PDA

View Full Version : Nevada City CA issues permits [LIVING permits] for homeless, novel idea for LTC?


gunsmith
11-17-2012, 5:18 PM
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2012/11/16/police-chief-uses-unique-method-to-control-homeless-population/

Nevada City is experimenting with permits for approved homeless people, being that if you're camping you can legally carry at your campsite ( I cant remember if that is concealed or open ) can this be used as a backdoor LTC?

If ( say for instance ) SF tried the same this could be very interesting.

Librarian
11-17-2012, 6:18 PM
While living on the street is pretty dangerous, and some of those out there should qualify for LTC, I seriously doubt this 'permit to live on the streets' will lead to LTC anywhere.

bigdawg86
11-17-2012, 6:24 PM
... interesting considering a vast majority of homeless people suffer from some sort of mental instability

gunsmith
11-17-2012, 8:15 PM
While living on the street is pretty dangerous, and some of those out there should qualify for LTC, I seriously doubt this 'permit to live on the streets' will lead to LTC anywhere.

I'm not saying homelessness is a good idea, or that giving homeless people a license to be homeless will help LTC, I am observing that CA law allows for people to carry a gun if they're legally camping.

A couple of bad choices and the rotten economy and many people are a few paychecks away from homelessness, I would seriously consider going back to San Francisco if I could legally camp in the city for a month while I got the money together for an apt.

Those weekly hotels in the loin are bed bug infested and I would rather camp then get those.

AyatollahGondola
11-17-2012, 10:39 PM
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2012/11/16/police-chief-uses-unique-method-to-control-homeless-population/

Nevada City is experimenting with permits for approved homeless people, being that if you're camping you can legally carry at your campsite ( I cant remember if that is concealed or open ) can this be used as a backdoor LTC?

If ( say for instance ) SF tried the same this could be very interesting.

That is, as long as the permit to camp doesn't come with restrictions, which I believe it would.

But on the other hand, wouldn't you be handing over some freedom just by allowing a sheriff or any municpal authority the power to deny a camping permit, and arrest you for not having one? We're talking about a basic human function here.....

FatalKitty
11-17-2012, 11:17 PM
That is, as long as the permit to camp doesn't come with restrictions, which I believe it would.

But on the other hand, wouldn't you be handing over some freedom just by allowing a sheriff or any municpal authority the power to deny a camping permit, and arrest you for not having one? We're talking about a basic human function here.....

since this is my sister home town (town right next to my town) I can tell you... we have had a LOT of issues lately with homeless people basically making permanent residences on public lands... setting up tents and living there. That by itself isn't bad but the drug use and other crime it brings is.
the permits ONLY purpose is to LIMIT people's ability to stay on public land. the permits are issued to homeless people and allow them to stay for 15 days. after which time they can apply for a 30 day extension.

they also don't issue these permits to regular folks just camping for the holiday or the weekend, and the don't require one for that purpose either

prkprisoner
11-17-2012, 11:24 PM
So what happens if someone doesn't get a permit? Jail is not likely. They probably can't afford to pay a fine. I think this whole permit to exist thing is a waste of time.

AyatollahGondola
11-17-2012, 11:46 PM
since this is my sister home town (town right next to my town) I can tell you... we have had a LOT of issues lately with homeless people basically making permanent residences on public lands... setting up tents and living there. That by itself isn't bad but the drug use and other crime it brings is.
the permits ONLY purpose is to LIMIT people's ability to stay on public land. the permits are issued to homeless people and allow them to stay for 15 days. after which time they can apply for a 30 day extension.

they also don't issue these permits to regular folks just camping for the holiday or the weekend, and the don't require one for that purpose either

I'm no stranger to the homeless scene. Lived and worked very close to the longest running shelter in downtown for years, and used to deliver goods to the Union gospel mission a few years ago. I wish the homeless were really self-reliant people living off the land, but the fact is they need to be in town because they live off others. But my concern is for freedom. the more power you grant to the government for your comfort, the less freedom you'll have when it really counts. If these people are using illegal substances and committing other crimes as you say, the law already has a cause to arrest them. Why do they need another law that could infringe on everyone, when they won't use the tools they already possess?

gunsmith
11-24-2012, 11:35 AM
Shelters really suck, legal camping should be recognized as a human right, but whatever.

It is legal to carry if you're legally camping, if other cities take up this movement it may be fun to examine the stipulations and see if we couldn't have an armed campout in some downtown area some day.

