razama wrote...
Well they don't put these homeless people in jail as a form of punishment. It isn't like they are saying "if you don't stop being homeless we are going to through you into jail - where btw we will feed you and provide showers".
They are doing it to keep up the apperance of cities so business will move in, so people wont be afraid to walk downtown, and so these homeless don't die on the street.
I'll simply be quoting the report from the original post:
Los Angeles, CA. According to a study by UCLA released in September 2007,
Los Angeles was spending $6 million a year to pay for fifty extra police officers
as part of its Safe City Initiative to crack down on crime in the Skid Row area at a
time when the city budgeted only $5.7 million for homeless services. Advocates
found that during an 11-month period 24 people were arrested 201 times, with an
estimated cost of $3.6 million for use of police, the jail system, prosecutors,
public defenders and the courts. Advocates asserted that the money could have
instead provided supportive housing for 225 people. Many of the citations issued
to homeless persons in the Skid Row area were for jaywalking and loitering --
“crimes” that rarely produce written citations in other parts of Los Angeles.
Hmmmmmm.
Constructive Alternatives to Criminalization
Daytona Beach, FL. In order to reduce the need for panhandling, a coalition of
service providers, business groups, and the City of Daytona Beach began a
program that provides homeless participants with jobs and housing. While in the
Downtown Street Team program, participants are hired to clean up downtown
Daytona Beach and are provided initially with shelter and subsequently with
transitional housing. A number of participants have moved on from the program
to other full-time jobs and housing.
Hmmmmmm.
Looks to me like criminalization ("putting people in jail") does not work nearly as well, both in terms of cost-effectiveness and sustainability, as wholly different and constructive approaches do.
And, humbly beg to differ, but that does sound like a punitive measure to me:
Recently, cities have indirectly targeted homeless people by restricting service providers’
food sharing programs.38 Historically, cities have attempted to restrict food sharing on
providers’ property through zoning laws. More recently, some cities have passed laws to
restrict food sharing in public spaces, such as parks. Some courts have found that food
sharing restrictions can violate religious groups’ right to freely exercise their religious
beliefs.39 Further, at least one court found that one food sharing restriction also infringed
on the right to free speech.40
Which, by the by, does plenty little to ensure "these homeless don't die on the street."