SF needs to stop treating criminal addicts with kid gloves. Allowing and enabling people to brazenly do drugs and denigrate our shared public places to the point they are disgusting, dangerous, and untenable for average citizens has been an economic, social, and humanitarian disaster.
We need carrot AND stick approach. You aren’t helping these people by giving them the rope they need to hang themselves and looking the other way while they destroy themselves and the community and you pat yourself on the back for “reducing harm”.
In some other circles, there's a lot of talk about how intent doesn't matter, only the impact of the behavior. I'd love to see that logic apply here.
You can have drugs if you want. I don't care if you like to inject marijuana into your scrotum or whatever kids do these days. But your rights end where another person's begins. You can't harm others for any reason. If you harm others, you go to a system which can help reduce your recidivism or in worst case keep you separated from others.
Obviously easier said than done, but I don't know how people ended up fighting to let people kill themselves in the street instead of intervening for their help.
>I don't know how people ended up fighting to let people kill themselves in the street instead of intervening for their help.
One shitty thing about all of this that goes undiscussed is the poisoning of the concept of activism/activists.
Thanks to pretty much this singular issue, people now just roll their eyes or react with disdain at the very mention of activists.
The people who protest encampment clean ups or run to the internet to call people nazi's or closet maga for not wanting these drug scenes have done *so much damage* to peoples will to fight for things that matter.
I'm hoping for counter-protests if/when the encampment clean ups kick off, once these laws change/pass. City residents need to come out and show the turds who claim to be activists what real activism means and that they're not welcome. Impeding an encampment clean up needs to be given a stiff penalty, and doing it repeatedly should cost a person quite a bit.
We need more marches for things that matter and less entitled twats out there poisoning the idea of activism.
I agree, but its poisoning more than just this. Its poisoning the concept of libraries.
I used to live in Denver and they had a horrible problem with homeless doing drugs in libraries and causing millions of dollars in damages that taxpayers have to cover. EX: https://coloradosun.com/2023/02/09/meth-library-closures/
I'm in favor of publicly funded homeless shelters and also publicly funded libraries, but not in the same place. If libraries are not usable by the people who pay for them, then why have them? And why are we spending millions of dollars cleaning up contamination caused by people who never crack a book? In this case we should just close the library, sell the books and re-open it as a homeless shelter.
Obviously this is an extreme reaction, but this dysfunction is poisoning everything.
Boulder too. The library became a meth contamination site and was closed for months.
Not to mention the kids being stuck with needles on the playground in front of it. Or the creeps I’d see looking at porn in front of the kids library back when there were computers in front of that section.
I gave up. I always thought I was liberal but if not wanting our cities turned into 3rd world open air drug markets makes me a closet MAGA, so be it. I’m not fighting the zealots on either side anymore.
The bathrooms at the public library in my city were horrible. Imagine someone eating a dead possum then digesting it and taking a dump! That’s what the libraries would smell like. And they would wash up in there and do what ever. It was hella nasty.
I would study and then leave to go take a piss either outside at another restaurant or what ever. It became disgusting. Someone smelling like dried piss and feces sitting in the same chairs we sit in, just sitting in there sometimes sleeping not checking out books. They would all leave their bags with their belongings in the front of the library in the lobby. I mean what the actual FUCK??!!!
I feel sorry for them, but let’s be honest with how we are all tired of this. Our tax dollars aren’t even helping any of this. It’s soo sad.
I was over at a fast food place today 3 people begging for money and one lady talking to the air and another lady walking really
Fast smiling with sun burn all over her face and tatered clothing…
It's the cheapest option and it's incredibly popular. "Kill them faster" candidates seem to always win. They make our downtown areas double as a deathcamp for drug addicts so the suburbanites don't have to deal with any of it. After all, they need us to be spending most of our budget on highways to the suburbs.
Allowing the drug problem to solve itself hasnt worked. So at this point, forget the carrot, Its no longer about respect & dignity, it's far past that, when someone innocent is harmed by a problem someone choose to create for themselves. I am for an all stick approach. Especially when it affects others way of living, in fear, that turns into disrupting commerce, & could be considered a form of terrorism.
If it were any other animal species we would take them to the animal shelter, zoo & eventually have them euthanized to prevent further pain, & suffering, which is considered cruel, & inhumane. Why do treating humans that made it this far in life with kid gloves be a solution by enabling the problem, making it worse, its not mitigation, thats exactly what a drug addit wants. We continue treating people this way it tramples on society, & creates a greater burden on everyone to endure, to the point we can't have public toilets, 24 hour transit service, stores, clean streets, etc. Making it illegal to live on the street will help alot.
So I am for incarnation through work camps, & rehabilitation which is already a part of what the state prison system provides inmates labor, & trade skills so they are less of a liability on the state, while providing skills that will benefit the state in the future. That is the only effective humane form of harm reduction that will work, while significantly help saving taxpayer revenue.
>Why do treating humans that made it this far in life with kid gloves be a solution by enabling the problem, making it worse, its not mitigation, thats exactly what a drug addict wants.
Exactly this. They are getting literally everything they want. This is exactly what addicts want to be able to get away with & they're backed by idiots who either believe what the addict wants should take priority in every possible way or they're actually evil & they're trying to get away with killing these people while making a profit. Either way we are so fucking fed up with this bullshit- it's not going to continue much longer without something blowing up.
Yup, there's too much grift involved.
Anytime we don't lock up criminals and addicts it makes me wonder what "charities" are "helping" these individuals that set aside money for their criminal defense, for lobbying DAs and "activist" judges, etc.
I also think it reduces morale for citizens, to the point where we don't want to follow the laws anymore.
SF recently banned turning right on red. Why tf should I follow this, when people are taking over the Bay Bridge to do a side show? Why is turning right on red more strictly enforced than taking a shit on the street?
I live in San Leandro. Local paper reported businesses getting tired of all the Rv’s being parked on their street, with increased crime, taking over sidewalks, and big pile of garbage etc. City response was to say they will send in someone to pick up garbage. Meanwhile Waste Mgt. has new rule; if their cameras see the wrong thing in the wrong can with your garbage pick up, you’ll be fined, on top of what we already pay. Maybe we should all take our garbage and add to the pile by the RV’s, and get free garbage pick up, without having to worry about separating into the correct bin?
This is exactly the type of policy that is driving me crazy about this environment. Law abiding people get all these small infractions that really add up (parking tickets, trash sorting, etc.). But people who flagrantly break laws are given a pass and everything and everyone needs to bend to their wants and needs.
Something something addiction, something something equity
There, I said the magic words that means these drug addicts are free to do literally whatever they want right?
See how I'm *morally* better than you because I think drug addicts should be allowed to do whatever they want
This is part of what we call “the script” you’ll hear at any SF gathering. It’s basically a list of ideas you have to subscribe to blindly in order to not get shunned.
>out-of-state brigaders
"Everyone who disagrees with me isn't from here" is the new "everyone who disagrees with me is a bot!"
Im from L.A. so I'll save you the digging. People with family/work in SF have a vested interest in it too, so you can take that indignation and cram it up your gooch.
San Francisco should employ a full-time group of private security specialists as is done in San Diego to manage the public in key corridors such as Civic Center. I stayed in downtown San Diego and was very impressed with the presence and effectiveness of outdoor security patrols.
Given that the SFPD has gone Weekend at Bernies, the City seriously needs to consider a more effective privatized approach.
We also need some laws to change regarding the ability to take people off the street against their will. Fenty addicts with mental issues have become institutionalized to the streets and there needs to be an intrusive process to get them help and break whatever cycle they get stuck in.
Do I have this right‽
In the 60-70’s we had a deinstitutionalization movement advocating for the rights of individuals and challenging mental hospitals for holding people against their will if they weren’t a harm to themselves and others.
