LA's homeless allowed to live in cars, US appeals court rules

[webfact]

LA's homeless allowed to live in cars, appeals court rules

LOS ANGELES: -- A federal appeals court ruled that a Los Angeles ordinance preventing homeless people from living in cars is unconstitutionally vague and struck down the ban.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals said the law that banned people living in their cars or recreational vehicles on a public street or in a public parking lot (even overnight) is unconstitutionally vague and encourages arbitrary or discriminatory enforcement. The decision overturned the District Court of Appeals ruling in favor of the city.

The ban was enacted in 1983, but faced renewed enforcement in 2010, after Los Angeles officials held a September town hall to address complaints of homeless people living in vehicles on streets in the Venice area of the city. City officials repeatedly said at the meeting that the “concern was not homelessness generally, but the illegal dumping of trash and human waste on city streets that was endangering public health,” the ruling said in the factual background.

The Los Angeles Police Department then created the Venice Homelessness Task Force, made of 21 officers to cite and arrest people living in cars, as well as distribute information about local shelters and social services. During their training, task force members were told that “an individual need not be sleeping or have slept in the vehicle to violate” the city ban, and that the LAPD officers should look for “possessions normally found in a home, such as food, bedding, clothing, medicine, and basic necessities.” They were to offer a warning for the first violation, a citation for the second and make an arrest on the third.

Full story: http://rt.com/usa/167188-la-homeless-cars-appeals-ruling/

-- RT 2014-06-20

[zaphod reborn]

Yep, that kind of law has a multitude of infirmities. How do you define sleep? Do you prefer that people continue to drive when they are too tired and perhaps cause an accident? What about truck drivers who sleep in their cabs as part of their job?

It would be funny if Bangkok tried to enforce something like that on the taxi drivers.

[Credo]

I don't think there is a problem of truck drivers sleeping on LA streets.

[Suradit69]

LA's homeless allowed to live in cars, appeals court rules

For some reason the magnanimity of the courts seems less than awe inspiring.

Sort of like saying that sick people will be allowed to die, hungry people will be allowed to starve ... and appeals court judges will be allowed to buy their way into cushy jobs for life.

[bushwacker]

Looks like the vote for change in America has not yet happened after 7 years of Obama!

[joshstiles]

Whaaaa??? I thought post had to be related to thailand....did I miss some rule?

[Scott]

Whaaaa??? I thought post had to be related to thailand....did I miss some rule?

Yes you did. This is the World News Section:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/724370-world-news-is-for-topics-not-related-to-thailand/

[NeverSure]

Anyone who can afford to own a car in the greater LA area and be able to produce proof of insurance, a valid driver's license,current plates and registration, prove it passed a smog test, and can prove he owns the car with all of this documentation is stylin'.

Insurance rates in LA are double what they are where I live. Insurance companies, while regulated, can set rates based on the actuaries.

I could go on, but somethin' ain't rat.

[tw25rw]

Lots of people live in their vehicles and have to 'stealth camp'. I can understand that people in residential areas don't want someone sleeping in their car outside the house, but many people have no where else.

[NeverSure]

My knee jerk reaction to the "homeless" is to wonder...

If I were suddenly homeless, I can think of ten people I could call and get a place to stay. That is unless I'd already used everyone up.

If I were homeless in LA, I'd go 100 miles E. or N. and be in major farm country where I could get a job doing something.

If I were truly disabled anywhere in the US I'd go on SSI and get cash, food and housing help.

These people have burned all of their bridges and all of their friends and have nowhere to go by their own doing.

I still wonder about the car, or even an RV as mentioned in the OP and all that goes with that.

[tw25rw]

They want/need independence. They have a vehicle to sleep in and store their stuff. If they sell it to pay rent, soon they will have no money for rent or a vehicle. With a vehicle they can move to where the work is.

Apparently Walmart have a policy of letting people sleep in their car parks over night.

[Scott]

It's always easier to comment on someone else's life and what they should have done. There are a lot of circumstances that may lead people to be living in their car. First, not all of these people are necessarily from California, they may be moved there and be looking for work. The car may be registered elsewhere etc.

Second, a lot of programs are not available to people who do not have a fixed address. Without that you are not a resident of a state and you are not eligible for services. I am aware of single mothers who moved to find work. Things didn't work out and they ended up living either in their car, or in shelters or in tents with their children. The children couldn't go to school because they weren't a resident of the district -- they had no address.

