|
|
Post by NamelessStain on Nov 14, 2013 14:56:51 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Gingerbread Man on Nov 14, 2013 15:27:53 GMT
It's not a FEMA camp, LOL. Where are they getting this? It's a private org. that has job training, free food, free lodging, free clothes. The homeless in Columbia are harrassing people en masse. It's not that there are a few of them either. Loitering, vagrancy, public defication and urination, and panhandling are unlawful in many, many cities.
The homeless and their mouth pieces are demanding job training, food and lodging. Columbia worked with a private org to get them what they want. When they created the solution, now they complain about the solution. No one is saying you have to get a job, engage in the training, or go to the facility. What they did was say you can go to jail because you're breaking the law here OR go get the help you're demanding in the facility.
1700 homeless in a 5 miles area is overwhelming the ability of the police to manage the calls about them.
Do I agree with this resolution? Not particularly but they are offering everything for free.
|
|
|
|
Post by Browning35 on Nov 14, 2013 16:25:43 GMT
Sometimes these headlines have a bit of truth to them.
So is any part of this true?
With some of these blogs it's hard to separate truth from fiction.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gingerbread Man on Nov 14, 2013 16:37:13 GMT
Yes, Columbia partnered with a local church org to help the homeless get jobs, food, shelter etc.
Yes, it's outside of downtown because the church can not afford a massive facility in downtown Columbia.
Yes, they bus them there, it's very expensive to shuttle folks one at a time. It's completely voluntary. They are free to leave. They do not have to go. But what they can't do is break the law that has been in effect for years and years. No city allows aggressive panhandling which is killing shopping downtown. It's been against the law for years to sleep on the streets in Columbia.
So they gave them a choice, one they have been demanding for. They wanted jobs, job training, clothes, free food, etc. Columbia and this org said fine, here you go but you're not going to break the law anymore.
Now they're mad about getting free stuff. Lots of free stuff.
|
|
|
|
Post by Browning35 on Nov 14, 2013 16:56:40 GMT
Okay. Cool, thanks. It's just that there's often a kernel of truth in even some of the most tinfoil of web-based publications.
So since I'm not familar with most of those sites I was just wondering where the kernel was at, if this was completely true or if this was just made up entirely.
Given some of the ideas that the progressive statists have come up with lately just because it's kind of a far-fetched claim that denies due process doesn't necessarily mean that it isn't true.
I'd have a definite problem with that, but enforcing laws that dealt with aggressive panhandling, public drunkeness and urination would be fine just so long as their rights aren't violated in the process.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gingerbread Man on Nov 14, 2013 17:45:54 GMT
Actually, due process is being avoided. They're breaking the law but instead of hauling them to jail they're offering them free stuff thus completely avoiding any criminal prosecution.
How's that for you? Then they complain about it.
It would be like someone getting stopped for drunk driving but instead of being jailed for it, they're offered a fresh set of clothes, a room to sleep it off and then alcohol abuse treatment.
|
|
|
|
Post by Browning35 on Nov 15, 2013 2:13:58 GMT
Great, now I'm kinda pissed but going the opposite way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ten Eight on Nov 16, 2013 0:27:17 GMT
I think it's a good idea but it will lead to more "Homelessness" once people can see what they can get for free.
We tried something similiar here. It ran out of funding in less than a year.
|
|
