I guarantee you that San Francisco does not adequately prosecute people who poop on the street or shout dirty comments at passers-by. And I guarantee you that complaining about the homeless problem does not mean a lack of compassion for an "already marginalized group". And SF is so politically correct that prosecuting members of this "already marginalized group" is a political challenge (although California has no problem throwing large numbers of black guys in jail without adequate due process). Nor do SF police consider street pooping a high priority. You do not get a homeless problem with effective policing and effective social services.
I really don't know what you're trying to get at with your comment. It seems to consist mostly of straw-man arguments and a lack of interest in confronting a real problem.
I was thinking of more serious crimes. But before you start prosecuting people for the offenses you listed, you first have to make sure there are adequate options for the people committing them.
Across the country, the homeless are routinely prosecuted for relieving themselves in public, yet in many cases they're offered no places to lawfully do so. (I don't know about downtown SF; I'm saying if there aren't bathrooms available to the homeless, you can't fairly prosecute them for going in public.)
Similarly, it's unfair to prosecute someone for shouting at passers-by if that person suffers from a serious mental illness, and has been denied treatment, as is so often the case. Indeed, our country has been defunding mental health and bolstering prisons, with the result that many would-be psychiatric patients are now being warehoused in prison.
> I really don't know what you're trying to get at with your comment. It seems to consist mostly of straw-man arguments
The article quote an SF startup CEO who seems to be calling all homeless people "degenerates." So it's hardly a straw man I'm arguing against. In case it wasn't clear, I'll be quite explicit: My argument is directed against the attitude espoused by the startup CEO in the second and third paragraphs of the article.
> a lack of interest in confronting a real problem.
Considering I explicitly agreed there was a problem and proposed an admittedly partial solution[1], I'm not sure how you reached that conclusion. What is the problem I'm uninterested in confronting? The problem of homelessness? The problem of tech workers having to encounter the homeless?
[1] I proposed better community policing as a way of addressing legitimate complaints about street crime. I should have also discussed the dire need to address the root issue, which is homelessness itself. For those interested, "housing-first" is a promising model.
Yes, let's all come together and help the city tackle the problem of drug abuse, an often cited precursor to becoming homeless.
I think cost and availablility of housing might have something more to do with it, seeing as rich folks doing drugs doesn't lead to homelessness nearly as much.
I really don't know what you're trying to get at with your comment. It seems to consist mostly of straw-man arguments and a lack of interest in confronting a real problem.