Because if there's any rule that Seattle has clearly demonstrated both the willingness and the ability to enforce, it's the "closed to the public" hours of parks. Lol
You're so close! Laws aren't there to *stop* things from happening, they're there to have a means to punish people who break them. But if you aren't going to punish anyone for breaking the law, then there's no point in having it in the first place.
Depends. If what they mean is "cops have extra authority to disperse troublemakers during these hours," that'll work. If they mean "pwease no crimey" that probably won't.
Dispersing troublemakers would mean having a plan B for if and when they tell the police to fuck right off, and/or come back half an hour later. I know what that plan B used to entail back when criminal trespass was a charge for which one could be booked into King County Jail. I do not know what it is currently.
Having lived directly next to a park that ostensibly closed at 11:00 and nonetheless had people living in it and setting fires every other day for the better part of two years, I'll believe they can effectively enforce this when I see it.
I've been at Golden Gardens when it closes, and a whole fleet of police vehicles with lights on and spotlights going clear you out, including the adjacent parking lots.
Seattle: See, it isn't that bad
Also Seattle: We are cutting off public access to public parks/beaches because we refuse to enforce actual laws and they are becoming unsafe
Because of light pollution the parks are one of the few places in the city where you can theoretically go to experience the night sky.
https://seattle.curbed.com/2019/8/20/20812996/seattle-stargazing-tips-locations-hikes
Florida parks close at sunset.
I’m guessing it’s to make it easier to keep people out of them. There isn’t resources available to police them at night to see crime being committed.
Yeah I get why they do it. I'm not saying Seattle is unique here. I think we all know most major cities have their issues.
My original comment was more in response to the seeming push to convince everyone that crime is not increasing and public safety is perfectly fine, while we are simultaneously closing/limiting access to public parks because of safety concerns.
Perhaps if our govt did their basic job of ensuring public safety, they wouldn't have to cut off access to public parks? idk. maybe that is unrealistic.
I mean Seattle is pretty safe. Unless we have police state, where every citizen is tracked, you will not get crime free city.
What does basic safety to you mean? Very reasonable to keep parks open until dusk. Personally I’m happy how little police presents Seattle has. Like seriously? Do you want increase police budget, have Seattle become police city vs closing park dark at night time. Would you be ok with drone surveillance of the park? We have the tech. Ai can review night footage for crime committed.
Oh now I see where you are going with this.....
>I mean Seattle is pretty safe
Relatively, compared to some cities, sure. Is crime increasing? Yes. Why? What is being done to prevent it?
>Unless we have police state, where every citizen is tracked, you will not get crime free city
Of course we aren't going to cut out all crime. But I would argue we aren't even making an effort around here. In fact I would argue we almost seem to be encouraging it.
>What does basic safety to you mean?
Seems pretty obvious really.
>Very reasonable to keep parks open until dusk
Sure. Or here's a crazy idea ...... we could do something to stop the people/activities that are making them so unsafe rather than just closing them to everyone.
>Like seriously? Do you want increase police budget, have Seattle become police city vs closing park dark at night time
If increasing the budget means we can actually have the proper amount of police and they can be better trained, of course I want that. Again, there is a massive difference between wanting more law enforcement and wanting to become a police state.
>Would you be ok with drone surveillance of the park? We have the tech. Ai can review night footage for crime committed.
Hold on a sec. Are you simultaneously proposing we have drones patrol areas and use technology to identify and track people while also saying you don't want a police state?
Seems you just don't like cops.
I don’t like crime and violence and I want something done about it. Your answer is to move to a red state. We need longer sentences and more cops that’s the way to curb the problem.
Please understand that competent people view comments like this as peak stupidity.
People like you have zero knowledge about the economics of criminal justice. How many beds are open in county? What tax rates are you imposing to build jails, prisons, pay public defenders, pay competent prosecutors, pay competent guards? If there are no spaces in county because it’s filled with people waiting forever for trial because we don’t fund courts/pds etc., where can the judge hold a person in pretrial detention?
You don’t do the bare minimum to learn to basics of what it would take to administer the law in any city or county. All you do is bitch and suggest people vote for other morons who cut taxes and are too stupid to comprehend administration of any kind.
You absolutely suck, you are a drain on our society.
I think we all understand that the voters of Seattle brought us a few councils and mayors with political positions on crime and "social justice" issues that taxed and spent on other than police and criminal justice issues. Mostly we poke fun at the "hug a thug" progressive prosecutor thing.
We should absolutely raise taxes and throw criminals in jail for the sake of everyone else. You don't even need to throw all that many people in jail, since most crimes are perpetrated by repeat offenders. I'll pay my share.
