It is now against the law to be homeless WTF!!1

[wr250]

He did explain once why he does that....

omfg bellgab forums rockzor the big 1!!!!111

slow down lil billy

from "posting and you"

[Kelt]

This use of "less fortunate" has to stop people. What ever happened to the "survival of the fittest" mantra? Why do we have to pansify everything? Why do I have to immediately feel bad for a homeless person and show disdain for someone successful without knowing the whole story of how they got there?

'Survival of the fittest', regarding the human race, ended when we began forming societies and taking care of our weakest members, like the elderly, the sick, the mentally ill.

Taking care of those who are incapable of looking after themselves is hardly "pansifying"

Survival of the fittest is fine if you're a lion or a lunatic or, I guess, a Spartan.

[wr250]

I really hope you have more regard for your fellow man than this, I truly do!!1

please note that their (or yours for that matter)  rights end as soon as they (or you) are a threat to others (or themselves).so if someone chooses to be homeless and not take their meds, then attack someone else, they should be institutionalized as such.

your exercise of your rights do not give carte blanche  to violate another's rights . thus if a mentally ill person is a threat to another (or themselves ex: suicide) then they should be institutionalized to receive the help and counseling they need.

[Bart Ell]

The U.S. sent approximately $37,680,000,000 overseas to other countries

Much of that to help your fellow man who needs it more than your fellow man from the same country. I guess your fellow man in another country is less important.

[Kelt]

Let me rephrase.

Mental illness is not (in most cases) the lack of rational thought.

I wasn't suggesting it is. In fact I explicitly pointed out that those suffering depression, for example, may be perfectly capable of making an informed, rational decision. That they can't follow up on what they know to be the correct, or least bad, decision is by no means their fault, nor is it any reason  for us to despise them for  their inability to take the (seemingly) correct course of action.

I understand your point of depression impacting rational thought. That point is a matter of degrees. Depression can be severe enough to bring about psychosis. It is transitory in most cases.

Someone with a psychotic disorder is not without the ability to make informed decisions most of the time. Some with severe enough illness are sometimes unable to be their own guardian. Taking away someone's ability to make their own decisions is quite complex and takes not only those in medicine but also those in the legal system to take away someone's autonomy, and even then it is somewhat limited.

The anecdote you take exception to presents us with a person that makes decisions that we may not like but they are not considered irrational. And the choice he makes to not take medication is willful and purposeful. Although, I doubt you will concede that point.

The only reason I take exception to anecdotal 'evidence' is because it's largely worthless in a debate. Take any number of politicians and their, "A constituent came up to me and said..." anecdotes. Utterly fabricated, mostly worthless. Assuming your anecdote has any basis in reality, which it may or it may not,  Prisoner X may not be indicative of a mindset outside a collective number totaling 1.  To wit, Prisoner X alone. He may be absolutely unique, and serves as no basis upon which to form an opinion on anything other than his own behaviour.

However, the claim that said anecdotal prisoner wants to kill people and spends extended periods institutionalised would strongly suggest to me that claims of his grasp on the rational are at the very least highly debatable. 

What I was originally responding to was homelessness and the position that the criminal justice system was making victims of the mentally ill.

Personally I think it's shameful that society would criminalise a vulnerable demographic.  The homeless are bothering business owners? 

Well, elderly drivers slow me down on the freeway, obese people glom over into my seat on airlines, and people who say, "I seen" when they mean to say, "I saw" make me want to self-harm.

I don't believe the elderly, the fat, or the stupid should be criminalised simply because they piss me off.

Likewise I don't believe the homeless should be criminalised simply because they happened to be too old to work, too fat to work, or too stupid to work, and thus incapable of securing a residence. 

Whether they're mentally ill and/or off their meds should also be an irrelevance.

[Kelt]

Does my fellow man have more regard for me? I seem to remember my fellow man raping and killing my 14 year old neighbor. I remember my fellow man killing my fiancé because he had to drive home drunk. I also remember my fellow man shooting me in the shoulder because he wanted to kill the guy beside me and didn't have much regard for whoever was in the way. Should I have regard for all of them or only those who show they deserve it?

Then your anger at these incidents would logically contradict your "Whatever happened to survival of the fittest" comment, when you think about it.

[Bart Ell]

Then your anger at these incidents would logically contradict your "Whatever happened to survival of the fittest" comment, when you think about it.

Ever see an angry team that just lost the big game?
People are not angry when they are not the fittest?
Drunks killing people in cars make them fitter?
Lots of fit girls in England.

[Kelt]

Ever see an angry team that just lost the big game?
People are not angry when they are not the fittest?
Drunks killing people in cars make them fitter?
Lots of fit girls in England.

A rapist overpowering a 14 year old girl would suggest the 14 year old girl wasn't fit enough to resist the rapist.

Taking a shot to the shoulder might suggest an unarmed, or slow, or both, individual was less suited to survive than a dude with a gun. 

These appear self-evident.

