Hacker News Reader

Comment by jl2718 | Hacker News Reader

I was homeless in Silicon Valley many years ago. There were a lot of ‘us’. We stayed hidden in the woods, bathed often, and dressed impeccably in public. Some had jobs. Some were grad students. Several couples. There were no drugs, alcohol, beggars, or thieves out there. $5/day was enough. It was hard physically, but very spiritual, financially free, and altogether one of the best times of my life. Today it’s too dangerous. There are way too many criminals and addicts on the street. There’s nothing worse for a good person who has fallen on hard times than a policy that is lenient on crimes, drug use, public consumption, and public nuisance of the homeless. You can walk away and lock the door. They can’t. Just imagine yourself out there being victimized by bad people only because rich people feel guilty for them. For them. The one that just mugged you for their next high, or worse. Guilt for them. Good luck, kid.

View on HN

This is so on point. I can not stand how little the police does to address the entirely open air drug sales and use, indecent exposure, and plethora of public safety issues (shattered glass bottles, prostitution, trespassing, selling stolen goods like bicycles) because the perpetrators are homeless. I’m not saying punish homelessness, I’m saying enforce existing laws regardless of who the perps are.

Do you think it has to do with generating income? Like if someone is homeless the odds of getting them to pay a fine is next to nothing. But snag a guy walking out of a bar pissing on the wall you're going to get some money out of it.

Probably as much to do with the revolving door as it does with generating income.

If you have a home / money, a fine or brief jail time are punishment. If you don't have home / money, you won't pay a fine, your time and lack of freedom won't solve an addiction brought on by being desolate. So, a month later, a cop has wasted hours, a judge has wasted hours, and the "criminal" still can't pay the fine, is still addicted, and will waste that same time again.

tldr; A fine of $50 for someone who doesn't have money to eat is in ways as inconceivable as a $1bln fine to someone in the middle class.

Sorry I don't understand your comment?

The purpose of a fine for doing something illegal is supposed to be corrective. If a person can not pay the fine, if they're not further inconvenienced by being arrested and sent to hours until jail; the effective corrective action is being applied to the judge, police; They can arrest the same homeless, mentally ill, drug addicted person each day; or put them in prison where they don't belong -- or they can fine/arrest violent offenders or people who are "corrected" by a jail time or fine.

It's a good point. Punishment in the form of losing something does not work on someone who lost everything.

You're correct. deterrent is the correct word.

> "The purpose of a fine for doing something illegal is supposed to be corrective."

that's almost certainly not true. a fine is primarily a deterrent, and failing that, is punitive. it's not corrective (or restorative), because it doesn't "correct" anything.

an example of corrective action is a burglar being required to return/replace stolen items.

Punitive actions are meant to correct the aberrant behavior by acting as a deterrent. The end goal of anything in criminal justice is to make the victim whole, and if that is not possible to deter future crimes of that type. This is why there are limits to how cruel we are allowed to be, as cruelty for vengeance sake is no more effective than is securing an individual who is very likely to continue their behavior.

Yeah, it sounds like he was going somewhere - or have a point, but lost it - or thought they finished but didnt. The question is, so what penalty for a homeless person would help them to re-align their values (or help rehabilitate them)?

This is a complicated issue because the Drug War is inherently discriminatory, and asking for our government to enforce these laws will always lead to discriminatory practices. All of the other issues definitely need to be addressed, however.

I was homeless as a teen for a short time. I guarantee you that there are moral/ethical homeless people that don't steal or attack people. (even when high)

So, I can say wholeheartedly it's not discriminatory against homeless or the disaffected, it's discriminates based on behaviour. Period.

If law breaking behaviour (theft, assault, etc...) exists most prominently in addicted homeless people, that shouldn't be surprising nor ignored. And it certainly shouldn't negate the laws of the land.

It's discriminatory against the poor, not the homeless

I've been poor most of my life. It's not discriminatory against the poor at all.

I lived in a van with my wife, and we didn't steal. There were people in the parks that would steal, and the police would come after them, not us. I speak from life experience.

