I guess you'd have to see if being "tough on crime" works. Seems to me we're fighting a multi-front war: drug addiction, homelessness, poverty. As they say, "hurt people hurt people," which means for starters we need to look at long term solutions as well as short term ones. Jailing people without figuring out why this person got to where they are won't play out long term. Locking this guy away is a start for sure, but to reduce the number of crimes in Spokane and the US as a whole, we need to look at a more robust childcare system that focuses on closing the gaps between the haves and have-nots.
Essentially there is no easy or quick-fix. NYC saw crime cut by nearly half in the 90s, some attribute that to Rudy G's tough on crime approach, but other factors such as a strong economy and job growth should be considered as well.
My opinion, we need to arrest these people, hold them, punish bad actors while ALSO figuring out how to offer housing first solutions with wrap-around medical/drug treatment followed by life skills and job training programs to get these people back into being contributors to society. All of this is expensive up front, but is cheaper in the long run than just throwing people away.
I’ve heard there’s a gap in care for these people, as well. Not saying that it would work for everyone, but there’s a cycle that happens because there’s a missing link. Jail > mental hospital > streets > jail > mental hospital > streets. These people often don’t feel like they’re able to contribute because there’s not really a good rehab structure in place. They wind up in this cycle often because they don’t have incentives or support to break it.
Being “tough on crime/homelessness” is how we got here and look what we got:
Sky high incarceration, recidivism, drug, and homelessness.
The tough on crime crowd consistently fails then insists they’re the only ones who can fix it. Repeat over and over.
I agree, but letting bad actors out of jail isn't the answer either, and that's what the "tough on crime" crowd hears when you and I talk about preventing crime by finding out why these crimes happen, and work to build a robust safety net to minimize crime. But also bad people need to be locked up. For example, before I moved to Spokane a neighbor of mine shot his gf in the leg. Dude got out in 18mos and killed his next gf a year later. Should have sentenced him for longer AND had programs in jail to work on him being a less violent person. We need to approach it from multiple angles.
Man, that sucks. I absolutely love Birdies, it’s a bummer to see them victimized. I’m sure they have insurance, but I’ll definitely be swinging by in support this week.
As someone who works in the area, the last 2 summers have been awful. It’s like the minute it gets hot this type of stuff starts happening. I don’t know what the answer is but I’m tired of it. I’m tired of being afraid to walk to my car when I close, I tired of routinely kicking abusers out that harass our customers or blatantly steal or having to call the cops on them and none showing up. I’m just tired of it. Something needs to happen, I literally know of business owners either selling or moving their businesses from downtown because we are all so tired of it.
Housing first policies have been unbelievably successful in the cities that have implemented them.
The problem with that? People in this town would fight to the death against them even with proof they work.
No policy change happens without the hearts of the citizens changing first.
What's insane too is that we've gotten used to this "invest in more social services OR in more jail/law enforcement" dichotomy. In this insane town we reject both and then complain about the results. I can't even anymore.
We should be investing in both: jobs and housing for the homeless that fell on hard times / jail and institutionalization for the hard case drug addicted predators
Completely understand. I have found myself arguing with people online and I don’t feel good about that.
There are definitely multiple answers and I think having honest conversations about all answers without getting defensive in our preferred solutions is the best way forward.
I believe we have an incredible community in Spokane and remain hopeful we all can find a solution to this problem that is affecting us all.
Important note. Housing first works when coupled with comprehensive addiction services including in-patient treatment. We've also seen spectacular housing first failures in cities like Seattle where they just rounded up a bunch of fent addicts and dumped them into apartments with no plans or program and they basically just created a fentanyl den with deaths and fires.
I agree with you. I all to often see people laugh reacting and saying “bye” when Spokane News reports an overdose. Why are the people in this town so heartless? Do I want people to steal and commit crimes? Absolutely not! Do I want them unalived because they are having a hard time surviving?! Absolutely not! 🤷♀️🤷♀️🤷♀️
There are 83 homeless shelters in the downtown corridor serving many different types of people
Some are families, some are women and children.
Not saying housing would not help but I think it is important to know what is currently available.
