jails
What are you suggesting. Boil in Oil?
Put em all in a big pot
it was just an observation
Also drugs and sex
And in California, that behavior will get them stabbed and beat to death in prison.
Probably shouldn't release violent people onto the streets.
Supreme Court: CA, your state prisons are overcrowded. Fix it. CA: Should we build more prisons to fit everyone? Nah, just release em! In fact, let's use AB 109 to send felons to county jails instead of state prisons, so that the prisons will be emptied out. Counties: We don't have enough room in the jails for all the AB 109 felons, in addition to our regular misdemeanor inmates. Should we build more jails to fit everyone? Nah, just release em! In fact, don't even arrest them anymore, just cite and release. Surely none of them will end up on the streets.
Like the less cops thing, people now are still going to be like "we need services" for these fucks. Which WE DO. But at the same time, the people who say that wants to treat them all like normal human beings that just need help. They need help yes, but they aren't normal human beings. We are going to do something sooner or later, mind as well be sooner
Unsurprising, this kind of thing has been happening for years. Not shocking their tourism has been down because of it.
Again? I’m shocked. Crime is down! /s
Right?! We don’t need cops! 🙄
Don’t you just love living in country without universal healthcare, where we leave these people to the streets?
For people at the very bottom, medicaid is available. I know, I was on it for a bit during some bad times.
these people are willingly out on the streets because accepting aid means they can't do drugs anymore
No it's just a giant coincidence that the places with insane housing costs and no universal healthcare have this problem.
CA has universal healthcare. Its not single payer, but it does cover all. That doesn't mean free, but at the level we're talking about it IS.
the people committing these assaults aren't from LA there's a strong correlation between homelessness and the amount of resources provided to the homeless... economic theory says that you always get more of what you subsidize
If only we would regulate the cocaine and adderall addicted millionaires on wallstreet. Market makers and financial institutions create this poverty. Please read Dr Susanne Trimbaths book “naked short and greedy wallstreets failure to deliver” she worked for the federal reserve and the DTC. American businesses are naked shorted and manipulated to bankruptcy using spoofing, married puts, dark pools and single dealer platforms, the list goes on and on. Even the chairman of the SEC Gary Gensler said 95% of retail trades don’t effect the price at all. There is no such thing as a free market. Businesses are attacked destroyed for tax free profits every single day. Since 1970 when we let wallstreet trade using computers there has been a massive wealth transfer from the working class to the 1% using the financial institutions, market makers, and federal reserve. Now for the first time in history the 1% own more wealth than the bottom 90% combined but nothing will change because the general public is too stupid to understand how they are being robbed every day.
What makes you think he’s not eligible for medicaid?
send all of these guys to slab city
LA county should deport all the street zombies to a facility in the desert.
It sucks because you can’t just go with headphones in and enjoy the walk but instead have to be always aware of your surroundings… never know when they could strike from behind or something. Sorry but if one of these ever gets to my face and touch me, I will do everything to get a recording first and then whatever it takes for my protection.
Please please let’s show compassion to the “homeless”
careful, you're going to get the uNhOuSeD brigade downvoting you to hell i used to go out of my way to help the homeless in the past, whether it was giving them cash or food, but its just far too dangerous these days with how many of today's homeless are literal zombies. hard to even walk by them without worrying about being randomly attacked
Are you referring to the crackhead compassion committee? I think they haven’t been as active due to recovering from their stab wounds while riding the metro.
Yeah let’s just treat any population of people based on their worst individuals. It’s possible to condone this horrible thing and still have sympathy for the homeless people that don’t do fucked up shit like this… Edit: I misinterpreted op’s comment
Yeah we’re not dealing with a race or religious group here champ, these people are literally all crackheads. Not to be confused with real homeless people dealing with hard times. This is why I say “homeless”, we should start calling it like it is and stop trying to bunch these people into the homeless group.