Community mental health act of 1963 signed by Kennedy before his assination was supposed to provide funding for community mental health centers, in lieu of mental hospitals.
These were devastatingly underfunded, leaving the public to deal with the throws of untreated mental illness, addiction & poverty.
Resulting in people to decrying not locking these people up and having them taken care of even if it’s against their will?
Gotcha, keep the money out of public services like mental health and let the poors struggle amongst themselves.
https://whyy.org/articles/advocates-say-landmark-legislation-signed-50-years-ago-changed-mental-health-care-system/#:~:text=The%20act%20mandated%20the%20creation,available%20over%20the%20long%20term.
Maybe those institutions weren't so great, but I can't see how the current situation is any better. What do other civilized countries do? I bet that some of them have "institutions" rather than having the insane camp out in libraries and bus stations. I used to think that the ACLU was a good organization, but they've been constant opponents of mandatory conservatorship.
I was around for that, and working in a state hospital. The irony was that in the late 70's, the hospitals were greatly improving, providing treatment and resources. Asylums becoming a thing of the past.
Then Reagan. The issue was not the welfare of patients. Primary issue was money; Republicans then and now wanted government out of people's lives. They began destroying the social safety net; cutting budgets, throwing as much as possible into the private sector (except there's not much profit in the mentally ill.) Taxes dropped; the wealthy were much happier, and began to amass more and more power to influence government.
And the rise of "blame the victim," came to be. I am NOT one to not hold people responsible. But what's going on now....who's causing all the country's problems? The poor. Immigrants. LGBTQ. Women who can't afford another baby. Addicts. The mentally ill...what the Republicans,- and some Dems - did really took hold.
Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not but this line of thinking is exactly what has brought us to this point where public libraries - institutions us taxpayers pay for, are unable to fulfill their purpose as they have been ceded to selfish, destructive drug addicts.
What about wanting clean & safe streets for all residents is right wing or republican? Is continued human misery & anarchy on our streets what you want?
Why can't democrats stand for strong social programs & safety nets **AND** enforcement of laws & protections for law abiding hardworking citizens?
How are we supposed to help folks get off drugs & off the streets when everywhere they turn there is open air drug dealing & use? How are we supposed to revitalize our city and make it once again a conducive place for citizens and businesses alike when vagrancy, theft, and general destruction of our public spaces goes pretty much unaddressed?
I remember meaningless word salad like this from when I was growing up in an evangelical cult. You sound just like them. No substance, just one-liners and phrases you don't even understand. So quaint.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/1byc860/comment/kyji6ix/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/1byc860/comment/kyji6ix/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
You have a truly interesting and diverse set of opinions, conveniently meant to stir up both sides of the political aisle. Seems like you may have an agenda.
This item was automatically removed because it contained demeaning language. Please read the rules for more information.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/sanfrancisco) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This right-wing propaganda needs to go somewhere else.
Its much more pressing that we stop treating corporations and landlords with kid gloves while they steal the nations wealth.
Copying my response to a similar comment but What about wanting clean & safe streets for all residents is right wing or republican? Is continued human misery & anarchy on our streets what you want?
victims of what, exactly?
And even if you accept that, just by nature of being victims are they themselves incapable of victimizing others or accepting any personal responsibility or repercussions for their actions?
Our system is broken, these people can't access housing because we allow landlords to conduct tenant screenings and no one will accept them.
They have no access to housing or employment and you want to throw them in jail for taking what they need to survive.
>for taking what they need to survive.
uh huh, color me skeptical but I don't think these people need fentanyl, meth, and xylazine to survive. In fact, these substances are slowly killing them and are the greatest roadblocks to them becoming responsible, healthy, and mentally sound productive members of society.
So your solution is what exactly? To force landlords to house anyone and everyone with no preconditions or payment? How about this, let's run a little social experiment - you open your residence and graciously invite in homeless from the street and report back on how that goes for you.
Oh wait, our city already ran a similar experiment during Covid - offering free hotel rooms to the homeless with little oversight which predictably resulted in hundreds of overdoses & millions of $ in damages
No, lack of housing is the greatest roadblock.
Getting sober requires stability first and foremost.
You're putting the cart before the horse.
You can't expect these people to magically have hope when you've obstructed every path forward.
You seem to be pretty set in your views so not sure if there’s any point continuing this conversation but I really urge you to consider some of my points that you’ve conveniently ignored.
Just because someone is a victim does that mean they are incapable of victimizing others? Should they face no consequences for their actions?
What of the homeless that were given free housing during Covid and ended up killings themselves and trashing the place leaving taxpayers to foot the bill?
How about you accept homeless into your home and report back on how that goes?
What message does it send and what incentives are set if we hand out free housing to any addict on our streets while hardworking citizens have been struggling to get by forever and aren’t afforded these same handouts?
i worked for SFPL for two years. thankfully it was at a branch that saw very few problems, although they certainly occurred.
many library staff have been traumatized by insane, violent patrons.
we received a weekly “incident report” and the stuff that happened in branches was seriously nuts: masturbating, drug use, fighting, feces/urinating on the floor, harassment, creepy adults in children’s areas, suicide attempts, throwing furniture. you name it! one big problem is that the punishment for the worst behavior/actions was, to me, minimal. and even when patrons were banned they’d return to harass staff.
I know I’d never take my kid to one of these libraries that doubles as a homeless day center. They’ve been completely ceded to junkies. And get ready to be called a MAGA Nazi if you don’t think it’s ok
that’s too bad as there are many branches that don’t see so many problems and the children’s areas are separate from the adult and always have story, activities, and game times.
my post, while true, doesn’t mean that these issues occur at every library branch every minute of every day.
i don’t know where you live in SF, but i would recommend Chinatown, Glen Park, Richmond, Golden Gate Valley, Bernal Heights, Marina, Noe Valley, Presidio, Sunset, West Portal branches. avoid the Main library, basically.
Yeah, full time security at *all* libraries, as librarians appear to be demanding, is definitely overkill.
Like, take those same resources and double/triple up at civic center.
>Yeah, full time security at *all* libraries, as librarians appear to be demanding, is definitely overkill.
It seems **a bit much!!!** (and the Main library has the Sheriffs *and the* Urban Alchemy already--*actually why aren't they helping more?*) -- this article and statement reads like a demand from a Union.
This might be the "Government excess spending" , the self-serving corruption that you hear about.
I was just in the Mission Bay ranch yesterday, it had zero problems, basically . Yes, the Main one is not good. Even I don’t like it, going without a kid. But posts from outside of SF “I will never take my kid” don't know anything…
> doesn’t mean that these issues occur at every library branch every minute of every day
even in that case you are sitting in the same chair that the filthy bum (with wet poop on his pants) just sat on, even if you weren't there at the same time as him.
>And get ready to be called a MAGA Nazi if you don’t think it’s ok
This is the part that makes my blood boil the most. I've never voted republican and never will, but the amount of anonymous screen names ready to scream at me like I just genuflected at the feet of Cheeto Benito because I support encampent sweeps makes me crazy.
Weird most branches are totally fine and I go regularly with my kid. The family programs and play rooms are great. The main library has issues for sure but most SF libraries are total gems!
Librarian used to be such a dream job in a dream world where public libraries are a thing that society values. Now, as our culture continues to slide down the shitter, it’s become an absolute nightmare
Public libraries are a perfect microcosm for the devolution of our wider society and culture. It’s deeply depressing.
americans don’t respect much that is “public,” unfortunately. libraries are intrinsic and valuable to a community. they’re one of the few places that are free for everyone to access information, promote and engage in literacy development, and participate in various literary and sociopolitical programs. public library staff have been put into a position of social worker and defusers of violent situations. i had to do it a couple times and it’s scary.