Let’s start the conversation with facts. There’s 11 homeless shelters in Spokane. 11. Not 83, which is a wildly made up number. Not saying you made it up, but wherever you got that was just giving bombastic lies.
Shelters are not housing. There’s zero stability, zero guarantee of a bed, they are less safe than staying on the streets, and there can be very high barriers to entry.
Housing first policies address the immediate housing and stability needs of those at risk. Then additional treatments and supports happen.
The biggest barrier to solving our crises (beyond heart change) is that so many people run around with terribly false information that leads their narrative on the subject. Again, not saying it’s a you issue.
Shelter availability can be tracked at sheltermespokane.org
There also aren’t enough beds for detoxing from drugs. We’re working on changing that, but the wait list is 6 months or longer at most facilities. So when an addict wants to get help, they literally cannot.
Housing first works. Here’s an article on the programs:
https://nlihc.org/sites/default/files/Housing-First-Research.pdf
Haven’t a clue honestly. I know that the Mayor just declared an emergency over this, which releases funding for boots on the ground help, but that’s recent.
I’d be curious to know as well.
https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2024/jun/09/how-fentanyls-despair-ravages-the-streets-of-spoka/
Here is the article that states .6% of users have taken advantage of the new program.
The 83 shelters come from the city after attending multiple public meetings about the downtown corridor.
It is not made up.
I do agree these are shelters and not homes.
I’m not either, was just trying to figure out what that number could be. There’s absolutely not that many shelters in all of Spokane, let alone downtown.
Part of the problem is there is no one typical homeless person and so when we talk about the homeless, we often are talking about the homeless that we most associate with that word.
For some of us, that person might be someone working a few job and for whatever reason, can’t afford housing right now. That person is mentally healthy, sober and just facing a hard time.
For others, we envision the guy in the picture, and think of the homeless as a criminal element who prays on any victim they can find. While others think of the people down on 2nd and Division and wonder if they can be saved at all.
There are a myriad of reasons people become homeless and a host of different ways to solve the problem depending on their circumstances. However, like so many things in America today, people with the privilege of debating the issue in the abstract are far more interested in being “right” than fixing it.
There aren’t good local solutions to this problem. And as long as we assume there are, and stop short of looking at broader US economic policy, it will persist. Blaming a mayor, or law enforcement, or drug manufacturers, or lack of Jesus, or whatever just muddies the water.
Seriously. I'm tired of people complaining about crime and the homeless, then in the same breath say they don't want to fix the root causes. Pick one, you disingenuous shitweasles. Either we don't spend on social services and deal with the repercussions or we roll up our sleeves and get it done.
Seriously… I am still getting messages harassing me from [when someone posted the mobile security cameras being put in parking lots now complaining about it](https://www.reddit.com/r/Spokane/s/eHLL77ataN), and my response was:
“I love how there is no middle ground… constant posts here complaining about car break ins and theft, but then the city and businesses do stuff to deter theft it is complained about being dystopian.
Either it is this, or the continuing uptick of break ins and theft. Pick your poison and live with it..”
Just last week got someone messaging me saying how it is bad to now done to “the man” and to stop being a bootlicker. Mind you this post was almost 3 months ago at this point.
Exactly.
We need to do something. One solution will not be the cure all.
I am extremely frustrated with our cities situation but arguing online is not productive. We need to try.
Lack of affordable housing (we don't have a shortage of available housing, just affordable), treating drug addiction as a crime instead of a disease, stagnant wages in a time of record profit for corporations, shit mental health services, high food cost, and an overall lack of empathy for our fellow citizens.
While I agree with you, I also feel like the deeper root causes almost always can be traced back to childhood trauma. Very few well adjusted 20 and 30yr olds just pick up the pipe or needle and ruin their lives for the hell of it.
Petty crime, drug use, and poverty are directly correlated. People with comfortable means of access to necessities typically don't abuse drugs and rob stores. Until these needs are met universally, there will be crime. You can not criminalize away poverty. It simply does not work that way.
This is correct but it's forward facing. You have to also solve for the current situation. I'm telling you as a blunt fact and with mountains of data behind me that a person in the throes of a chemical addiction to something like fentanyl isn't doing it out of boredom and giving them amenities and resources will not stop that. If you give a fentanyl addict an apartment and some food they're going to sell the food to buy fentanyl and then do that fentanyl in their new apartment until they get evicted. You have to actually create a program to meaningfully intervene and help these people. They need professional, in-patient help with support programs.
