Violence at Homeless Camp...

[dle]

https://www.castanet.net/edition/news-s ... htm#214197

While feeling the cyclist's frustration, it did zero good to approach and accuse the people in the homeless camp. It just escalated an already tense situation.

Yes, I agree with him that the bikes/bike parts and the scooter he was referring to were probably stolen. He simply had no proof and so there was nothing to be gained by engaging in a peeing contest with the homeless camp. Sure, I agree they were most likely lying through their teeth about the thefts. Duh. But again, without proof, what's your outcome? I guess he just need to vent and say his piece.

It is very frustrating to know that they can steal whatever they want, whenever they want, and it will be overlooked by law enforcement. They just turn a blind eye. Unless the bikes or whatever have distinct identification markings it would be very hard to prove and a waste of time and they are broken down and sold before the cops would even get there if you called them - if they would even come out which won't happen so save your breath. It is very frustrating that you can't protect your property even if you catch them red-handed you have to let them walk away with your stuff. If you go after them, you are the one who gets in trouble, not the thief.

On Gordon Drive on my way to work around 7:00ish one morning last week I was stopped at the light on Sutherland. Two rough looking guys on those little bikes with tall handlebars, one towing one of those little baby trailers jammed full of who knows what stuff - and I mean jammed - it was sticking out all over the place and dragging on the ground - hurried across the road in front of me. They were carrying about 6-8 bike tires between them, another bike without any wheels, and a bunch of other crap - they were loaded down and dragging it along. It was obviously stolen stuff - it wasn't the kind of stuff the homeless have in their grocery carts. What homeless person has 8 bike tires in his possessions that are legitimately theirs? Someone in another car yelled at them about stealing the stuff and he got the finger in return and one guy started dragging his load back towards that guy in the car, while freeing up one hand. I don't know if that exchange would have escalated because the light turned green and we had to move. They hurried into that little park - Mill Park I think it's called, where there were a couple of tents set up that I saw when I drove past. That area is a bad area of town, along Sutherland and Gordon by the Capri, has been for years. I'm sure there have been incidents of clashes between homeowners and thieves but nothing is ever done about it. It's just accepted now, it's just the way it is. Sad & frustrating. I guess they will move somewhere else once the new Capri project is built but that will be 20 years from now...

[Queen K]

What gets me is that the article also states the the new building on that lot will be for the homeless but with "too many rules."

Here: "After more yelling between the cyclist and advocates, the cyclist rode away seemingly unharmed.

The camp was ordered emptied because the city plans on building a housing project on the site.

But advocates said the housing is inadequate and comes with too many rules."

Ahhhh yes, too many rules. The homeless should just get to live rule free! No rules for them. That's why they're homeless right?

Parents had too many damned rules.
Job? Too many rules like being clean and showing up.
Rental unit? Too many damn rules, like paying on time and not using the place as a grow op or destroying it in other ways.
Institution? OHHHH, too many rules!!! Like respecting the staff and oh God, rules! No bringing in eight bags of cans, cash them in first.
Homeless shelter? Oh my God, those pesky rules again!

I was flabbergast when I read that about the advocates objecting to all the rules.

Okay, here's a rule: never give them anything again. No RV injection site, no Insite injection site, no help where professionals have to observe ethical standards which closely resemble rules, no hand outs, no jails anymore there there's rules. No rules for them!!

I am outraged, can you tell?

[maryjane48]

Im not sure of the rules but you being outraged wont change reality .addiction is a s,much a,medical issue as cancer is .

Folks being homeless cost you more than. Supplying homes .

[Queen K]

Im not sure of the rules but you being outraged wont change reality .addiction is a s,much a,medical issue as cancer is .

Folks being homeless cost you more than. Supplying homes .

Yes, MJ, there are many studies on the efficiency of "spend a dime to save the dollar." I get that. And I've always advocated for that very thing myself.

Rules won't change reality? Okay, but rules can subtly shape a negative reality to a better one. And advocates are objecting to rules for the homeless in taxpayer funded housing. Those rules can be what saves people from a great deal of negative impact.

[alanjh595]

Im not sure of the rules but you being outraged wont change reality .addiction is a s,much a,medical issue as cancer is .

Folks being homeless cost you more than. Supplying homes .

This from someone advocates that they are pro-drugs at every opportunity?

[HorganIsMyHero]

Ahhhh yes, too many rules. The homeless should just get to live rule free! No rules for them. That's why they're homeless right?

Parents had too many damned rules.
Job? Too many rules like being clean and showing up.
Rental unit? Too many damn rules, like paying on time and not using the place as a grow op or destroying it in other ways.
Institution? OHHHH, too many rules!!! Like respecting the staff and oh God, rules! No bringing in eight bags of cans, cash them in first.
Homeless shelter? Oh my God, those pesky rules again!

I was flabbergast when I read that about the advocates objecting to all the rules.

Okay, here's a rule: never give them anything again. No RV injection site, no Insite injection site, no help where professionals have to observe ethical standards which closely resemble rules, no hand outs, no jails anymore there there's rules. No rules for them!!

I am outraged, can you tell?

If we're talking about the Castanet article posted in this thread it has a single sentence about rules which is ambiguous as all get out and doesn't state which rules are being objected to.

So why are people getting up on soapboxes and ranting while bashing homeless people with countless stereotypes? Prejudice is never the answer to anything and neither is mindlessly bashing others.

[Queen K]

All of life is governed by rules. Get over it.

[ferri]

*Keep the Bickering where it belongs please. Thank you.

[hobbyguy]

Ummm... my wife watched the exchange on CTV, and when one of the "advocates" started mouthing off, I was shocked by some of the %%$## coming from my wife's chair.

The attitudes of that bunch will indeed turn people against them. The disrespect for everyone else is patently obvious. To be honest, it made me think that maybe the old vagrancy laws weren't as short sighted as I used to think they were.

[HorganIsMyHero]

All of life is governed by rules. Get over it.

I didn't say there shouldn't be rules for homeless shelters, I just want to know which rules homeless advocates don't like. You posted stuff about not paying rent and property damage, but the article says nothing at all about any of this.

Is there another article that states what rules homeless advocates don't like to be in place for shelters?

[Queen K]

Okay, why dont' both of us use google to try to find out and report back here.

I guarantee you though, judging from the 10 likes my post got, the rules won't matter to those who follow rules to be successes in their lives.

[HorganIsMyHero]

I guarantee you though, judging from the 10 likes my post got, the rules won't matter to those who follow rules to be successes in their lives.

I have no clue what this sentence means. The number of likes a post receives has nothing to do with homeless people nor does it have anything to do with following rules in life.

It's actually easier to go talk to some homeless people instead of finding articles in order to find out what they're able to handle as they're all individuals. Lots of these shelters don't have the right kind of accommodations for certain mental illnesses which is a shame and I'm guessing is part of these rules to which the Castanet article refers.

[Queen K]

Okay, I've been googling "housing for homeless in Vancouver" in search of articles highlighting the "advocates dont' like the rules" issue, so far I'm getting a lof of information in regards to Marpole area.

What are you doing?

[Queen K]

This is interesting: "we don't care if we screw the FN out of 1.3 million dollars because WE have no where to go and WE aren't going to let the construction begin soil testing, remediation and other work begin." Like that.

https://www.pressreader.com/canada/vanc ... 6520969742

[Queen K]

Here is are the rules for Lighthouse, a homeless shelter.

The only rule I have an issue with is "no food or drink" in the shelter. I hope water is an exception. But it's their rule. That's it.

https://www.lighthousesaskatoon.org/ser ... lterrules/