1820
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 66 points 2 months ago

Just for transparency's sake before I go into this, my wife is second from the top at the library.

The library here really did have to remove benches outside in a couple of places (in part) because of homeless people. Not because they were sleeping on them, there are other places outside the library where the homeless can sleep and the library does what it can to help the local homeless community.

Unfortunately, some (far, far from most) of the local homeless around the library were either very publicly using drugs or getting so fucked up on those drugs (or possibly just having a really bad mental illness episode) that they were harassing people and scaring kids. So when it came time to replace all of the benches since they got too old, they decided that they would not replace some of them.

There was definitely a big outcry about how the library was being anti-homeless, but it was nuts because there were people on the other side still complaining about how the library always stinks because they let the homeless people in there. I may be biased because of my wife, but I'm also a regular patron and I'm pretty much on their side on this one. It was becoming a huge issue and they really didn't want to keep getting the cops involved because they rightfully don't trust what the cops might do with the homeless and only end up calling them as a last resort.

Society has absolutely failed those people though. There is no question about that. But at some point, the library had to draw a line at how accommodating they could be.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 24 points 2 months ago

the local homeless around the library were either very publicly using drugs

Biggest drug dealers in America - the Sackler family - weren't worth our time to punish. So some guy who washed out on Percocets and can only afford Fentanyl shouldn't have a place to sit.

There was definitely a big outcry about how the library was being anti-homeless, but it was nuts because there were people on the other side still complaining about how the library always stinks because they let the homeless people in there.

In America you have two options -

  1. pretend homelessness and addiction aren't happening
  2. destroy public property in a scorched earth campaign against drug use

The very idea of housing, treatment, and rehabilitation is too socialist to consider.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 36 points 2 months ago

Biggest drug dealers in America - the Sackler family - weren’t worth our time to punish. So some guy who washed out on Percocets and can only afford Fentanyl shouldn’t have a place to sit.

I didn't say being publicly intoxicated, I said publicly using drugs. As in they were shooting up while kids were being taken to storytime past them on the way to the library.

The library allows homeless people to be inside it from open to close. They give them free internet. They give them free help filling out necessary government forms. They hang around just to chat. They allow homeless people to sleep outside all around the building. They are literally building a shower and a washer/dryer facility in the new auxiliary library free for anyone to use.

In America, your local public library does more to help homeless people than anything you have probably done yourself, but I guess since they haven't personally solved the problem, they're the worst of the oppressors.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I didn’t say being publicly intoxicated, I said publicly using drugs. As in they were shooting up while kids were being taken to storytime past them on the way to the library.

We have a solution for this as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supervised_injection_site

Proven highly effective for reducing crime, mitigating the need for emergency response, curtailing disease spread, and channeling addicts to rehabilitation clinics

But because it comes off as permissive and benevolent, rather than punitive and prohibitionary it remains Haram in much of the US.

In America, your local public library does more to help homeless people than anything you have probably done yourself

It's a public service staffed with dozens of people. Of course a single person isn't going to do more in spare time than a team of people doing the work professionally.

But that doesn't excuse the rest of the state for tearing out local infrastructure as a means of tormenting the homeless.

"I did two good things so I have permission to do one bad thing" isn't sounds public policy.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago

From my initial post:

Society has absolutely failed those people though. There is no question about that. But at some point, the library had to draw a line at how accommodating they could be.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

But at some point, the library had to draw a line

It's not the library staff making these decisions. Its inevitably the city council or the governor

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago

It was not in this case, it was the chief administrator of the library.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] prole 9 points 2 months ago

NIMBY City, USA.

If only they had somewhere to go other than a Library...

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 23 points 2 months ago

Read. They literally still sleep outside the library. The library has not driven them away. They took away benches so that they weren't shooting up in front of toddlers going into the library.

As I told someone else- homeless people can be in the library from open to close. They can sleep on library property. They have free access to all library services including free internet, help accessing all kinds of government aid, and just having someone to talk to them if they're lonely. In another branch, the library is putting in a shower and a washer/dryer for anyone to use for free.

But yes, they took away a few benches because of problem people rather than calling the cops.

What have you done to help the homeless?

[-] prole 12 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

As I said, if they had somewhere else to go to safely use, they wouldn't be doing it on library benches. That's who the NIMBY comment was directed toward, the councilmen or whoever that vote to remove those benches, but are almost certainly against having the actual solution because NIMBY.

Instead, just complain about how they smell or whatever, and shuffle them around somewhere else.

[-] jj4211@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

The thing is that you can give people every resource and they still will go where they feel like it. Whether because they don't care or because they lack the mental facilities to make reasonable decisions due to mental health issues. There may not be a very good and safe answer for dealing with some folks.