Robidouxs
11-24-2012, 2:27 PM
We have constitutional carry in Arizona. I see no problem with anyone carrying, just be ready to accept the responsibility and burden that go along with it. If you go waving your gun around and point it at people, expect to earn a few extra holes and/or a new home.

postal
11-24-2012, 2:33 PM
That woulda been a great news story!!!!!

People camping out at best buy for the black friday sale... legally armed since they're 'camping'!!

Nyanman
11-24-2012, 4:36 PM
since this is my sister home town (town right next to my town) I can tell you... we have had a LOT of issues lately with homeless people basically making permanent residences on public lands... setting up tents and living there. That by itself isn't bad but the drug use and other crime it brings is.
the permits ONLY purpose is to LIMIT people's ability to stay on public land. the permits are issued to homeless people and allow them to stay for 15 days. after which time they can apply for a 30 day extension.

they also don't issue these permits to regular folks just camping for the holiday or the weekend, and the don't require one for that purpose either
Grass Valley resident then? Nice to 'meet' someone else in the same county.


There is nothing I can really add to the above, apart from a +1 for truth. People camp out in the local park. People loiter around the downtown Nevada City area smoking pot and blocking the sidewalks-in the middle of the day.
I got to hear from my younger sibling (who is at the high school) that one of their classmates has a plan for life: work an easy job, get a disability, have a doctor write a script, and sit around all day smoking pot while on disability/unemployment.
Saying 'we have some problems' doesn't begin to cover it.
Actually, there was some stuff I could add :D

FatalKitty
11-24-2012, 5:22 PM
I'm no stranger to the homeless scene. Lived and worked very close to the longest running shelter in downtown for years, and used to deliver goods to the Union gospel mission a few years ago. I wish the homeless were really self-reliant people living off the land, but the fact is they need to be in town because they live off others. But my concern is for freedom. the more power you grant to the government for your comfort, the less freedom you'll have when it really counts. If these people are using illegal substances and committing other crimes as you say, the law already has a cause to arrest them. Why do they need another law that could infringe on everyone, when they won't use the tools they already possess?

This does not "Grant power to the government" it is simply a measure to ensure that homeless aren't destroying the public areas they inhabit by being there for extended periods. They leave trash, and just don't take of the grounds. Yes there are laws for that... we are we gonna do... fine then $2000 for littering? HA! Oh how about jail time... sure... let's spend thousands in tax money to house and feed them in jail, rather than giving them a nudge by saying "You can stay here for 15 days... if at the end of that 15 days you are a good dude, you can stay another 30 days."
This keeps them from sleeping on our sidewalks by giving them an area to camp temporarily.

the law does not infringe on everyone, as stated... campers with legitimate reasons to camp (weekend or holiday camping) do no need permits.

Are there flaws in the proposal? YES... I'm sure with your expert experience and advice... you can come up with a better solution, please bring it up at the next council meeting.

also these permits are not for camping out downtown, I have no idea where you guys are getting that idea. if you are familiar with the NC area you will know there there are several sites that are just open land or trees/forest and THATs where homeless people stay, sometimes down by the rivers. These areas are also great spots for a weekend camping trip with the family... just not when they are overrun by a permanent settlement of drug addicted homeless people trashing the place.

FatalKitty
11-24-2012, 5:24 PM
Grass Valley resident then? Nice to 'meet' someone else in the same county.


There is nothing I can really add to the above, apart from a +1 for truth. People camp out in the local park. People loiter around the downtown Nevada City area smoking pot and blocking the sidewalks-in the middle of the day.
I got to hear from my younger sibling (who is at the high school) that one of their classmates has a plan for life: work an easy job, get a disability, have a doctor write a script, and sit around all day smoking pot while on disability/unemployment.
Saying 'we have some problems' doesn't begin to cover it.
Actually, there was some stuff I could add :D

LOL
I guess we need to go do some shootin sometime!

AyatollahGondola
11-24-2012, 6:44 PM
"You can stay here for 15 days... if at the end of that 15 days you are a good dude, you can stay another 30 days."
This keeps them from sleeping on our sidewalks by giving them an area to camp temporarily.
.
And if they don't comply with the permit or terms for it?

"we are we gonna do... fine then $2000 for littering Camping? HA! Oh how about jail time... sure... let's spend thousands in tax money to house and feed them in jail"

Seems you would be back to square one, with the exception that you now have another law on the books that applies to everyone.

