Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you combine all the money spent dealing with the homeless cleanups in addition to the decontamination clean ups, the property damage, business damage and stolen goods you can bet it is close to a billion yearly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy
Wrong... immediate danger means throwing rocks at people or sleeping naked in the snow or walking in front of cars thinking you won't be hurt because you are God.
I think you need to re-read the law link you posted.
Quote:
(a)When a person, as a result of a mental health disorder, is a danger to others, or to himself or herself, or gravely disabled, a peace officer, professional person in charge of a facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment, member of the attending staff, as defined by regulation, of a facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment, designated members of a mobile crisis team, or professional person designated by the county may, upon probable cause, take, or cause to be taken, the person into custody for a period of up to 72 hours for assessment, evaluation, and crisis intervention, or placement for evaluation and treatment in a facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment and approved by the State Department of Health Care Services.
At a minimum, assessment, as defined in Section 5150.4, and evaluation, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 5008, shall be conducted and provided on an ongoing basis. Crisis intervention, as defined in subdivision (e) of Section 5008, may be provided concurrently with assessment, evaluation, or any other service.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy
And which constitutional amendment guarantees you those rights?
I suggest you look up CA state laws pertaining to camping on public land, loitering, trashing public parks and vandalism.
If the police were allowed to actually do their jobs you most likely would not see camps getting to this level.
There are two approaches to managing the homeless problem, ignore it like LA does, or provide shelter for almost all homeless people like New York does; with over 65k homeless they only have 4k who are unsheltered.
OK so you think it makes sense to spend billions to provide free housing to the homeless so they can carry on doing the same behaviors they did without the housing?
What's occurring in NY is not as wonderful or successful as you are claiming it to be.
There are far more options then just your two approaches.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy
Actually it's more like 25-30%,
I can show you stats that show 55%
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy
but why would you infer that I was talking about one psych tech, were you imagining one giant supportive housing complex for all of the homeless people in LA?
I made no such inference and the personal narrative you created is beyond ridiculous and not worth answering.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy
Once again, you can't round up the homeless and put them in mental hospitals. Here is the California law that establishes the criteria for involuntarily detaining a person for 72 hours for psychiatric evaluation:
...and if the shop owner can't pay enough to attract employees then he can charge more for the hamburger or go out of business.
Exactly! Thanks for making my point. People will still do the work for less. Increasing minimum wage makes everything else go up artificial. I now have to raise rents on my rental property so I can keep affording that burger. Oops.
If you combine all the money spent dealing with the homeless cleanups in addition to the decontamination clean ups, the property damage, business damage and stolen goods you can bet it is close to a billion yearly.
I think you need to re-read the law link you posted.
I suggest you look up CA state laws pertaining to camping on public land, loitering, trashing public parks and vandalism.
If the police were allowed to actually do their jobs you most likely would not see camps getting to this level.
OK so you think it makes sense to spend billions to provide free housing to the homeless so they can carry on doing the same behaviors they did without the housing?
What's occurring in NY is not as wonderful or successful as you are claiming it to be.
There are far more options then just your two approaches.
I can show you stats that show 55%
I made no such inference and the personal narrative you created is beyond ridiculous and not worth answering.
I don't see anything in that laws that goes against anything that I've stated.
Show me where I said "round' up the homeless and put them in mental hospitals".
I say reopen mental hospitals. Mentally ill people need to be in a facility!! What's so wrong with that?? The Florida shooter, the YouTube shooter both mentally ill. When did we get so weak?? A small liberal part of the population is controlling everything and we're in danger because of it. I'm sure a lot of parents that have to padlock their bedroom doors in fear wish we would reopen them too.
I think you need to re-read the law link you posted.
This law?
Quote:
(a)When a person, as a result of a mental health disorder, is a danger to others, or to himself or herself, or gravely disabled, a peace officer, professional person in charge of a facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment, member of the attending staff, as defined by regulation, of a facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment, designated members of a mobile crisis team, or professional person designated by the county may, upon probable cause, take, or cause to be taken, the person into custody for a period of up to 72 hours for assessment, evaluation, and crisis intervention, or placement for evaluation and treatment in a facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment and approved by the State Department of Health Care Services. At a minimum, assessment, as defined in Section 5150.4, and evaluation, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 5008, shall be conducted and provided on an ongoing basis. Crisis intervention, as defined in subdivision (e) of Section 5008, may be provided concurrently with assessment, evaluation, or any other service.
It says exactly what I told you it says, what part of it do you think contradicts anything that I have said? If you live in California ask a local cop what happens when they take a person to the ER for a 5150 evaluation. 90% of the time they are evaluated and immediately released, or if they have a history with the hospital and are on meds they refill their meds and release them. Adjudicating someone as being in danger of harming themself or others is not taken lightly by medical personnel or the courts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matadora
I suggest you look up CA state laws pertaining to camping on public land, loitering, trashing public parks and vandalism.
For the most part those issues are covered under local municipal or county ordinances because there is no state law against camping on public land, or prohibiting sleeping on the sidewalk. Laws governing vandalism or loitering are misdemeanors or infractions. You can't take someone to jail for an infraction, they just get a ticket like a speeding ticket and while a person can be booked for a misdemeanor, it seldom happens and if they are booked they are released in a day or so. But feel free to check with your local police dept. if you don't believe me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matadora
If the police were allowed to actually do their jobs you most likely would not see camps getting to this level.
They are doing their job, but it's like herding cats. Citing and releasing the homeless is futile, it does nothing to fix the problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matadora
OK so you think it makes sense to spend billions to provide free housing to the homeless so they can carry on doing the same behaviors they did without the housing?
Did I say we should spend billions What I said is that if you don't give the homeless a place to sleep then get used to stepping over them on your way to work. There is only shelter space for one out of four of the 58,000 homeless in LA, what do you want them to do, sleep 4 to a cot?
Actually that doesn't dispute the fact that over 90% of the homeless in NYC are sheltered, it's just a rant about the cost. But if NY can do it, so can LA - if they chose to, or they can just leave them on the streets and let people walk over them on their way to work ... It's up to the people of LA to decide how to manage the issue...not my circus, not my monkeys.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matadora
There are far more options then just your two approaches.
Then lets discuss them. I don't have all the answers & never said that I did. But I do understand the law and I promise you , there are no loopholes in the law that would allow for confining or relocating large numbers of the homeless against their will
I say reopen mental hospitals. Mentally ill people need to be in a facility!! What's so wrong with that?? The Florida shooter, the YouTube shooter both mentally ill. When did we get so weak?? A small liberal part of the population is controlling everything and we're in danger because of it. I'm sure a lot of parents that have to padlock their bedroom doors in fear wish we would reopen them too.
Yeah, it strikes me as kind of crazy that both of these shooters were not only visited by officers but also questioned, and they were just let go. Something is wrong with the system.
Yeah, it strikes me as kind of crazy that both of these shooters were not only visited by officers but also questioned, and they were just let go. Something is wrong with the system.
The family of the YouTube shooter never told the police that she was violent or could be a danger to anyone; they just reported her missing.
Yep and you just don't seem to know how to read or interpret this law. Read it again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy
It says exactly what I told you it says, what part of it do you think contradicts anything that I have said?
Here let me make it easy for you. You said that a person can't be placed in a mental facility against their will. The above laws states otherwise.
According to the law: When a person, as a result of a mental health disorder, is a danger to others, or to himself or herself, or gravely disabled
Then: a peace officer, professional person in charge of a facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment, member of the attending staff, as defined by regulation, of a facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment, designated members of a mobile crisis team, or professional person designated by the county...
Can do the following: may, upon probable cause, take, or cause to be taken, the person into custody for a period of up to 72 hours for assessment, evaluation, and crisis intervention,
Or this can be done: Or placement for evaluation and treatment in a facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment and approved by the State Department of Health Care Services.
At a minimum: At a minimum, assessment, as defined in Section 5150.4, and evaluation, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 5008, shall be conducted and provided on an ongoing basis.
Did you read the part that the assessment shall be conducted and provided on an ongoing basis?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy
If you live in California ask a local cop what happens when they take a person to the ER for a 5150 evaluation. 90% of the time they are evaluated and immediately released, or if they have a history with the hospital and are on meds they refill their meds and release them.
