Bad news: we lock people up without trials all the time, for lots of reasons that have nothing to do with homelessness.
i dont know where OP was going with this. but…
the criminalization/coercion of street-homeless to overcrowded sub-standard shelter… basically is a prison( remarkably similar to jail) or concentration camp.
a significant chunk of the residents are ex-cons who recently got released but they dont have money+job for an apartment(if they even want one).If homelessness is illegal, are homes being provided? How are homeless people supposed to just manifest a home out of the ether?
It’s a crime to be poor
In the United States, all crime is like that. Areas with no cash bond are better about it, but most places only let the people before trial out if they can afford to pay.
What my city do is issuing a ticket. At some point some people have so much tickets that it dosen’t matter if they get out of their situation or not
Which country is this?
A develop one
making homelessness illegal
That’s a great idea! Other great ideas:
- Being poor is a lighter offense, poor people should get fines
- But you should face a death penalty for suicide!
- …Actually let’s delegalise all forms of dying.
I was trying to say that making homelessness illegal is fucking stupid, and is a disgusting example of peak capitalism.
The devil is in the details. You have to define homelessness first. Would a ban on that even be legal? And what is the state doing to prevent it and/or what are the penalties for violators? There is certainly a chance that this inches painfully close to keeping people concentrated, in a camp, which should, in a sane world, weigh heavily against such a ban. But if a ban meant anybody on the street gets put in an apartment, given medical care including therapy, and then given a chance to become a productive member of society within their means, then it wouldn’t be imprisonment. That’s the Finnish solution to the problem, which benefits from having a smaller population in the country overall and a smaller percentage of homeless people than, say, Los Angeles.
Would a ban on that even be legal?
If we’re talking the US, it’s routine for municipalities to effectively ban homelessness. The penalties are usually a visit to jail & fines. Yes, fines, for people who can’t afford homes. The supreme court also recently ruled that municipalities can do this even if there’s not enough shelter space for them. It’s not really an exaggeration to say that US attitudes & policies towards homelessness are genocidal.
A nearby town (in Canada) has some issues with an encampment of tenters on the city’s land. The city want to evict them to make a new transit hub and have enacted bylaws trying to make it illegal to tent. They’ve spend outrageous sums on police and lawyers trying to kick them out. It went to court and a judge ruled that it violated Canadian charter of rights to be evicted without anywhere to go. So the city spent like $1.7 million on bs and still needs to provide alternative site or housing.
I’m not following your logic on this one. I mean, we are definitely shit to homeless people, but I’m not seeing the direct logical connection you’re making cause and effect wise.
Sure.
So, in the US, you’re innocent until proven guilty. You cannot be guilty of a crime until you’re proven guilty of it. Speeding tickets require a judge to determine guilt.
A lot of US states are making it illegal to be homeless. They’re rounding people up and sending them to asylums or work programs. Which means. . . they’re being imprisoned without a trial. And. . . If they’re given a trial by judge (like with tickets), the crime they’re committing is something they couldn’t have avoided in the first place.
More meat for the grinder unfortunately. Private prisons gotta make money somehow.
The prison never stops being built.
System of a Down - Prison Song https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4L20t8Dvlg
