The Constitutional “right” to sleep on the street valiantly defended by the ACLU
The city of Los Angeles and civil liberties officials will meet with a federal mediator next week in an attempt to resolve a lawsuit that would prevent police from arresting homeless people for sleeping on sidewalks.
The court-ordered session scheduled for Monday will be closed-door.
The A-C-L-U filed a lawsuit three years ago to prevent the L-A-P-D from cracking down on the sleeping homeless. Earlier this year, a federal appeals court ruled in favor of the A-C-L-U.
Police Chief William Bratton and City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo have vowed to fight the suit. But Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has said the city should find other ways to police the streets.
Another example of how the ACLU works vigorously to advance the march of chaos. The majority of these “Urban Campers” (I almost choked on a chicken bone the first time I heard that one) are drug/alcohol addicted, mentally ill or have chosen to live their lives on the streets. Many of these people are dangerous to the community for these reasons and should not be left to wander until the next 12 year-old girl gets a brick to the head. Community leadership has an obligation to protect its citizens and to keep the streets free of urine, feces, broken glass, used neeedles and the general filth associated with large “homeless” populations. How exactly is the ACLU “helping” people who, for their own safety and that of the people in the community, would be better taken care of in institutions, drug rehab or jail?
Email This
Posted by Greg Scott on August 20, 2006 6:44 pm
Trackback URL:
Comments
3 Responses to “The Constitutional “right” to sleep on the street valiantly defended by the ACLU”
-
-
-
Affiliations
The Giants
Advertise
-
-
Our Store
- Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
-
- More blogs about the ACLU
Syndicate Me
Probably because the ACLU’s overall plan requires a large base of disenfranchised persons with nothing, who are willing to join into the ‘People’s Revolution’.
Glib, you are always quick to disparage the “rights” of people you don’t agree with. I have just one question I would like you to answer. When the Constitution is silent on a particular “right”, like privacy for example, in which branch of government do these “rights” reside?
Living on public sidewalk isn’t ‘privacy’, and the Constitution is not entirely silent on the issue…
but anyway.
The right of privacy, in and of itself, according to the constitution, would reside with the states, or the people.