New program launching in Indianapolis to provide safe place for people living in cars

[firecadet613]

So if someone is incapable or unwilling to purchase or rent property then they have no right to exist outside of an institution in this country. Got it. Produce for the system or face what, execution? Exile? Incarceration? Those are the only acceptable outcomes in your world.

Live in a hotel. Camp in a friends yard. Live in an RV (and rent or buy a space in the campground). Live on your boat (still need a place to keep it in a marina). The public domain is for the public. If one person gets to live for free in a public space, why shouldn't everyone?

And, I'll also add, this will not happen anywhere close to me. I'm more off the beaten path than you and I can state this isn't a good thing to allow - look at California and Seattle if you need examples.

As someone who spent their career in law enforcement, how can you have these viewpoints? You've never trespassed someone? Evicted someone?

When your position is the same as California leftist judges you may need to rethink it…

Amen...

Again, says who? Work or you cannot exist.

Who gets to determine who gets a free ride and who doesn't?

 

[firecadet613]

I'm beginning to wonder if @phylodog doesn't just take the opposing viewpoint just for arguments sake.

 

[phylodog]

Live in a hotel. Camp in a friends yard. Live in an RV (and rent or buy a space in the campground). Live on your boat (still need a place to keep it in a marina). The public domain is for the public. If one person gets to live for free in a public space, why shouldn't everyone?

Who’s donating RV’s, hotel rooms, etc?

And, I'll also add, this will not happen anywhere close to me. I'm more off the beaten path than you and I can state this isn't a good thing to allow - look at California and Seattle if you need examples.

As someone who spent their career in law enforcement, how can you have these viewpoints? You've never trespassed someone? Evicted someone?

I haven’t advocated for legalized trespassing, that’s the folks like want to put words into my mouth.

Amen...

Who gets to determine who gets a free ride and who doesn't?

Who gets to decide how long a person can exist in one place if they’re not on private property?

I don’t post to be the contrarian, the vast majority of the time I am with the majority opinion here. Sometimes I post to try to get people to question the system. The system has produced millions of homeless and as much as many here want to dismiss that as being the fault of the homeless, most of the time it is not. Many are too busy taking all they have for granted to consider a different perspective. I don’t particularly care if it’s a popular opinion.

 

[Ingomike]

I haven’t advocated for legalized trespassing, that’s the folks like want to put words into my mouth.

You have advocated for trespassing on public property.

Who gets to decide how long a person can exist in one place if they’re not on private property?

The representatives of the people through various laws.

I don’t post to be the contrarian, the vast majority of the time I am with the majority opinion here. Sometimes I post to try to get people to question the system. The system has produced millions of homeless and as much as many here want to dismiss that as being the fault of the homeless, most of the time it is not. Many are too busy taking all they have for granted to consider a different perspective. I don’t particularly care if it’s a popular opinion.

Yes, it is their fault if they are homeless with all the private and government programs available to help people. But, as was said in this thread, many don’t want that help.

 

[Ingomike]

The public domain is for the public. If one person gets to live for free in a public space, why shouldn't everyone?

That this is a controversial point on INGO baffles me.

 

[phylodog]

You have advocated for trespassing on public property.

I've advocated for people being allowed to use public property if they have no alternative. Institutions aren't an alternative to most who would qualify, they sound great to those who wouldn't step foot in one

Yes, it is their fault if they are homeless with all the private and government programs available to help people. But, as was said in this thread, many don’t want that help.

I don't blame them. Spent any time in one? I'd much prefer to live in my car or under a bridge.

 

[phylodog]

That this is a controversial point on INGO baffles me.

I don't find it controversial. If someone chooses not to purchase or rent a domicile, where else are they to go? You don't want them on your property and I don't blame you so where then? Debtor's prison? That's what homeless shelter's may as well be if you're going to require people to either pay for housing or live in one.

 

[Ingomike]

So if someone is incapable or unwilling to purchase or rent property then they have no right to exist outside of an institution in this country. Got it. Produce for the system or face what, execution? Exile? Incarceration? Those are the only acceptable outcomes in your world.

One cannot simply just exist, a human being is not a rock. They need space to exist in, they need food to sustain, they need a place to use the bathroom. There are very few habitable places in this country where there are unowned spaces that one can exist in. Therefore the whole concept of a right to just exist without work or space doesn’t exist simply because humans must have resources to exist. Those encampments are not existing, they are taking resources from others…