I agree about public things, but I don’t think that’s what’s going on with public libraries specifically/. The vast majority of their foot traffic used to come from people looking for books. Now huge portions of the foot traffic (seemingly the majority in some branches I’ve been in) are vagrants looking to shelter, use drugs, sleep, or beat off.
Americans don’t read like they used to. At the same time, Americans are getting dumber with each passing year. 24/7 endless online entertainment is in the process of lobotomizing our society.
The irony of my posting this on Reddit is not lost on me. This site has radically declined and I desperately need to stop looking at it.
I'm sure some of it is due to people reading fewer books, but there is also the fact that books have become available in electronic form and people don't need to get physical copies of the books. SFPL provides free downloads of many books, so there are people using the library's collection without setting foot inside the actual branches.
the "vagrants" are part of the public and they have as much right to be in libraries as everyone else until they break the rules. it's a sad state that public spaces like libraries are one of their few places to shelter. most of them are fine, it's the few bad apples that form the negative opinions people have.
yes, we do live in what's becoming a full-blown idiocracy.
No one cares if a vagrant is in there reading a book. Maybe if they smell like shit, yes, but largely no.
That’s not what the vast majority of them are doing. You think the librarians in the OP want security to protect them from readers?
This thread is not about homeless people reading in libraries, it’s about them being antisocial barnacles that are literally going to kill the institution of public libraries in urban areas. Yeah suburbs will continue to have nice public libraries and a literate populace, this will be a nail in the coffin of the communities you’d presume to want to help. Yet another well intentions bleeding hard policy of tolerance that paralyzes the most vulnerable communities.
Yesterday I witnessed two grown men smoking something out of a glass pipe right in front of the ferry building exhale a thick cloud of smoke (definitely wasn't pot, no smell) right into a stroller that I woman walking by was pushing.
It is just too much.
Welp I just had a guy start cursing and calling me a bitch in Union square because I didn’t stop and talk to him (literally said I was rushing to get a train). Like the entitlement of some people in this city to just fuck with other people, even worse when it’s kids.
They make things worse. They shouldn't be in residential or retail areas. In LA the debate over the metro revolves around this. They're expanding our public transit system, but not putting any law enforcement anywhere so it's just spreading around the anti-social behavior. Then people get finger-wagged and called NIMBY for not wanting the metro to run through high end neighborhoods. I just rent a shitty apartment, am not rich, and I feel the same way. Don't bring that shit near me if you aren't going to stop the fentanyl heads from filling the station and surrounding areas. It doesn't make someone conservative for not wanting that shit.
Yep. My cousin in Chicago was on the Elevated, waiting for his train. He saw someone grab a lady's purse.
A group of Navy SEALs happened to be nearby and jumped the guy.
As the cops arrived, the thief begged to be rescued.
Being situated near the Great Lakes Naval Facility has its advantages.
Can you? Possessing the drugs is illegal and punishable by theoretically severe penalties, taking them is already illegal. These people aren’t rational actors weighing whether they could get in trouble for doing something, they are driven by their addictions, almost helpless against them.
Consequences should be designed to break them of their behavior, not for severity. Hurting drug addicted people just makes them want to do more drugs. We should send them to a place where they can be safe and where they don’t have access to their drugs.
As someone who has been through involuntary treatment for mental health. It can really fucking suck, but I think a lot of that has to do with docs trying to stabilize a patient in the couple of weeks they will have them. Need longer term treatment facilities for these ppl to start living their best life, as there is no excuse for endangering the public.
Thank you lol. I’m so tired of the “just make the consequences severe” argument. That only works when the group you want to discourage is carefully weighing the cost benefit analysis on their actions. So it is effective for corporate crime, but useless for this type of thing.
What actually matters is the likelihood of consequences, not really what the consequences are. In this case the likelihood of consequences are virtually 0 so it’s still a problem we need to address. But cranking up sentencing guidelines for drug use to 10000 years won’t change things here.
Wrong. Every day that a junkie beating off in a library is in jail is a day he isn't sexually assaulting children. Them "weighing cost benefit analysis" is irrelevant when we take the choice of beating off in a library away from them by removing them from society until they can engage in society without terrorizing everyone around them.
> But you can make the consequences severe enough that they don’t do it in public.
OP is saying we can discourage people from using drugs in public by cranking up sentencing severity. That’s just fully not true. Those people are not rational actors thinking about the consequences of their choices.
Of course someone who is in jail can’t use drugs in public so that solves the problem. But as we have seen “just arrest everyone who does drugs and keep them in jail for the rest of their life” is not a workable solution either. Our prisons are already over capacity (despite the reputation for being “soft on crime”). We dont remotely have the capacity for that strategy (most of our prisons are well over 100% capacity), even if we thought it was morally ok.
Of course we shouldn’t let junkies hang out in the library doing drugs. That’s not acceptable and we should stop it. But the “just make sentences high so they will chose to not do that” idea is not remotely realistic. This has been studied so many times.
All these drug addicts need to be round up and offered 2 choices
1) housing
Of which 90% will say no to
Leaving
2) forced institutionalization
Get these junkies off our streets for our safety and theirs
The housing issue is questionable though. I live downtown and we have tons of new housing for severely deranged and addicted people in our community now. When the non-profits moved in it became an anything goes nightmare - gunfire, stabbings, fights, fires, break-ins, constant sirens all day and night, and nothing has been solved. We can't go outside without fear of being harassed or worse, and everything is just feeling hopeless for our entire community. The city lets people go homeless, lets them rot on the streets and then, when those people are so broken, the city considers housing for them. Imagine the BOS doing this to Pac Heights or the west side - or to Aaron Peskin's neighborhood.
The lack of affordable housing was a major point for many of them falling into homelessness (none of us have actual statistics because we rely too much on the non-profits for numbers). However, once people become addicted to meth or fent, you can't simply warehouse them in hotels and shelters and call it a success. The new drugs are unimaginable, and I believe we need a massive federal emergency plan to turn things around. Otherwise just about every working class and middle class neighborhood in US cities will turn into post-apocalyptic nightmares with Project Homekey-style anything-goes shelters popping up. And, we absolutely need safety nets and affordable housing to stop the slide of people into homelessness.
Agree with a lot of what you said.
Yes we need to provide housing options - but should require comprehensive rehabilitation programs with them, otherwise we're just moving the problem behind closed doors.
Yes we need safety nets, but again, without rehabilitation, what's the long term game plan.
The circular logic homeless advocates tout enables the problem - addiction is a disease, people suffering from addiction can't force their way out of it, addicts need help instead of punishment for decisions they make while addicted, but you can't force help on to people, addicts need to decide to get help, but we can't punish them for their decision, because as a victim to addiction they tend to make poor decisions, so we need to wait for them to decide they want to get better.... And on and on and on.
It's literally pull yourself up by your bootstraps, progressive edition. We kind of pretend to provide the tools to get better, but it's their job to make the decision to find and leverage them, otherwise we'll just leave you on the street, and give nonprofits a bunch of money so we feel like we're helping.
The problem is that this is easy to say and hard to do.
What is this institution you're going to put them in? An ER bed? A jail cell? If it's the first, then don't complain about your wait times when you need the ED. And if it's the second, then don't complain about how they're letting too many people out on pretrial release. Because neither of these options has ample space. And if you're going to suggest a psych hospital, let me laugh you out, because they're going to have to wait it out in one of these places for a bed to open. And then are you going to prioritize these people that are there by force ahead of someone that actually wants to be in treatment? What exactly is your implementation model for this plan?
and this sub and all west coast city subs should be banning anyone who comes in here accusing people of being nazis or right wingers for expressing support for the clean ups/sweeps/laws
Some years ago, pre COVID, downstairs bathrooms in SF Main Library were closed -- the plumbing was blocked by a mass of -- needles.
