# Should we instiutionalize the homeless **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 31, 2008, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780 "2008-01-31T22:34:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2008, 1:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780/21 "2008-02-01T01:36:13Z")
[QUOTE=Two and a Half Inches of Fun] Have you ever been around homeless people? The difference between a smelly professor or a woman wearing perfume and a smelly homeless person is HUGE. [/QUOTE] Yes, I have been around hundreds of them. I volunteer, and I have lived in areas with large homeless populations. Some of them smell horrible - those are typically the mentally ill. Some of them smell poorly, more like a construction worker after a long day. Some of them don’t smell at all - they get showers at the shelter. I have also been around women who put on way too much disgusting perfume, to such an extent that I had to leave the area. Even better, there is a nice little pit thread on the topic right now: > **[Good GOD, what a stench!](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=453806)** > > The imbecilic gigglebitch who sits on the other side of a low divider from me used to shpritz herself liberally with a hideous cologne. It was so gag-inducing that the attorneys of the department complained and she was promptly shut down. I snuck a... Now, you want to ban smelly bums from society. I am still asking you to tell me how to determine if someone is a smelly bum, and why the \*bum \* modifier is so important if the \*smelly \* bit is the real problem. ---
**Author:** ![Two\_and\_a\_Half\_Inches\_of\_Fun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ea666f/32.png) [@Two\_and\_a\_Half\_Inches\_of\_Fun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Two_and_a_Half_Inches_of_Fun)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2008, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780/22 "2008-02-01T01:46:21Z")
[QUOTE=Algher] Now, you want to ban smelly bums from society. I am still asking you to tell me how to determine if someone is a smelly bum, and why the \*bum \* modifier is so important if the \*smelly \* bit is the real problem. [/QUOTE] I never used the word bum. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2008, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780/23 "2008-02-01T01:49:15Z")
[QUOTE=Algher] Now, you want to ban smelly bums from society. I am still asking you to tell me how to determine if someone is a smelly bum, and why the \*bum \* modifier is so important if the \*smelly \* bit is the real problem. [/QUOTE] I propose we pick people who have no sense of smell to make the determination. That takes out the guesswork about how fair it’ll be. ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2008, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780/24 "2008-02-01T03:41:23Z")
[QUOTE=Huerta88] Just highlighted a couple of things to revert to my point that some of the things you say “aren’t a crime” or aren’t a basis for jailing [I think the OP also had in mind alternatively institutionalizing] people **were** crimes at one time and would be still in some jurisdictions, except that the courts decided they knew better than the voters and legislatures and decided to declare vagrancy, loitering, and no-visible-means-of-support laws unenforceable. I suspect that given a chance, many Americans might way the respective rights and determine that fifteen urine soaked vagrants did not have the right effectively to render the downtown library in a city of 250,000 people, say, unusable (or markedly unpleasant to use) for the remaining 247,985 citizens. [/QUOTE] Let’s look at the OP. > [@](#): > > I think this guy and others like him should be locked up either in a mental institution or a low level security facility. I agree that 15 smelly people makes a library a less than inviting place. However, that’s a long way from agreeing that they should be “locked up” for no other reason than being scary, sick, lazy or annoying. When they cross the line and become dangerous, then I’ll be right there with you. ---
**Author:** ![Triskadecamus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b19c9b/32.png) [@Triskadecamus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Triskadecamus)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2008, 5:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780/25 "2008-02-01T05:58:00Z")
So, it’s OK to lock em up, as long as you don’t call them bums. And it’s OK to walk down the street speaking obscenities to folks that are not there as long as you have a BlueTooth in your ear. And locking them up is for their own good, which you define without their consent. If I find you a little frightening, and a bit mentally ill, if not downright nuts, can I have you locked up? (In a low security mental hospital, of course.) Tris ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2008, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780/26 "2008-02-01T06:01:21Z")
[QUOTE=Two and a Half Inches of Fun] I never used the word bum. [/QUOTE] True, **Huerta88** did. You still have yet to answer any of my questions, however. ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2008, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780/27 "2008-02-01T14:07:46Z")
[QUOTE=Algher] Now, you want to ban smelly bums from society. I am still asking you to tell me how to determine if someone is a smelly bum, and why the \*bum \* modifier is so important if the \*smelly \* bit is the real problem. [/QUOTE] And I am still saying, with all respect, that you are willfully adopting a silly argument. 99 out of 100 reasonable people would consistently know what a smelly bum was. The 100th would want to pose cute hypothetical arguments about how we can’t ever reach agreement on what smells bad, like the judge who said that some people might affirmatively **enjoy** the smell of feces – it could be “ambrosia” to them. The “bum” part does matter to me because, if you’ll recall, I jumped in on the OP’s social contract point. I believe in the social contract. I also believe that someone who doesn’t work, pays no taxes, and imposes on his fellow citizens with his smell, nutty behavior, etc., has (mis)-used his free will in such a way and to such a degree that his desire to, say, occupy the library or the sidewalk is entitled to somewhat less consideration than that of someone who **is** contributing to society. But N.B. that my moral judgment in this regard, while I stand by it, is not necessary in order to conclude that we can and should have quasi-objective standards for what constitutes a public nuisance. If a professor craps himself in the library, or Britney Spears starts shouting at invisible pink elephants, I’ve got no problem saying everyone (offender included) is better off if they are sequestered somewhere other than the public sphere. ---
**Author:** ![Baldwin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baldwin/32/7264_2.png) [@Baldwin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baldwin)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2008, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780/28 "2008-02-01T14:32:24Z")
[QUOTE=Two and a Half Inches of Fun] 7. They are dangerous. The homeless commit crime at a high rate. [/quote] I presume you have a cite for this? > [@Two and a Half Inches of Fun](#): > > So, do you think we should institutional the homeless to help the sick ones and punish the lazy or should we continue to the current situation? “Punish the lazy”? If we’re going to lock up people for being lazy and not contributing to society, I’d rather start with people who have inherited wealth, don’t work a day in their lives, and do nothing to help anybody else. Put Alice Walton in a workhouse and then we can start dealing with “lazy” people who have no money. I’ve been homeless twice, for brief periods in my twenties. It’s definitely a bigger pain in the ass than working. The additional burden of mental illness would have been really tough. ---
**Author:** ![DMC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dmc/32/18049_2.png) [@DMC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DMC)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2008, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780/29 "2008-02-01T14:59:46Z")
[QUOTE=Huerta88] If a professor craps himself in the library, or Britney Spears starts shouting at invisible pink elephants, I’ve got no problem saying everyone (offender included) is better off if they are sequestered somewhere other than the public sphere. [/QUOTE] What if the professor was sick? What if Spears was drunk? What if someone throws up on a foreign dignatory? That’s pretty nasty, and smells awful, as well. Lock them up? ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2008, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780/30 "2008-02-01T15:37:49Z")
[QUOTE=Two and a Half Inches of Fun] Two days this week I went downtown and saw some of the same homeless people I usually do. Now, I am not a psychologist nor I have ever spent much time with these people. [/quote] Then you have a very limited basis on which to form opinions. Before I deal with the rest of your post, I just want to mention I knew a lady who was homeless for several years, slept mostly in Chicago’s Union station. She later earned an MD is now an emergency medicine specialist in Wisconsin. If you don’t want to associate with the evil nasty scary-looking homeless people don’t ever get into an accident or have a heart attack in her area, because if you do you’ll stand a good chance of being treated by one of those evil, nasty, scary-looking (formerly) homeless people. Just sayin’ > [@](#): > > But one thing is clear for any amount of interaction is that they are mentally ill if not flat out nuts. This guy by the library has a cell phone that looks about five years old and is missing the battery, but he still seems to hold conversations on the phone. I think this probably a sign that there is something wrong with him. Either that, or he hopes he less likely to be mugged