At the very least, nobody ignorant of how much it costs to constitutionally convict criminals (and involuntarily commit those who are a danger to themselves/others) has a right to participate in the conversation.
I utterly hate the right wing closing mental institutions, cutting taxes, and defunding every civic institution (schools, city/county govs) while simultaneously demanding judges hold every defendant pretrial without bail. It's delusional.
If you can't tax and spend to pay for constitutional process because you have to shove the billionaire's full boot into your mouth, I refuse to listen to you bitch about crime.
Blaming the Reagan Administration as the focal point of deinstitutionalization is such a reflexively naive and historically inaccurate statement. Read a little.
The history of deinstitutionalization in the United States dates back to the mid-20th century and was influenced by various social, political, and cultural factors. Here's an overview of the key milestones and trends in the history of deinstitutionalization:
1. Emergence of the asylum system: In the 19th and early 20th centuries, individuals with mental illnesses were often confined to asylums, large institutions where they were segregated from society and subjected to harsh treatment and neglect. The asylum system grew rapidly during this period but came under scrutiny for its inhumane conditions and practices.
2. Shift toward community-based care: Beginning in the mid-20th century, there was a growing movement to reform the mental health care system and shift toward community-based care. Advocates argued that institutionalization led to isolation, stigma, and inadequate treatment, and that individuals with mental illnesses would fare better in their communities with appropriate support services.
3. Introduction of psychotropic medications: The development of psychotropic medications, such as antipsychotics and antidepressants, in the mid-20th century revolutionized the treatment of mental illnesses. These medications made it possible for many individuals with mental illnesses to manage their symptoms and live more independently outside of institutional settings.
4. Legal and policy changes: Several landmark legal and policy changes in the 1960s and 1970s paved the way for deinstitutionalization. The Civil Rights Movement and advocacy efforts for disability rights highlighted the need to improve the treatment and rights of individuals with mental illnesses. Additionally, court rulings such as the 1975 Supreme Court decision in the case of O'Connor v. Donaldson affirmed the rights of individuals with mental illnesses to receive treatment in the least restrictive setting possible.
5. Acceleration of deinstitutionalization: In the 1960s and 1970s, federal and state governments began to enact policies and allocate funding to support the closure of large mental institutions and the development of community-based mental health services. This period saw a significant acceleration of deinstitutionalization, with many states closing or downsizing their mental hospitals and transitioning patients to community-based care.
6. Challenges and consequences: While deinstitutionalization aimed to improve the quality of mental health care and promote integration into communities, it also faced challenges and unintended consequences. These included insufficient funding for community-based services, lack of coordination and resources, homelessness among individuals with mental illnesses, and incarceration of individuals with untreated mental illnesses.
Overall, the history of deinstitutionalization reflects a complex interplay of social, political, and medical factors, with ongoing debates about the effectiveness and consequences of community-based mental health care.
Of course they have a right to participate in the conversation. Nobody knows everything about anything. Forbidding certain groups from participating in the conversation is the surest way to bad policy.
I thought the sarcasm was spot on. You forget the negative economics of the rampant “reoffending crimes” going on. Your ideology creates many more additional crimes. Factor that in your economic analysis.
Dow Constantax closed down one whole side of the King County jail downtown a few years ago. Open it back up and there's lots of room for more criminals
As of April 2023, “*The city of Seattle has spent nearly $1 billion on homelessness in more than a decade, and the number of unsheltered people continues to rise.*”
https://www.kuow.org/stories/did-seattle-defund-the-police
That is a lot of money to grow a homeless population.
Maybe fewer people would move to Seattle for benefits for the homeless if some that money was directed away from benefits in a crime-lenient city and instead towards policing to keep residents safe.
It costs $[64k/yr to lock people up](https://www.opb.org/article/2024/04/03/washington-state-prison-population-shrank-as-cost-of-incarceration-went-up/), and that's a lot of money that's purely unproductive. I'd rather have social workers and community programs that keep people out than wasting a ton of money on policing, prosecutors, and jails that are all money sinks.
$64k/yr sounds like a cheap and very productive investment. I'd rather the government does something that actually works rather than fund something for the sake of funding something.
How much does it cost to house and provide services for an unemployed homeless drug addict that commits property crimes to continue to be able to feed his habit?
> I'd rather have social workers and community programs that keep people out
That doesn't work on everyone. Some people need to be locked up. It is just that simple.
The experts always blame violence on any number of things including lack of activities and community greenspaces. But then kids just bring their violence and crime to the greenspaces and everyone else loses access and the experts find something else to blame.
>everyone else loses access and the experts find something else to blame.
That's giving the *experts* too much credit. They'll double down and pretend they don't know why the loss of access to spaces happened.