A civilised society does what it can to protect the 14 year old girl or the slow guy who got shot... it doesn't shrug its shoulders and say, "Survival of the fittest, I guess."

English girls would be way down my list of fitness though, if I had a list like that.

[Catsmile]

'Survival of the fittest', regarding the human race, ended when we began forming societies and taking care of our weakest members, like the elderly, the sick, the mentally ill.

Taking care of those who are incapable of looking after themselves is hardly "pansifying"

Survival of the fittest is fine if you're a lion or a lunatic or, I guess, a Spartan.

Even the saber-toothed tiger took care of it's weak and elderly. Were such actions what lead to it's extinction? Probably not, but if it did, at least it went out with dignity. It would be sad if humankind couldn't equal or surpass the beneficent nature of a wild beast, who's time passed long ago. 

Bart Ell is the benefactor of the beneficent nature of members, and moderator of BellGab. Seems he mostly post derogatory things to, or about members on BellGab. I reckon it's okay by him when he is on the receiving end of beneficent human nature. It just seems to increasingly incite ever more rude post. More issues than a magazine stand, comes to mind.

Bene-thats all I got to say about that. 

[fineart]

I support any law that bans homeless people. Homeless people are lazy people who do not work to pay their bills and taxes. So lets ban all the homeless people and send them to Iraq.

[Bart Ell]

Seems it mostly post derogatory things to, or about members on BellGab.

Hello, Kettle.

[DocHolliday]

I support any law that bans homeless people. Homeless people are lazy people who do not work to pay their bills and taxes. So lets ban all the homeless people and send them to Iraq.

What if we fed the homeless to the homeless?  Then you solve two problems in one!  No longer are the homeless without homes, they're feeding the rest of the homeless and ending starvation!

[aldousburbank]

What if we fed the homeless to the homeless?  Then you solve two problems in one!  No longer are the homeless without homes, they're feeding the rest of the homeless and ending starvation!

Nice idea but at the end you'd still end up with one obese homeless dude.

[The General]

What if we fed the homeless to the homeless?  Then you solve two problems in one!  No longer are the homeless without homes, they're feeding the rest of the homeless and ending starvation!

That's almost as brilliant as hiring the illegal aliens build the border fence.  From the southern side.

[area51drone]

You don't have to believe me zoo, but I guarantee you that there are millions of people who would be more than happy to sit on their ass and do nothing other than watch TV and stuff their faces with the latest flavor of Doritos if the government was willing to hand them their livelihoods.  I don't feel like doing work that they should be doing, like picking up trash from the side of the road - worst case - because I *would* rather be doing something useful with my time.   But those of us here who feel that way are completely in the minority when it comes to general society!!1

[Zoo]

You don't have to believe me zoo, but I guarantee you that there are millions of people who would be more than happy to sit on their ass and do nothing other than watch TV and stuff their faces with the latest flavor of Doritos if the government was willing to hand them their livelihoods.  I don't feel like doing work that they should be doing, like picking up trash from the side of the road - worst case - because I *would* rather be doing something useful with my time.   But those of us here who feel that way are completely in the minority when it comes to general society!!1

You make a valid point area51drone. I just think people will surprise you. Let me ask a question-If money was no object would you really do nothing but play video games? If so why are you not a video game tester? If that is what you love to do then do it!!1

[George Drooly]

Saying the economy since 2008 is responsible for more (or any) homeless just seems inaccurate to me. Certainly there must be some cases, yes, but I continue to be amazed at how much people overstate this "recession" and its effects. Those who have the gall to compare it to the (genuine) Great Depression really need to do some research and get some perspective. I know of no families whose father had to hop the rails, go west, and disappeared forever. There's no dust bowl anywhere right now. I don't even honestly know anyone who has lost their job or even altered their lifestyle... and I've been among the working poor my whole life. I would say perhaps getting a job in this economy is difficult (I was lucky to be chosen from 102 applicants for my current position) but again, I think the idea that people are losing their jobs and properties is exaggerated, certainly compared to the 1930s or even the 1970s (which I experienced, and which was far worse than the last few years.

[Zoo]

Thoughts!!1

http://youtu.be/COsbqzYdzR4

http://youtu.be/A6IntxCA3sA

[b_dubb]

Thoughts!!1
http://youtu.be/COsbqzYdzR4

They guy was asked to leave.  He didn't.  Instead he sticks his finger in the cops face.  Probably says something really insulting.  Then he gets his ass kicked. 

I find that shit like that doesn't happen to me.  Probably because I don't:

1) trespass
2) Stick my finger in cop's face
3) make smart ass remarks to cop's

The guy may not have deserved the beat down but he was asked to leave and he didn't comply.  And we don't know what was said.  Not the slam dunk police brutality example you may think it is.  IMHO

[Kelt]

Thoughts!!1

http://youtu.be/COsbqzYdzR4

http://youtu.be/A6IntxCA3sA

Police acting like vicious, petty, arrogant, simple-minded dickheads is nothing new.

