urbanSTL

Right. It's a behavioral issue, not an issue against the homeless or homeful.

Resurrectus wrote:

jlblues wrote:In the Lucas Park thread several people mentioned the concept of eliminating homelessness. I realize there are more than a few idealists on this forum , but does anyone seriously think that is an attainable goal?

In the Lucas Park thread, the concept of eliminating homelessness in Lucas Park (not this city, this state, this country, or the world) is mentioned as an attainable goal.



Also, the focus is on eliminating the homeless who trash the park, aggressively panhandle, use loud vulgar language, use the park as a toilet, remain in the park after closing, and throw leftovers on the ground for bugs, pigeons, and rats. If the homeless respected the land like the rest of society does, then we wouldn't be so focused on eliminating them.

Word.

^^^Wow Resurrectus, you have worked yourself into a frenzy. I am pretty sure I was agreeing with you.



I was referring to comments like these - and others:

Arch City wrote:

Resurrectus wrote:The homeless problem has already been addressed by both the city and neighborhood groups, and there are many different places (both government and private) that the homeless (mentally-ill, drug-addicted, disabled, or just plain lazy) can go to for free assistance.



The Horizon Club, located downtown at 23rd and Pine, is the best place for the homeless to find assistance. NLEC is the worst and only keeps them homeless.

Apparently it hasn't been addressed well enough considering that there are still homeless and mentally-ill people on the streets of downtown.

<snip>

Seriously, I don't think any species should be leaving logs in the park for visitor's viewing displeasure. Nonetheless, if humans are pooping and pee peeing in the park, it is a testament to a larger societal problem.

Matt Drops The H wrote:<snip> I am not saying that the homeless should be allowed to colonize Lucas Park forever. I am merely saying that a better and more comprehensive strategy needs to be developed where the roots of homelessness are examined more thoroughly, where the homeless find opportunities to begin employment training or find temporary housing.

I think it's uniquely American to assume that trying to prevent problems rather than responding to the problems' effects is idealistic.

Matt Drops The H wrote:I think it's uniquely American to assume that trying to prevent problems rather than responding to the problems' effects is idealistic.

Trying to prevent a problem for someone who does not even see that there is a problem, is idealistic.

In so far as their breaking the law, the homeless present a problem to the city, as has been amply pointed out. Thus curbing the problem seems a municipal or regional responsibility.



It is not, in my opinion, idealistic to try and prevent homelessness from occuring. It's not reasonable to expect homelessness can be wholly eradicated, but it is possible to invest our time, money, and energy in addressing the causes of homelessness in order to prevent future costs and lawbreaking.

Resurrectus wrote: In the Lucas Park thread, the concept of eliminating homelessness in Lucas Park (not this city, this state, this country, or the world) is mentioned as an attainable goal.



Also, the focus is on eliminating the homeless who trash the park, aggressively panhandle, use loud vulgar language, use the park as a toilet, remain in the park after closing, and throw leftovers on the ground for bugs, pigeons, and rats. If the homeless respected the land like the rest of society does, then we wouldn't be so focused on eliminating them.

That's my point. Just because you're homeless does not give you the right to:

-aggresively panhandle

-curse all day long in a loud voice

-take a leak wherever you want

-take a dump wherever you want

-bathe in the fountains

-throw trash around

An article on the front page of Charter.com (i had to check my email):



1 in 4 homeless are veterans



That is not good.

^ It's not good for anyone to be homeless, let alone veterans who dedicated their service to our country. As a Marine Corps veteran myself, I'm aware of the transition assistance that was mandatory and still is before entering civilian status. Ref: http://www.seamlesstransition.va.gov/



The fact is that war for the soldier exists not only in a battlefield but within one's mind as well. It is probably the case that veterans suffer a higher percentage of mental illness than the general population, especially during times of war. And if mental illness plays a large part in contributing to the homeless problem , it stands to reason that veterans are twice as likely as the general population to become homeless. Keep in mind, though, that the veteran homeless population makes up an extremely small percentage of all living veterans.



As far as St. Louis goes, I don't recall seeing young homeless people who could have recently exited the military. In fact, many of our homeless seem older. So I'm not sure how long after exiting the military that conditions deteriorated to get to that point. I wonder what percentage of our homeless served in Vietnam.



Something to think about as we celebrate Veteran's Day on Sunday & the Marine Corps birthday on Saturday.

trent wrote:An article on the front page of Charter.com (i had to check my email):



1 in 4 homeless are veterans



That is not good.

I'm also a veteran, and during the time that I was in the USAF, I met some of the laziest people ever. Some of the older members once left the military, but they couldn't handle civilian life, so they reenlisted.



Unless a particular veteran received an injury (mental or physical) in the military that makes his transition to civilian life difficult, then I don't even see why stating, "1 in 4 homeless are veterans," is a significant point.