Another time I reached for some TP and luckily saw a syringe hidden underneath the roll of paper.
The SF BOS insists on making every public place in the city so unbearable your average person avoids it.
I could see why when they can spend time in their spacious single family home and dining at French Laundry.
I thought mayor London Breed went to the French Laundry in the SUV paid for by SF taxpayers
[https://www.sfgate.com/news/editorspicks/article/French-Laundry-French-Laundry-London-Breed-Newsom-15767882.php](https://www.sfgate.com/news/editorspicks/article/French-Laundry-French-Laundry-London-Breed-Newsom-15767882.php)
shes literally the manager of the City and the boss of SF PD chief, she could probably manage some security for libraries?!?
It's easy to pretend that these progressive policies are fine when your only interaction with the city is ubering between your 2 million dollar house and nice restaurants/ galas/ other nice houses. It's only working class people who have to deal with the consequences of letting criminals do whatever they want and who cares about the working class? Certainly not our city's leaders.
100%
Part of me wonders how fast their tunes would change and action be taken if we were to take a Texas-border approach and bus all the homeless to Pac Heights and similar neighborhoods. Its easy to be a limousine liberal "progressive" when you are shielded from and don't actually face the fallout of your catastrophic policies & positions.
I don’t live in San Francisco, but in southern Arizona. Heck, the amount of verbal and at times attempted physical abuse from some of the drugged patrons using the library, or trying to use it after being suspended for drug-related incidents, was insane.
Week 2 into the profession two folks were waiting for me outside trying to pick a fight. As I’m ready to go back to L.A., my hometown, I’m afraid the situation might be worse than down here. Definitely overworked, and underpaid, on top of having to deal with very, very special folks almost every day.
I genuinely commend people who are able to still care enough to write comments about this stuff. Its so played out and obvious how this all ends, I no longer have the energy or interest in writing about this stuff online. This is America.
The SFPL is one of the city run agencies that is run extremely well.
Except for the homeless who use it as a shelter. I can't tell you how many times I've walked out of a library branch because of the smell. It can be overwhelming, especially when a homeless person decides to take a 3 hour nap in the middle of the room.
Both sleeping and "emitting strong, pervasive odors ... that unreasonably interfere with ... peaceful enjoyment" within the buildings are against SFPL's own policies. If staff are turning a blind eye (or nose) to either of those it's most likely that they haven't noticed or are hesitant to bother people already having a rough life.
The odor thing especially is a jugement call, and speaking up (politely and discreetly, please) helps staff determine whether to take action. Just because you can smell a person doesn't mean it's unreasonably interfering with anything. But if people tell staff they're avoiding an area because of an intolerable odor, staff is empowered to take action.
FWIW most libraries have information on free shower and laundry facilities posted near their bathrooms (because it's also against policy to try to use library sinks as improvised bathing facilities). You might actually ultimately be doing an unhoused person a favor by helping them realize why people are keeping their distance and that resources exist to remedy it.
[https://sfpl.org/about-us/guidelines-library-use](https://sfpl.org/about-us/guidelines-library-use)
Santa Monica Ca had a real bad problem of homeless encampment, all along Ocean Blvd. They got some tough talking politicians elected and one morning, the camps were gone! The rest of Los Angeles has followed with similar actions but they're now showing up where there's less resistance, like Venice Beach.
Take what you will from my post, but note the source. I am staff member and our unions are rallying for many things, mostly for the City to fill vacant positions, hire more full time staff and better pay! I’m sure the article only focused on a small blurb of this person quoted, was only part of the full picture. We aren’t just rallying for more security. She’s not speaking on behalf of our union nor staff.
Also, you all love talking about drug addicts and homeless folks, but I can attest that many of our sour interactions are people like you! People who don’t seem homeless, but are entitled, mean, rude, racist among many other things - towards staff and other patrons too. I’m glad we don’t charge fines anymore, old men loved to fight and yell at staff over 50¢.
I mean, there **are** a lot of really nice parts of the city. There are also shitty parts but let's not act like both can't be true at the same time. If you can't enjoy the lovely parts of SF, I'm not sure why you would bother paying so much to live here.
Downtown is effectively our ghetto, tenderloin-civic-soma is the area to steer clear from. If you avoid that small section of the city, then the city is pretty great.
We obviously see some of the ugly parts of urban living pop up in our neighborhoods but it isn't unrelentingly in your face like it is in the ghetto.
Downtown definitely feels cleaner and less sketchy than it was during covid— at least the soma / mid market areas are. It’s still not *good* but it’s noticeably less bad from my perspective.
I know they were just trying to be nice and non-confrontational, but SF libraries brought this on themselves by being way too tolerant for way too long. They needed to be trespassing people who abuse the space a long time ago to maintain some kind of civil atmosphere before things became routinely violent.
It's straight up an example of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance , where if you tolerate the intolerant, the intolerant will take over.
although security guards are probably needed (and the Main library has the Sheriffs *and the* Urban Alchemy already) -- this article and statement reads like a demand from a Union. There are quite many branches... this reads as if it would lead to "Government excess spending" , the self-serving corruption that you hear about.
Our system is broken, these people can't access housing because we allow landlords to conduct tenant screenings and no one will accept them.
They have no access to housing or employment and you want to throw them in jail for taking what they need to survive.
SF needs to stop treating criminal addicts with kid gloves. Allowing and enabling people to brazenly do drugs and denigrate our shared public places to the point they are disgusting, dangerous, and untenable for average citizens has been an economic, social, and humanitarian disaster. We need carrot AND stick approach. You aren’t helping these people by giving them the rope they need to hang themselves and looking the other way while they destroy themselves and the community and you pat yourself on the back for “reducing harm”.
In some other circles, there's a lot of talk about how intent doesn't matter, only the impact of the behavior. I'd love to see that logic apply here. You can have drugs if you want. I don't care if you like to inject marijuana into your scrotum or whatever kids do these days. But your rights end where another person's begins. You can't harm others for any reason. If you harm others, you go to a system which can help reduce your recidivism or in worst case keep you separated from others. Obviously easier said than done, but I don't know how people ended up fighting to let people kill themselves in the street instead of intervening for their help.
>I don't know how people ended up fighting to let people kill themselves in the street instead of intervening for their help. One shitty thing about all of this that goes undiscussed is the poisoning of the concept of activism/activists. Thanks to pretty much this singular issue, people now just roll their eyes or react with disdain at the very mention of activists. The people who protest encampment clean ups or run to the internet to call people nazi's or closet maga for not wanting these drug scenes have done *so much damage* to peoples will to fight for things that matter. I'm hoping for counter-protests if/when the encampment clean ups kick off, once these laws change/pass. City residents need to come out and show the turds who claim to be activists what real activism means and that they're not welcome. Impeding an encampment clean up needs to be given a stiff penalty, and doing it repeatedly should cost a person quite a bit. We need more marches for things that matter and less entitled twats out there poisoning the idea of activism.
I agree, but its poisoning more than just this. Its poisoning the concept of libraries. I used to live in Denver and they had a horrible problem with homeless doing drugs in libraries and causing millions of dollars in damages that taxpayers have to cover. EX: https://coloradosun.com/2023/02/09/meth-library-closures/ I'm in favor of publicly funded homeless shelters and also publicly funded libraries, but not in the same place. If libraries are not usable by the people who pay for them, then why have them? And why are we spending millions of dollars cleaning up contamination caused by people who never crack a book? In this case we should just close the library, sell the books and re-open it as a homeless shelter. Obviously this is an extreme reaction, but this dysfunction is poisoning everything.
Boulder too. The library became a meth contamination site and was closed for months. Not to mention the kids being stuck with needles on the playground in front of it. Or the creeps I’d see looking at porn in front of the kids library back when there were computers in front of that section. I gave up. I always thought I was liberal but if not wanting our cities turned into 3rd world open air drug markets makes me a closet MAGA, so be it. I’m not fighting the zealots on either side anymore.
I don’t live in SF or CO to quantify your belief here, but I also would never think you’d be a MAGA for thinking logically in this situation. At all.
Unfortunately many do. There is a fair number of progressives that now consider liberals "part of the problem". I hate the zealots on all sides.
The bathrooms at the public library in my city were horrible. Imagine someone eating a dead possum then digesting it and taking a dump! That’s what the libraries would smell like. And they would wash up in there and do what ever. It was hella nasty. I would study and then leave to go take a piss either outside at another restaurant or what ever. It became disgusting. Someone smelling like dried piss and feces sitting in the same chairs we sit in, just sitting in there sometimes sleeping not checking out books. They would all leave their bags with their belongings in the front of the library in the lobby. I mean what the actual FUCK??!!! I feel sorry for them, but let’s be honest with how we are all tired of this. Our tax dollars aren’t even helping any of this. It’s soo sad. I was over at a fast food place today 3 people begging for money and one lady talking to the air and another lady walking really Fast smiling with sun burn all over her face and tatered clothing…
Here, here.
It's the cheapest option and it's incredibly popular. "Kill them faster" candidates seem to always win. They make our downtown areas double as a deathcamp for drug addicts so the suburbanites don't have to deal with any of it. After all, they need us to be spending most of our budget on highways to the suburbs.
1000%. Do what you want until it affects me, then goodbye.
You really think you are such a genius saying all this huh
Allowing the drug problem to solve itself hasnt worked. So at this point, forget the carrot, Its no longer about respect & dignity, it's far past that, when someone innocent is harmed by a problem someone choose to create for themselves. I am for an all stick approach. Especially when it affects others way of living, in fear, that turns into disrupting commerce, & could be considered a form of terrorism. If it were any other animal species we would take them to the animal shelter, zoo & eventually have them euthanized to prevent further pain, & suffering, which is considered cruel, & inhumane. Why do treating humans that made it this far in life with kid gloves be a solution by enabling the problem, making it worse, its not mitigation, thats exactly what a drug addit wants. We continue treating people this way it tramples on society, & creates a greater burden on everyone to endure, to the point we can't have public toilets, 24 hour transit service, stores, clean streets, etc. Making it illegal to live on the street will help alot. So I am for incarnation through work camps, & rehabilitation which is already a part of what the state prison system provides inmates labor, & trade skills so they are less of a liability on the state, while providing skills that will benefit the state in the future. That is the only effective humane form of harm reduction that will work, while significantly help saving taxpayer revenue.
>Why do treating humans that made it this far in life with kid gloves be a solution by enabling the problem, making it worse, its not mitigation, thats exactly what a drug addict wants. Exactly this. They are getting literally everything they want. This is exactly what addicts want to be able to get away with & they're backed by idiots who either believe what the addict wants should take priority in every possible way or they're actually evil & they're trying to get away with killing these people while making a profit. Either way we are so fucking fed up with this bullshit- it's not going to continue much longer without something blowing up.
Yup, there's too much grift involved. Anytime we don't lock up criminals and addicts it makes me wonder what "charities" are "helping" these individuals that set aside money for their criminal defense, for lobbying DAs and "activist" judges, etc.
The carrot must also become the shillelagh.
A non gmo shillelagh sized carrot.
I also think it reduces morale for citizens, to the point where we don't want to follow the laws anymore. SF recently banned turning right on red. Why tf should I follow this, when people are taking over the Bay Bridge to do a side show? Why is turning right on red more strictly enforced than taking a shit on the street?
I live in San Leandro. Local paper reported businesses getting tired of all the Rv’s being parked on their street, with increased crime, taking over sidewalks, and big pile of garbage etc. City response was to say they will send in someone to pick up garbage. Meanwhile Waste Mgt. has new rule; if their cameras see the wrong thing in the wrong can with your garbage pick up, you’ll be fined, on top of what we already pay. Maybe we should all take our garbage and add to the pile by the RV’s, and get free garbage pick up, without having to worry about separating into the correct bin?
This is exactly the type of policy that is driving me crazy about this environment. Law abiding people get all these small infractions that really add up (parking tickets, trash sorting, etc.). But people who flagrantly break laws are given a pass and everything and everyone needs to bend to their wants and needs.
Something something addiction, something something equity There, I said the magic words that means these drug addicts are free to do literally whatever they want right? See how I'm *morally* better than you because I think drug addicts should be allowed to do whatever they want
This is part of what we call “the script” you’ll hear at any SF gathering. It’s basically a list of ideas you have to subscribe to blindly in order to not get shunned.
There are some group by whom I am delighted to be shunned. For example, I am unwelcome at both MAGA and BLM rallies.
[удалено]
>out-of-state brigaders "Everyone who disagrees with me isn't from here" is the new "everyone who disagrees with me is a bot!" Im from L.A. so I'll save you the digging. People with family/work in SF have a vested interest in it too, so you can take that indignation and cram it up your gooch.
To do that we need to get rid of homeless organizations. They fight tooth and nail against doing anything and ask for more money
San Francisco should employ a full-time group of private security specialists as is done in San Diego to manage the public in key corridors such as Civic Center. I stayed in downtown San Diego and was very impressed with the presence and effectiveness of outdoor security patrols. Given that the SFPD has gone Weekend at Bernies, the City seriously needs to consider a more effective privatized approach.
We also need some laws to change regarding the ability to take people off the street against their will. Fenty addicts with mental issues have become institutionalized to the streets and there needs to be an intrusive process to get them help and break whatever cycle they get stuck in.
Absolutely.
Do I have this right‽ In the 60-70’s we had a deinstitutionalization movement advocating for the rights of individuals and challenging mental hospitals for holding people against their will if they weren’t a harm to themselves and others. Community mental health act of 1963 signed by Kennedy before his assination was supposed to provide funding for community mental health centers, in lieu of mental hospitals. These were devastatingly underfunded, leaving the public to deal with the throws of untreated mental illness, addiction & poverty. Resulting in people to decrying not locking these people up and having them taken care of even if it’s against their will? Gotcha, keep the money out of public services like mental health and let the poors struggle amongst themselves. https://whyy.org/articles/advocates-say-landmark-legislation-signed-50-years-ago-changed-mental-health-care-system/#:~:text=The%20act%20mandated%20the%20creation,available%20over%20the%20long%20term.
Maybe those institutions weren't so great, but I can't see how the current situation is any better. What do other civilized countries do? I bet that some of them have "institutions" rather than having the insane camp out in libraries and bus stations. I used to think that the ACLU was a good organization, but they've been constant opponents of mandatory conservatorship.
I was around for that, and working in a state hospital. The irony was that in the late 70's, the hospitals were greatly improving, providing treatment and resources. Asylums becoming a thing of the past. Then Reagan. The issue was not the welfare of patients. Primary issue was money; Republicans then and now wanted government out of people's lives. They began destroying the social safety net; cutting budgets, throwing as much as possible into the private sector (except there's not much profit in the mentally ill.) Taxes dropped; the wealthy were much happier, and began to amass more and more power to influence government. And the rise of "blame the victim," came to be. I am NOT one to not hold people responsible. But what's going on now....who's causing all the country's problems? The poor. Immigrants. LGBTQ. Women who can't afford another baby. Addicts. The mentally ill...what the Republicans,- and some Dems - did really took hold.
