The Security Threat That is the Homeless

[Edmund BlackAdder]

Why is it I am now thinking about the Winston Churchill Speech the one with "We shall fight them on the beaches"

4 June 1940
"I have, myself, full confidence that if all do their duty, if nothing is neglected, and if the best arrangements are made, as they are being made, we shall prove ourselves once again able to defend our home, to ride out the storm of war, and to outlive the menace of tyranny, if necessary for years, if necessary alone.
At any rate, that is what we are going to try to do. That is the resolve of His Majesty's Government-every man of them. That is the will of Parliament and the nation.
The American Empire and the Bananna Republic, linked together in their cause and in their need, will defend to the death their native soil, aiding each other like good comrades to the utmost of their strength.
Even though large tracts of Europe and many old and famous States have fallen or may fall into the grip of the Wino and all the odious apparatus of Leftist rule, we shall not flag or fail.
We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in the pubs,
we shall fight on the streets and avenues,
we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the pool hall, we shall defend our cities, whatever the cost may be,
we shall fight on the porches,
we shall fight on the lawn,
we shall fight in the back allies and in the streets,
we shall fight in the food kitches;
we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this nation or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the Martialist Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God's good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old."

We have met the enemy and they are the homeless... and they are ... US

It is? Well then put a dress on it and call me Susan.

*wipes a tear* Very nice sir, very nice. I wonder if the point will be lost on our dear Martialist?

Most probably yes. The lack of a reply so far to such wonderful rebuttles is telling. Most likely there is much gnashing of tooth in The Kingdom of Fa where the Fa King (Official King of Fa) is telling his Fa King Subjects (The official subjects of the king of fa) all about our Fa King Comments (The official comments about the king of fa) is quite a state of Fa King Disbelief (The official disbelief of the king of fa).

Oh.



My.



God.

Why yes, I suppose I am.

Nomination for post of the year. Thats ****ing great!

Why Thank you. Wibble.

Yargh! Even Adolf Hitler is blushing after reading this dreck. So, BlackAdder, if you lose your job and happen to end up out on the street, does that mean that we should not show you any compassion whatsoever and shoot you like the dog that you are? How about your homeless wife and kids, too? Should we cut off their begging cups and chop off their blocks, too? Maybe you would want me to cut down your homeless wife or daughter at 50 paces? The funny thing about such diatribes as yours is that such people often end up among the very people that they despise so dearly. It's fate's/god's little way of teaching us that we are all equal irregardless of race, class, or any other social division that man has created for himself. Wibble...I've got to remember that one :lol:! (This post was tongue n' cheek, of course)

My wife is not only homeless, she is topless sir, and for $20 you can see her bottomless, though at the legally required 50 pace limit. How you knew this escapes me for the moment, but I have to repel a flash mob of winos who are after my port attacking from my starboard side. They aren't here yet, but I can smell them coming. It's either bums or these underpants I have on my head to hide the tinfoil. Baaaaah.

 

[Xue Sheng]

:lfao:

yup that's the speech

 

[SageGhost83]

My wife is not only homeless, she is topless sir, and for $20 you can see her bottomless, though at the legally required 50 pace limit. How you knew this escapes me for the moment, but I have to repel a flash mob of winos who are after my port attacking from my starboard side. They aren't here yet, but I can smell them coming. It's either bums or these underpants I have on my head to hide the tinfoil. Baaaaah.

:lol::lol::lol:

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I'm going to pull a quote out of the piece.

So why did I get so upset? Why am I on this soapbox now?
It’s simple. I’ve lived with the homeless problem for over
thirteen years. For as long as I’ve lived in Syracuse, New
York — a relatively small city in Central New York that is
plagued with homeless people — I’ve dealt with the
harassment of street people. The problem isn’t even really
my own, because as a large, relatively strong male with
martial arts training, I’m more than capable of taking care of
myself (even if I don’t find it overly pleasant). No, the
problem is that I have friends and family members who’ve
worked downtown for as long as I’ve lived here, and I’ve had
to watch as, daily, they walked that gauntlet of homeless
beggars and predators.

Interesting, considering that local TV station WTVH had this to say on Jan 30 2008:

Last year, they counted about 700 homeless people with a decline of 37% of "chronically homeless people." They hope this trend continues with this years census.

http://www.wtvh.com/news/local/14895481.html


According to the 2000 census, the city population was 147,306, and its metropolitan area had a population of 732,117. So, 700 doesn't seem like a large amount but a .001% crime rate's small too, unless you're one of the victims.

So, can anyone point me at some reliable numbers for crimes committed by the homeless? There are a number of LEO on here. How many of the calls you go on involve homeless? What were they for? Were they in your experience like Mr Elmore has described many of them as?


In nearly 40 years, living in or near decent sized cities, I can count on 1 hand the number of times I've seen an obvious street person, and my "worst" interactions were in Toronto dealing with a window washer who required 2 "no thanks" before moving along. I have had no problems, nor seen many if any homeless in Syracuse (The OP's home), Rochester, Albany, Buffalo (all NY), Erie PA, Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinati (all Ohio), and the Atlanta GA area. Now, other people will have had different experiences. It's totally possible that I may have just been lucky so far. It's also possible that I as a rule avoid frequenting those areas that one is most likely to encounter large groups of homeless. I can say that those I did encounter were not the "freshest" in scent, but neither was the old woman I served when working in the supermarket deli who left the floor wet, or the heavy smoker who reaked of smoke.

To be honest, and fair, I have to say I'm in disagreement with Phil here on the risk presented, based on my own experiences. His own experiences however have been different and we simply have different data. It doesn't make one right the other wrong. We've just come to different conclusions based on different experiences.

So, as I said earlier, I'd love to see some information from first-hand reports or possibly more statistics from various agencies that can be brought to the table for a broader, more indepth look.

In the end, the only way to end the "threat" of the homeless, both real and imagined, is to deal with the issue of homelessness, it's causes, it's legacies, etc.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Sidebar. I'm slowly working through this (on pg 44 atm), and while I don't agree with some of the characterizations, some of the advice on minimizing risk seems spot on to me. For the folks who are hammering Phil I might suggest a different tactic. Read it, take what works for you, flush the rest. It's a long read and worth a little thought.

 

[Cryozombie]

In nearly 40 years, living in or near decent sized cities, I can count on 1 hand the number of times I've seen an obvious street person, and my "worst" interactions were in Toronto dealing with a window washer who required 2 "no thanks" before moving along.

They are fairly obvious in Chicago... quite all over the place... but more often than not, they are trying to sell you a copy of "Streetwise" than hassling you for money. I have NO problem with that, and often buy a copy.

 

[Doc_Jude]

Nomination for post of the year. Thats ****ing great!

Second.

 

[Doc_Jude]

Mister Homeless, you better get away from me before I pull this sword out from under my trench coat and paint your cardboard box condo an interesting new color called "Hint of Brain"!!!

- ^_^

 

[Drac]

The homeless have become such a big problem here that Cleveland passed a law preventing " Agressive Panhandling" ...Too many office type and tourists have been harrassed by those seeking funds, they had gotten so bold as to approach groups of people going to or returning from lunch DEMANDING money, oh yeah that will make people want to work in downtown Cleveland... The city just started posting signs AGAINST giving these people money..It is a major problem....

 

[jks9199]

I have to agree with Bob; there is some good, basic self defense information in the pamphlet. I didn't take issue with that. I do take issue with Elmore's characterization of "the homeless" as a major security threat. It's not born out through crime reports or similar information; the homeless are, from my understanding, more often the victims than the victimizer.

I also felt his response style was so aggressive as to become a problem; minor changes move aggressive defiance to confident refusal, which is much less likely to be a problem. Maybe it was just his presentation for his pamphlet; maybe it was a "gravitationally challenged" individual (as I myself am) trying to look tough for the photos. I felt his points regarding looking at your watch were excellent.

But the good gets lost in the hyperbole... Something that seems to happen to Elmore a lot.

Oh... as an aside... I do actually agree that the homeless population does pose a very specific security threat. They're an "invisible population" in many ways; they're actions are often unnoticed, and they have frightening latitude of movement. That's a great potential means for any sort of terrorist organization to move people into downtown areas where they'd ordinarily not enjoy that level of free movement.

 

[Doc_Jude]

Whatever you do, don't punch a homeless guy in the mouth. A friend of mine got in a scuffle with an overly aggressive pan-handler, punched the guy in the mouth, knocked him right out, and then looked down to see one of the guy's teeth in his knuckle! He almost lost his hand from the subsequent infection.

One more reason for open-hand strikes. They work on anyone from the homeless to big sumo fellas (ala Keith Hackney).

 

[Carol]

I'm going to go against the grain here

I downloaded the book and read it from beginning to end. Overall, I liked it....although I admit that I did not like the way he made many of his points.

There is a good bit of hyperbole in the book that is over the top. I'm not a homeless-basher. Not everyone that is down on their luck chooses to be in your face. The homeless folks that are at local shelters trying hard to get their life together weren't/aren't a threat to me or anyone else.

But having lived in a densely populated part of Boston for as long as I did...I think he gave a more thorough, and more accurate description of what my neighbors and I faced on Massachusetts Avenue better than anyone else. Overall, I've faced the most personal danger from the aggressive street bums and drunks (that most people called "homeless" whether they actually were or not) than I did from the non-homeless criminals that were out and about...and that's coming from someone whose nextdoor neighbor was a correctional halfway house.

