• IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    🙄 or like, you could admit you were wrong, remove the propaganda, and not resort to your head cannon 🤷‍♂️

    Seems extremely reasonable for dealing with aggressive homeless individuals.

    • Transporter Room 3@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      “aggressive homeless individuals”

      There it is.

      There’s the problem.

      You’re assuming this will be used when needed, and not used in excess, trampling down people who are already underfoot.

      All cops are bastards, no exceptions for location.

      If they CAN abuse a law, they WILL abuse it. At every opportunity.

      • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        I know. There are issues with the police, so now we can’t have laws on the books either. Despite circumstances many homeless don’t take no for an answer and threaten people. There needs to be a law to detain those people. That’s regardless of the help they will or wont get or accept before or after.

        • HumanPenguin@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yep you can have the laws.

          By keeping them precise in what they allow police to apply.

          When the gov use terms like nuisance. It is intentionally verge.

          If its about aggressive begging or homelessness. Define it as such. Don’t intentionally leave it to a stressed officer to decide.