The camp outside Tesco....

ADGS

Spotted the girl who seems to be the camp's most regular denizen getting a ticking off from a WPC yesterday, so maybe the police have been reading this thread and decided to start a clear-up.

ZoeM

I have to say I agree with Starlight. Where is the sympathy?

People seemed concerned about whether or not this is an eyesore, not that these are actual people living lives so shit they have to block it out with booze and drugs.

Do you really think they would choose that life over any others? What an unpleasant lot my neighbours seem to be.

Arkady

I don’t have a problem with them doing that. I do it myself. I have a problem with them turning the pavement into a rubbish dump when they already have a flat to drink and take drugs in. The question, posed here several times but conveniently ignored, is whether they have a right to monopolise the pavement when they have other options – as all homeless people do. Legally they have no such right. I’d argue that they have no moral right to do so either. To the contrary. To say so is not nasty or judgmental, indeed it’s the considered opinion of several homeless charities, counselling services and the founder of the Big Issue. But you’d rather ignore that so that you can clamber on a lame high-horse and accuse others of being unsympathetic, which is ignorant as well as offensive.

macbreen

Wow...I hardly notice them when I go past. "The camp outside tesco" what next..."The mountain of dogshit".

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

krappyrubsnif

I don't notice them either. Is that a good thing? Is it a sign of moral degeneracy on my part? Have I become habituated to Stroud Green slipping inexorably closer to the urban squalor of a slum in Kibera, Kenya?

I know - these people need rescuing! We need a celebrity - let's call in some actress from Crouch End to come in by W7 and be photographed giving that girl a big hug. Bob Geldof! Bono! Tesco Aid! There must be some actress from East Enders who could do it.

Then we could all raise millions for charity, feel much better about it, invest the money in a Turkish drug gang dry cleaning front, and all be much richer. Job done!

graeme

Bono probably not a good choice at the moment, Krappy

<img width="350" height="469" src="http://i.imgur.com/LUdJn.jpg"></img>

missthing

krappyrubsnif = genius

Mills

I've spoken to the Scottish woman (Joanne?) lots of times, and was worried when she vanished for a few months couple of years ago. She's just managed to get back in touch with her son who was taken away from her by the boyfriend of the time 20 odd years ago and has found out she's becoming a granny. Yes, she's a subsistance heroin user, but she gets enough money there to not have to resort to petty crime. If you look at the state of her legs and general well-being, she's not going to have a long life (I think she's mid 30s and been on the street more than half her life) . Criticising her for being dirty, or 'scummy' or anything like that is outrageous. She's had a shit time, and I wouldn't want to speculate about why she ended up on the streets but I can't imagine it was as a result of having a great time in Scotland. So I will continue to get her food sometimes, give her cigarettes, and once bought her sanitary towels because she had none and no money. She's a person and I don't care if she makes the street 'untidy'. She's someone who had a shit time and can't get out of it. A bit of empathy (not sympathy) please.

Mills

Oh, and 50p man is back around as of last week. Not seen mixed race lady with the dog for a bit, but sat and did the crossword with once, and encountered her arguing politics with communist pamphlet man. She's an interesting person, if a bit shouty when pissed.

cristo

Well said Mills. A little compassion goes a long way.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Arkady

It’s not compassionate to encourage someone live on the street by subsidising their heroin addiction. It’s compassionate to compel them into an NHS rehabilitation programme so that they can live an existence that isn’t one of living day-to-day, hand-to-mouth, fix-to-fix. Your compassion is laudable, your misdirection of it actively makes things worse. The evidence for this is overwhelming, but it’s easier for you to feel smug and charitable (and tell us about your charitable acts here, which rather undermines your altruism).

sincers

And now for a hat-trick... If in 15 years they've not managed to make themselves useful, then they'll get no sympathy from me. My sympathy/empathy is also reserved for those far more deserving.

cristo

Well said Mills.