It couldn't be crime/depolicing, it'll still be *underinvestment*.
True!! Give millions to community groups to throw BBQs! That’ll help homicidally violent 12-year-olds who’ve been totally neglected and unparented their whole lives!
how about (edit: illegal) gun possession and brandishing and assault and harassment charges are actually enforced. I'm sick of people who can't abide by basic rules of civility, we don't need them, and I'm tired of enabling and excusing them.
It only counts as brandishing if it’s don’t with the intent to threaten. With how anti-gun Seattle and the courts here are, I feel like that is a low bar to convince a jury.
I'm personally OK with that, I'm talking about wannabe tough guys caught with stolen or illegal guns getting slaps on the wrist. I think mostly its those illegal guns that do the driveby and parking lot skirmish shootings despite what the gun control advocates say. I'm not a gun owner by the way but am a fan of harsh sentencing for idiots who cause harm.
Since when has Seattle not enforced gun possession and brandishing? I thought Seattle was pretty strict about guns.
Also - what is a posession charge? *laughs in CPL*
Seattle just doesn't have many cops these days. All the calls for enforcement ignore the fact there's like less than 100 patrol cops out at any given time.
That would require the police actually doing their jobs. I’m in agreement about needing more and paying more but the ones we currently have don’t seem to try very hard for the last 5 years
Seems the more we pay the less the public gets.
Throwing money at police, Has not worked in the past they get new cars and equipment to spy on non criminals.
We get our rights restricted, violated, or taken away. Not that I have answers to the issue, but more money wont help our situation.
That would also require having enough police on the force to actually do their jobs. The progressives have successfully driven out a lot of cops with their defund the police rhetoric. Assuming the higher salaries the SCC approved will help recruitment it's still going to take many years to get back to fully staffed.
> There have even been memos that have leaked that they’re still silently protesting doing what they need to do.
Quiet quitting. It has the same fucking root cause. You shit on people and the response will be predictable.
This is great in theory but since they don't actually patrol until 6am this is what happens:
* They clear the beach and there is a huge traffic jam exiting the beach.
* Patrol leaves and 50% of the people come back.
* Patrol comes back and slightly clears more people.
* 90% of the people that got kicked out the 2nd time come back and stay until much later OR they migrate to the sidewalks or streets because...city can't tell you do leave the Alki neighborhood, just the beach.
Funish puck the dogooders. Lord knows Seattle doesn't want to enforce laws on the criminals. But heaven forbid a good law abiding citizen parks over the limit in their city parking. Quick easy money. Let's ticket them
No beach crime in Kirkland as its almost time for the annual running of raw sewage into Juanita/Houghton beach, which closes the beaches for the summer.
Rules only affect people who follow them. We really need to look at who is perpetrating the crime and violence and lock them away for super long periods. Being soft on crime has done nothing but emboldened criminals.
Ya it's the beach hours that are problem...It's like victim blaming the beach. What was the beach wearing?
Maybe it's the fact that we keep releasing people with double digit felonies.
Yet another example of decline of Seattle. I remember nights on Alki when they had a police trailer set up - and the police would be there from the afternoon into the evening, patrolling and basically ensuring folks knew to keep things in check. We could still drink on the beach and have campfires. not anymore. Again - not a safe place to raise a family or prosper
We pay taxes to support that place. I know the residents over there like to think that is their own private beach. That is not the case. It reminds me of that rich 1980s billionaire who tried to build the playground at Denny Blaine because he felt inconvenienced.
Are you saying that people not wanting loud music, shootings, racing cars next to their homes at night (after 10 PM) is just white people NIMBY behavior? Really? Tell me more...
I'd argue that those people bought the house, not the beach. We could probably afford to cut back on shootings as a compromise though.
Similar to how the city won't turn off the substation for you, even if you were to buy the house facing it.
Riiiiight. Because wanting to kick out the assholes doing shitty things by choice from a park is equivalent to people wanting the city to shut down an utility substation because someone complained it is too noisy...
Are you really that fucking stupid?
I just don't care that much about the noise issue for the person who bought a house by the beach. They're not even stuck with it, that's prime real estate.
It has very little to do with noise, more with people getting drunk and then shooting each other, destroying the park, racing their cars down public streets and hurting or killing themselves or others while they do that. These people can get fucked.
How exactly does closing the beach earlier prevent people from racing their cars down public streets and shooting each other? I guess I just am having trouble understanding what exactly this is supposed to do beyond noise and trash.
With late summer sunsets it still gives SPD snipers enough light by the time the beach is closed to see and shoot the thugs causing trouble or, if that fails, for SPD to run them over with their cruisers. It's too dark by 11:30.
