Forum: Internet Links Topic: Breaking and entering legal in San Fran. started by: GORDON Posted by GORDON on Apr. 05 2010,14:01
< http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin....ossible >QUOTE A group of homeless people and housing activists took over a privately owned Mission District duplex on Sunday in what served as the climax of a protest designed to promote use of San Francisco's vacant buildings as shelters for the needy.
But the owner of the property - who was targeted over his eviction of a tenant - said the demonstration was nothing more than breaking and entering. Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 05 2010,14:20
Only if you're a poor, disenfranchised chap and you're breaking into the place of something with way more money than you.Hmm, given this logic, is it possible to break into a homeless shelter? Posted by unkbill on Apr. 06 2010,06:31
So the police had a pretty good idea there was a crime being committed and they stood by and watched. Guess they earned there pay because nothing got out of hand.
Posted by Leisher on Apr. 06 2010,07:20
According to the comments, the rest of the story on the cops is that they were told not to make arrests. One poster even put some of the city's top cops' numbers there for people to call and bitch. QUOTE Specifically, he said the city should foreclose on buildings where hefty back taxes are owed or use its powers of eminent domain to turn over long-vacant homes to nonprofit developers. Insanity. First of all, you can't take a property on a whim. And who sets the line of when a property is far enough behind in taxes to where it can be taken by the city? And keep in mind, the property would need to be owned outright by someone. What if in addition to no taxes being paid, no payments were being made to the lender? In that case, the lender should assume control of the property, not the city. Secondly, eminent domain? Really? So you want Big Brother to come in and just take property from people whenever they feel like it? Why? Because you think the government should tell people how to use their property? Go fuck yourself. You can feel free to let the government run your life, but I'd prefer they stay out of mine. The government should be like a guardian angel. You never see or hear it, but it's there protecting you without interfering in your life. Third, who the fuck are you to tell people what to do with their property? You can claim "It's for the greater good!", but quite honestly, how the fuck do you know? Oh, look we put a roof over someone's head. Great. Now what? Look around you asshole and you'll see a nation of spoiled, lazy fucks who ask what their country can do for them first instead of getting a job and/or an education and doing things for themselves. This is a direct result of government handouts. Explain to me how this evolves the human race and moves us forward as a species. It doesn't. It promotes laziness. It doesn't motivate. It teaches people that they don't have to do anything or learn anything because the government will provide by taking from people who do work hard and do educate themselves. Yeah, that's a wonderful ideal you're promoting you small minded idiot. But if you insist upon free housing one of the people who commented on the linked article had a fantastic idea, you see Alcatraz is just sitting there...vacant... Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 06 2010,08:22
(Leisher @ Apr. 06 2010,09:20) QUOTE But if you insist upon free housing one of the people who commented on the linked article had a fantastic idea, you see Alcatraz is just sitting there...vacant... The seagulls damn near legally own that place seven months of the year. Posted by GORDON on Apr. 06 2010,10:30
(Malcolm @ Apr. 06 2010,11:22) QUOTE (Leisher @ Apr. 06 2010,09:20) QUOTE But if you insist upon free housing one of the people who commented on the linked article had a fantastic idea, you see Alcatraz is just sitting there...vacant... The seagulls damn near legally own that place seven months of the year. it was actually taken over by Injuns in the 70's. They kept it for over a year. This was before it was a national park. Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 06 2010,10:42
(GORDON @ Apr. 06 2010,12:30) QUOTE (Malcolm @ Apr. 06 2010,11:22) QUOTE (Leisher @ Apr. 06 2010,09:20) QUOTE But if you insist upon free housing one of the people who commented on the linked article had a fantastic idea, you see Alcatraz is just sitting there...vacant... The seagulls damn near legally own that place seven months of the year. it was actually taken over by Injuns in the 70's. They kept it for over a year. This was before it was a national park. Last time I was there, over half the island was fenced off because of the fucking seagulls. It was their mating or hunting or migrating or doing nothing season, I don't remember which. Posted by GORDON on Apr. 06 2010,12:45
Ah, so San Fran enviro weenies were protecting the delicate ecosystem of a trillion ocean birds.Got it. Posted by TPRJones on Apr. 07 2010,07:03
QUOTE So you want Big Brother to come in and just take property from people whenever they feel like it? Why? Because you think the government should tell people how to use their property? Go fuck yourself. Seconded. When I get in these sorts of arguments over the homeless with bleeding heart assholes, I ask them two questions: 1) how many square feet is your house, and 2) how many homeless families are you letting live with you? If the first answer is larger than about 700 square feet and the second answer is zero (which are both invariably the case) then I tell them that until they put their own beliefs into action themselves they can shut their hypocritical mouths about making me pay for it out of my pocket. |