Brodiej

Can we all agree to disagree on this one. This has well and truly done a 360 a couple of times at least. PS: Rather than buying them stuff to consume, buy them a scratchcard or a euromillions.

Billy Bookcase

So compulsion is now compassion.
War is certainly peace and perhaps ignorance is strength too.

How nice it must be to live in such a well-fortfied neoliberal bubble bouncing around across the sea of Manichaeism.

I envy you your belligerent certainties.

I must also say that it's wonderful to have this rare and useful glimpse into the moral and political world we share here.

Sevlow

I beg your pardon?

Arkady

An old university pal of mine became a heroin addict, and ended up on the brink of destitution. What saved him was the compassion of others who *compelled* him to enter a methadone programme. Had he not been confronted over it he might well be dead – he admits that he could never have made the decision himself because of the nature of addiction. At the very least he would be living on the streets, feeding his habit from the ‘charity’ of those who think it is compassionate to maintain people in a limbo of misery. The poor lady in question is still where she is after so many years because of such misdirected ‘compassion’. Compassion is rooted in empathy. That being so – how would you want to be treated if you were her? Would you like to be allowed to live on the street (despite already being shown a great deal of compassion by being given free accommodation by the state), and given dribs and drabs of money to keep you that way until you die of something horrible? Or would you prefer to have no source of income so that you were compelled to enter a programme, improving your life and the lives of others? Shelter and Crises tend to hedge their bets in public, as they fear losing funding if they start suggesting that people shouldn’t ‘help the homeless’ through direct donation – as shown on this thread many people have terribly simplistic views of the problem. But vast amounts of research has been done on this topic, and where councils have made evidence-led campaigns to introduce ‘money boxes’ etc instead of directly giving to the homeless (Aberdeen, Nottingham) it has had a big impact. Again, the founder of the Big Issue has waxed lyrical about this. I’m not talking out of my hat – I’ve followed this issue for a long time. Want to be compassionate? Volunteer at a homeless kitchen, or at a shelter, or as a mentor, etc. But don’t ignorantly tell me that by supporting an evidence-led, proven approach to helping people that I’m lacking compassion, or I’ll tell you to f*ck off. Thames Reach’s *Killing with Kindness* campaign is a god place to start if you want to know more: <http://www.thamesreach.org.uk/news-and-views/campaigns/giving-to-beggars/>;

barnesbq

Am I the only one who still is confused why it's apparently not OK to want people who take drugs outside a shop on a high street to be moved on, or is that just stirring up the shit again? You simply CANNOT claim a piece of pavement and turn it into an open air heroin den. Clearly, though, you can - as they are. So now all of us who work our tits off to keep our heads afloat in life 'within the system' (who are apparently walking around in bubbles of arrogance and self importance) have to suffer this crime in our neighbourhood as we go about our business? I think at the very least they should be searched and prosecuted for possession like any other human being stopped on the street would be. After that, perhaps they system can intervene to help counsel tham out of addiction in some kind of shelter- if that even kind o fhelp even exists (it probably doesn't).
It's very sad to see people intent on self destruction homeless or not, but being homeless does not put you above the law, which is in place to protect individuals and others who may be at risk around them. (like local kids who might step on on of their filthy needles?)
This thread will roll on and on, but does ANY one of us actually think they should not be helped/forced out of their predicament and position on SGR? I can't believe that any one would think they could just be allowed to do whatever they like as it's a 'free world?'

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Sevlow

I like Joanne! What I don't like is posh middle class self righteous pompous silver spoon born in the mouth conts. I shall continue to give her ££££££ until such time

barnesbq

I hope that wasn't a gripe at me - I'm working class born and bred from up north - and they don't like homeless drug abusers on their streets up there either.

Mills

Be interested to know how I, as a relative stranger, can compel someone to enter a rehabilitation programme. Until such time as I can find a way to successfully do that, I'll just have to be one of these terrible people giving someone else a bit of a hand every now and then.