You are helping spread a deadly lie.

I challenge anyone to prove me wrong. Go be genuinely poor, it's really easy to do. Just use a tiny amount of money to live off of. And see if it causes you to commit crimes.

Move to a single room apartment, or be homeless. It does not make you immoral or unethical or cause you to mug people or steal.

You seem to be taking this personally. I don't see how your personal experiences address the claim that the poor are disproportionately inclined to commit petty crimes

I don't think he's disputing that crime and poverty are correlated. I think he's disputing both the idea that poverty causes crime and the idea that cracking down on petty crime hurts the poor.

There are many people who are poor due to unfortunate circumstances, but more than likely, if a poor person commits crimes, it has less to do with their poverty and more to do with other factors that caused both their poverty and criminality. We may have reasons to feel sympathy for or try to help the criminally inclined poor, but showing them leniency doesn't usually help them.

It also doesn't help poor people in general, because typically the victims of poor criminals are other poor people.

I would add that sometimes, getting really in trouble is what helps some younger people straighten up in life. It's a disservice to the poor to ignore their crimes against others.

It's a disservice to the poor to allow them to become unfairly entrenched in the legal system. No one is ignoring crimes wholesale. This argument is about which of these "crimes" are legitimate and which aren't.

My mother's family was so poor that they ran out of beans to feed 7 kids one winter. They never stole, hurt anyone or broke any laws.

That's great for her, but that doesn't define the moral boundary.

Society decides the moral boundry, and currently stealing is immoral.

No. It's all about context. Thinking in such absolutes is a sign of low intelligence and empathy.

Then clarify your context, what crime is appropriate for homeless people and the poor to be arrested for?

I say it's the laws that currently exist, what do you say?

What kind of question is that? It doesn't even make sense and I don't know what kind of answer you expect. Why do you continue to derail this conversation so hard?

I was discussing this point:

>"It's discriminatory [law] against the poor, not the homeless"

I think it's fair to express how my experience is evidence that this is not a universal truth and there is room to challenge it.

Threads naturally change topics as they grow.

You're telling me that if I was rich I would still have risked my freedom to steal food from the supermarket during the time when I was homeless and extremely sick and unable to work?

And conversely, that I should have just starved instead of stealing food in order to maintain my moral standing? That is arguably an illogical position.

Obviously I am saying neither of those things, because I am speaking in generalities (as they apply in the US) and have no knowledge of you in particular.

That's exactly my point. Your absolutisms and generalities discriminate against many individuals.

If the generalizations I am making are an inaccurate reflection of the reality of poverty and crime, then please enlighten me.

In America (my personal frame of reference) I could eat 7 meals a day as a homeless person. No one starves here if they go and look for food. I got food stamps the day I walked into the social services office.

"Starving or stealing" in the US today is a straw man argument.

That's not a straw man. What you're thinking of is a false dichotomy. Not everyone is in the same position you were, and it's stupid to think that your experience is the baseline experience. Sounds like you were doing a lot better than others.

If you live in San Franscico there are a ton of places you can get food:

https://www.kqed.org/bayareabites/110356/where-homeless-peop...

Where do you live? I will likely be able to find food for you online. If not from a website, there will be a church, if not a church a social network that will get you food.

I've even seen people post on imgur.com and get sent pizza by people on the other side of the country.

If you need help getting food right now, post an email address here and I will find a way to get you food.

I've used plenty of those programs growing up in a poor family. It was never enough. And today, with budgets becoming ever tighter, it's less than ever. I work hard for the food on my table but it wouldn't be here and I wouldn't be here if I had never stolen food when I needed it most. But none of this has a damn thing to do with your straw man argument that I was saying being poor causes someone to commit crimes, and it has nothing to do with the drug war. I'm done talking with you because you're just playing devils advocate and derailing the conversation.

Every single time I asked for help I got something, even if I had to ask a few different people.