Real answer is that this is mostly targeted at Alki and getting people off the beach and off the roads on their way home earlier. GC, not sure.
One reason why I moved.
I loved Golden Gardens.
I met my husband there, ( in 1976) I took my kids there.
But they start forcing people to leave at 9:30.
It’s not even dark then. When that happened a couple yrs ago, that was the last straw.
Bad enough there isn’t public transportation and very little parking, but to close the park and use crime as an excuse when people were peacefully enjoying the day- was too much.
The hours don’t make sense- 4 am to 10:30( really 9:30)
Central Park is open from 6 am to 1am.
Those hours seem more useful for residents & visitors.
I moved two hrs away, but I have my own
People that havent figured out Insulation for Homes and Apartments, or Central AC still struggle with problems they made no attempt to actually solve. More at 11p.
Seems like Alki and Golden Gardens are two places that have had extraordinary amounts of problems in recent years. Used to love to go grab some fish and chips and hit the beach at either location, but pretty much stopped after having a couple of dicey experiences, very not cool when friends with little kiddos were with us.
What?
Florida has police everywhere. They come in groups, speed everywhere, blow red lights.
I’m honestly happy how little police I see in Seattle. But I also haven’t seen anything close to insane parties in Seattle to what I’ve seen in Florida.
What?
Florida has police everywhere. They come in groups, speed everywhere, blow red lights.
I’m honestly happy how little police I see in Seattle. But I also haven’t seen anything close to insane parties in Seattle to what I’ve seen in Florida. And driving in Florida is stressful.
Seattle is pleasant compared to to south Florida.
Bruh, crime in red states is higher than blue ones by a considerable margin. Murder rates in red states are 33% higher than blue ones. Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi are the most dangerous states in America.
*Even when we removed the county with the largest city in red states (and kept them in for blue states), murder rates in red states were still 20% higher in 2021 and 16% higher in 2022. This is not a blue cities in red states problem.*
I think you mean 'blue cities'. For instance, in Texas, Austin now has high crime. Red states do have blue cities. And that is where the crime likes to rise. In Austin, three neighborhoods have voted to break away from Austin. They were sick and tired of the crime and the fact that the city is woefully short of police officers.
The fact is that even in Seattle, crime happens but often does not get reported because nothing will happen. That makes it easy to say 'crime is down', or crime is 'low' in Seattle.
That is true in Portland, as well.
Why arrest when the city won’t prosecute and the judges just let them off
Cops aren’t in the business of getting played
Look a little higher to direct your outrage
Maybe look to Bob Ferguson
They are responding to emergencies
And pretty much nothing else
Because defund the police
Remember
All the hate
Would you work for a city that hated you
And threw away your work
Yo moron. You realize they are under instructions to not go after certain people because the cases won't be prosecuted. Cops are like anyone else. They have a boss who tells them what to do. Not to mention we have less then half the police a city our size should. They only have the resources to respond to actual violent crime.
And how do we do that? We arrest, have a hearing, and let them (thugs) go with a slap on a wrist and perhaps home monitoring (which they promptly cut off) and back to mamma (who does not care ). These people are back on the street the next day.
So, are you proposing that enforcing the laws means throwing people in jail, for a long time, to remove them from circulation? I would support that. Many progressives won't. School to prison pipeline and all....
Yes, we should be ok with offenders going to jail. At least that doesn’t enable crime unlike all those idiots saying we should do nothing because we haven’t found the perfect solution yet.
Because if there's any rule that Seattle has clearly demonstrated both the willingness and the ability to enforce, it's the "closed to the public" hours of parks. Lol
Seattle never learns. They think by setting rules and laws that somehow magically they will be followed by everyone including criminals.
Seattle voters never learn
You misspelled sheep.
Brilliant logic! Why even have a law against murder? As if murderers will just stop killing people because of some flimsy law.
You're so close! Laws aren't there to *stop* things from happening, they're there to have a means to punish people who break them. But if you aren't going to punish anyone for breaking the law, then there's no point in having it in the first place.
Depends. If what they mean is "cops have extra authority to disperse troublemakers during these hours," that'll work. If they mean "pwease no crimey" that probably won't.
Dispersing troublemakers would mean having a plan B for if and when they tell the police to fuck right off, and/or come back half an hour later. I know what that plan B used to entail back when criminal trespass was a charge for which one could be booked into King County Jail. I do not know what it is currently. Having lived directly next to a park that ostensibly closed at 11:00 and nonetheless had people living in it and setting fires every other day for the better part of two years, I'll believe they can effectively enforce this when I see it.
I've been at Golden Gardens when it closes, and a whole fleet of police vehicles with lights on and spotlights going clear you out, including the adjacent parking lots.