There's not a magic wand where homeless are concerned. Nothing works here either. What is doubly not working is sending the cops in to take people's rights away. Sacramento city has just paid a hefty sum of the taxpayers money to the homeless and their pimping counsel for enforcing a no camping ordinance, and siezing their property. In addition, when they pass these ordinances under the reasoning that it will fix the homeless problem, it also applies to every soul in the city or county. They passed a code against camping out on the river in your boat. that now applies to the homeless and me.

I might also add that gun laws are often enacted under the premise that it will crack down on criminals

Mulay El Raisuli
11-25-2012, 6:29 AM
And if they don't comply with the permit or terms for it?

"we are we gonna do... fine then $2000 for littering Camping? HA! Oh how about jail time... sure... let's spend thousands in tax money to house and feed them in jail"

Seems you would be back to square one, with the exception that you now have another law on the books that applies to everyone.

There's not a magic wand where homeless are concerned. Nothing works here either. What is doubly not working is sending the cops in to take people's rights away. Sacramento city has just paid a hefty sum of the taxpayers money to the homeless and their pimping counsel for enforcing a no camping ordinance, and siezing their property. In addition, when they pass these ordinances under the reasoning that it will fix the homeless problem, it also applies to every soul in the city or county. They passed a code against camping out on the river in your boat. that now applies to the homeless and me.

I might also add that gun laws are often enacted under the premise that it will crack down on criminals


Affecting only criminals. But how well does that work?


The Raisuli

Mesa Tactical
11-25-2012, 7:18 AM
the law does not infringe on everyone, as stated... campers with legitimate reasons to camp (weekend or holiday camping) do no need permits.


There's that word again.

I'm wondering how this works. Camping for recreation is "legitimate," but camping because you have nowhere else to go is not?

As gunsmith said, this is a basic human right.

FatalKitty
11-25-2012, 9:01 AM
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2273/2203548643_4b3fc55c07.jpg http://keysweekly.wpcdn.com/wordpress1/wp-content/uploads/ee/article_images/Camp_adjacent_Legion.jpg

THIS
is not a "basic human right"

maybe if they were in YOUR back yard you would feel different.


the only ****ing point I am trying to make here is that you weirdos with your dreams about carrying downtown because you have a "camping permit" are barking up the wrong tree... these permits are to prevent the above images from happening by keeping homeless from trashing the place.
I'm not going to get into a debate about "camping rights" (what part of the constitution is that again?) with you guys - I really couldn't give a ****, go camp out in the desert, not my backyard. thanks.

AyatollahGondola
11-25-2012, 9:57 AM
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2273/2203548643_4b3fc55c07.jpg http://keysweekly.wpcdn.com/wordpress1/wp-content/uploads/ee/article_images/Camp_adjacent_Legion.jpg

THIS
is not a "basic human right"

maybe if they were in YOUR back yard you would feel different.


the only ****ing point I am trying to make here is that you weirdos with your dreams about carrying downtown because you have a "camping permit" are barking up the wrong tree... these permits are to prevent the above images from happening by keeping homeless from trashing the place.
I'm not going to get into a debate about "camping rights" (what part of the constitution is that again?) with you guys - I really couldn't give a ****, go camp out in the desert, not my backyard. thanks.

OK. the name calling and profanity caused me to see your point and agree with it.

Mesa Tactical
11-25-2012, 10:03 AM
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2273/2203548643_4b3fc55c07.jpg http://keysweekly.wpcdn.com/wordpress1/wp-content/uploads/ee/article_images/Camp_adjacent_Legion.jpg

THIS
is not a "basic human right"

maybe if they were in YOUR back yard you would feel different.

That's littering. Isn't already a crime in your town? It is in mine.

As it is in Stockbridge, Massachusetts (appropriate link for Thanksgiving weekend):

m57gzA2JCcM

Anyway, issuing permits for people to breathe sounds like the start of a slippery slope. We have lots of homeless here in Costa Mesa. The City Council has responded by demolishing bits of city infrastructure used by the homeless. That's another dumb idea.

Edit: I want to apologize for the suggestion that I am opposed to camping permits. I'm not at all. I'm a regular user of the San Gorgonio Wilderness, for example, where a permit is required just to enter, a policy of which I heartily approve. But the Forest Service doesn't ask for an electric bill when they issue a permit. Whether or not one has a permanent home is immaterial to them. Everyone is treated equally. So the notion there is "legitimate" camping and "illegitimate" camping sort of surprised me.

