Sfdebris.net

“There’s a lot of reasons why this kind of approach is not likely legal,” National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty legal director Eric Tars tells the publication. “I would call it an internment camp, or a concentration camp. If it’s not a jail, then what else could it possibly be?”

Darth Wedgius wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 1:32 am California holds a disproportionately high number of America's homeless, and the mayor of Redding has asked for permission to implement a plan for tackling it.

https://www.ijpr.org/post/redding-mayor-envisions-forcing-homeless-people-stay-temporary-shelter#stream/0

“There’s a lot of reasons why this kind of approach is not likely legal,” National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty legal director Eric Tars tells the publication. “I would call it an internment camp, or a concentration camp. If it’s not a jail, then what else could it possibly be?”

Maybe call it a sanctuary district? I'm not going to compare this to Nazi extermination or work camps because even my stupidity has bounds once in a while. I think comparisons to debtors prisons would be very strained as well. And the rough similarity to DS9's sanctuary districts might be setting off some of my alarm bells more loudly than warranted.

But maybe not.

I doubt this would pass judicial muster, but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals can be odd at times. If a horse is ever made a court justice, that would be the court.

This worries me. Slippery slopes aside (as they probably should be) it might even be helpful in practice. But, as I think Ben Franklin once said, "From the standpoint of One holding an interest in the Liberty of the Common Man, this Totally Blows."

clearspira wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 1:12 pm

Darth Wedgius wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 1:32 am California holds a disproportionately high number of America's homeless, and the mayor of Redding has asked for permission to implement a plan for tackling it.

https://www.ijpr.org/post/redding-mayor-envisions-forcing-homeless-people-stay-temporary-shelter#stream/0

“There’s a lot of reasons why this kind of approach is not likely legal,” National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty legal director Eric Tars tells the publication. “I would call it an internment camp, or a concentration camp. If it’s not a jail, then what else could it possibly be?”

Maybe call it a sanctuary district? I'm not going to compare this to Nazi extermination or work camps because even my stupidity has bounds once in a while. I think comparisons to debtors prisons would be very strained as well. And the rough similarity to DS9's sanctuary districts might be setting off some of my alarm bells more loudly than warranted.

But maybe not.

I doubt this would pass judicial muster, but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals can be odd at times. If a horse is ever made a court justice, that would be the court.

This worries me. Slippery slopes aside (as they probably should be) it might even be helpful in practice. But, as I think Ben Franklin once said, "From the standpoint of One holding an interest in the Liberty of the Common Man, this Totally Blows."

Hey, we are approaching the right date for it. 2024 in Trek wasn't it?
Although we are also approaching the right date for WW3 which... also isn't all that unlikely.

ProfessorDetective wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 3:03 pm I've always been one for just building the homeless population houses to live in (a few studies have shown that the upfront cost would outweigh the current long-term cost of caring for the homeless populations on the street. Plus a short-term employment spike), but not if we're FORCING them into it.

And I bet you dollars to donuts they'll cut as many corners as possible just to sweep the unfortunate folks under the rug.

Antiboyscout wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 5:55 pm

ProfessorDetective wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 3:03 pm I've always been one for just building the homeless population houses to live in (a few studies have shown that the upfront cost would outweigh the current long-term cost of caring for the homeless populations on the street. Plus a short-term employment spike), but not if we're FORCING them into it.

And I bet you dollars to donuts they'll cut as many corners as possible just to sweep the unfortunate folks under the rug.

If you think that simply shoving a homeless person into a house solves the problem, you don't know what the problem is.

Intentionally creating a giant homeless camp isn't the solution ether.

reopening mental health facilities is likely the best idea.

clearspira wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 1:12 pm

Darth Wedgius wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 1:32 am California holds a disproportionately high number of America's homeless, and the mayor of Redding has asked for permission to implement a plan for tackling it.

https://www.ijpr.org/post/redding-mayor-envisions-forcing-homeless-people-stay-temporary-shelter#stream/0

“There’s a lot of reasons why this kind of approach is not likely legal,” National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty legal director Eric Tars tells the publication. “I would call it an internment camp, or a concentration camp. If it’s not a jail, then what else could it possibly be?”

Maybe call it a sanctuary district? I'm not going to compare this to Nazi extermination or work camps because even my stupidity has bounds once in a while. I think comparisons to debtors prisons would be very strained as well. And the rough similarity to DS9's sanctuary districts might be setting off some of my alarm bells more loudly than warranted.

But maybe not.

I doubt this would pass judicial muster, but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals can be odd at times. If a horse is ever made a court justice, that would be the court.

This worries me. Slippery slopes aside (as they probably should be) it might even be helpful in practice. But, as I think Ben Franklin once said, "From the standpoint of One holding an interest in the Liberty of the Common Man, this Totally Blows."

Hey, we are approaching the right date for it. 2024 in Trek wasn't it?
Although we are also approaching the right date for WW3 which... also isn't all that unlikely.

BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 9:56 pm

clearspira wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 1:12 pm

Darth Wedgius wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 1:32 am California holds a disproportionately high number of America's homeless, and the mayor of Redding has asked for permission to implement a plan for tackling it.

https://www.ijpr.org/post/redding-mayor-envisions-forcing-homeless-people-stay-temporary-shelter#stream/0

“There’s a lot of reasons why this kind of approach is not likely legal,” National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty legal director Eric Tars tells the publication. “I would call it an internment camp, or a concentration camp. If it’s not a jail, then what else could it possibly be?”

Maybe call it a sanctuary district? I'm not going to compare this to Nazi extermination or work camps because even my stupidity has bounds once in a while. I think comparisons to debtors prisons would be very strained as well. And the rough similarity to DS9's sanctuary districts might be setting off some of my alarm bells more loudly than warranted.

But maybe not.

I doubt this would pass judicial muster, but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals can be odd at times. If a horse is ever made a court justice, that would be the court.

This worries me. Slippery slopes aside (as they probably should be) it might even be helpful in practice. But, as I think Ben Franklin once said, "From the standpoint of One holding an interest in the Liberty of the Common Man, this Totally Blows."

Hey, we are approaching the right date for it. 2024 in Trek wasn't it?
Although we are also approaching the right date for WW3 which... also isn't all that unlikely.

Wasn't the eugenics wars in the 90's?