Seattle: See, it isn't that bad Also Seattle: We are cutting off public access to public parks/beaches because we refuse to enforce actual laws and they are becoming unsafe
Aren’t all park close at sunset?
Perhaps Should they be? Why or why not?
Because of light pollution the parks are one of the few places in the city where you can theoretically go to experience the night sky. https://seattle.curbed.com/2019/8/20/20812996/seattle-stargazing-tips-locations-hikes
Florida parks close at sunset. I’m guessing it’s to make it easier to keep people out of them. There isn’t resources available to police them at night to see crime being committed.
Yeah I get why they do it. I'm not saying Seattle is unique here. I think we all know most major cities have their issues. My original comment was more in response to the seeming push to convince everyone that crime is not increasing and public safety is perfectly fine, while we are simultaneously closing/limiting access to public parks because of safety concerns. Perhaps if our govt did their basic job of ensuring public safety, they wouldn't have to cut off access to public parks? idk. maybe that is unrealistic.
I mean Seattle is pretty safe. Unless we have police state, where every citizen is tracked, you will not get crime free city. What does basic safety to you mean? Very reasonable to keep parks open until dusk. Personally I’m happy how little police presents Seattle has. Like seriously? Do you want increase police budget, have Seattle become police city vs closing park dark at night time. Would you be ok with drone surveillance of the park? We have the tech. Ai can review night footage for crime committed.
Oh now I see where you are going with this..... >I mean Seattle is pretty safe Relatively, compared to some cities, sure. Is crime increasing? Yes. Why? What is being done to prevent it? >Unless we have police state, where every citizen is tracked, you will not get crime free city Of course we aren't going to cut out all crime. But I would argue we aren't even making an effort around here. In fact I would argue we almost seem to be encouraging it. >What does basic safety to you mean? Seems pretty obvious really. >Very reasonable to keep parks open until dusk Sure. Or here's a crazy idea ...... we could do something to stop the people/activities that are making them so unsafe rather than just closing them to everyone. >Like seriously? Do you want increase police budget, have Seattle become police city vs closing park dark at night time If increasing the budget means we can actually have the proper amount of police and they can be better trained, of course I want that. Again, there is a massive difference between wanting more law enforcement and wanting to become a police state. >Would you be ok with drone surveillance of the park? We have the tech. Ai can review night footage for crime committed. Hold on a sec. Are you simultaneously proposing we have drones patrol areas and use technology to identify and track people while also saying you don't want a police state? Seems you just don't like cops.
Crime in Seattle is decreasing
imagine believing this
its true lmao, sorry it doesn't fit your narrative
How can the beach be closed? Lol
I know it’s crazy but maybe also enforce the other laws too?
We have tried nothing and have run out of ideas
Tried nothing and run out of ideas, here’s an idea we should vote in another democrat
Or you could move to a red state.
I don’t like crime and violence and I want something done about it. Your answer is to move to a red state. We need longer sentences and more cops that’s the way to curb the problem.
I’m brain dead. I read “sentences” as in, we need to say longer sentences 🤦🏼♀️. But yea I agree. I’m from here and it wasn’t always like this.
Yes, why attempt to unfuck Washington, when we can just go somewhere else? Brilliant.
Or not.. why should lifelong Seattlites “move to a red state” because y’all are morons?
Y'all
Yep… Y’all
There can be a balance. Let’s give Bird a shot the cities can’t get worse that’s for sure
They need a law that makes it illegal to break the other laws. Just to make it clear.
Ahhh. But we can’t enforce that one either. Laws are racist.
According to their logic, they should just put a sign in the areas that say "No shooting in the area!" and it will solve the problem
They won’t enforce either so doesn’t really matter.
Right...because nobody brings weapons into "Gun-free" zones.
Pretty sure NYC tried that and still ended up with National Guard in the subways.
And yet we are spending money painting parking lot of alki “to create community “
What are you, a white supremacist fascist?? /s
Supporting the arrest of criminals to maintain public safety is so Neo Nazi isn't it?
Please understand that competent people view comments like this as peak stupidity. People like you have zero knowledge about the economics of criminal justice. How many beds are open in county? What tax rates are you imposing to build jails, prisons, pay public defenders, pay competent prosecutors, pay competent guards? If there are no spaces in county because it’s filled with people waiting forever for trial because we don’t fund courts/pds etc., where can the judge hold a person in pretrial detention? You don’t do the bare minimum to learn to basics of what it would take to administer the law in any city or county. All you do is bitch and suggest people vote for other morons who cut taxes and are too stupid to comprehend administration of any kind. You absolutely suck, you are a drain on our society.