I've known several junkies in my time. A couple have died, a few have managed to get out of it, a few just keep on keeping on. However none of them were on the street. I can't imagine what makes a person choose that kind of, frankly shit, life rather than try to get out of it, but I suspect it's not just down to them not pulling themselves together and sorting themselves out.

Sevlow

@ Mills Your wasting your time on here mate, hung drawn and quartered!

Arkady

@ barnesbq: I think Sevlow is being tongue-in-cheek. @ Wells: Well, you could always follow the advice in the link I posted. I’ll paraphrase it for you – give money to homeless charities, not to the homeless. A proven means of showing your compassion without making the situation worse. Why not set up a direct debit to Thamesreach? That way it is spent on food, shelter and rehabilitation, not on a lifetime of drug addiction.

Mills

How do you know I don't already give to homeless charities? And it's Mills.

Also, I believe the jury is still actually out on whether giving to homeless charities and not individuals is proven to be the best way at present. In my experience of both drug and homelessness charities, current thinking is that the bridge is too big between what's available and what's needed at the moment, so although it is very helpful to those lucky enough to be involved with a charity already, or on their radars, there are many it will miss. If Joanne isn't going to get help herself, and can't be compelled to go (I imagine she gets lots of offers, living round somewhere like here) then should she just be left to petty crime or prostitution?

Mills

Oh and incidentally I said I usually give her food, fags and once sanitary towls, very little cash. If that makes me a bad person, so be it.

Arkady

Mills - apologies for the name mix-up. I’ve been looking for a report that Shelter (I think it was them, my pal used it in his dissertation) put out a few years ago on the subject of whether there were sufficient ‘beds for the night’ in London, and I can’t find it. Perhaps others will have more luck. It concluded that it was a difficult question to answer; there are always beds available, but a large percentage of those actually sleeping on the street ‘choose’ to do so, either due to shame or (more often) mental illness. Rehabilitation, including methadone programmes, are available on the NHS. The jury is not out – if all those giving money to the homeless gave them to homeless charities then we wouldn’t need to have this discussion. Your final question is very pertinent – it’s at the crux of the whole discussion, and there are no easy answers. Putting aside the obvious, proven but politically difficult solution of heroin proscription (which would eradicate heroin addiction in a generation), we seem to be left with this choice: do we buy-off drug addicts to stop them stealing? (I will leave prostitution side as we’ve discussed it to death here recently). I think that’s where it becomes a moral question, to which the answer is no. If someone is faced with that decision and chooses crime, then they should and can be incarcerated and compelled to overcome their addiction (I’m not naïve to the difficulties of this in our short-sighted prison service). By providing funds directly to the homeless you are a) bribing them not to rob others and c) prolonging their suffering. Again: this is not compassionate, it is the very opposite. I can’t imagine anyone having a problem with providing the articles that you list.

Mills

I am not talking about 'beds for the night'. I am talking about getting homeless people off the streets, or indeed not. What drives someone to stay on the streets is not simply not having a home or a hostel to go to. Or perhaps we should just round up people and force them into all these lovely beds for the night that are being provided, perhaps round them up and force them to all go on methadone programmes?

Both Shelter and Crisis have argued that it isn't right to tell people who give money to beggars how to spend their money and that "Obviously there may be issues about where the money may end up, but every person is different and it may be the case that these people need help to get food," Emma Guise (Shelter). Short term relief through buying someone a cup of tea or some fags or just giving them a bit of recognition as a human being and not 'some charity's problem' is worth a lot. Of course longer term people can be assisted by donating to a charity, but it's not the same for everyone. There is not some kind of generic 'homeless' person. Councils push the 'never give to beggars', but having worked for one of the nastiest London councils, I am very aware that it has little to do with wanting to help the homeless.

To be honest, I am also, not particularly comfortable with the idea that I have the right to tell someone what to spend their money on, either. Clearly it would be better for someone to not spend their money on booze or drugs, but the same goes for me - no one tells me I am not allwed to spend my money on booze or drugs, and sometimes I just do.