I am sorry you have experienced bad times. But have you considered that you could have asked for food instead of stealing it? Every restaurant I ever worked at gave food to people who asked. A number of other companies did as well. I have given people food that weren't even asking for it because I could see they needed it. (I have plenty of experience dumpster diving, which I chose over stealing)

You can justify breaking the law, and I wouldn't hold it against you for the sake for food, but it doesn't means it's the right thing to do. I begged on the streets and found charity every time.

The post is about being homeless, and your original comment was this:

>This is a complicated issue because the Drug War is inherently discriminatory, and asking for our government to enforce these laws will always lead to discriminatory practices. All of the other issues definitely need to be addressed, however.

But you seem to have derailed the conversation in your response, because the comment you replied to was this:

>I’m not saying punish homelessness, I’m saying enforce existing laws regardless of who the perps are.

I am discussing laws and the effects on poor people, I feel this is on topic, just like the original comment. And in my experience the law protects everyone from everyone, and the loudest claims of "discrimination" were from people who broke the law, just like you are doing now. And the people who don't break the law don't feel discriminated against.

The parent comment to this was how a homeless guy bent over backwards to fit in with society and did not break the law. Yet you seem to be the only one saying the poor/homeless are victims of the law and discriminated against in this entire thread.

If you change the topic, you should expect to be challenged.

Maybe consider the possibility there is a completely different way to live that protects you from what "seems" like discrimination, and that would be suffering a little to do what is right. Humble yourself and ask for help instead of blaming others and breaking the law.

I don't disagree that they are "inclined" to commit petty crime, just like the rich are more inclined to cheat on their taxes. (when is that last time you heard a poor person rant against the inheritance tax?)

But, I disagree that your social status decides guilt.

Rich/famouse/politicians shouldn't get away with crimes they commit based on their status anymore than a poor person should. Crime is crime. Just because the judge/police/whoever feels social pressure to not enforce the law means everyone else suffers.

Feeling pity for someone's situation does not absolve them of their actions. Personally knowing poor/homeless people gives me a perspective that they aren't total victims and that they don't deserve absolution based on status. (just like the rich don't)

I've been extremely poor most of my life. I've been homeless. And neither of our personal anecdotes have any bearing on the reason why the drug war began.

I suggest checking out The Emperor Wears No Clothes for a background behind the start of drug prohibition as a new way to discriminate and make use of bolstered police forces after the failure of alcohol prohibition, as well as prevent the disruption of several entrenched industries.

It's a short read, extremely informative, and it's available freely online here: https://jackherer.com/emperor-3/

> Go be genuinely poor, it's really easy to do. Just use a tiny amount of money to live off of. And see if it causes you to commit crimes.

That's not the correct way to look at it.

We are artificially creating crimes from things which shouldn't be illegal and which infringe upon basic freedoms, and then creating the conditions that lead to people committing those "crimes".

"Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime," as Beria says. The Drug War is a tool to, among other things, benefit the new tax-supported slave trade disguised as a private industrial prison system. Affluent citizens are usually able to circumvent the system, as designed, and thus these laws are able to discriminate against the poor while seeming "fair".

I don't disagree with anything you are saying. But you aren't hearing what I said, being poor doesn't cause you to commit crimes.

If you have been homeless, you know that there are both good and wonderful people that are homeless and rotten crooks. Neither of which adding money to their pocket would change.

The argument isn't about being poor causing someone to commit crimes. That's a complete straw-man. Let's focus.

The argument is about discriminatory laws and conditions forcing a percentage of those in poverty to be considered criminals. Specifically, the drug war. That was all my original comment deconstructed. We could extend the moral boundary to stealing food in order to survive provided you don't hurt anyone, but that's it.

I never made any claim that being poor causes some kind of effect on people that turns them into criminals. You're barking up the wrong tree.

>..a percentage of those in poverty to be considered criminals. Specifically, the drug war.

I knew tons of people that did drugs on the streets (most of them) and none of them went to jail accept those that committed crimes while doing drugs.

Is there statistics somewhere that shows "x number of people are in jail for inhaling while minding their own business"?