Absolutely should give the resources, but be aware that won't ensure they use those resources instead of doing things a way that is unsafe and/or unfairly inflicting problems on folks.

[-] prole 9 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

If only we had some real life data to see if things like safe injection sites work................ oh well I guess we'll just have to make assumptions instead.

[-] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

He laid out that that sort of accommodation is available, just that some people will still fail to avail themselves of it.

It may be even mostly working around his library, but that doesn't mean there still are people falling to use those facilities.

[-] uis@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago

The thing is that you can give people every resource and they still will go where they feel like it. Whether because they don't care or because they lack the mental facilities to make reasonable decisions due to mental health issues. There may not be a very good and safe answer for dealing with some folks.

Are we talking about homelessness or about people walking?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Why is it a library's job to facilitate drug use?

[-] prole 9 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Maybe you are amalgamating all of the replies to your comment into one user, but I don't know why you're so aggressive... I don't think I attacked you in any way.

I'm not sure why you are taking what I said so personal... Are you a councilman?

Edit: Damn that was a quick edit, I could have sworn your comment was much different when I replied. Now mine just looks like nonsense.

To reply to your edited comment: I literally said they should have somewhere else to do it.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Why is it a library’s job to facilitate drug use?

[-] prole 8 points 2 months ago

Please go back and look at my initial reply, I literally said the opposite.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

This was what you said:

As I said, if they had somewhere else to go to safely use, they wouldn’t be doing it on library benches. That’s who the NIMBY comment was directed toward, the councilmen or whoever that vote to remove those benches, but are almost certainly against having the actual solution because NIMBY.

It was a library decision. The decision was because they were doing it in front of kids.

Libraries are funded by taxpayers. The library was getting complaints about kids walking past homeless people on the benches near the entrance shooting up and smoking meth. They were asked to leave multiple times, but they would just come back. So, there are three options here:

  1. Call the cops. They didn't want to do that for reasons I think should be obvious.

  2. Just let them keep doing it. This seems to be your preferred option and it's a good way to get a library shut down via tax referendum.

  3. Remove some of the benches.

But sure, they could have just gotten shut down and then there would be almost no free services for the homeless at all. That would be a possibility.

[-] cocobean@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 months ago

I think what Prole is saying is that it shouldn't fall to the library in the first place. The city should be responsible for finding a solution. I don't think their comment was opposed to your actions (although I also initially interpreted it that way).

[-] prole 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Yes. Well mostly yes.

It was a bit of both. Mostly the former, but I did take umbrage with the part about people complaining that they smell and are a nuisance and "maybe I'm bias because my wife, but I tend to agree" or whatever it was. So I guess I purposefully made it open to being interpreted as having both meanings if one so chooses. I figured they'd only take it personal if they themselves were a NIMBYs — a self-report of sorts.

But yes mostly what you said.

[-] prole 3 points 2 months ago

My initial comment:

NIMBY City, USA.

If only they had somewhere to go other than a Library…

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

So I should just ignore the comment after that?

[-] prole 4 points 2 months ago

No? What about my comments conflict in any way? I'm just saying that they should have somewhere safe to do it so the library is never a necessary option to begin with. But there aren't because NIMBYs prevent that shit from happening.

Perhaps I'm overgeneralizing, and your specific situation is different.

[-] bluewing@lemm.ee 6 points 2 months ago

I agree we should build a homeless shelter right next to your house. And I'm sure you will be at the forefront to see that it happens.......

[-] prole 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Lol buddy, you don't know where I live/work. No need to do that.

And where did I say "homeless shelter"?

[-] bluewing@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago

Nice try at deflection.

And to continue the internet meme-- "I ain't your buddy, Pal."

[-] prole 11 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I am not meming.

And it's not deflecting. I'm not talking about homeless shelters, I am talking about comprehensive, government-funded, public housing (it doesn't have to be shitty, look at what Finland has done). I am talking about safe injection sites. I am talking about social workers on the ground, every day, making sure that these people have what they need.

YIMBY. Bring it all on.

[-] fossilesque@mander.xyz 3 points 2 months ago

Finland isn't real. Fake news.

And yes, I am memeing, but only to drop this little doco re: Finland for the curious: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jt_6PBnCJE

Their program is a marvel.

[-] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 months ago

I already have people sleeping next to my house so that would be a huge improvement. YIMBY!

[-] uis@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Sure, but I'm in favour of more permanent solution.

[-] deaf_fish@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

One homeless person decides to do drugs in front of the library. I guess we have to remove all the benches and make everything very inconvenient for everyone.

The one person does a thing so we have to take it away rule doesn't apply to people with houses.

