Posted on 11/20/2011 9:56:23 AM PST by fireman15
Nicholas Cecil Leading Horse was born into the Sioux Nation in Valentine, Neb., on Christmas Eve 1946.
The youngest of Lewis and Margaret Leading Horse’s six children, he would grow up to become Tacoma’s most expensive street drunk.
From his mid-40s into his early 60s, he would cost taxpayers an estimated $2,407,100. The money was spent on emergency fire, police and medical care, ambulance rides, food, shelter, detox and sobering services, court and jail time, and rehabilitation efforts.
A decade ago, The News Tribune added up Leading Horse’s tab from the previous 10 years and put it in the seven-figure range. After a Sunday cover story about him was published on July 15, 2001, he became the face of the local problems presented by homeless addicts and alcoholics. He was the motivation to build better, cheaper ways to deal with them.
In his case, they eventually worked.
Cecil Leading Horse, at age 64, is sober.
Since Dec. 14, 2008, he has lived without alcohol or heroin in a studio apartment at the headquarters of Metropolitan Development Council – known as MDC – on Fawcett Avenue.
He lives two floors above the Sobering Center of Tacoma – a place founded, in part, because of him. He used it so much that he had his own room, his own plastic mattress. The staff there helped save his life the night he took his last drink.
Today, Leading Horse costs the public the same as most other low-income seniors living in subsidized housing on Social Security, Medicaid and food aid.
Read more: http://www.thenewstribune.com/2011/11/19/1913136/cecils-story-man-who-cost-tacoma.html#ixzz1eGicllAF
(Excerpt) Read more at thenewstribune.com ...
Didn’t the ULEOs murder a Native about a year ago for walking down the street carving wood? He didn’t cost the city much after that. Might have been Seattle.
so instead of costing taxpayers millions, cecil now only costs them tens of thousands (per year).
In Obamaland, that’s considered “success”
I wouldn’t have cared if he died on the street. Sounds harsh, but no one has the right to claim $2 million plus in other people’s money. I’d rather spend the money on feeding those who WANT to live...
WA Ping
Build it and they will come. In the '08 campaign Christine Gregoire announced, with great pride, that the state's investment in homeless and dependency was paying off because the number of people being served had gone up over 20% in just 2 years.
Looks more like the government AIDED and ABETTED him...
While the media portrayed that person as a innocent woodcarver, he was a frequent flyer with the police including on a previous occasion assaulting the officer that shot him. The way it was reported, it was pretty weak grounds to shoot the guy, but he wasn’t an angel.
Yes, although I think the final price tag is still being determined...
Many believe the cop murdered that guy, 1st degree. The cost is still to be determined.
No.
Try to help them, certainly, but once they've shown they are bent on self destruction, step back and let Darwin take over.
It's a tough choice, IMHO. But the American people can NOT afford to foot the bill for this type of behavior and keep our own families cared for, too.
Not with Big Government sticking its hand in our pockets to foot the bill, anyway!
I’m not saying it was a legal shooting. I am pointing out that not everything is as clear cut as the media made it out to be.
“Jurors unanimously found that Williams was carrying an open knife when first seen by Birk.”
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2014235279_policeshooting16m.html
The police officers that I work with generally show amazing restraint. At close range in the hands of a drunk with a violent past a knife is often a more effective weopon than a handgun. I am not going to second guess the decision that the officer had to make in seconds.
Seattle is trying a different alternative that seems to be working. It purchased a cheap hotel, and confirmed alcoholics can stay in it free of charge instead of living on the street. No effort is made at rehabilitation, and they are given free food, and have an on-call nurse available for routine medical care.
And it saves the taxpayers a LOT of money, costing just a fifth of what it would cost otherwise in emergency services, police and other problems.
Though it would save even more money by providing them with grain alcohol and mixer drinks to lessen stomach damage, they have balked at the idea, as they figure both that the public would not stand for it, and that it would attract more alcoholics from other cities.
Surprisingly, there has been another benefit, in that it has been noted that the alcoholics are drinking less on their own, and have improved nutrition so need less regular medical care on top of much less emergency medical care. The police and emergency rooms are also much happier having to deal with them far less often.
The bottom line is two things. The first is that the public do not enjoy seeing drunks dying in the gutters. The second is the recognition that trying to force alcoholics to not be alcoholics doesn’t work, so it’s better to just minimize the expense.
I agree with that statement.
What works best for us is what matters. As long as we are being reasonable humane, of course.
Can we really afford to keep coddling these people?
These are the same people who tell us not to feed the bears in the national parks. Go figure
That was quite the sanitized version
The woodcraver was murdered in cold blood
You unionized first responders really stick together! That ULEO murdered that man.
Actually the cop did flat out murder the wood carver. Carrying a knife and wood carving was not a crime then or now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.