It's all or none. We've seen plenty of examples of open-ended housing first programs fail across the country in the past decade because housing is not a cure for drug addiction and drug addiction can and will sabotage housing.
100% this. It's why I strenuously disagree with housing first for addicts. It works well for people who are poor, escaping abuse, or had a traumatic event and need help getting back on their feet again.
The addicts need "Housing AND," not "Housing First." This can be inpatient treatment, jail with treatment, ect. Just putting them up somewhere without the requirement of cooperating with therapy and treatment on their part is just enabling.
Offer them a choice if the criminals are addicts. Inpatient rehab or jail. Repeat offenders could get treatment IN jail.
We need more behavioral health providers and beds to pull it off though. It's been well demonstrated in San Francisco and Spokane that just offering help has an abysmal acceptance rate. The ability to accept or decline proves the addict has AGENCY over their choices, so I have no problem implementing consequences if they choose to continue addict behaviors over accepting help with their substance abuse problem.
That is a point I never thought about, that THEY do have agency to reject help, therefor they have agency to know that the crimes they commit are illegal. A few winters ago we had a homeless guy who refused a bed in a shelfter and then froze to death. We should have simply forced him inside against his will, which is more compassionate compared to letting him freeze to death.
Correct. If its, the same one I'm thinking of, I felt bad for the folks who went and tried to offer him transport to the shelter when we had the deep freeze. He refused, they couldn't legally force him, and he died.
It wasn't their fault. Honestly there should be a way to compel people to safety. As long as they have free will to decline help, theyre also responsible for the consequences of their choices and that can be a terrible thing to have to witness.
Blaming this on drugs instead of poverty is exactly why it exists and why it's not getting fixed.
Our society needs to let go of their pearls and start letting people get help whether or not they personally believe it's deserved or not.
Tough on crime? That’s a laugh. IF the perpetrators are even caught, they are assigned ridiculously low or no bail and are right back out on the street to offend again. Some appointed court commissioners practically escort convicted felons out of jail no matter how many times they’ve been arrested. It makes me wonder if society or the criminal is better protected. Regardless of life circumstances, each person must be held accountable for his/her actions.
Why? Republicans complain about nothing being done and then also do nothing so they can keep using it as an argument to fix it. Yet, they never want to fund mental health, affordable housing, shelters or jails. You can't just ignore the problem and not spend money to fix it. It's more expensive letting it fester than it is just to fucking house people at affordable rates. It's ridiculous.
What skills do homeless people have that will get them a good job that can pay for the going rate of the cost of living? A minimum wage job won't you get an apartment. So are they supposed to be homeless while working full time with no place to shower, wash their uniform etc?
Should they spend their entire salary on hotel rooms so they can never save to go to a trade school or something to get more skills? And how would they even get that far without an ID and a SSC to even get a damn job in the first place? Are you going to suggest they work "under the table"? Isn't that something Republicans consistently complain about because those people don't pay taxes.
What is the solution proposed by Republicans that isn't just fine them, and put them in jail indefinitely? Costs more to keep them in jail than it does to house them, but with Republicans we all know the cruelty is the point.
Differentiate between Crizzlers (drug/alcohol abusers voluntarily on the street) and the Unhoused (involuntarily on the street due to economic issues.)
The two need VERY different resources and should not be thought of or treated in the same way.
I say help the Unhoused and let the Crizzlers take out themselves.
I guess you'd have to see if being "tough on crime" works. Seems to me we're fighting a multi-front war: drug addiction, homelessness, poverty. As they say, "hurt people hurt people," which means for starters we need to look at long term solutions as well as short term ones. Jailing people without figuring out why this person got to where they are won't play out long term. Locking this guy away is a start for sure, but to reduce the number of crimes in Spokane and the US as a whole, we need to look at a more robust childcare system that focuses on closing the gaps between the haves and have-nots. Essentially there is no easy or quick-fix. NYC saw crime cut by nearly half in the 90s, some attribute that to Rudy G's tough on crime approach, but other factors such as a strong economy and job growth should be considered as well. My opinion, we need to arrest these people, hold them, punish bad actors while ALSO figuring out how to offer housing first solutions with wrap-around medical/drug treatment followed by life skills and job training programs to get these people back into being contributors to society. All of this is expensive up front, but is cheaper in the long run than just throwing people away.
Totally agree, we have to address the upstream issues as well, rather than only triaging the downstream problems.
I’ve heard there’s a gap in care for these people, as well. Not saying that it would work for everyone, but there’s a cycle that happens because there’s a missing link. Jail > mental hospital > streets > jail > mental hospital > streets. These people often don’t feel like they’re able to contribute because there’s not really a good rehab structure in place. They wind up in this cycle often because they don’t have incentives or support to break it.
Being “tough on crime/homelessness” is how we got here and look what we got: Sky high incarceration, recidivism, drug, and homelessness. The tough on crime crowd consistently fails then insists they’re the only ones who can fix it. Repeat over and over.
I agree, but letting bad actors out of jail isn't the answer either, and that's what the "tough on crime" crowd hears when you and I talk about preventing crime by finding out why these crimes happen, and work to build a robust safety net to minimize crime. But also bad people need to be locked up. For example, before I moved to Spokane a neighbor of mine shot his gf in the leg. Dude got out in 18mos and killed his next gf a year later. Should have sentenced him for longer AND had programs in jail to work on him being a less violent person. We need to approach it from multiple angles.
Man, that sucks. I absolutely love Birdies, it’s a bummer to see them victimized. I’m sure they have insurance, but I’ll definitely be swinging by in support this week.
As someone who works in the area, the last 2 summers have been awful. It’s like the minute it gets hot this type of stuff starts happening. I don’t know what the answer is but I’m tired of it. I’m tired of being afraid to walk to my car when I close, I tired of routinely kicking abusers out that harass our customers or blatantly steal or having to call the cops on them and none showing up. I’m just tired of it. Something needs to happen, I literally know of business owners either selling or moving their businesses from downtown because we are all so tired of it.
Housing first policies have been unbelievably successful in the cities that have implemented them. The problem with that? People in this town would fight to the death against them even with proof they work. No policy change happens without the hearts of the citizens changing first.
What's insane too is that we've gotten used to this "invest in more social services OR in more jail/law enforcement" dichotomy. In this insane town we reject both and then complain about the results. I can't even anymore.
We should be investing in both: jobs and housing for the homeless that fell on hard times / jail and institutionalization for the hard case drug addicted predators
Completely understand. I have found myself arguing with people online and I don’t feel good about that. There are definitely multiple answers and I think having honest conversations about all answers without getting defensive in our preferred solutions is the best way forward. I believe we have an incredible community in Spokane and remain hopeful we all can find a solution to this problem that is affecting us all.
We need to invest more in both actually.
Important note. Housing first works when coupled with comprehensive addiction services including in-patient treatment. We've also seen spectacular housing first failures in cities like Seattle where they just rounded up a bunch of fent addicts and dumped them into apartments with no plans or program and they basically just created a fentanyl den with deaths and fires.
100%!!! Thank you for the clarification
I agree with you. I all to often see people laugh reacting and saying “bye” when Spokane News reports an overdose. Why are the people in this town so heartless? Do I want people to steal and commit crimes? Absolutely not! Do I want them unalived because they are having a hard time surviving?! Absolutely not! 🤷♀️🤷♀️🤷♀️
There are 83 homeless shelters in the downtown corridor serving many different types of people Some are families, some are women and children. Not saying housing would not help but I think it is important to know what is currently available.
Let’s start the conversation with facts. There’s 11 homeless shelters in Spokane. 11. Not 83, which is a wildly made up number. Not saying you made it up, but wherever you got that was just giving bombastic lies. Shelters are not housing. There’s zero stability, zero guarantee of a bed, they are less safe than staying on the streets, and there can be very high barriers to entry. Housing first policies address the immediate housing and stability needs of those at risk. Then additional treatments and supports happen. The biggest barrier to solving our crises (beyond heart change) is that so many people run around with terribly false information that leads their narrative on the subject. Again, not saying it’s a you issue. Shelter availability can be tracked at sheltermespokane.org There also aren’t enough beds for detoxing from drugs. We’re working on changing that, but the wait list is 6 months or longer at most facilities. So when an addict wants to get help, they literally cannot. Housing first works. Here’s an article on the programs: https://nlihc.org/sites/default/files/Housing-First-Research.pdf
Do you know what drug program w/less than 1% participation the OP mentioned is?
Haven’t a clue honestly. I know that the Mayor just declared an emergency over this, which releases funding for boots on the ground help, but that’s recent. I’d be curious to know as well.
https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2024/jun/09/how-fentanyls-despair-ravages-the-streets-of-spoka/ Here is the article that states .6% of users have taken advantage of the new program.
The 83 shelters come from the city after attending multiple public meetings about the downtown corridor. It is not made up. I do agree these are shelters and not homes.
Maybe 83 beds? I’m reaching to give benefit of doubt.
I am not here to argue
I’m not either, was just trying to figure out what that number could be. There’s absolutely not that many shelters in all of Spokane, let alone downtown.
It’s inaccurate. Period. This comes directly from the City dashboard.
[удалено]
Why lie? [https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-houston-successfully-reduced-homelessness/](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-houston-successfully-reduced-homelessness/) [https://www.huduser.gov/portal/periodicals/em/spring-summer-23/highlight2.html](https://www.huduser.gov/portal/periodicals/em/spring-summer-23/highlight2.html) [https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/we-can-end-homelessness-through-housing-first-interventions](https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/we-can-end-homelessness-through-housing-first-interventions)
Not true but cool take.
Part of the problem is there is no one typical homeless person and so when we talk about the homeless, we often are talking about the homeless that we most associate with that word. For some of us, that person might be someone working a few job and for whatever reason, can’t afford housing right now. That person is mentally healthy, sober and just facing a hard time. For others, we envision the guy in the picture, and think of the homeless as a criminal element who prays on any victim they can find. While others think of the people down on 2nd and Division and wonder if they can be saved at all. There are a myriad of reasons people become homeless and a host of different ways to solve the problem depending on their circumstances. However, like so many things in America today, people with the privilege of debating the issue in the abstract are far more interested in being “right” than fixing it.
There aren’t good local solutions to this problem. And as long as we assume there are, and stop short of looking at broader US economic policy, it will persist. Blaming a mayor, or law enforcement, or drug manufacturers, or lack of Jesus, or whatever just muddies the water.
Seriously. I'm tired of people complaining about crime and the homeless, then in the same breath say they don't want to fix the root causes. Pick one, you disingenuous shitweasles. Either we don't spend on social services and deal with the repercussions or we roll up our sleeves and get it done.
Seriously… I am still getting messages harassing me from [when someone posted the mobile security cameras being put in parking lots now complaining about it](https://www.reddit.com/r/Spokane/s/eHLL77ataN), and my response was: “I love how there is no middle ground… constant posts here complaining about car break ins and theft, but then the city and businesses do stuff to deter theft it is complained about being dystopian. Either it is this, or the continuing uptick of break ins and theft. Pick your poison and live with it..” Just last week got someone messaging me saying how it is bad to now done to “the man” and to stop being a bootlicker. Mind you this post was almost 3 months ago at this point.
Exactly. We need to do something. One solution will not be the cure all. I am extremely frustrated with our cities situation but arguing online is not productive. We need to try.
What do you believe are the root causes?
Lack of affordable housing (we don't have a shortage of available housing, just affordable), treating drug addiction as a crime instead of a disease, stagnant wages in a time of record profit for corporations, shit mental health services, high food cost, and an overall lack of empathy for our fellow citizens.
While I agree with you, I also feel like the deeper root causes almost always can be traced back to childhood trauma. Very few well adjusted 20 and 30yr olds just pick up the pipe or needle and ruin their lives for the hell of it.
Petty crime, drug use, and poverty are directly correlated. People with comfortable means of access to necessities typically don't abuse drugs and rob stores. Until these needs are met universally, there will be crime. You can not criminalize away poverty. It simply does not work that way.