Wandering further off topic (sorry), I notice many municipalities, including my own, attempting to deal with the "homeless problem" by outlawing homelessness, or as close to doing so as they can get away with (despite the preponderance of Christians on local City Councils, whose New Testaments apparently have Mark Chapter 14 and Matthew Chapter 26 torn out of them). Mostly they try to shift people into neighboring cities. Issuing a "special" camping permit for people whose sleeping arrangement are "not legitimate" because they don't have a permanent abode sounds a lot like demanding a permit to live. It's not a model I'd want to use for expanding civil rights.

BTW: this year my city expressed pride and satisfaction that homeless numbers are down from last year. Looks like a few park dwellers managed to get mortgages.

CCWFacts
11-25-2012, 9:01 PM
This has nothing to do with LTC. A homeless permit doesn't establish residence. Homeless have the same rights as everyone else, but 99.9% of them have criminal and mental health issues that make LTC irrelevant to them.

As for homeless in cities, there seems to be an endless supply of people who can be homeless if given an incentive. Cities like SF have offered increasing incentives and also a host of "homeless services" industries, which rake in billions of dollars. The consequence has been the entire city has turned into a "dialog about homelessness", with a city made miserable and an endless drain on the taxpayers.

Cities need to be careful if they don't want to go down that path.

My current city is in the early phases of the path and I see more and more of them showing up all day. There's no good ending for this story. People will stop shopping. Real estate values will drop. Tax revenue will drop. It doesn't end well.

If cities are smart they'll set rules for how people need to behave in the city, and those should include not sleeping on sidewalks, not begging for money in restaurants, not taking baths in cafe restrooms, not sleeping in the library, and not "making a public nuisance" in public.

Read this recent story (http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Human-waste-shuts-down-BART-escalators-3735981.php) and see if this is where you want to see your home city (whatever it is) go down that path.


We have lots of homeless here in Costa Mesa. The City Council has responded by demolishing bits of city infrastructure used by the homeless. That's another dumb idea.

No it's a really good idea. Why don't you spend a week in San Francisco or Berkeley or Santa Monica and then see if you want your city to do anything (or fail to do anything) to attract homeless people. Once it starts there is no end to it, believe me...

TRICKSTER
11-26-2012, 12:10 AM
The truth is that the more "services" that a city offers the homeless, the more homeless people will flock to that city.
I dealt with the homeless in San Francisco for years and have watched the problem grow. Very few of the homeless
there are from S.F. let alone CA. They came here because of the liberal attitude and benefits.

tyrist
11-26-2012, 12:40 AM
I'm not saying homelessness is a good idea, or that giving homeless people a license to be homeless will help LTC, I am observing that CA law allows for people to carry a gun if they're legally camping.

A couple of bad choices and the rotten economy and many people are a few paychecks away from homelessness, I would seriously consider going back to San Francisco if I could legally camp in the city for a month while I got the money together for an apt.

Those weekly hotels in the loin are bed bug infested and I would rather camp then get those.

647(e) PC of the California penal code makes it illegal to camp on city streets without the permission of the city. It applies to tents.

AyatollahGondola
11-26-2012, 7:32 AM
647(e) PC of the California penal code makes it illegal to camp on city streets without the permission of the city. It applies to tents.

No it doesn't

AyatollahGondola
11-26-2012, 8:06 AM
647(e) PC of the California penal code makes it illegal to camp on city streets without the permission of the city. It applies to tents.

No it doesn't

Wait a minute, I guess it could. One of the more confusing manners of the codes is the way they are set forth. 647(e) differs from 647e. A distinction with a difference

Mesa Tactical
11-26-2012, 8:09 AM
No it's a really good idea. Why don't you spend a week in San Francisco or Berkeley or Santa Monica and then see if you want your city to do anything (or fail to do anything) to attract homeless people. Once it starts there is no end to it, believe me...

Well, I'll draft a letter to the Council suggesting they knock down the library next. Last time I was there there were a number of homeless using the facilities.

cadurand
11-26-2012, 10:37 AM
Well, I'll draft a letter to the Council suggesting they knock down the library next. Last time I was there there were a number of homeless using the facilities.No need to be flippant.

Providing services to the homeless does attract more homeless people.