Like you Neversure, I know a number of people I could go to, but none of them would let me take my 3 aging cats and my old dog. I would never leave them behind.

[NeverSure]

It's always easier to comment on someone else's life and what they should have done. There are a lot of circumstances that may lead people to be living in their car. First, not all of these people are necessarily from California, they may be moved there and be looking for work. The car may be registered elsewhere etc.

Second, a lot of programs are not available to people who do not have a fixed address. Without that you are not a resident of a state and you are not eligible for services. I am aware of single mothers who moved to find work. Things didn't work out and they ended up living either in their car, or in shelters or in tents with their children. The children couldn't go to school because they weren't a resident of the district -- they had no address.

Like you Neversure, I know a number of people I could go to, but none of them would let me take my 3 aging cats and my old dog. I would never leave them behind.

It's all about decisions. LA is the last place I would go to look for work if I was broke. The cost of everything is too high and employment opportunities are better elsewhere.

I would get myself to the state where I was last a resident, and get someone to let me use their address even if I lived in my car.

I believe that somehow these people made a string of bad decisions. They failed to have a backup plan, even if they are willing to work which at least some aren't.

I can also think of ten people who would send me money to get home and settled. I could board pets temporarily until I got settled if I had a plan. I wonder how many of those people in the OP have 3 cats and a dog in their car with them?

If they chose to move to LA, it's not their resident state, and they are homeless in their car or amazingly an RV, they blew it and need to go home. If California is their home, then they could go to a far less expensive part where there is work. LA is an expensive jungle.

It's all about choices which put them where they are.

[tw25rw]

LA is just one of many places where people live in their vehicles.

[wooloomooloo]

Harsh, NeverSure, even for you.

[NeverSure]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

LA is just one of many places where people live in their vehicles.

Harsh, NeverSure, even for you.

Still, what long string of life choices did they make? Almost no one suddenly winds up homeless and with no friends to turn to without some other factors involved. It takes time and a lot of poor choices to get into that position.

Anyone can find himself unemployed and broke. But if that is followed by a life of responsibility, making good friends, and keeping his nose clean, he won't find himself with nowhere to turn.

[folium]

Don't know what it is like in the US in this respect, but in the UK many of the homeless are ex- military with plenty of mental baggage who never quite reintegrated into civilian life, and found life outside the military very difficult.

Hardly a case of poor life choices in that situation....

[NeverSure]

Those with mental issues from military service who are in the US qualify for veterans' disability. And so they should. It was a long time coming but it's there.

No, that's not a series of bad choices, but they don't need to be homeless, either.

I've worked a lot with "homeless" by donating time in rescue shelter. That's where I got my eyes opened. Most of the people who came there had been engaged in some bad pattern such as drugs or worse. Their background checks would come up so bad that they couldn't get a job except for day work occasionally.

They were allowed 10 days in the shelter, given clean clothes and meals, etc. If they found a job during that time they could stay longer. Most of them traveled from town to town staying in shelters, and sometimes sleeping out. They panhandled and bummed their way through life unless they committed another crime and went back to jail.

There are people who will commit a crime just to get tossed into an American jail and get free room and board and medical, etc.

[Scott]

It's always easier to comment on someone else's life and what they should have done. There are a lot of circumstances that may lead people to be living in their car. First, not all of these people are necessarily from California, they may be moved there and be looking for work. The car may be registered elsewhere etc.

Second, a lot of programs are not available to people who do not have a fixed address. Without that you are not a resident of a state and you are not eligible for services. I am aware of single mothers who moved to find work. Things didn't work out and they ended up living either in their car, or in shelters or in tents with their children. The children couldn't go to school because they weren't a resident of the district -- they had no address.

Like you Neversure, I know a number of people I could go to, but none of them would let me take my 3 aging cats and my old dog. I would never leave them behind.

It's all about decisions. LA is the last place I would go to look for work if I was broke. The cost of everything is too high and employment opportunities are better elsewhere.

I would get myself to the state where I was last a resident, and get someone to let me use their address even if I lived in my car.

I believe that somehow these people made a string of bad decisions. They failed to have a backup plan, even if they are willing to work which at least some aren't.