The police are always around on the streets, they don't have time to arrest people for just "drugs". I am amazed this is the refrain still going around. Consider how many states have made weed legal now, those same states decriminalized weed decades ago. No jail for weed in a lot of places for a very long time.

If you want to talk about other drugs, and pretend like they don't lead to crimes, bring up the stats, I'd be curious to know.

I got in a car accident, and it turns out the driver had a tiny crumb of marijuana in a booksack, and I got six months jail time for it because the judge was incredibly corrupt and complicit with how the system works.

I watched someone else who got caught trespassing and hunting without tags, caught with several grams of marijuana, his second possession arrest, only get a few hours of community service because he wasn't poor or youthful.

This charge has had an extremely negative impact on my life, and I did nothing to deserve it.

Your understanding of how the world works is so small and broken, you need to work on developing empathy for others caught up in the system and stop assuming that just because they are in it, they deserve it. You have no idea what police are arresting people for outside of your little town, and it's arrogant to assume otherwise. Read that book.

My experiences are LA, Portland, Tampa, Key west, Phoenix, Tempe, Tuscon and a lot of other places where I was homeless.

I didn't get into fights, I didn't argue with the police when they told us to move or leave an area, I was respectful and decent. While people right next to us caused problems and got arrested.

So, I have seen plenty of police action, and rarely was it undeserved.

I think people who don't want to take responsibility for their actions are blind to the effects they have on others and simply can't see how their actions are scary for police to deal with and feel entitled to be belligerent.

> The police are always around on the streets, they don't have time to arrest people for just "drugs"

Meanwhile, my local police blotter is littered with "adolescent charged with drug possession/paraphernalia" reports.

> No jail for weed in a lot of places for a very long time.

There are plenty of fines, and if you can't pay them, you have the option of voluntarily or involuntarily spending time in jail over them.

In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.

That doesn't respond to the 'public safety issues' the GP was discussing.

Being on the streets is a spectrum of bad luck and bad choices. Yes, that means there are generally examples of people who are mostly one or mostly the other and plenty in between. Usually what happens is a few things go wrong at the same time from either category and life spirals out of control.

The problem is that it's hard to get people back on their feet again and the criminal justice system is quite terrible at it in general, but that doesn't mean that people never learning that there are consequences for their actions is a good thing, either.

Part of the problem is that various criminal societies have developed and need to be dismantled so as not to self-perpetuate the harm they cause to others.

Would it be ok if I ask you about this in details ?

there was a documentary about this, seen on Italian TV (English doc with subs)

That sounds like a nice hippy colony you had there. My experience was different.

Winter kills people. Summer kills people. Have your shelter from the elements planned, or you wont make it. The Homeless Shelter doesnt have the resources to help you all day. And they only let everyone sleep on the floor for the coldest 3 months of the year, when Christmas donations make feeding everyone ONE meal possible. When that runs out, or by county statute, you're on your own.

There's always someone that keeps the light-sleepers awake during those months. There's always someone bringing a virus in to that shelter. And there's always the one who needs to get voted off the island for everyone's safety - and sometimes he gets to stay, which keeps everyone awake except the security officer. Sometimes there's even the person who should be in a nursing home, but cant afford it and will defacate on theirself, and let it run down the floor. They can't help it, and we only get tapwater to clean it with.

So you make other arrangements where you can. If you had your wits about you and enough resources, you could get by on a daily basis. Those "criminals" were just fellows looking for their next meal, same as me. I didnt bother them except as a "heads up," and they returned the favor in both ways.

Same with cops - who, after enough analysis from this perspective became just another gang. The "heads up" I gave them were just of a different sort - fast food menus or coffee are things you'll have in common. Always have "normal" conversation ready for cops that isnt snitching - running & hiding only makes them chase, and you're going to have to walk near / with one eventually.

Always smile and wave to the cop. I dont care if you have a kilo of coke in a trojan condom up your ass, wave to make the man with a gun think you're friendly when he simply drives past and ignores you. You want to be human but forgettable.