I've experienced this twice.

Once I lived near a recycling center. Actually it was a couple miles away, but my street was a main route to get to it. Homeless people cruised down my street all day and night. Pushing their shopping carts (stolen from local stores) rattling and banging away down the sidewalk. Of course they would stop and rummage through my dumpsters seeing if I had thrown anything away they could recycle. I didn't care as long as they didn't make a mess. Sadly, they tended to leave part of my garbage on the ground.

And now I live near a "food bank". It's open two days a week. The homeless start showing up a day early. The church that runs the food bank is nice enough to NOT let the people hang out on church property. Which sends them to the streets around the church.

Just a couple examples of "services" that can attract homeless people.

I'm not saying to get rid of these services but let's not pretend there's zero impact to the community.

Mesa Tactical
11-26-2012, 11:32 AM
No need to be flippant.

Providing services to the homeless does attract more homeless people.

We're getting off topic, again, but here in Costa Mesa "services" apparently include a park shelter and cabana with barbecue and restrooms that was installed in the 1970s. It was the only shade in Lions Park.

http://www.dailypilot.com/news/tn-dpt-0504-vegas-20120502,0,6391227.story

It was used for many years by the Lions Club for their annual Fish Fry. Since they moved to another city park last year, the only users appeared to have been homeless people and Hispanic families. Almost no white residents! That was all the City Council needed to know to order it be demolished.

So given this sort of hysterical reaction to the presence of homeless people, it's not much a of stretch to expect the library be the next city facility marked for destruction. I suspect the only reason it is still standing is because no Council Members have ever actually been inside it, except perhaps to vote.

tyrist
11-26-2012, 12:34 PM
No it doesn't

Yes it most certainly does; the state court of appeals made a ruling.

yuccales
11-26-2012, 1:38 PM
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2273/2203548643_4b3fc55c07.jpg http://keysweekly.wpcdn.com/wordpress1/wp-content/uploads/ee/article_images/Camp_adjacent_Legion.jpg

THIS
is not a "basic human right"

maybe if they were in YOUR back yard you would feel different.


the only ****ing point I am trying to make here is that you weirdos with your dreams about carrying downtown because you have a "camping permit" are barking up the wrong tree... these permits are to prevent the above images from happening by keeping homeless from trashing the place.
I'm not going to get into a debate about "camping rights" (what part of the constitution is that again?) with you guys - I really couldn't give a ****, go camp out in the desert, not my backyard. thanks.

VERY well said!

reachoutar
11-26-2012, 1:58 PM
i used to live in grass valley ca which is 20 min from Nevada City. It is a beautiful town, but the people up there are crazy. Lots of meth and weed is openly smoked on the streets and cops dont mind. So now they have openly armed homless. So glad i moved

gunsmith
11-26-2012, 4:18 PM
lets keep the thread friendly, OK?

The topic isn't the affect of homelessness in urban areas, the topic is that if some locals legalize camping in urban areas if might allow for limited carry in an urban setting that usually off limits to residents of said urban area.

If your main concern is bashing stinky smelly yucky homeless people, I am sure you'll get a lot of comments in off topic.

I like looking a regs/laws and looking for methods to legally carry that writers of laws/regs may not be aware of.

FatalKitty
11-26-2012, 6:12 PM
i used to live in grass valley ca which is 20 min from Nevada City. It is a beautiful town, but the people up there are crazy. Lots of meth and weed is openly smoked on the streets and cops dont mind. So now they have openly armed homless. So glad i moved

I hate nevada city, I don't go there at all if I can avoid it. I never cross the Brunswick Basin in "the badlands"
there USED to be pot openly smoked at the little park on the corner of sac and broad... that has been nipped in the butt from what I understand. I don't know if I ever saw "meth" openly smoked on the streets with cops not caring...

the only "openly armed" homeless are the ones that don't wear sleeves

lets keep the thread friendly, OK?

The topic isn't the affect of homelessness in urban areas, the topic is that if some locals legalize camping in urban areas if might allow for limited carry in an urban setting that usually off limits to residents of said urban area.

If your main concern is bashing stinky smelly yucky homeless people, I am sure you'll get a lot of comments in off topic.

I like looking a regs/laws and looking for methods to legally carry that writers of laws/regs may not be aware of.

who the hell would legalize camping in "urban" areas? pull up google maps and look at Nevada City... it's not like the bay or sac or something..