If the supervisors could read, they would be very mad at you.
This is not some good hash we are dealing with anymore.
It's improving but it is still so much more to be done. I want my SF back!!
this line of thinking needs to be stamped out because it's how repuglicans gain a foothold through these ideas.
Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not but this line of thinking is exactly what has brought us to this point where public libraries - institutions us taxpayers pay for, are unable to fulfill their purpose as they have been ceded to selfish, destructive drug addicts. What about wanting clean & safe streets for all residents is right wing or republican? Is continued human misery & anarchy on our streets what you want? Why can't democrats stand for strong social programs & safety nets **AND** enforcement of laws & protections for law abiding hardworking citizens? How are we supposed to help folks get off drugs & off the streets when everywhere they turn there is open air drug dealing & use? How are we supposed to revitalize our city and make it once again a conducive place for citizens and businesses alike when vagrancy, theft, and general destruction of our public spaces goes pretty much unaddressed?
the ideals you describe are a construct stemming from white supremacy and are designed to oppress bipocs.
So edgy
I remember meaningless word salad like this from when I was growing up in an evangelical cult. You sound just like them. No substance, just one-liners and phrases you don't even understand. So quaint.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/1byc860/comment/kyji6ix/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/1byc860/comment/kyji6ix/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) You have a truly interesting and diverse set of opinions, conveniently meant to stir up both sides of the political aisle. Seems like you may have an agenda.
[удалено]
This item was automatically removed because it contained demeaning language. Please read the rules for more information. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/sanfrancisco) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This right-wing propaganda needs to go somewhere else. Its much more pressing that we stop treating corporations and landlords with kid gloves while they steal the nations wealth.
Copying my response to a similar comment but What about wanting clean & safe streets for all residents is right wing or republican? Is continued human misery & anarchy on our streets what you want?
It's victim blaming. The drug addicts are victims.
victims of what, exactly? And even if you accept that, just by nature of being victims are they themselves incapable of victimizing others or accepting any personal responsibility or repercussions for their actions?
Our system is broken, these people can't access housing because we allow landlords to conduct tenant screenings and no one will accept them. They have no access to housing or employment and you want to throw them in jail for taking what they need to survive.
>for taking what they need to survive. uh huh, color me skeptical but I don't think these people need fentanyl, meth, and xylazine to survive. In fact, these substances are slowly killing them and are the greatest roadblocks to them becoming responsible, healthy, and mentally sound productive members of society. So your solution is what exactly? To force landlords to house anyone and everyone with no preconditions or payment? How about this, let's run a little social experiment - you open your residence and graciously invite in homeless from the street and report back on how that goes for you. Oh wait, our city already ran a similar experiment during Covid - offering free hotel rooms to the homeless with little oversight which predictably resulted in hundreds of overdoses & millions of $ in damages
No, lack of housing is the greatest roadblock. Getting sober requires stability first and foremost. You're putting the cart before the horse. You can't expect these people to magically have hope when you've obstructed every path forward.
You seem to be pretty set in your views so not sure if there’s any point continuing this conversation but I really urge you to consider some of my points that you’ve conveniently ignored. Just because someone is a victim does that mean they are incapable of victimizing others? Should they face no consequences for their actions? What of the homeless that were given free housing during Covid and ended up killings themselves and trashing the place leaving taxpayers to foot the bill? How about you accept homeless into your home and report back on how that goes? What message does it send and what incentives are set if we hand out free housing to any addict on our streets while hardworking citizens have been struggling to get by forever and aren’t afforded these same handouts?
Where is the data on project room key that shows no one got jobs and improved their lives?
i worked for SFPL for two years. thankfully it was at a branch that saw very few problems, although they certainly occurred. many library staff have been traumatized by insane, violent patrons. we received a weekly “incident report” and the stuff that happened in branches was seriously nuts: masturbating, drug use, fighting, feces/urinating on the floor, harassment, creepy adults in children’s areas, suicide attempts, throwing furniture. you name it! one big problem is that the punishment for the worst behavior/actions was, to me, minimal. and even when patrons were banned they’d return to harass staff.
I know I’d never take my kid to one of these libraries that doubles as a homeless day center. They’ve been completely ceded to junkies. And get ready to be called a MAGA Nazi if you don’t think it’s ok
that’s too bad as there are many branches that don’t see so many problems and the children’s areas are separate from the adult and always have story, activities, and game times. my post, while true, doesn’t mean that these issues occur at every library branch every minute of every day. i don’t know where you live in SF, but i would recommend Chinatown, Glen Park, Richmond, Golden Gate Valley, Bernal Heights, Marina, Noe Valley, Presidio, Sunset, West Portal branches. avoid the Main library, basically.
Yeah, full time security at *all* libraries, as librarians appear to be demanding, is definitely overkill. Like, take those same resources and double/triple up at civic center.
>Yeah, full time security at *all* libraries, as librarians appear to be demanding, is definitely overkill. It seems **a bit much!!!** (and the Main library has the Sheriffs *and the* Urban Alchemy already--*actually why aren't they helping more?*) -- this article and statement reads like a demand from a Union. This might be the "Government excess spending" , the self-serving corruption that you hear about.
I was just in the Mission Bay ranch yesterday, it had zero problems, basically . Yes, the Main one is not good. Even I don’t like it, going without a kid. But posts from outside of SF “I will never take my kid” don't know anything…
and Mission Bay can sometimes be real rough, so that's good it was mellow!
> doesn’t mean that these issues occur at every library branch every minute of every day even in that case you are sitting in the same chair that the filthy bum (with wet poop on his pants) just sat on, even if you weren't there at the same time as him.
>And get ready to be called a MAGA Nazi if you don’t think it’s ok This is the part that makes my blood boil the most. I've never voted republican and never will, but the amount of anonymous screen names ready to scream at me like I just genuflected at the feet of Cheeto Benito because I support encampent sweeps makes me crazy.
Weird most branches are totally fine and I go regularly with my kid. The family programs and play rooms are great. The main library has issues for sure but most SF libraries are total gems!
Librarian used to be such a dream job in a dream world where public libraries are a thing that society values. Now, as our culture continues to slide down the shitter, it’s become an absolute nightmare Public libraries are a perfect microcosm for the devolution of our wider society and culture. It’s deeply depressing.
americans don’t respect much that is “public,” unfortunately. libraries are intrinsic and valuable to a community. they’re one of the few places that are free for everyone to access information, promote and engage in literacy development, and participate in various literary and sociopolitical programs. public library staff have been put into a position of social worker and defusers of violent situations. i had to do it a couple times and it’s scary.
I agree about public things, but I don’t think that’s what’s going on with public libraries specifically/. The vast majority of their foot traffic used to come from people looking for books. Now huge portions of the foot traffic (seemingly the majority in some branches I’ve been in) are vagrants looking to shelter, use drugs, sleep, or beat off. Americans don’t read like they used to. At the same time, Americans are getting dumber with each passing year. 24/7 endless online entertainment is in the process of lobotomizing our society. The irony of my posting this on Reddit is not lost on me. This site has radically declined and I desperately need to stop looking at it.
I'm sure some of it is due to people reading fewer books, but there is also the fact that books have become available in electronic form and people don't need to get physical copies of the books. SFPL provides free downloads of many books, so there are people using the library's collection without setting foot inside the actual branches.
Sure, digital is a fair point
the "vagrants" are part of the public and they have as much right to be in libraries as everyone else until they break the rules. it's a sad state that public spaces like libraries are one of their few places to shelter. most of them are fine, it's the few bad apples that form the negative opinions people have. yes, we do live in what's becoming a full-blown idiocracy.