I can also think of ten people who would send me money to get home and settled. I could board pets temporarily until I got settled if I had a plan. I wonder how many of those people in the OP have 3 cats and a dog in their car with them?

If they chose to move to LA, it's not their resident state, and they are homeless in their car or amazingly an RV, they blew it and need to go home. If California is their home, then they could go to a far less expensive part where there is work. LA is an expensive jungle.

It's all about choices which put them where they are.

But what about acting career?!! It just wasn't taking off in Wyoming!

(One of my kids who was born in the US, set out to find his life by heading for California. It didn't turn out quite the way he wanted when he hit the ocean, so he joined the US Navy -- that got him all sorted out).

Not everything works out the way it's supposed to or planned.

[tw25rw]

How they got there isn't the point of the thread, rather how they are treated when they are there.

[losworld]

It's always easier to comment on someone else's life and what they should have done. There are a lot of circumstances that may lead people to be living in their car. First, not all of these people are necessarily from California, they may be moved there and be looking for work. The car may be registered elsewhere etc.

Second, a lot of programs are not available to people who do not have a fixed address. Without that you are not a resident of a state and you are not eligible for services. I am aware of single mothers who moved to find work. Things didn't work out and they ended up living either in their car, or in shelters or in tents with their children. The children couldn't go to school because they weren't a resident of the district -- they had no address.

Like you Neversure, I know a number of people I could go to, but none of them would let me take my 3 aging cats and my old dog. I would never leave them behind.

It's all about decisions. LA is the last place I would go to look for work if I was broke. The cost of everything is too high and employment opportunities are better elsewhere.

I would get myself to the state where I was last a resident, and get someone to let me use their address even if I lived in my car.

I believe that somehow these people made a string of bad decisions. They failed to have a backup plan, even if they are willing to work which at least some aren't.

I can also think of ten people who would send me money to get home and settled. I could board pets temporarily until I got settled if I had a plan. I wonder how many of those people in the OP have 3 cats and a dog in their car with them?

If they chose to move to LA, it's not their resident state, and they are homeless in their car or amazingly an RV, they blew it and need to go home. If California is their home, then they could go to a far less expensive part where there is work. LA is an expensive jungle.

It's all about choices which put them where they are.

Okay so let's say these people made bad choices. What is your solution to kick them out of their cars and let them live in a shopping cart? Sounds like another bad decision to me.

[Ulysses G.]

Sure a lot of the homeless are parasites, but a fair amount made the wrong choices or just had a lot of bad luck. I do think it is really wrong that our government does not give them more help, like they do in the UK, so they can get out of the hole that they are in. A single man or woman with no children can not collect welfare, no matter what their circumstances are. All they can get is a small amount of food stamps, but that does not pay the rent.

[Scott]

In some places, a single person can get General Assistance, but those programs are usually funded by the local gov't and they are very meager. They are also quite rare. Again, you have to have an address and be a resident to get them.

[NeverSure]

It's always easier to comment on someone else's life and what they should have done. There are a lot of circumstances that may lead people to be living in their car. First, not all of these people are necessarily from California, they may be moved there and be looking for work. The car may be registered elsewhere etc.

Second, a lot of programs are not available to people who do not have a fixed address. Without that you are not a resident of a state and you are not eligible for services. I am aware of single mothers who moved to find work. Things didn't work out and they ended up living either in their car, or in shelters or in tents with their children. The children couldn't go to school because they weren't a resident of the district -- they had no address.

Like you Neversure, I know a number of people I could go to, but none of them would let me take my 3 aging cats and my old dog. I would never leave them behind.

It's all about decisions. LA is the last place I would go to look for work if I was broke. The cost of everything is too high and employment opportunities are better elsewhere.

I would get myself to the state where I was last a resident, and get someone to let me use their address even if I lived in my car.

I believe that somehow these people made a string of bad decisions. They failed to have a backup plan, even if they are willing to work which at least some aren't.

I can also think of ten people who would send me money to get home and settled. I could board pets temporarily until I got settled if I had a plan. I wonder how many of those people in the OP have 3 cats and a dog in their car with them?

If they chose to move to LA, it's not their resident state, and they are homeless in their car or amazingly an RV, they blew it and need to go home. If California is their home, then they could go to a far less expensive part where there is work. LA is an expensive jungle.