or assaulted if it looks like he’s talking to someone or has a means to call for help. > [@](#): > > I think this guy and others like him should be locked up either in a mental institution or a low level security facility. Why? What crime have they committed? > [@](#): > > 1. These homeless people scare people. I know parents that will not use that branch of the library because they afraid of the homeless people. I wasn’t aware that being scary looking was a crime. In which case the fully employed Harley enthusiast living upstairs in my apartment building should be arrested, but really, she’s a very nice person even if she IS a walking art gallery. Ditto for her boyfriends. > [@](#): > > 1. Many of these people are sick and need help. It is not compassionate to just leave people with mental problems out on the street. I do not know what it is like where you live but it is fucking cold here. Fucking cold is when the wind chill is 5. below 0. What about the people who just need jobs? > [@](#): > > 1. If they are not sick, they are lazy. You can find a job in this country. Really? Can you tell me where? Because I’ve been unemployed myself for 2 months now and despite submitting applications on a daily basis I’ve only managed 4 interviews - in each case I was one of dozens of applicants for a single position - and I’ve yet to get a job offer. Given that everyone wants an address and phone number, I would think having no permanent address would be a further handicap for the homeless in getting employment, not to mention difficulty in hygiene when you have no access to a shower and difficulty in dressing nice when you have no iron for your clothes and no closet to keep them in. > [@](#): > > One only needs to look at the success of so many hard working immigrants that have no experience in out economy and sometimes cannot even speak the language when they start out. We’ll just ignore the exploited, the deported, the ones killed laboring in unsafe jobs, and the homeless immigrants, m’kay? > [@](#): > > And if not I hear the military is looking for people. If you are mentally ill you will not be accepted by the military. I’m sure the homeless lady I used to see at the intersection of Lake and Michigan in the Chicago Loop who is missing one foot would also not be accepted by the military. Someone with diabetes will not be accepted by the military. You DO realize that there are a lot of people who look OK but have some hidden problem that makes them unacceptable to simply dump into the military, yes? > [@](#): > > 1. If they can be helped they can become productive members of society. But this will require a radical break. Thank Og my doctor friend never had to go to the likes of you for help. Apparently you are clueless that it only takes something like a house fire to render a nice, middle class person homeless, and that it frequently takes a couple years to come back from something like that. What about all those people who lost homes during Katrina, should we lock all them up for the crime of having lost just about everything? > [@](#): > > 1. They are annoying. I do not want to be asked for spare change. Hang a sign around your neck saying more or less that. > [@](#): > > They stink - really bad in summer. That’s because they do not have a shower. You’d reek pretty bad, too, if the only place you could wash up was the sink at the Greyhound bus station or in some McDonald’s or, yes, a city library - and that’s assuming some self-righteous jerk who DOES have a home and bathroom doesn’t chase you out, first. > [@](#): > > 1. They are dangerous. The homeless commit crime at a high rate. Cite, please > [@](#): > > 1. We are having a society here. These people need to live up their responsibilities and get off the street or we should get them off the street. Why don’t you pay for an apartment for them, then? As a bonus, they’d have a bathroom where they could shower daily so as not to offend your nostrils. Or perhaps you could build a homeless shelter next door to your home so you could potentially house, feed, and bathe dozens of people. > [@](#): > > So, do you think we should institutional the homeless to help the sick ones and punish the lazy or should we continue to the current situation? I think you should get a dose of compassion. Why don’t you volunteer at a shelter or soup kitchen for awhile so you can get a better perspective and have some actual knowledge on which to base your opinion? You do realize that jailing people, making it a crime to be homeless, will virtually make them unemployable? How does that solve the problem? Looks to me like it only perpetuates it. ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2008, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780/31 "2008-02-01T16:13:13Z")