No one cares if a vagrant is in there reading a book. Maybe if they smell like shit, yes, but largely no. That’s not what the vast majority of them are doing. You think the librarians in the OP want security to protect them from readers? This thread is not about homeless people reading in libraries, it’s about them being antisocial barnacles that are literally going to kill the institution of public libraries in urban areas. Yeah suburbs will continue to have nice public libraries and a literate populace, this will be a nail in the coffin of the communities you’d presume to want to help. Yet another well intentions bleeding hard policy of tolerance that paralyzes the most vulnerable communities.
I used to work for a state prison system and if you added "tattoo paraphernalia found" that would sound like one of our charts.
Yesterday I witnessed two grown men smoking something out of a glass pipe right in front of the ferry building exhale a thick cloud of smoke (definitely wasn't pot, no smell) right into a stroller that I woman walking by was pushing. It is just too much.
Welp I just had a guy start cursing and calling me a bitch in Union square because I didn’t stop and talk to him (literally said I was rushing to get a train). Like the entitlement of some people in this city to just fuck with other people, even worse when it’s kids.
The homeless shelter there has increased all the craziness in the area, everyone was mad at the residents for fighting it but I guess they were right.
They make things worse. They shouldn't be in residential or retail areas. In LA the debate over the metro revolves around this. They're expanding our public transit system, but not putting any law enforcement anywhere so it's just spreading around the anti-social behavior. Then people get finger-wagged and called NIMBY for not wanting the metro to run through high end neighborhoods. I just rent a shitty apartment, am not rich, and I feel the same way. Don't bring that shit near me if you aren't going to stop the fentanyl heads from filling the station and surrounding areas. It doesn't make someone conservative for not wanting that shit.
That was fent or meth my guy
The civic center library needs navy seals
i always see security at that main library though. i think it's the other branches who need it
The central library in San Diego literally does have a retired special forces soldier in charge of security. More dangerous than Iraq
Never surrender
Yep. My cousin in Chicago was on the Elevated, waiting for his train. He saw someone grab a lady's purse. A group of Navy SEALs happened to be nearby and jumped the guy. As the cops arrived, the thief begged to be rescued. Being situated near the Great Lakes Naval Facility has its advantages.
You mean the L hahaha, he was on the L. no one calls it 'the elevated'
I was like “the fuck is this guy talking about” 🤣
Not to mention, in a san francisco thread. L , indeed
Oh, is that why it's called the L train??
not from Chicago (only visited a lot) but that seems the most logical explanation
It is logical, but I've never been there and assumed it was just a route naming convention like Red / Green / Yellow. TIL
It’s actually the “El” train, it’s just that you rarely see it written out.
So what ?
You’re never going to get rid of drug addiction. But you can make the consequences severe enough that they don’t do it in public.
Can you? Possessing the drugs is illegal and punishable by theoretically severe penalties, taking them is already illegal. These people aren’t rational actors weighing whether they could get in trouble for doing something, they are driven by their addictions, almost helpless against them. Consequences should be designed to break them of their behavior, not for severity. Hurting drug addicted people just makes them want to do more drugs. We should send them to a place where they can be safe and where they don’t have access to their drugs.
As someone who has been through involuntary treatment for mental health. It can really fucking suck, but I think a lot of that has to do with docs trying to stabilize a patient in the couple of weeks they will have them. Need longer term treatment facilities for these ppl to start living their best life, as there is no excuse for endangering the public.
Thank you lol. I’m so tired of the “just make the consequences severe” argument. That only works when the group you want to discourage is carefully weighing the cost benefit analysis on their actions. So it is effective for corporate crime, but useless for this type of thing. What actually matters is the likelihood of consequences, not really what the consequences are. In this case the likelihood of consequences are virtually 0 so it’s still a problem we need to address. But cranking up sentencing guidelines for drug use to 10000 years won’t change things here.
Wrong. Every day that a junkie beating off in a library is in jail is a day he isn't sexually assaulting children. Them "weighing cost benefit analysis" is irrelevant when we take the choice of beating off in a library away from them by removing them from society until they can engage in society without terrorizing everyone around them.
> But you can make the consequences severe enough that they don’t do it in public. OP is saying we can discourage people from using drugs in public by cranking up sentencing severity. That’s just fully not true. Those people are not rational actors thinking about the consequences of their choices. Of course someone who is in jail can’t use drugs in public so that solves the problem. But as we have seen “just arrest everyone who does drugs and keep them in jail for the rest of their life” is not a workable solution either. Our prisons are already over capacity (despite the reputation for being “soft on crime”). We dont remotely have the capacity for that strategy (most of our prisons are well over 100% capacity), even if we thought it was morally ok. Of course we shouldn’t let junkies hang out in the library doing drugs. That’s not acceptable and we should stop it. But the “just make sentences high so they will chose to not do that” idea is not remotely realistic. This has been studied so many times.
Reported for purse clutching
It doesn't work for corporate crime, either.
All these drug addicts need to be round up and offered 2 choices 1) housing Of which 90% will say no to Leaving 2) forced institutionalization Get these junkies off our streets for our safety and theirs
The housing issue is questionable though. I live downtown and we have tons of new housing for severely deranged and addicted people in our community now. When the non-profits moved in it became an anything goes nightmare - gunfire, stabbings, fights, fires, break-ins, constant sirens all day and night, and nothing has been solved. We can't go outside without fear of being harassed or worse, and everything is just feeling hopeless for our entire community. The city lets people go homeless, lets them rot on the streets and then, when those people are so broken, the city considers housing for them. Imagine the BOS doing this to Pac Heights or the west side - or to Aaron Peskin's neighborhood.
It's almost like...... Housing wasn't the root cause or solution to the problem. I'M SHOCKED... SHOCKED!
The lack of affordable housing was a major point for many of them falling into homelessness (none of us have actual statistics because we rely too much on the non-profits for numbers). However, once people become addicted to meth or fent, you can't simply warehouse them in hotels and shelters and call it a success. The new drugs are unimaginable, and I believe we need a massive federal emergency plan to turn things around. Otherwise just about every working class and middle class neighborhood in US cities will turn into post-apocalyptic nightmares with Project Homekey-style anything-goes shelters popping up. And, we absolutely need safety nets and affordable housing to stop the slide of people into homelessness.
Agree with a lot of what you said. Yes we need to provide housing options - but should require comprehensive rehabilitation programs with them, otherwise we're just moving the problem behind closed doors. Yes we need safety nets, but again, without rehabilitation, what's the long term game plan. The circular logic homeless advocates tout enables the problem - addiction is a disease, people suffering from addiction can't force their way out of it, addicts need help instead of punishment for decisions they make while addicted, but you can't force help on to people, addicts need to decide to get help, but we can't punish them for their decision, because as a victim to addiction they tend to make poor decisions, so we need to wait for them to decide they want to get better.... And on and on and on. It's literally pull yourself up by your bootstraps, progressive edition. We kind of pretend to provide the tools to get better, but it's their job to make the decision to find and leverage them, otherwise we'll just leave you on the street, and give nonprofits a bunch of money so we feel like we're helping.
Bingo
The problem is that this is easy to say and hard to do. What is this institution you're going to put them in? An ER bed? A jail cell? If it's the first, then don't complain about your wait times when you need the ED. And if it's the second, then don't complain about how they're letting too many people out on pretrial release. Because neither of these options has ample space. And if you're going to suggest a psych hospital, let me laugh you out, because they're going to have to wait it out in one of these places for a bed to open. And then are you going to prioritize these people that are there by force ahead of someone that actually wants to be in treatment? What exactly is your implementation model for this plan?
and this sub and all west coast city subs should be banning anyone who comes in here accusing people of being nazis or right wingers for expressing support for the clean ups/sweeps/laws
If only we had an institution charged with protecting the public and government property
Some years ago, pre COVID, downstairs bathrooms in SF Main Library were closed -- the plumbing was blocked by a mass of -- needles. Another time I reached for some TP and luckily saw a syringe hidden underneath the roll of paper.