"Oh look somebody stabbed somebody to death with a knife. We better take all the knives away from everyone." This would never happen.

What if a homemed person did drugs in the library (which probably happened statistically)? Would you close up the library?

I guess I'm just saying this because you feel like the act was some how moral, I'm telling you it's not. That's okay, real life can be tricky, but don't kid yourself, removing those benches is anti-homeless behavior.

You don't have to take the blame personally for it, just own it. But if you don't admit that you're part of the problem, then that's pretty bad.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago

One homeless person decides to do drugs in front of the library. I guess we have to remove all the benches and make everything very inconvenient for everyone.

That is not even close to what happened. Why are you just making shit up? Also, see my replies to others about how the library you hate is doing much more than you personally could ever possibly do to help the homeless.

[-] deaf_fish@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago

What do you mean, "See my replies"? Do you think people get paid to post on here? If you had something you wanted to add, add it to your initial comment. I don't have all day.

Sorry my dude, doing a bunch of other stuff for homeless, doesn't absolve you of anything. You do good stuff for homeless, great! Plus 20 points to Gryffindor. You take away benches, not great. - one point to Gryffindor.

I'm sorry my dude you got to deal with the negative one and why you got it.

Again, this doesn't make you a bad person to remove benches, what makes you a bad person is doing s*** like pretending you're not part of the problem. It's fine. I'm part of the problem too. The problem is systemic.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Okay, well since you're lazy, I'll help you:

The library allows homeless people to be inside it from open to close. They give them free internet. They give them free help filling out necessary government forms. They hang around just to chat. They allow homeless people to sleep outside all around the building. They are literally building a shower and a washer/dryer facility in the new auxiliary library free for anyone to use.

In America, your local public library does more to help homeless people than anything you have probably done yourself, but I guess since they haven’t personally solved the problem, they’re the worst of the oppressors.

And:

As I told someone else- homeless people can be in the library from open to close. They can sleep on library property. They have free access to all library services including free internet, help accessing all kinds of government aid, and just having someone to talk to them if they’re lonely. In another branch, the library is putting in a shower and a washer/dryer for anyone to use for free.

But yes, they took away a few benches because of problem people rather than calling the cops.

Not that it will help, since I didn't remove anything. I made it clear from the top that my wife is the one work works at this library. You're not only too lazy to read other people's responses, you're too lazy to read what you're responding to.

But please prove me wrong and tell me how you've done so much more for the homeless than this and other public libraries. Go for it.

[-] deaf_fish@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago

I'm surprised that someone who has a wife who's done so much for homeless doesn't understand the very basic point I'm trying to make.

Your wife doesn't absolve herself of removing benches by doing a million things for the homeless. It doesn't work that way. It has never worked that way. And it will never work that way.

Pretending that it does, does not help homelessness. It hurts it big time. It hurts homelessness way more than removing benches. Because you are pretending that you can take anything away from them as long as you make up for it in other ways. By your metric not by theirs.

Also I never said I did a lot for homeless people. I think I volunteered at a food bank once. But I never took anything away from them. But I am still part of the problem like everyone else is.

Apparently except for you, You're a special birthday boy who has a wife that does a lot of stuff for homeless people.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Good job not responding to almost anything I said. It proves you don't read.

[-] deaf_fish@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago

I read it all, I only responded to the parts that I felt were worth responding to. The rest was hot garbage from somebody who's a special birthday boy.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

I know you're lying because I never once talked about myself or how special or great I am. First you lied about the one person doing drugs and now you're lying about this.

For the record: I am not special or great or anything positive. I am one of the worst people on this planet. By far.

load more comments (17 replies)
[-] jj4211@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

I think any fair interpretation of his info is that the homeless are given all sorts of reasonable accommodations even at that library including places to sit and rest, but they still sometimes elected to use an inappropriate space even while being given a choice.

Like if you built a whole guest house in your yard open to homeless and they leave it empty and break into your living room instead. You wouldn't be anti homeless because you wanted them in the well equipped shelter with beds and sofas instead of your couch.

[-] deaf_fish@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago

I think you've missed my point. I am not pro let homeless do whatever they want. I never claim to be that.

I am pro, if you take benches away from everyone because of a homeless person. You should own that.

It doesn't make anyone a bad person, because everyone takes away stuff from homeless people. It's a systemic problem.

But if you pretend that you had no choice, or that it was the right thing to do, then you're full of shit.

It's like if a politician gets caught insider trading. Yeah, everyone does it. Does that mean it's a good idea to stand up and say "I had no choice"? No you stand up and say " I did it, everyone does it, it's not right. It makes us a lot of money. Let's have a conversation about it."

this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2024
1820 points (100.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

6659 readers
2495 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS