The Supreme Court came up late last week and said that Americans don't have a right to camp on public property (meaning on sidewalks, city parks, etc). A city can displace the public campers.
When all this homeless 'hype' started up a decade ago....no one really envisioned 'druggies' being in the mix, and that long-term camping (say for 20 years) would be acceptable.
Having been on the end of military deployments and their vision of long-term camping.....there are three essential elements.
First, sanitation is a key factor. You can't show me a single public camping situation in SF, Portland, Seattle, or LA.....where you don't have rats/mice. Every single health agency ought to be doing their job and shutting down public camping.
Second, safety is an absolute must. You can't have a quarter of your 'tent-city' on some drug-rage and you worried about getting killed over some comment you made over the Power-Rangers, the pitching staff of the Detroit Tigers, or the best way to cook ribs.
Third and final....when someone says long-term camping (at least to a Army or Air Force guy)....there's a limit. Army folks might be agreeable to two or three months of this style of living....Air Force guy might have six weeks of patience....to live in 1-star $90 tent.
For those cities who want to be 'helpful'? Select a point at the end of town....50 acres of property, and add public toilets/showers, and some covered patio area for dispersal of food. Register the guy at the gate, and have the police monitor the camp. Drug-use? Don't accept it....force rehab.
The point on this discussion that I shake my head on.....how can a guy go and find this healthy (mentally) for a mid-20s person to sign up for 40 years of camping lifestyle?
No comments:
Post a Comment