And that's just the lay of the land - you better know them - cops, gangs, geography; be friendly rather than a nuisance around their turf. Even the hardest of them usually appreciates some manner reciprocity and a genuine nature from the lowest among us.

Then again, I didnt have access to suits. So I looked homeless, even with as much of a job as I could keep. All my money went out the moment it came in - ITS DECEPTIVELY EXPENSIVE TO BE HOMELESS SAFELY.

In order to not get picked up by the cops, I needed to move around A LOT.

Friends - fellow "travellers" and otherwise make survival possible. Need a ride to get out of dodge? Need folk medicine to survive, need a meal? Better share, so you can be shared-with. And you usually dont wanna be known as homeless, just a "slob".

At the same time most of those fellows in the same situation are going to be drains on your resources, not worthwhile investments of your time. Do you wanna eat, or just stare at someone else who's hungry until you punch each other? But you need to know that guy's name, have him like you enough to not try to steal from you.

Need to see a doctor? Need a dentist, a shower, a hot meal that isnt convenience food or similar junk food served by a soup kitchen? You better have a job that makes these possible - if not, you're screwed. And thats rarely a ticket out to a liveable life.

So every motherfucker has their lotto-ticket dream that they know is gonna work out. Emotionally, this keeps them alive. It doesnt matter what it is, or if its realistic. They're not gonna take "no" for an answer if they can help it, regarding that. This is how people fucking snap - they run out of ideas they think they can work.

Or worse - they settle in, and accept their lives as the perpetually ignored. They can last for 30 years, but they usually dont make it through the next winter.

Even cheap folk medicine became a terrible expense, and neglected health problems become untenable. This is what gets us all, eventually. And then someone steps in to help if you're lucky and young, after usually irreparable damage is done, and what's fixable costs a fortune.

Local "assistance" agencies requiring folks to be homeless for a Full Year to qualify for any help made it worse. But then, requirements that folks have their last address within that county, and not leave the county to seek opportunities elsewhere? Just makes it worse.

You get three hots and a cot - after trying and failing for a full year, tied down to the place you keep failing in. That year of failure breaks most people in some way.

No, not everyone is entirely out of options. But so many of us kid ourselves - we turn it into a "choice," when it was really just the only way to escape an even worse situation of similar poverty - that was my story.

I had kept the same job for years before, and through my time on the streets. It was the hardest time there, feeling ashamed around those people about my... "lifestyle". Its still painful to look back and see how I just... Changed.

Dont get me wrong - I kinda miss parts of it. Getting off work and being free to play and code, to wander, to learn whats around me in a new spot to explore. The stargazing simple dates, and

But hey. Tell me more about your bougie homelessness.

Yes, those things existed. I saw very little of them, and mostly avoided them. That wasn't easy either. I had some special training in survival and evasion, and it wasn't that serious, but it was the mindset I was coming from. I did a lot of walking, all day, all night, carrying everything with me, and very little sleeping. Sometimes I'd try to memorize a song, and in harder times I'd just repeat to myself, "I will always keep myself mentally alert, physically strong and morally straight". During the summer it was bougie homeless. The numbers dwindled as the weather got cold until I was alone for all I knew, and the cold was brutal, especially up in the hills when everything I had was wet from the rain. The first time I got really sick, I was freezing and miserable, and I gave up; I walked out and headed into town to catch the bus to a shelter. I got on Hotel 22 at about 2am, and realized pretty quickly that I was in a bad place, and I was headed to a worse place. The driver made it clear: the dude in a t-shirt shaking wild-eyed and moaning was going to the VA shelter, and everybody else was there to avoid it. I went back into the hills with a bit more acceptance of fate in my mind. I'm not sure that it would be as easy to avoid today. I've watched it get worse, thankfully not up close. "There but for the grace of god go I". I whisper that to myself every day, and conversely, no matter how much I succeed and achieve and prove myself professionally, I'll never feel like I truly deserve anything better than "cold nasty brutish and short". That may be what I liked about it most of all, a feeling like I didn't owe anybody anything, like there was nothing to feel guilty for. That's a special kind of freedom.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com