Posted on 12/07/2019 6:13:47 PM PST by upchuck
Portland, Oregon, like many cities on the left coast, is struggling with a growing homelessness crisis. But what can they do about it? One idea that’s now being floated is to change the building codes so that all new structures (including private property, not just government buildings) include spaces for people to “rest” and “feel welcome and safe.” This understandably has prospective property owners concerned, since the wording is all quite vague and suggests that they will be forced to allow the homeless to camp in and around their buildings. (KATU News)
The obvious questions are already being raised. What specifically does “rest” mean in this context? Does that mean that new buildings will have to include spaces for the “unhoused” (their word) where they will be “protected from the weather?” That’s basically just an invitation for people to come trespass and stay there.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
The chances of unintended consequences are endless with this terrible idea from Marxists who have to force their ideas on people by mandate or law because on their own, the ideas wouldn't be accepted by the voters voluntarily.
This is basically "redistributing the homeless" to private property throughout the city.
Once they're on "your" property, the property owners won't be able to get them to leave.
This is going to be a nightmare if it goes through.
Just what the Bolsheviks did in Russia in the 1920s, see “Dr. Zhivago.” Pure hate for the Constitution.
“city council members must provide HALF of their private homes “
I think they should show the way and do it one there own now. Be a leader, Show you love so others will follow.
Or be the experiment that shows your plan is bad.
Poison Sumac grows up along Hudson Bay. No problem in the temperate climate of Portland, OR (or Maine).
They will see when people leave their homes and apartments and then safely ge able to break into your home while you’re away.
I suspect that not much of what goes on in Portland would stand up to constitutional scrutiny.
That is if, and this is a big if, jurists in Portland and Oregon actually considered the Constitution the law of the land. They don’t.
The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are impediments to proper government as far as they are concerned.
Private property rights in California, Oregon, and Washington, have just been pretty much put through the wood chipper. It is beginning to look as if even the concept of private property rights is gone.
Thanks-did not know it would grow there-my plant map lists that zone as not being suitable, but it does show it growing East of Oregon/Washington...
Hey, the lefties running that place won’t have to personally deal with it, so it’s all good.
Good. They can start by resting on their property first.
when the homeless pay the taxes o nthe property- then perhaps we can talk- but the answer will still be NO!
It’s not far from mandating that private property owners provide fresh drinking water in these “rest areas”, followed by fresh fruits and vegetables. Next step, private property owners must allow the “unhoused” to shelter in covered patios, porches and decks. Soon, the “unhoused” must be provided indoor shelter during inclement weather, to include “minimally reasonable” provisions...you know, like WiFi, highspeed internet, and cable TV.
I was thinkin maybe raising africanized honey bees- or raising ‘emotional support velvet ants’ or ‘emotional support black widows’ or ‘emotional support scorpions’ on the property-
That will work so well during backyard bbq time & the kids playing in THEIR yard.
I'd like to see somebody try to argue this on third amendment grounds.
In the famous Griswold v. Connecticut case of emanations from penumbras in the Constitution, one was found in the third amendment. The ban on quartering soldiers in peacetime in one's home was a privacy issue. It was extended to include "agents of the state," to keep, say, child services from harassing families or home-schoolers.
If Portland is going to act as if their homeless are wards of the state, and in so doing require people to make their own private property accessible to the homeless, that is akin to quartering them in your home and should be unconstitutional.
-PJ
A couple of bee hives are also quite welcoming.
They should just make every Antifa member take one or two homeless in with them in their mother’s basement.
Problem solved.
Bloomberg can fly ‘em out there on his fleet of private jets and have his city reimburse him on a typical N.Y.N.Y. cost plus basis of a +500%.
Taking?
This is a great way to cure the problem of high housing prices in Portland.
The place should become “affordable” in no time!
Why, Comrade! I'm surprised you'd have to ask that!
Obviously, you (the homeowner) are legally liable for anything that happens to your "guests" while they are "resting" on your property!
Regards,
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.