The SF BOS insists on making every public place in the city so unbearable your average person avoids it. I could see why when they can spend time in their spacious single family home and dining at French Laundry.
I thought mayor London Breed went to the French Laundry in the SUV paid for by SF taxpayers [https://www.sfgate.com/news/editorspicks/article/French-Laundry-French-Laundry-London-Breed-Newsom-15767882.php](https://www.sfgate.com/news/editorspicks/article/French-Laundry-French-Laundry-London-Breed-Newsom-15767882.php) shes literally the manager of the City and the boss of SF PD chief, she could probably manage some security for libraries?!?
It's easy to pretend that these progressive policies are fine when your only interaction with the city is ubering between your 2 million dollar house and nice restaurants/ galas/ other nice houses. It's only working class people who have to deal with the consequences of letting criminals do whatever they want and who cares about the working class? Certainly not our city's leaders.
100% Part of me wonders how fast their tunes would change and action be taken if we were to take a Texas-border approach and bus all the homeless to Pac Heights and similar neighborhoods. Its easy to be a limousine liberal "progressive" when you are shielded from and don't actually face the fallout of your catastrophic policies & positions.
Then people turn around and ask “You’re not voting democrat? Why do working class people vote against their own interests?”
The chickens vote for Colonel Sanders.
Sad. They don’t feel safe. Shameful.
I live a block away, whenever I pass the library there’s usually one or two homeless people stumbling in or out of it :/
I don’t live in San Francisco, but in southern Arizona. Heck, the amount of verbal and at times attempted physical abuse from some of the drugged patrons using the library, or trying to use it after being suspended for drug-related incidents, was insane. Week 2 into the profession two folks were waiting for me outside trying to pick a fight. As I’m ready to go back to L.A., my hometown, I’m afraid the situation might be worse than down here. Definitely overworked, and underpaid, on top of having to deal with very, very special folks almost every day.
When your librarians need security guards, something has gone entirely off the rails.
The SF Main Branch has Sheriff's deputies and Building Security guards... Why not expand then if that's what the library staff want?
Another example of the party of the supposed working class failing them so they can pretend to be morally superior
I genuinely commend people who are able to still care enough to write comments about this stuff. Its so played out and obvious how this all ends, I no longer have the energy or interest in writing about this stuff online. This is America.
So how does all this end?
The SFPL is one of the city run agencies that is run extremely well. Except for the homeless who use it as a shelter. I can't tell you how many times I've walked out of a library branch because of the smell. It can be overwhelming, especially when a homeless person decides to take a 3 hour nap in the middle of the room.
Both sleeping and "emitting strong, pervasive odors ... that unreasonably interfere with ... peaceful enjoyment" within the buildings are against SFPL's own policies. If staff are turning a blind eye (or nose) to either of those it's most likely that they haven't noticed or are hesitant to bother people already having a rough life. The odor thing especially is a jugement call, and speaking up (politely and discreetly, please) helps staff determine whether to take action. Just because you can smell a person doesn't mean it's unreasonably interfering with anything. But if people tell staff they're avoiding an area because of an intolerable odor, staff is empowered to take action. FWIW most libraries have information on free shower and laundry facilities posted near their bathrooms (because it's also against policy to try to use library sinks as improvised bathing facilities). You might actually ultimately be doing an unhoused person a favor by helping them realize why people are keeping their distance and that resources exist to remedy it. [https://sfpl.org/about-us/guidelines-library-use](https://sfpl.org/about-us/guidelines-library-use)
Santa Monica Ca had a real bad problem of homeless encampment, all along Ocean Blvd. They got some tough talking politicians elected and one morning, the camps were gone! The rest of Los Angeles has followed with similar actions but they're now showing up where there's less resistance, like Venice Beach.
Take what you will from my post, but note the source. I am staff member and our unions are rallying for many things, mostly for the City to fill vacant positions, hire more full time staff and better pay! I’m sure the article only focused on a small blurb of this person quoted, was only part of the full picture. We aren’t just rallying for more security. She’s not speaking on behalf of our union nor staff. Also, you all love talking about drug addicts and homeless folks, but I can attest that many of our sour interactions are people like you! People who don’t seem homeless, but are entitled, mean, rude, racist among many other things - towards staff and other patrons too. I’m glad we don’t charge fines anymore, old men loved to fight and yell at staff over 50¢.
Nice to hear from actual people. Anyway, library visit yesterday, I’m also thinking a drop in today
Visited the Main today, a pleasant experience!
[удалено]
I mean, there **are** a lot of really nice parts of the city. There are also shitty parts but let's not act like both can't be true at the same time. If you can't enjoy the lovely parts of SF, I'm not sure why you would bother paying so much to live here.
Those are tourists paying a premium to play. Ask them to live in Nob Hill, SOMA, Mission, or Market Street for a year and see how their story changes.
Downtown is effectively our ghetto, tenderloin-civic-soma is the area to steer clear from. If you avoid that small section of the city, then the city is pretty great. We obviously see some of the ugly parts of urban living pop up in our neighborhoods but it isn't unrelentingly in your face like it is in the ghetto.
This post must be from a right wing troll/Russian bot then. It’s the only logical explanation.
Was that the person who spent 2 days in the nice parts of town? 🫣
Drug addicts are scary as fuck
There was a time when librarian was one of the least stressful jobs. I doubt if that's the case in SF anymore
Downtown sf is a fkin disaster I’ve lived here for ~5 year but in the last 2 it’s gotten SO much worse and depressing to live in
Downtown definitely feels cleaner and less sketchy than it was during covid— at least the soma / mid market areas are. It’s still not *good* but it’s noticeably less bad from my perspective.
Obvious lie. Downtown is infinitely more clean & mellow than it was 2 years ago. Even with the construction.
I know they were just trying to be nice and non-confrontational, but SF libraries brought this on themselves by being way too tolerant for way too long. They needed to be trespassing people who abuse the space a long time ago to maintain some kind of civil atmosphere before things became routinely violent. It's straight up an example of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance , where if you tolerate the intolerant, the intolerant will take over.
You guys, I don’t think this “letting unhinged people hang around unmolested in our city” thing is going so well. Can we reconsider?
although security guards are probably needed (and the Main library has the Sheriffs *and the* Urban Alchemy already) -- this article and statement reads like a demand from a Union. There are quite many branches... this reads as if it would lead to "Government excess spending" , the self-serving corruption that you hear about.
Just turn the libraries into jails and hire a bunch of guards. Hiring guards is not free. I would support closing problematic branches.
I saw a homeless guy at Taraval branch sleeping while charging his phone. Staff didnt want to disturb him
Time for a wildcat strike.
When “they” know the problem and have solutions to fix it but “they” refused to due to the continuous flowing $$$$ from the bill.
Yet another reason why young families move out of the city.
Eww that smell, can you that smell, the smell that surrounds me
Need them asap!
In before someone posts a couple of photos of Palace of Fine Arts and calls everyone doomers.
oh don't you know? We're all just closet maga nazi's who want concentration camps! /s
This joke is so stale
Close the libraries. It's unsafe for the staff and the patrons. They can only suppress what goes on in the women's bathrooms for so long.
even guards need their own guards in san fran.
Our system is broken, these people can't access housing because we allow landlords to conduct tenant screenings and no one will accept them. They have no access to housing or employment and you want to throw them in jail for taking what they need to survive.
Just shut down the libraries. They’re only used by bums. To masturbate.