[QUOTE=DMC] What if the professor was sick? [/quote] Then he should go somewhere appropriate to be treated for his sickness, preferably at his own expense, but I’m a visionary. He definitely shouldn’t stay in, or keep coming back to, the library if he has some “condition” that makes him perenially stink. > [@](#): > > What if Spears was drunk? She might well be taken to jail under the laws that decree public drunk and disorderly conduct to be an excessive imposition on the commonweal. If her overall mental state, including voluntary intoxication (which the law tells us is not a defense to anything) were deemed such that she was a threat to herself or society, then Van Halen informs me she could be (hey, just was!) involuntarily committed under Section [5150](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5150_(album)) of the California Welfare and Institutions Code. > [@](#): > > What if someone throws up on a foreign dignatory? That’s pretty nasty, and smells awful, as well. Lock them up? Then we would revert to John Stuart Mill and evaluate the totality of the circumstances, understanding that non-idiots can distinguish between a decorated war veteran who is President of the United States but has food poisoning, and a bum drunk off of rotgut puking in the library. The President is not a bum (free rimshot, people). ---
**Author:** ![Tastes\_of\_Chocolate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tastes_of_chocolate/32/3232_2.png) [@Tastes\_of\_Chocolate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tastes_of_Chocolate)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2008, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780/32 "2008-02-01T16:22:09Z")
How about rather then sending out the paddy wagons to round up everyone that scares or disgusts **Two and a Half Inches of Fun** , we actually provide help? Maybe part of > [@](#): > > 1. We are having a society here. These people need to live up their responsibilities and get off the street or we should get them off the street. Yep, we have a society, and WE need to live up to our responsibilities. Not lock them up to get them out of our sight. Help them get food, jobs, someplace to live and mental health treatment. It’s not the homeless that aren’t meeting their obligations, it’s the rest of us. That being said, there are people who don’t want help. They are where they want to be. Who am I do say that they don’t have the same rights I do. To go to the library, to be on the side walk, to talk on a cellphone. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2008, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780/33 "2008-02-01T18:45:25Z")
Institutionalizing the homeless is expensive, and for the ones who are homeless because of chronic low-grade mental illness, it requires a commitment to keep them institutionalized for life since the chance of cure is neglibible. A more practical solution would be to put them to sleep. The likelihood of society accepting this solution seems low. ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2008, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780/34 "2008-02-01T19:33:31Z")
[QUOTE=Huerta88] Then we would revert to John Stuart Mill and evaluate the totality of the circumstances, understanding that non-idiots can distinguish between a decorated war veteran who is President of the United States but has food poisoning, and a bum drunk off of rotgut puking in the library. The President is not a bum (free rimshot, people). [/QUOTE] Again, what if your bum is also a decorated war veteran with food poisoning who happens to be in the library? Yes, most people are capable of telling the completely mentally fried, drunken bums. However, this is a sliding scale. There are many types of homeless out there: Mentally ill in need of medication Mentally ill in need of therapy Addicts Unfortunates (layoffs, bankruptcy, runaways, abuse victims) Bums You appear to put everyone you don’t like in the final category. You also appear to claim that you can ID them all on sight, and that you are willing to give power to others to ID them on sight and to get them out of your sight - regardless of any civil rights. ---
**Author:** ![AHunter3](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ahunter3/32/368_2.png) [@AHunter3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AHunter3)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2008, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780/35 "2008-02-01T19:57:59Z")
I do not support the notion that it’s OK to lock up the batshit insane, at least not simply for being batshit insane. Homeless or otherwise. a) If you can establish that beforementioned batshit-insane person is legally incompetent to make decisions — a process that should put the burden of proof on the person making the allegation, and one where the standards, in order to protect all of us from being carted away by our younger relatives if we fail to croak and leave them our fortune soon enough to suit them — then it’s OK to deal with the beforementioned batshit-insane in order to secure _their_ safety and happiness, under the assumption that they can’t make appropriate decisions. But if we’re going that route, _your_ happiness (including sense of smell being offended, etc) isn’t relevant. In my opinion, beforementioned legally incompetent batshit-insane person isn’t at risk to self there in the library, so as court-appointed guardian I’m OK with person being in library. b) For everything else, you lock up beforementioned batshit-insane person on the same basis that you lock up anyone else. Has to be something they did in violation of law or statute. Now it’s not relevant to bring up “for their own good” arguments. Strictly “that’s illegal” or “that’s against the policy of the library”. ETA: actually we don’t usually lock up people for violating library policy but I guess we could have them escorted out of the building. c) Being homeless, being lazy, shiftless, or unemployed or whatever, is all irrelevant to either situation. ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2008, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780/36 "2008-02-01T19:59:32Z")
[QUOTE=Algher] There are many types of homeless out there: [/quote] You are right. > [@](#): > > Mentally ill in need of medication Could be put in a controlled environment where the medication will be supplied to them and where, if they show evidence that they won’t comply with the medical regime, can be constrained to do so by being committed. I.e., institutionalization. > [@](#): > > Mentally ill in need of therapy Same. > [@](#): > > Addicts Same. > [@](#): > > Unfortunates (layoffs, bankruptcy, runaways, abuse victims) Section 8, shelters, job banks, private charity. It’s odd for me to be saying this as I’ve posted elsewhere about my dislike of taxes, but dammit, we’re **already** paying for a lot of safety net. Some non-trivial portion of the visibly-problematic homeless population are those who **refuse** available resources or “don’t like the shelter.” Again anomalous for me, but I’d support spending more for accommodations for the truly “can’t work” (as opposed to “won’t work”) remainder of the population if someone convinced me that there was a deficit. There’s just no way that “the library” or “the sidewalk” is the answer to “where is the best place to have these guys supported by society, assuming they really need to be supported by society?” > [@](#): > > Bums > You appear to put everyone you don’t like in the final category. Not so. I’d probably not like a lot of bankrupts and runaways either. > [@](#): > > You also appear to claim that you can ID them all on sight, and that you are willing to give power to others to ID them on sight and to get them out of your sight - regardless of any civil rights. I can ID them pretty reliably, so can you. They will generally be those doing something that is inappropriate in view of the intended purpose of the public or private property they’re taking up. There’s no specific civil right to occupy any particular area of space, for any particular purpose, unless you own that area of space. Other civil rights that do exist are qualified by reasonable restrictions and must be assessed in view of the countervailing rights of others. The right to speak doesn’t include the right to scream inside a library. The right to peacably assemble doesn’t include the right to block the sidewalk while doing so (as abortion protestors found out). I don’t discount individual autonomy, but nor is it unlimited (and I pay less heed to it when it’s being exercised by a less rational person). A bum “wants to” sit in the library and stink it up? I’m sure that is a deeply-held desire. I just don’t think it trumps the rest of our desires. ---
**Author:** ![Mister\_Rik](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mister_rik/32/491_2.png) [@Mister\_Rik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mister_Rik)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2008, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780/37 "2008-02-01T20:11:18Z")
[QUOTE=begbert2] I propose we pick people who have no sense of smell to make the determination. That takes out the guesswork about how fair it’ll be. [/QUOTE] _heh_ One of the “bums” at the local shelter (where I lived for eight years) actually has no sense of smell (medically confirmed). In addition, he’s also on the low end of the intelligence scale, and it seemed that no amount of explanation could make him understand that, even though he can’t smell himself, _other people can_, and that regular showering would make people stop complaining about him. You’d think he’d eventually understand the problem when _other homeless people_ didn’t want to be around him because he smelled so bad, but we had limited success with him. He’d occasionally make a token effort, but judging by his aroma it seemed what he was doing, instead of actually showering, was just rubbing a dry bar of soap all over himself to mask (unsuccessfully) the smell. Fortunately for everybody at the shelter he lived in a separate outbuilding, not in the dorm (it was a proper living space, not a shed). On the other hand, I was told about another old man who lived at the shelter before I did who simply refused to shower. He lived in the dorm, and generated all manner of complaints from the other residents. That guy had no excuse; the showers