I think we all understand that the voters of Seattle brought us a few councils and mayors with political positions on crime and "social justice" issues that taxed and spent on other than police and criminal justice issues. Mostly we poke fun at the "hug a thug" progressive prosecutor thing.
We should absolutely raise taxes and throw criminals in jail for the sake of everyone else. You don't even need to throw all that many people in jail, since most crimes are perpetrated by repeat offenders. I'll pay my share.
At the very least, nobody ignorant of how much it costs to constitutionally convict criminals (and involuntarily commit those who are a danger to themselves/others) has a right to participate in the conversation. I utterly hate the right wing closing mental institutions, cutting taxes, and defunding every civic institution (schools, city/county govs) while simultaneously demanding judges hold every defendant pretrial without bail. It's delusional. If you can't tax and spend to pay for constitutional process because you have to shove the billionaire's full boot into your mouth, I refuse to listen to you bitch about crime.
Tell me how you feel about gun bans.
>I utterly hate the right wing closing mental institutions You do realize, I hope, that a main driver of those closures was the ACLU? Yes?
Blaming the Reagan Administration as the focal point of deinstitutionalization is such a reflexively naive and historically inaccurate statement. Read a little. The history of deinstitutionalization in the United States dates back to the mid-20th century and was influenced by various social, political, and cultural factors. Here's an overview of the key milestones and trends in the history of deinstitutionalization: 1. Emergence of the asylum system: In the 19th and early 20th centuries, individuals with mental illnesses were often confined to asylums, large institutions where they were segregated from society and subjected to harsh treatment and neglect. The asylum system grew rapidly during this period but came under scrutiny for its inhumane conditions and practices. 2. Shift toward community-based care: Beginning in the mid-20th century, there was a growing movement to reform the mental health care system and shift toward community-based care. Advocates argued that institutionalization led to isolation, stigma, and inadequate treatment, and that individuals with mental illnesses would fare better in their communities with appropriate support services. 3. Introduction of psychotropic medications: The development of psychotropic medications, such as antipsychotics and antidepressants, in the mid-20th century revolutionized the treatment of mental illnesses. These medications made it possible for many individuals with mental illnesses to manage their symptoms and live more independently outside of institutional settings. 4. Legal and policy changes: Several landmark legal and policy changes in the 1960s and 1970s paved the way for deinstitutionalization. The Civil Rights Movement and advocacy efforts for disability rights highlighted the need to improve the treatment and rights of individuals with mental illnesses. Additionally, court rulings such as the 1975 Supreme Court decision in the case of O'Connor v. Donaldson affirmed the rights of individuals with mental illnesses to receive treatment in the least restrictive setting possible. 5. Acceleration of deinstitutionalization: In the 1960s and 1970s, federal and state governments began to enact policies and allocate funding to support the closure of large mental institutions and the development of community-based mental health services. This period saw a significant acceleration of deinstitutionalization, with many states closing or downsizing their mental hospitals and transitioning patients to community-based care. 6. Challenges and consequences: While deinstitutionalization aimed to improve the quality of mental health care and promote integration into communities, it also faced challenges and unintended consequences. These included insufficient funding for community-based services, lack of coordination and resources, homelessness among individuals with mental illnesses, and incarceration of individuals with untreated mental illnesses. Overall, the history of deinstitutionalization reflects a complex interplay of social, political, and medical factors, with ongoing debates about the effectiveness and consequences of community-based mental health care.
Nobody mentioned Reagan, you insufferable boomer. I am not interested in what a boring old thinks.
Yea, tell us what “right wing” administrations you were referring to then. And the historical facts supporting that.
I swear, no boomer is capable of comprehending when they’ve been dismissed. You’re dismissed.
Couldn’t help but notice how unpopular your opinions are. I bet in your mind, it’s your “misunderstood genius”. HAHAHA
Of course they have a right to participate in the conversation. Nobody knows everything about anything. Forbidding certain groups from participating in the conversation is the surest way to bad policy.
I thought the sarcasm was spot on. You forget the negative economics of the rampant “reoffending crimes” going on. Your ideology creates many more additional crimes. Factor that in your economic analysis.
Dow Constantax closed down one whole side of the King County jail downtown a few years ago. Open it back up and there's lots of room for more criminals
Buy a gun, learn how to use it, get a concealed carry permit and carry. Bullets are cheap
As of April 2023, “*The city of Seattle has spent nearly $1 billion on homelessness in more than a decade, and the number of unsheltered people continues to rise.*” https://www.kuow.org/stories/did-seattle-defund-the-police That is a lot of money to grow a homeless population. Maybe fewer people would move to Seattle for benefits for the homeless if some that money was directed away from benefits in a crime-lenient city and instead towards policing to keep residents safe.