Clearly this is a sloppy broken system that needs to be changed. Instead of taking them to the ER they can be taken to a new modern mental institution to be evaluated on an ongoing basis.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy
Adjudicating someone as being in danger of harming themself or others is not taken lightly by medical personnel or the courts.
For the most part those issues are covered under local municipal or county ordinances because there is no state law against camping on public land,
Have you read California Penal Code 647e? It's posted on every bridge they live under here in Northern CA. Also on the fences to the wetlands that they cut open to set up tent camps on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy
Laws governing vandalism or loitering are misdemeanors or infractions. You can't take someone to jail for an infraction, they just get a ticket like a speeding ticket and while a person can be booked for a misdemeanor, it seldom happens and if they are booked they are released in a day or so. But feel free to check with your local police dept. if you don't believe me.
I think I am well aware of how the system works in CA. I am working with my local police department and have learned that CA is a screwed up mess with respect to who is responsible... does the state remove these camps or can the city?
If they are under the bridge the state has jurisdiction. If they cut the fence the city is responsible, if they are on the wetland the State has to deal with it. No wonder nothing is being done about this out of control issue. The police can't even get the State Troopers to do their part due to the bleeding harts suing them for trying to do their jobs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy
They are doing their job, but it's like herding cats. Citing and releasing the homeless is futile, it does nothing to fix the problem.
Nope they are not doing their job. After 3-5 citations it should be an automatic jail sentence as any other state imposes on repeat offenders. The people of CA are 100% responsible for taking the polices rights away, for agreeing to early release, for lowing the penalty on drug and weapons crimes. I am well versed on what is going on in CA. It's people like you who have helped get this mess where it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy
Did I say we should spend billions :confused.
You don't think building and housing the homeless in CA will run in the billions? Take a look at what it's costing NY.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy
What I said is that if you don't give the homeless a place to sleep then get used to stepping over them on your way to work.
I don't mind stepping over them on my way to anywhere...I don't want to put up with all the other things they do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy
There is only shelter space for one out of four of the 58,000 homeless in LA, what do you want them to do, sleep 4 to a cot?
Nope, I prefer to see mental institutes being re-built so that the 55% of mentally disturbed as well as the drug addicts have a place to go for both shelter and treatment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy
Actually that doesn't dispute the fact that over 90% of the homeless in NYC are sheltered,..
No one was disputing that...the point you missed was the scandalous politics and the billions it's costing NY and the taxpayers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy
But if NY can do it, so can LA - if they chose to, or they can just leave them on the streets and let people walk over them on their way to work ... It's up to the people of LA to decide how to manage the issue...not my circus, not my monkeys.
It's not just LA that's plagued with this problem. It's the entire State of CA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy
Then lets discuss them. I don't have all the answers & never said that I did. But I do understand the law and I promise you , there are no loopholes in the law that would allow for confining or relocating large numbers of the homeless against their will
There are laws preventing them from setting up tents and living quarters on public land. Those laws need to be enforced. Take Houston for example...4th largest city in the US and about to become the 3rd. Are there homeless there? Sure. Why don't you see the epidemic there that you see in CA? Recently a federal judge had to block the city of Houston from allowing it's officers to do their job enforcing encampments due to a lawsuit by the homeless. Withing several months DT Houston began looking like LA and many parts of Northern CA with respect to homeless tents. Fast forward to Dec 2017 the judge lifted his order and now the Houston police can go about enforcing encampments.
The homeless here behave they way they do because they know they are protected and the police can't do anything about it. The homeless in Houston behave much differently when the police are doing their job.
I am all for re-building of mental institutions where they can get the proper mental care that they need, where they can get off of drug and learn a skill so those who can are able to leave the institution and integrate back into the society as a functioning member of society.
I am all for the police enforcing the laws and keeping the homeless in check.
I am all for lengthily jail time for repeat offenders.
I am all for making the homeless abide by the same rules everyone else is expected to abide by.
I am against spending one single dime to build free housing for the homeless who are going to live the same lifestyle they did on the streets. That's just the most nonsensical thing I have ever heard.
Yep and you just don't seem to know how to read or interpret this law. Read it again.