were private stalls, so he couldn’t even make the excuse that he didn’t want anybody to see him naked. After several direct orders from the staff to shower went unheeded, the house manager came to him and handed him soap and a towel and ordered him into the shower. The manager stood outside the shower room and waited to make sure he actually did it. He told me that the guy went into the shower room and closed the door, and the manager heard the water running for ten minutes. The water shut off, and a couple minutes later the guy emerged … with completely dry hair and dry towel. He’d simply stood _beside_ the shower with the water running for ten minutes :dubious: The next step involved the staff packing all of the guy’s stuff into boxes and carrying it all outside. In January. In 10 degree weather, with snow on the ground. “What are you doing?” the guy hollered. He was told he would either shower, or he was out. He showered. ---
**Author:** ![Tastes\_of\_Chocolate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tastes_of_chocolate/32/3232_2.png) [@Tastes\_of\_Chocolate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tastes_of_Chocolate)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2008, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780/38 "2008-02-01T20:48:45Z")
[QUOTE=Huerta88] > [@](#): > > Mentally ill in need of medication[/quuote] > > Could be put in a controlled environment where the medication will be supplied to them and where, if they show evidence that they won’t comply with the medical regime, can be constrained to do so by being committed. I.e., institutionalization. What makes your preferences so important that they can over rule others. Do you really feel that anyone who causes you distress by their mere proximaty should be either forced to take medication or should be warehoused where you can’t see them? If these people present no danger to themselves or to others, what gives you or I that right? Maybe I don’t like the cologne you insist on wearing, or the music you always listen to grates on my nerves. Should I have the right to have you sent someplace else until you comply with my sense of what should be allowed? ---
**Author:** ![Annie-Xmas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecc23a/32.png) [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2008, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780/39 "2008-02-01T21:33:53Z")
[QUOTE=Baldwin] “Punish the lazy”? If we’re going to lock up people for being lazy and not contributing to society, I’d rather start with people who have inherited wealth, don’t work a day in their lives, and do nothing to help anybody else. Put Alice Walton in a workhouse and then we can start dealing with “lazy” people who have no money. [/QUOTE] People who don’t need a job should work and take a job from someone really needs one? Every time I see a story about a multi-million dollar lottery winner continuing to work for a salary, I think about the people who are begging for a chance to work for an honest wage. ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2008, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780/40 "2008-02-01T21:58:17Z")
[QUOTE=Tastes of Chocolate] What makes your preferences so important that they can over rule others. Do you really feel that anyone who causes you distress by their mere proximaty should be either forced to take medication or should be warehoused where you can’t see them? If these people present no danger to themselves or to others, what gives you or I that right? Maybe I don’t like the cologne you insist on wearing, or the music you always listen to grates on my nerves. Should I have the right to have you sent someplace else until you comply with my sense of what should be allowed? [/QUOTE] The proposition is that if someone is causing **significant** unease, discomfort, displeasure for a **significant** number of people, by conduct that has little or no social utility (as perceived by a significant part of society), their behavior can be subjected to sanction or modification. This general principle stands behind: all law (putting aside ‘natural law’ theories for the moment); all zoning ordinances; and just about any of the many laws and regulations to which you and I are subjected every day (don’t litter; don’t blast your radio too loud; don’t walk around with your junk hanging out of your pants). Note that for the most part, these “public order” regulations apply only when you’re in “public.” That’s because that’s when you’re most likely to interfere with others rights by exercising your own contended-for and annoying “rights.” If you want to crap your pants/litter/walk around naked on your own property, out of public view, I doubt I or anyone will care. Is securing a space of your own a high price for exercising your eccentricites without fear of complaint/coercion/sanctions? I don’t think so, YMMV, but as long as we have any public order laws, that’s how it is. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-instiutionalize-the-homeless/435780.md?page=3)