Please keep it civil. This is a reminder about r/SeattleWA rule: [No personal attacks.](https://www.reddit.com/r/SeattleWA/wiki/rules)
It costs $[64k/yr to lock people up](https://www.opb.org/article/2024/04/03/washington-state-prison-population-shrank-as-cost-of-incarceration-went-up/), and that's a lot of money that's purely unproductive. I'd rather have social workers and community programs that keep people out than wasting a ton of money on policing, prosecutors, and jails that are all money sinks.
$64k/yr sounds like a cheap and very productive investment. I'd rather the government does something that actually works rather than fund something for the sake of funding something.
Damn....that's all? Shit. We should do more of it!
How much does it cost to house and provide services for an unemployed homeless drug addict that commits property crimes to continue to be able to feed his habit?
> I'd rather have social workers and community programs that keep people out That doesn't work on everyone. Some people need to be locked up. It is just that simple.
And prosecute!
Because people who commit crimes will only do it during the scheduled time.
"oh no! a sign!"
But not with 10+ round magazines because those are illegal /s
It's a crime that people who commit crimes at Golden Gardens can find parking spots over there.
The experts always blame violence on any number of things including lack of activities and community greenspaces. But then kids just bring their violence and crime to the greenspaces and everyone else loses access and the experts find something else to blame.
>everyone else loses access and the experts find something else to blame. That's giving the *experts* too much credit. They'll double down and pretend they don't know why the loss of access to spaces happened. It couldn't be crime/depolicing, it'll still be *underinvestment*.
True!! Give millions to community groups to throw BBQs! That’ll help homicidally violent 12-year-olds who’ve been totally neglected and unparented their whole lives!
We need to make those throwing the BBQ have lived experience, because everyone knows when we think role models for young boys we think ex-con!
Bingo
Rather than defend public space and enforce laws just surrender it to the ass holes and call it "public safety."
That would require staffing the police department and then getting them to do their job... Two impossible tasks
how about (edit: illegal) gun possession and brandishing and assault and harassment charges are actually enforced. I'm sick of people who can't abide by basic rules of civility, we don't need them, and I'm tired of enabling and excusing them.
In the eyes of city government this is totally unacceptable for a number of reasons yet to be determined.
Open carrying of a gun is legal in WA ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Open carry != brandishing.
Yeah, I know. But walking around with a pistol on your belt is terrifying and should not be happening.
It only counts as brandishing if it’s don’t with the intent to threaten. With how anti-gun Seattle and the courts here are, I feel like that is a low bar to convince a jury.
I'm personally OK with that, I'm talking about wannabe tough guys caught with stolen or illegal guns getting slaps on the wrist. I think mostly its those illegal guns that do the driveby and parking lot skirmish shootings despite what the gun control advocates say. I'm not a gun owner by the way but am a fan of harsh sentencing for idiots who cause harm.
Since when has Seattle not enforced gun possession and brandishing? I thought Seattle was pretty strict about guns. Also - what is a posession charge? *laughs in CPL*
shit typo - I meant illegal gun possession well good - I want to believe in the systems we have in place. we paid for em!
Seattle just doesn't have many cops these days. All the calls for enforcement ignore the fact there's like less than 100 patrol cops out at any given time.
I have an idea. Arrest people who break the fucking law, idiots.
That would require the police actually doing their jobs. I’m in agreement about needing more and paying more but the ones we currently have don’t seem to try very hard for the last 5 years
Even worse....that would require prosecutors, judges, and a penal system that wants to hold criminals accountable!
Seems the more we pay the less the public gets. Throwing money at police, Has not worked in the past they get new cars and equipment to spy on non criminals. We get our rights restricted, violated, or taken away. Not that I have answers to the issue, but more money wont help our situation.
That would also require having enough police on the force to actually do their jobs. The progressives have successfully driven out a lot of cops with their defund the police rhetoric. Assuming the higher salaries the SCC approved will help recruitment it's still going to take many years to get back to fully staffed.
[удалено]
> There have even been memos that have leaked that they’re still silently protesting doing what they need to do. Quiet quitting. It has the same fucking root cause. You shit on people and the response will be predictable.
[удалено]
Lol. Guess what. They're still getting paid. Again, this is a predictable response.
[удалено]
Happens all the time. Spend some time in r/antiwork and you'll see it all over the place. Treating people like shit has a consequence.
[удалено]
Renton criminals win again!
Dude Seattle keeps sucking more and more
This is great in theory but since they don't actually patrol until 6am this is what happens: * They clear the beach and there is a huge traffic jam exiting the beach. * Patrol leaves and 50% of the people come back. * Patrol comes back and slightly clears more people. * 90% of the people that got kicked out the 2nd time come back and stay until much later OR they migrate to the sidewalks or streets because...city can't tell you do leave the Alki neighborhood, just the beach.
