BMorris2526 t1_izz59wj wrote
They are trespassing and refuse to go to a shelter. Yes, he can have them removed.
Good-Expression-4433 t1_izzbfgw wrote
Note that shelter space is extremely limited and some not even taking more people right now. Plus homeless encampments elsewhere are regularly scattered by police. The state house was obviously a bit of a publicity stunt but the idea was to make it visible and make people do something about it if they have them removed.
I had to navigate homeless programs last year and it was a nightmare and showed how unequipped we are in dealing with the problem. And it's only gotten worse since.
fishythepete t1_izzkd0n wrote
Counter-point: Why? Functionally it’s no different from them sleeping in the woods or under a bridge on state property, this is just less convenient and worse optics for the people elected to deal with the issue.
I’m ok with that.
ncastleJC t1_j01y0se wrote
Because he’s an elitist like the other knobs on the hill.
fishythepete t1_j01yfjv wrote
Grown ups are having a civil discussion here, leave the playground barbs where they belong.
Mutabilitie t1_izzfl2m wrote
Oh, but if it’s a protest under the First Amendment, you have to analyze it in terms of time, place, and manner restrictions. (Can’t yell fire in a crowded theater.)
deathsythe t1_j025qa1 wrote
> Can’t yell fire in a crowded theater.
Good lord I am sick and tired of hearing this. Do they not teach civics anymore? Brandenburg v. Ohio & Hess v. Indiana overturned most of Schenck v. United States.
The fact that this "yelling fire in a crowded theater" myth has continued on well into the information age is a blight on the education system.
Unless the 1A execution/speech in question would "incite imminent lawless action" it is protected speech. The test for what qualified as "imminent lawless action" isn't exactly a cakewalk either. It requires specifics, and actionable statements/plans.
March_Latter t1_izza1nz wrote
I love how they place their answer as if there is no other possible location to pitch their tent but the state house.
[deleted] t1_j01h277 wrote
it's a statement in plain view. an email direct to the man in charge that can't be dumped in the spam bucket. it's a tough choice for them, and rather brave too.
March_Latter t1_j01kvld wrote
And screw the law. Rhode Island does not care for it!
[deleted] t1_j01l5j5 wrote
go ahead. go uphold it. i dare ya.
March_Latter t1_j01m0q4 wrote
I can't wait for Anarchy can you? So exciting. No more having to put up with "protections" and so on. Everyone gets to do what they like. Its going be awesome.
[deleted] t1_j01n2aw wrote
oh go jump off the Crook Point bridge. this is people begging for shelter. they're not robbing mom & pop shops for cash. chill out. they need a place to live.
March_Latter t1_j01o0lr wrote
Hell, no problem, give them your address if they need a place to stay. But don't sit there and say law does not matter so you can get your way. Selfish stupid ideas that a court should absolutely prevent rather than encourage.
[deleted] t1_j01of74 wrote
i dont think you understand how homelessness happens/works.
March_Latter t1_j01ow6a wrote
Absolutely 100% irrelevant to the law. Again, a stupid, selfish discussion that has no place in law that a shameful excuse for a judge has decided is worthy.
[deleted] t1_j01so17 wrote
fascist.
March_Latter t1_j03j3h6 wrote
That's your answer? Why don't you go look up the definition of the word before you use it. I know why, your not a useful member of society....just a bitcher.
ncastleJC t1_j01y3ec wrote
Go help them if you’re such a good person people like you are a waste of humanity.
March_Latter t1_j03itq7 wrote
Why would I go help them violate the law? I leave that to the useless people.
[deleted] t1_j01h8k6 wrote
there is no room for them. read the story.
if you think there is room, i quadruple-dog-dare you to take one of them by the hand, and walk them to a shelter.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments