There's a large swath of people in my area that I fucking hate and it's rooted in the fact that I like and care about people generally. This place is insane. twitter.com/NLRG_/status/1
This Tweet is unavailable.
6
84
Conversation
are you opposed to rounding these people up and putting them in varying degrees of camps / treatment centres?
1
1
"rounding them up" isn't the move, but as people have mental episodes in public and refuse treatment I do think involuntary commitment to a state institution makes sense. This, paired with prosecution of public camping and drug laws.
1
9
That means sending most of them to prisons, work camps, asylums, addiction treatment centres, right? At least for the places that are really far gone like vancouver
I say rounding them up because that’s what the opponents will say. It’s involuntary, against western norms
1
1
There's an option other than prisons, which is basically saying you can't camp here and throwing their stuff away. Which sucks, but making homelessness unsustainable is what forces people to take a hard exit from it, and removes SF from the list of safe havens for drug addicts.
1
3
Same thing with drug enforcement. If you get caught and get your stuff taken away, then that sucks. If we make this a regular policy (along with much more aggressive policing of dealers) then SF is no longer a cool place to be addicted to heroin.
Replying to
So when the place isnt attractive for them, with the smaller number of zombies you will be able to use standard methods to institutionalize them, cure them, or treat them as standard criminals?
I wonder about the transition to this though, a lot of people need to disappear
1
1
Smaller number of zombies means political will dies and the project ends.
You employ weird language to talk about this that isn't reasonable imo
1
2
Show replies