The City of Dallas Public Library System is trying to pass a new law/regulation that stipulates that if a patron of library "smells bad", they can ask him/her to leave the library. Just for your info, the main downtown library is used quite often by homeless people to get in out of the cold or rain or snow and, worse, to use the public toilets to give themselves "sponge baths". They stand naked at the lavatories using wet paper towels to wipe down their dirty, stinkin' bodies. The users of the library find that somewhat annoying and have asked that something be done about it. What'cha think? Kick the dirty, stinkin' bums out? Or let the library be a source of homeless shelters? Baron Max
its an interesting question, since most libraries are publicly funded....homeless dont pay taxes. on the other hand, we have morality issues here. i think there would be circumstances where the homeless guy shouldnt be kicked out. what if he just REALLY liked reading instead of getting a job. does it matter where someone lives, if they are to use public facilities? i say let them stay, but place security cameras in the non-private sections of the lavatory. seems like a fairly inexpensive solution to a very odd problem. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Out. We had the same problem in our city. You would walk in the doors of the main library and the odor of feces would engulf you. The restrooms were just inside the man doors in the lobby. The bathrooms were like a toilet at a ballpark or something really disgusting. They finally had to pass a law or something. Then the library went back to being a library.
maybe they should be out of the library. the library is used for reading and learning, not for the bums to have their bath. if they want, they could go to other facilities which can be bulit by government, specially for the homeless. i do not deny their right of learning. Archibring
The reason we don't build cheap shower facilities and shelter for them is because any city that does that opens itself up to a lawsuit when one homeless person does something like stab another homeless person in the unsupervised facilities. Also if a drunk homeless person manages to drown in the shower the city can be sued by the homeless persons siblings who would not let the homeless person live at their house but will sue the city when the homeless person dies. How much would a parking lot covered with poly tarps and a military shower and bathroom trailor cost?
Well, I don't know about other cities, but Dallas has literally thousands of privately-funded and church-supported facilities and/or shelters for the homeless all over the city. Well, it's not a matter of cost ...it's a matter of such makeshift facilities can't and won't comply with city zoning and building codes/laws/regulations. One can't just put up a tent and provide showers on some downtown sidewalk, can they? And if one group can build such a non-complying place, why can't others? Pretty soon people would be skirting the zoning/building laws all over town. Dallas is now in a legal/voter fight about the construction of a multi-million dollar homeless shelter. Everyone thinks it's a great idea but.... no one wants it in "their neighborhood"!! Apparently we have the money, but no place to build it! ...so I suppose we'll have to build it in Pakistan or somewhere far, far away from Dallas!! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Baron Max
That's pretty much my opinion on the matter. It's not as if showering facilities don't exist, and well, the library isn't a place for that. If there are no showering facilities then hey, those bums gotta do what they gotta do to get clean. I've no problem with bums coming in to actually do some reading as hopefully it'll be beneficial and will help get them out of the slump they're in. However, to use the library as a showering facility and nothing more is just wrong. Perhaps the library ought to make a program specifically targetted towards bums for every book read, they receive a special wash in the library bathrooms. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! There's no place downtown for that? All the homeless shelters I know of around where I live are built in the downtown areas. It works too since that's where they spend most of their time anyways. - N
What about the horrid stink from their bodies and clothing? Don't you think that might be offensive to the regular patrons of the library? Do the homeless, or anyone else, have the right to infringe on the nasal senses of everyone else in the area/room? Is stinking one of our Constitutional rights, too? And if it is, does their right to stink outweigh everyone else's right not to smell it? As I said, we have private and charitable shelters all over the downtown area, but Dallas wanted one that was "up-to-standards" and operated by the city. Admittedly, some claim that it's to get the homeless OUT of the downtown area, but that seems to be only a political ploy by the opposition. But really, that's not the issue here. The issue is whether a person has the "right" to walk into the public library and stink the place up so badly that other patrons leave. Even tho' they stink like a pig pen, do they still have the right to enter such public places? Baron Max
depends, baron max. what if i think chanel #5 smells worse than pig dung? should the offender be forced to leave?
I've no idea since it's a "public" library. If it was a private one, they reserve the right to refuse service to anyone. I guess when it comes to public things and this being a democracy and all, if the majority doesn't like the way the bum smells, then they can force him out even though the bum "may" pay taxes (let's assume the guy isn't a bum in this case). I pay taxes and vote, but my vote doesn't always win, so I suppose the same applies to the smelly taxpayer. - N
So, then do we agree that the problem has bureaucratic causes rather than being an issue of cost to the taxpayers or the bums being stinky by choice? The bums who are trying to wash are clearly sick of their own stench. I heard four types of complaints by the bums against shelters: 1. Shelters force the bums to associate with other bums not of their own choosing. Some of these other bums are very unpleasant to be arround. 2. Shelters try to run their lives. 3. Shelters are full, lack resources, perhaps including a lack of showers, and shelters kick them out during the day time. 4. Shelters won't let them drink and do drugs. Private nonprofit shelters also have problems with neighbors trying to resist their opening up in their neighborhoods. Private shelters formed as stand alone non-profits at least don't expose larger organizations to liability risk. Of course everthing must be insured or the bureaucracy will throw a fit. Unmanned low budget facilities would be much cheaper than normal staffed facilities, but are as you point bureaucratically impossible. Water electric and sewer hookups don't cost that much. Unmanned low budget facilities are more vulnerable legally because they can't claim they did everything in their power to make the facility safe. People do already skirt zoning laws all over the place. The cities create, change and enforce the zoning law accordind to how the balance of political pressures dictates that the create and enforce zoning laws. There is a constant power struggle between NIMBYism, City service seekers, the interests of city workers, the interests of taxpayers, the political aspirations of city politicians, the vague feelings of average voters, and the specific interests of campaign contributors most of whom are developers. Of course in theory the Bums could always straighten up, get jobs and homes and stop bothering us. But could they? Why does somebody become a drunk or crazy person?
Yep, Chanel No 5 was already mentioned in the city debate about "odors" ...if the odor is offensive to patrons, out they go! Baron Max
Huh? What "bureacratic causes"? What are you talking about exactly? As the library officials see it, the stink and the homeless laying around in the lobby, etc is bothering the patrons, who have complained. The library already has such rules as no eating and drinking, so why not another rule that says people who stink can't come into the library? I don't think htat I fully understand your post, Nirakar. I don't think anyone is trying to force them to go to the shelters ...they just don't want them in the library or using the libraries toilets as BATHrooms. So does that mean that a few more illegal activities is okay ...since it's been done before? I don't think that's the way laws operate, is it? Or should? Again, I'm not sure that I understand your post? Are you trying to say that ye're for the new rules or against them? Your post isn't clear to me ...if it makes any difference to you, please explain it ...and it might help me if you use only words that a little, tiny things, or that have been used in "See Spot Run" and "Cat in the Hat". Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Baron Max
Baron Max, The problem is not that the bums go into the library. The problem is not that the bums want to wash themselves. The problem is that we don't want to be smelling the bums stench and we don't want to be seing the bums washing themselves in the bathrooms and we don't want the bums to make a mess in the bathroom or use up all the paper towles. I don't think any of us would resent the bums comming into the library and reading quietly to get out of cold weather if the bums didn't stink. So, what is stopping us from giving the bums the help they need to get clean enough to be allowed in the library? My previous post all relates to the above question and to your related statement that zoning codes prevent low cost attempts to help the bums find a place to wash themselves. As I see it, it is bureaucratic rules, political stalemates, and disfunctional legal system that is stopping us from the creating of a low cost place for the homeless to get clean and use the bathroom so that they bothering the rest of us by stinking up our librarys and shitting behind our dumpsters. I hate to see our legal/political/bureaucratic system stopping us from using our common sense to solve a simple problems like the effects of stinking bums who want to be clean and warm. It is easy to come up with ways to help the bums to stop stinking up our world, but I have no answer for how to get arround the burocratic system that so often stops us from using our common sense. Baron Max, you probably think there is a simpler solution to stinking people in the library than my solution which is to change the entire world. (just making a joke about myself, don't get confused) You probably think, kick them out of the library, end of story. But it is not the end of the story. Now these guys have not washed in the library. They stink even more than they would have. They are trying to hang out in the Seven eleven to get warm and they stink there. They are sleeping and shivering and stinking Bus stop shelters if you have them. They are pissing on the sides of buildings. And they are angrier and crazier because their life is still yet harder. They will panhandle more because what else can they do out in the cold. And with that extra money they will drink more because what else can they do in the cold. I am thinking Dallas on a late December day is about 40 Farenheit. Is Dallas warmer than that?
wow. then i support the legislation, as long as it doesnt discriminate. personally, i hate the smell of almost ALL perfumes and colognes. *shrug*
no, the problem is citizens of ANY type behaving in a disruptive manner. spongebaths in a public place are unacceptable anywhere you go in america. period.
Ahh, but there are hundreds, perhaps thousands, of places where they could go to shower and shave and even launder their clothes ....and it's all free of charge provided by charitable organizations. Those places are all over the downtown Dallas area, and even out in the surrounding suburbs. Low cost??? NO!! Dallas is/has been proposing a $12 million facility for the homeless ...which they won't use any more than they use the present, private, charitable facilities. Those facilities are available, the homeless just won't use them ...and a $12 million ain't gonna' change their minds! No, it's easy to come up with facilities. The difficult part is getting the homeless people to USE the damned things!!! There are facilities all over the area specifically for their use, and free of any charge ....yet they won't use them. Easy? No, not be a long, long shot! And bureacracy is NOT the problem, either. Baron Max