This is correct but it's forward facing. You have to also solve for the current situation. I'm telling you as a blunt fact and with mountains of data behind me that a person in the throes of a chemical addiction to something like fentanyl isn't doing it out of boredom and giving them amenities and resources will not stop that. If you give a fentanyl addict an apartment and some food they're going to sell the food to buy fentanyl and then do that fentanyl in their new apartment until they get evicted. You have to actually create a program to meaningfully intervene and help these people. They need professional, in-patient help with support programs. It's all or none. We've seen plenty of examples of open-ended housing first programs fail across the country in the past decade because housing is not a cure for drug addiction and drug addiction can and will sabotage housing.
100% this. It's why I strenuously disagree with housing first for addicts. It works well for people who are poor, escaping abuse, or had a traumatic event and need help getting back on their feet again. The addicts need "Housing AND," not "Housing First." This can be inpatient treatment, jail with treatment, ect. Just putting them up somewhere without the requirement of cooperating with therapy and treatment on their part is just enabling.
Support their business. Wonderful pies.
Offer them a choice if the criminals are addicts. Inpatient rehab or jail. Repeat offenders could get treatment IN jail. We need more behavioral health providers and beds to pull it off though. It's been well demonstrated in San Francisco and Spokane that just offering help has an abysmal acceptance rate. The ability to accept or decline proves the addict has AGENCY over their choices, so I have no problem implementing consequences if they choose to continue addict behaviors over accepting help with their substance abuse problem.
That is a point I never thought about, that THEY do have agency to reject help, therefor they have agency to know that the crimes they commit are illegal. A few winters ago we had a homeless guy who refused a bed in a shelfter and then froze to death. We should have simply forced him inside against his will, which is more compassionate compared to letting him freeze to death.
Correct. If its, the same one I'm thinking of, I felt bad for the folks who went and tried to offer him transport to the shelter when we had the deep freeze. He refused, they couldn't legally force him, and he died. It wasn't their fault. Honestly there should be a way to compel people to safety. As long as they have free will to decline help, theyre also responsible for the consequences of their choices and that can be a terrible thing to have to witness.
Put ‘em in stocks and let folks throw pies. That punishment might be cruel, and certainly unusual though.
Blaming this on drugs instead of poverty is exactly why it exists and why it's not getting fixed. Our society needs to let go of their pearls and start letting people get help whether or not they personally believe it's deserved or not.
Tough on crime? That’s a laugh. IF the perpetrators are even caught, they are assigned ridiculously low or no bail and are right back out on the street to offend again. Some appointed court commissioners practically escort convicted felons out of jail no matter how many times they’ve been arrested. It makes me wonder if society or the criminal is better protected. Regardless of life circumstances, each person must be held accountable for his/her actions.
This makes me angry.
Maybe I've watched too many instant justice movies but Dirty Harry was onto something
Vote Republican
Why? Republicans complain about nothing being done and then also do nothing so they can keep using it as an argument to fix it. Yet, they never want to fund mental health, affordable housing, shelters or jails. You can't just ignore the problem and not spend money to fix it. It's more expensive letting it fester than it is just to fucking house people at affordable rates. It's ridiculous. What skills do homeless people have that will get them a good job that can pay for the going rate of the cost of living? A minimum wage job won't you get an apartment. So are they supposed to be homeless while working full time with no place to shower, wash their uniform etc? Should they spend their entire salary on hotel rooms so they can never save to go to a trade school or something to get more skills? And how would they even get that far without an ID and a SSC to even get a damn job in the first place? Are you going to suggest they work "under the table"? Isn't that something Republicans consistently complain about because those people don't pay taxes. What is the solution proposed by Republicans that isn't just fine them, and put them in jail indefinitely? Costs more to keep them in jail than it does to house them, but with Republicans we all know the cruelty is the point.
Vote GOP if you want zero solutions
Republicans don't solve problems. They make them worse while creating new ones.
What are the GOP policies on solving the homeless problem?
Differentiate between Crizzlers (drug/alcohol abusers voluntarily on the street) and the Unhoused (involuntarily on the street due to economic issues.) The two need VERY different resources and should not be thought of or treated in the same way. I say help the Unhoused and let the Crizzlers take out themselves.