Here let me make it easy for you. You said that a person can't be placed in a mental facility against their will. The above laws states otherwise.
According to the law: When a person, as a result of a mental health disorder, is a danger to others, or to himself or herself, or gravely disabled
Then: a peace officer, professional person in charge of a facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment, member of the attending staff, as defined by regulation, of a facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment, designated members of a mobile crisis team, or professional person designated by the county...
Can do the following: may, upon probable cause, take, or cause to be taken, the person into custody for a period of up to 72 hours for assessment, evaluation, and crisis intervention,
Or this can be done: Or placement for evaluation and treatment in a facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment and approved by the State Department of Health Care Services.
At a minimum: At a minimum, assessment, as defined in Section 5150.4, and evaluation, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 5008, shall be conducted and provided on an ongoing basis.
Did you read the part that the assessment shall be conducted and provided on an ongoing basis?
Well this is a sloppy broken system that needs to be changed. Instead of taking them to the ER they can be taken to a new modern mental institution to be evaluated on an ongoing basis.
Adjudicating someone as being in danger of harming themself or others is not taken lightly by medical personnel or the courts.
For the most part those issues are covered under local municipal or county ordinances because there is no state law against camping on public land,Have you read California Penal Code 647e? It's posted on every bridge they live under here in Northern CA. Also on the fences to the wetlands that they cut open to set up tent camps on.
I think I am well aware of how the system works in CA. I am working with my local police department and have learned that CA is a screwed up mess with respect to can the state remove these camps or can the city. If they are under the bridge the state has jurisdiction. If they cut the fence the city is responsible, if they are on the wetland the State has to deal with it. No wonder nothing is being done about this out of control issues. The police can't even get the State Troopers to do their part due to the bleeding harts suing them for trying to do their jobs.
No they are not doing their job. After 3-5 citations it should be an automatic jail sentence as any other state imposes on repeat offenders. The people of CA are 100% responsible for taking the polices rights away, for agreeing to early release, for lowing the penalty on drug and weapons crimes. I am well versed on what is going on in CA. It's people like you who have helped get this mess where it is.
You don't think building and housing the homeless in CA will run in the billions? Take a look at what it's costing NY.
I don't mind stepping over them on my way to anywhere...I don't want to put up with all the other things they do.
No I want to see mental institutes being re-built so the 55% of mentally off and drug addicted ones have a place to go.
No one was disputing that...the point you missed what the scandalous politics and the cost it costing the taxpayers.
It's not just LA that's plagued with this problem. It the entire State of CA.
There are laws preventing them from setting up tents and living quarters on public land. Those laws need to be enforced. Take Houston for example...4th largest city in the US and about to become the 3rd. Are there homeless there? Sure. Why don't you see the epidemic there that you see in CA? Recently a federal judge had to block the city of Houston from allowing it's officers to do their job enforcing encampments. Withing several months DT Houston began looking like LA and many parts of Northern CA with respect to homeless tents. Fasts forward to Dec 2017 the judge lifted his order and the police can now go about enforcing encampments.
The homeless here behave they way they do because they know they are protected and the police can't don anything about it. The homeless in Houston behave much differently when the police are doing their job.
I am all for re-building of mental institutions.
I am all for the police enforcing the laws and keeping the homeless in check.
I am all for lengthily jail time for repeat offenders.
I am all for making the homeless abide by the same rules everyone else is expected to abide by.
I am against spending one single dime to build free housing for the homeless who are going to live the same lifestyle they did on the streets. That's just the most nonsensical thing I have ever heard.
You are basically repeating everything you said before. I know what is involved in the 5150 process because I had to deal with it when I worked in law enforcement. 647e is a law related to the possession of an open container of alcohol. It is an infraction which means you would be issued a citation, like you would receive for a speeding violation but you are not arrested and taken to jail.
It doesn't really matter what you are "all in for" you can't change the law, if you feel it should be changed I strongly encourage you to contact your local and state representatives.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What I said is that if you don't give the homeless a place to sleep then get used to stepping over them on your way to work. There is only shelter space for one out of four of the 58,000 homeless in LA, what do you want them to do, sleep 4 to a cot?