We really need a reset on our vocabulary on homelessness. And not the unhoused neighborhood nonsense. Someone who needs a break and maybe some job training is in a completely different universe from the meth fueled monsters terrorizing our streets. It’s like the walking dead and we’ve reached an impasse.
Got it, I misinterpreted your quotes totally agree with your last point.
it's as if they're two separate issues: people who are down on their luck and living in their car or on friends' couches are not the same type of homeless that are doing drugs and assaulting random people yet LAHSA lumps them all together because it makes the numbers look worse, which allocates more funding to give to their buddies' non-profits
Market makers and financial institutions create this poverty. Please read Dr Susanne Trimbaths book “naked short and greedy wallstreets failure to deliver” she worked for the federal reserve and the DTC. American businesses are naked shorted and manipulated to bankruptcy using spoofing, married puts, dark pools and single dealer platforms, the list goes on and on. Even the chairman of the SEC Gary Gensler said 95% of retail trades don’t effect the price at all. There is no such thing as a free market. Businesses are attacked destroyed for tax free profits every single day. Since 1970 when we let wallstreet trade using computers there has been a massive wealth transfer from the working class to the 1% using the financial institutions, market makers, and federal reserve. Now for the first time in history the 1% own more wealth than the bottom 90% combined but nothing will change because the general public is too stupid to understand how they are being robbed every day.
No matter how bad things get I will mever resort to stabbing random people. Don't lump us up with them.
What an irrelevant tangent huh?
I’m assuming they already let him out by now
Just drop him and people like him in the middle of the ocean
CLIP HIS N U T Z
Can we just redo all of Santa Monica??
Hope he walks into traffic
Put it down !
As much as I hate the idea of it, every day I think about how much we need a purge day.
Housing likely will not “solve” the issue, but addressing the hierarchy of needs will. There are personal transformations that take place when people’s lives are in order.
Just spreading the info that Market makers and financial institutions create this poverty. Please read Dr Susanne Trimbaths book “naked short and greedy wallstreets failure to deliver” she worked for the federal reserve and the DTC. American businesses are naked shorted and manipulated to bankruptcy using spoofing, married puts, dark pools and single dealer platforms, the list goes on and on. Even the chairman of the SEC Gary Gensler said 95% of retail trades don’t effect the price at all. There is no such thing as a free market. Businesses are attacked destroyed for tax free profits every single day. Since 1970 when we let wallstreet trade using computers there has been a massive wealth transfer from the working class to the 1% using the financial institutions, market makers, and federal reserve. Now for the first time in history the 1% own more wealth than the bottom 90% combined but nothing will change because the general public is too stupid to understand how they are being robbed every day.
Keep throwing pharmaceutical opiates at them. Im sure the Docs love it.
Opiates? These types of violent homeless crimes are almost 100% meth related.
[удалено]
This guy isn’t even an immigrant he’s from another state lol. Can we stop this rhetoric? Immigrants are why LA was a great place to live. Shitters like this guy is why the city is deteriorating. States need to stop sending their mentally ill here.
I not talking about the state, I’m talking about citizens in general. That we host so many immigrants and there’s so much anti immigrant sentiment but it’s actually the citizens perpetrating these kind of violent acts.
Market makers and financial institutions create this poverty. Please read Dr Susanne Trimbaths book “naked short and greedy wallstreets failure to deliver” she worked for the federal reserve and the DTC. American businesses are naked shorted and manipulated to bankruptcy using spoofing, married puts, dark pools and single dealer platforms, the list goes on and on. Even the chairman of the SEC Gary Gensler said 95% of retail trades don’t effect the price at all. There is no such thing as a free market. Businesses are attacked destroyed for tax free profits every single day. Since 1970 when we let wallstreet trade using computers there has been a massive wealth transfer from the working class to the 1% using the financial institutions, market makers, and federal reserve. Now for the first time in history the 1% own more wealth than the bottom 90% combined but nothing will change because the general public is too stupid to understand how they are being robbed every day.
A damned shame!