I was going to come on saying "stats can be mutated", but the article in question seemed to have concete numbers, so it may be true. If so, it is a HUGE issue.

My personal guess would be that a majority of veteran homeless would be in places that have a "higher number of soldiers", which for some reason does not (in my mind) fit the profile of STL homeless.

And no...... that is just a guess. NOt asked any of the homeless if they are vets.

bsharmastl wrote:I was going to come on saying "stats can be mutated", but the article in question seemed to have concete numbers, so it may be true. If so, it is a HUGE issue.

Veterans comprise 11% of the American population yet 22% of the homeless population. All this says is that veterans are twice as likely to be homeless on average than the general population. Much of this can be explained by a higher level of mental illness in the veteran population as compared to the general population.



I pretty much agree with Ressurectus. In the military, every material need is taken care of for you. You don't have to think about paying for housing, food, etc. This all must change when you transition.



So no, I don't consider this to be a huge issue. It is an issue, however.

^ And something we need to keep in mind in the coming years for veterans that have served in Iraq and Afghanistan.

innov8ion wrote:

bsharmastl wrote:I was going to come on saying "stats can be mutated", but the article in question seemed to have concete numbers, so it may be true. If so, it is a HUGE issue.

Veterans comprise 11% of the American population yet 22% of the homeless population. All this says is that veterans are twice as likely to be homeless on average than the general population. Much of this can be explained by a higher level of mental illness in the veteran population as compared to the general population.



I pretty much agree with Ressurectus. In the military, every material need is taken care of for you. You don't have to think about paying for housing, food, etc. This all must change when you transition.



So no, I don't consider this to be a huge issue. It is an issue, however.

Maybe I should have explained why I personally used the term "huge issue". Anyone who has put their life on the line for our country, deserves some cushion in the transition and should have some safeguards for them to have a decent life.

I am ABSOLUTELY opposed to having my tax money pay for lazy ass healthy people on welfare. I am ALL for helping those who served this country. Thus, I consider 22% of homeless vets as a major issue.

Not sure, maybe Urban Informant or Directioneer?

^ Downtown (CID) Guides



http://www.downtownstl.org/Home.aspx?ContentID=36

want to end the presence of beggars/panhandlers, then don't give them money. pretty easy. Give your "guilt money" to St. Patricks Center and that's it. problem solved!

JCity wrote:want to end the presence of beggars/panhandlers, then don't give them money. pretty easy. Give your "guilt money" to St. Patricks Center and that's it. problem solved!

It's the visitors/tourists that give them money, food, clothes, cigarettes, etc. Residents only give in to aggressive panhandlers when in fear of getting attacked if they don't give.

bsharmastl wrote:Maybe I should have explained why I personally used the term "huge issue". Anyone who has put their life on the line for our country, deserves some cushion in the transition and should have some safeguards for them to have a decent life.

I am ABSOLUTELY opposed to having my tax money pay for lazy ass healthy people on welfare. I am ALL for helping those who served this country. Thus, I consider 22% of homeless vets as a major issue.

Agreed, and so does America. Ref: http://www1.va.gov/homeless/



VA offers a wide array of special programs and initiatives specifically designed to help homeless veterans live as self-sufficiently and independently as possible. In fact,VA is the only Federal agency that provides substantial hands-on assistance directly to homeless persons. Although limited to veterans and their dependents, VA's major homeless-specific programs constitute the largest integrated network of homeless treatment and assistance services in the country.



VA's specialized homeless veterans treatment programs have grown and developed since they were first authorized in 1987. The programs strive to offer a continuum of services that include:



* aggressive outreach to those veterans living on streets and in shelters who otherwise would not seek assistance;

* clinical assessment and referral to needed medical treatment for physical and psychiatric disorders, including substance abuse;

* long-term sheltered transitional assistance, case management, and rehabilitation;

* employment assistance and linkage with available income supports; and

* supported permanent housing.

I was down in Nashville this last weekend and saw something interesting.



Almost every bar, restaurant and shop in downtown had a sign in their windows telling people not to give to panhandlers: it only supports their drug and alcohol abuse habits plus brings Nashville down. The signs then listed a number of agencies to donate money and volunteer at.



I also must have had the CHUMP beacon on. I got panhandled in the following locations:

-standing in line outside Coyote Ugly

-walking down the street by Ernest Tubbs

-in the parking lot of McDonalds on Saturday morning

-in the parking lot of the new Target out by Charlotte Pike

-along 21st Street by Vanderbilt when going to a coffee shop

dweebe wrote:Almost every bar, restaurant and shop in downtown had a sign in their windows telling people not to give to panhandlers: it only supports their drug and alcohol abuse habits plus brings Nashville down. The signs then listed a number of agencies to donate money and volunteer at.

I still think these signs are a good idea, even though there will always be those worried about what the signs do for our public image (even as the homeless people harrassing visitors aren't exactly doing wonders for our image).