There's just a lot more cameras around these days, so the abuses get caught for posterity... and the law courts.

If smart phones and Youtube had been around in the 50s and 60s there would be a million videos on there showing cops battering the shit out of blacks, protestors, gays, people minding their own business...

[Zoo]

T
The guy may not have deserved the beat down but he was asked to leave and he didn't comply.  And we don't know what was said.  Not the slam dunk police brutality example you may think it is.  IMHO

He (Kelly Thompson) died from that beat down!!1

[b_dubb]

He (Kelly Thompson) died from that beat down!!1

Well maybe charges will be brought against the officers and they'll be brought to justice.

[Zoo]

Well maybe charges will be brought against the officers and they'll be brought to justice.

They got time off with pay and then they got found innocent of all charges!!1

[b_dubb]

They got time off with pay and then they got found innocent of all charges!!1

I'm glad I don't live in NY then.

[area51drone]

Do you think this guy would be flipping shit to Nazi soldiers with guns pointed at him when they burst through the door?   A holstered weapon is still a weapon, and I personally would not be giving the cops shit.  If he had just done what was asked of him, he wouldn't have gotten beat up.  He would have been let go outside, then he could call whomever it was that he needed to talk to and gotten back in to go to sleep.   Like it or not, just obey the cops and at least you'll live.    I'm not saying all cops are good or bad, I'm just saying listen, do what your told (for the most part) and you'll be able to at least live another day. 

[Zoo]

Do you think this guy would be flipping shit to Nazi soldiers with guns pointed at him when they burst through the door?   A holstered weapon is still a weapon, and I personally would not be giving the cops shit.  If he had just done what was asked of him, he wouldn't have gotten beat up.  He would have been let go outside, then he could call whomever it was that he needed to talk to and gotten back in to go to sleep.   Like it or not, just obey the cops and at least you'll live.    I'm not saying all cops are good or bad, I'm just saying listen, do what your told (for the most part) and you'll be able to at least live another day. 

Well I think they have check points already in America were who are asked to verify you are an American. I do not think this is right at all but they are doing it. Police are doing knock less warrants because people are gardening indoors. They are also hitting the wrong places too. He does not have to do what the cop tells him to do. It is called rights. If you know your rights and the officer does not who is at fault? Whose job is it to know the law? Ignorance of the law is no excuse no matter if you are a citizen or a cop. Personally a cop should know the rights of citizens and should be protecting from everyone even other cops!!1

[area51drone]

Well I think they have check points already in America were who are asked to verify you are an American. I do not think this is right at all but they are doing it. Police are doing knock less warrants because people are gardening indoors. They are also hitting the wrong places too. He does not have to do what the cop tells him to do. It is called rights. If you know your rights and the officer does not who is at fault? Whose job is it to know the law? Ignorance of the law is no excuse no matter if you are a citizen or a cop. Personally a cop should know the rights of citizens and should be protecting from everyone even other cops!!1

He wasn't in his house, he was in a non profit business that had a disturbance call.  He could have just been calm about it and he probably would have been fine.   Worst case asked to leave.   I don't agree with the police state either, but if you're trying to fight the cops, you're likely going to lose.    Staying calm and asking what right they have to be in your house or asking you certain questions in public is different than being confrontational and or verbally or physically abusive.

[albrecht]

He wasn't in his house, he was in a non profit business that had a disturbance call.  He could have just been calm about it and he probably would have been fine.   Worst case asked to leave.   I don't agree with the police state either, but if you're trying to fight the cops, you're likely going to lose.    Staying calm and asking what right they have to be in your house or asking you certain questions in public is different than being confrontational and or verbally or physically abusive.

Who knows what is actually legal and lawful these days. But for many decades it has been confirmed that checkpoints are legal within a certain distance to the international border (usually only enforced on the one with Mexico. I also don't know, interesting question, about whether they would apply to Free Trade Zones areas or airports, warehouses, etc.) Allegedly to secure the border was the reason considered legal. But we know they don't secure the border as a matter of policy so....

These have been expanded post-911 and, I think, maybe expanded more into the interior. Some states, also, allow check-points for DUI and the like. Considering the documents and testimony and official White House policy that admit that ICE releases illegals, even after a detainment or arrest (if that even happens) and that the government won't secure the actual border it is patently obvious that the internal checkpoints are for Americans. Likely for revenue generation by tickets (no license tickets, bad inspection tickets, no insurance tickets, DUI etc) or by the asset forfeiture laws and to get people used to "showing papers" and check-points and basically bowing to authority.

[Zoo]

It is said that a single citizen in a average year breaks the law at least 26 times a year. So the average citizen in a criminal 26 times a year. Criminal is a person who has committed a crime. Does this tell us that we have too many laws, or is it we have no regard for the law as citizen?

[aldousburbank]

It is said that a single citizen in a average year breaks the law at least 26 times a year.

Once again, I come in well above the bell curve.