I do wish the book was written in a different fashion. Part of me wishes that I had seen something like this 20 years ago.....on the other hand, had I done so...and had the mindset that I had when I was 19, the hyperbole in the book would likely have offended me...meaning, I would have likely tossed it instead of reading it. His defensive suggestions and use of force are conservative and practical. which, to me, was a bit refreshing compared t the "I'd rather by tried by 12 than carried by 6" mindset. Some of these points seem to be lost in the tone.

Regardless, props to Phil for making the book available at no charge. Its a book I might not have read otherwise and, despite my personal disagreements, I'm glad I read it.

 

[Empty Hands]

That's a great potential means for any sort of terrorist organization to move people into downtown areas where they'd ordinarily not enjoy that level of free movement.

What does this mean? Doesn't everyone have the right to go pretty much wherever they want, whenever they want once they are inside the country? Aside from the obvious like military bases or private property.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

What does this mean? Doesn't everyone have the right to go pretty much wherever they want, whenever they want once they are inside the country? Aside from the obvious like military bases or private property.

Actually, no you don't. The average person won't notice the restrictions much, but your travels and activities are actually quite restricted. Try boarding a plane without a drivers licence, or taking a photo of the White House while on vacation in DC with certain types o cameras, for example. Those are however broader topics for discussion elsewhere.

The average person, when confronted with a couple of dirty, smelly people, is to look away and walk away. They don't look too closely at the contents of Mr. Stinky's push cart of swag. A coordinated attack, disguised as homeless bums could do some serious damage to person and property. Maybe the enemy isn't the drugged out wino, but the terrorist masqurading as him?

 

[Empty Hands]

The average person won't notice the restrictions much, but your travels and activities are actually quite restricted. Try boarding a plane without a drivers licence, or taking a photo of the White House while on vacation in DC with certain types o cameras, for example.

Well sure, but that doesn't really seem to apply to the apparently "terrifying" latitude of movement that homeless people have. Since they mostly walk, I was considering it from that standpoint. What downtown core (to take from jks' post) can't I enter that a homeless person can?

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Apparently, Airports.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23256026/

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpa...0A35751C0A963958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
(I liked this one. I feel very safe in NYC now, not)

bout a dozen people now live permanently at Kennedy, settling down at night in the cavernous international terminals that never close, sacking out like weary travelers in modular chairs or on the floor.

They are different from the homeless people who sleep on the streets or in the subways. They are, in effect, invisible, working to blend in with the human traffic. They do not seem dirty or aggressive, and they rarely panhandle. Most are mentally ill, but not a threat to themselves or others. Some are well educated. They prefer the heated, air-conditioned, relatively crime-free airport to conditions in the street.

http://www.journeyplanner.co.uk/results.php?q=Gatwick+Airport

 

[SageGhost83]

I would like to think that people have enough common sense to keep their guard up and be mindful of their environment and those around them regardless of whether they are dealing with the homeless or not. I looked past the hyperbole in the document and what I found was nothing more than common sense precautions that should and usually are taken by ordinary defense-minded individuals. I don't agree with him singling out the homeless - I think that you must be aware of everybody in your environment and take precautions whether they are homeless or not. I do agree with Bob Hubbard, though. I believe I saw something like that in a Haha Lung book at the local Borders Books and Music store. A seemingly homeless person was hiding myriad weapons under his rags and in his push cart and nobody suspected a thing. We are a very open society and I don't think that it would take much imagination for someone to hit us real good if they really wanted to, but that is indeed another thread. I think the article took what is basically common practice for many of us while out in public, and slanted it to target the homeless. Nice, street-wise advice, but it could apply to society in general, not just the homeless.

 

[Xue Sheng]

(I liked this one. I feel very safe in NYC now, not)

You mean you did before

 

[Drac]

bout a dozen people now live permanently at Kennedy, settling down at night in the cavernous international terminals that never close, sacking out like weary travelers in modular chairs or on the floor.

They are different from the homeless people who sleep on the streets or in the subways. They are, in effect, invisible, working to blend in with the human traffic. They do not seem dirty or aggressive, and they rarely panhandle. Most are mentally ill, but not a threat to themselves or others. Some are well educated. They prefer the heated, air-conditioned, relatively crime-free airport to conditions in the street.

They did that at Cleveland Hopkins for years until they stepped up security first with the baggage screeners and now TSA..You cannot get past the ticket lobby and once in the baggage claim area you cannot enter again...Recently the Cleveland Police have been putting them out, meaning they are escorted to the RTA trains platform where they will spend the night until the trains start running again at 4AM..Then they will board the trains and attempt to ride until the Transit Police are called to remove them..
Oh the joy for the early morning commuters to have to sit in proximity of someone that has not bathed in about a month..

 

[MA-Caver]

Oh the joy for the early morning commuters to have to sit in proximity of someone that has not bathed in about a month..

Been there done that. How about sleeping next to them all night (and their shoes are off!!) with a dirty pillow and blanket on the dirty floor of a shelter because it's too damned cold outside?