It's all about choices which put them where they are.

Okay so let's say these people made bad choices. What is your solution to kick them out of their cars and let them live in a shopping cart? Sounds like another bad decision to me.

Oops. Did I say kick them out of their car, or even out of town? If I implied it, I didn't mean to. If they stay in that situation, it's still a choice. They are where they are from choices. Not recent choices but long term choices. Recent choices they can get out of. Long term choices where they burn all of their bridges and have no one or no place to turn is their own fault.

Scott mentioned a son who tried for a while and it didn't work out. He joined the Navy. Good for him. He couldn't have joined the Navy if he had a serious criminal background - even one conviction. He developed a Plan B. Good for him. Perhaps the entire experience was good for him, and he landed on his feet. I'll bet Scott had a role in it, instilling a work ethic which kept him from still being in a car.

[ClutchClark]

Something the new conservative minded-- " I was born with a supportive family and into a community I could fall back on but I am not going to let that prevent me from sitting in judgement of everyone else less fortunate" -- type of people forget and which anyone who really did help the homeless could attest to is that there is a large incidence of mental illness amongst America's homeless and any law enforcement from the Reagan era can attest to it because it was Reagan budget cuts who threw America's mentally ill to the curb if they were not dangerous:

http://www.nhi.org/online/issues/135/reagan.html

Coincidentally, its many of my TP acquaintences, the folks who are angry at everything and everyone, who share a certain opinion that any social assistance program is wasteful government spending and because there is nothing about this in the Constitution then it must be forbidden. It is helpful to their conscience when they paint all of these less fortunate types as victims of drug and alcohol use and chronic poor choices--that they all deserve their situation. Then they say that those non-govt safety nets will be funded by the contributions of good hearted Christian-minded citizens like themselves.

But anyone that has heard a few minutes of their rationalizations will quickly recognize these types will not give one dime of contribution.

Americans living in cars are often recently displaced from their homes and jobs with the economic crash under bush. They are in a tough spot and suffer from depression/anxiety as a result of their circumstances. They may go for job interviews but their lack of a residence address and their wrinkled clothes and their "I smell like I just slept in my car for the last week (or month)" does not make a good impression on their interviewer.

I grew up with many of my TP acquaintances. We were white and we were male and we could literally find work anywhere after WW2 through the 90's when we retired. Many of us heard stories from our folks of the hardships of the 30's and our uncles might have relied on the CCC for work but by the time we were tykes we never saw anything ourselves except unlimited opportunity. We were lucky. We were born into the perfect era to be American. Its alot harder to make a life today then it was for us.

People living in cars will be a part of the new American landscape for decades to come.

[harryfrompattaya]

Anyone who can afford to own a car in the greater LA area and be able to produce proof of insurance, a valid driver's license,current plates and registration, prove it passed a smog test, and can prove he owns the car with all of this documentation is stylin'.

Insurance rates in LA are double what they are where I live. Insurance companies, while regulated, can set rates based on the actuaries.

I could go on, but somethin' ain't rat.

NeverSure I beg to differ with you my cousin has a used car lot in So Central LA now he renting out the cars so people can sleep in them at night als the lot and cars are guarded by dog

This is a interesting business as he works with a Medical Marijuana

[harryfrompattaya]

Most homeless people have drug problems some are unsuccessful criminals or just plain nuts and it will cost the Government to house or cure them

That is ones I knew in America 15 years ago.

If you think different try to help one see what that will get you

[klikster]

I sort of go with, "Don't kick a guy when he's down."

[Credo]

A lot of people in Beverly hills have drug problems too.

I think the group that is being referred to who live in their car are probably not to be confused with the drug addled/mentally ill group that move around with shopping carts.

[folium]

I sort of go with, "Don't kick a guy when he's down."

IMHO a decent, civilized society provides a safety-net for those genuinely in need.

Welfare should not be an alternative lifestyle but a means of ensuring that people have at least the basics.

Property prices in much of California are similar to those in southern England, where many people now live in canal boats, trailers and even garden sheds. Why? Because they need to be near their places of work but cannot afford the property prices.

Folk living in cars in CA is in some ways little different to the 1 million plus people living in Dharavi, technically a slum but in reality a fantastically well-situated area of low cost housing convenient for Central Mumbai.