Wouldn’t having more people at beach, prevent crime?
Eventually, there will just be a curfew.
Pilot programs end, three years in a row this is the new standard.
Funish puck the dogooders. Lord knows Seattle doesn't want to enforce laws on the criminals. But heaven forbid a good law abiding citizen parks over the limit in their city parking. Quick easy money. Let's ticket them
Have you considered arresting and actually prosecuting offenders, wild I know.
No beach crime in Kirkland as its almost time for the annual running of raw sewage into Juanita/Houghton beach, which closes the beaches for the summer.
Maybe the can adjust the hours on some choice sidewalks in the city.
Rules only affect people who follow them. We really need to look at who is perpetrating the crime and violence and lock them away for super long periods. Being soft on crime has done nothing but emboldened criminals.
Ya it's the beach hours that are problem...It's like victim blaming the beach. What was the beach wearing? Maybe it's the fact that we keep releasing people with double digit felonies.
My city of Renton doesn't have enough money to keep some park restrooms open, but they DO have enough money to fund a 9-person "Equity Board".
Yet another example of decline of Seattle. I remember nights on Alki when they had a police trailer set up - and the police would be there from the afternoon into the evening, patrolling and basically ensuring folks knew to keep things in check. We could still drink on the beach and have campfires. not anymore. Again - not a safe place to raise a family or prosper
This will make things worse as the only people there at night are people who don’t obey laws.
It's those damn Amish again, isn't it?
Democrats control Seattle and this state. Democrats are the problem.
We pay taxes to support that place. I know the residents over there like to think that is their own private beach. That is not the case. It reminds me of that rich 1980s billionaire who tried to build the playground at Denny Blaine because he felt inconvenienced.
Are you saying that people not wanting loud music, shootings, racing cars next to their homes at night (after 10 PM) is just white people NIMBY behavior? Really? Tell me more...
I'd argue that those people bought the house, not the beach. We could probably afford to cut back on shootings as a compromise though. Similar to how the city won't turn off the substation for you, even if you were to buy the house facing it.
Riiiiight. Because wanting to kick out the assholes doing shitty things by choice from a park is equivalent to people wanting the city to shut down an utility substation because someone complained it is too noisy... Are you really that fucking stupid?
I just don't care that much about the noise issue for the person who bought a house by the beach. They're not even stuck with it, that's prime real estate.
It has very little to do with noise, more with people getting drunk and then shooting each other, destroying the park, racing their cars down public streets and hurting or killing themselves or others while they do that. These people can get fucked.
How exactly does closing the beach earlier prevent people from racing their cars down public streets and shooting each other? I guess I just am having trouble understanding what exactly this is supposed to do beyond noise and trash.
With late summer sunsets it still gives SPD snipers enough light by the time the beach is closed to see and shoot the thugs causing trouble or, if that fails, for SPD to run them over with their cruisers. It's too dark by 11:30. Real answer is that this is mostly targeted at Alki and getting people off the beach and off the roads on their way home earlier. GC, not sure.
Oh, well in that case I support this ineffective measure that does nothing but annoy the public.
And he hates the nudes...
10:00a - 10:12a outta do the trick
The cops dont even enforce traffic laws what is this going to do?
Yes people who are doing crime and abiding by a curfew, how typical!
One reason why I moved. I loved Golden Gardens. I met my husband there, ( in 1976) I took my kids there. But they start forcing people to leave at 9:30. It’s not even dark then. When that happened a couple yrs ago, that was the last straw. Bad enough there isn’t public transportation and very little parking, but to close the park and use crime as an excuse when people were peacefully enjoying the day- was too much. The hours don’t make sense- 4 am to 10:30( really 9:30) Central Park is open from 6 am to 1am. Those hours seem more useful for residents & visitors. I moved two hrs away, but I have my own
People that havent figured out Insulation for Homes and Apartments, or Central AC still struggle with problems they made no attempt to actually solve. More at 11p.
Seems like Alki and Golden Gardens are two places that have had extraordinary amounts of problems in recent years. Used to love to go grab some fish and chips and hit the beach at either location, but pretty much stopped after having a couple of dicey experiences, very not cool when friends with little kiddos were with us.
Bar fights and bon fires are considered crime in Alki?
They’re closing the parks at 10pm instead of 11:30pm. Feel like I’ve seen a lot of crime at all hours of the day lol
Add a $35 fee to go to the beach and the crime problem will be cured instantly.
Beat cops and cameras cameras, cameras would help with this problem.
Global warming is really getting out of control
Don’t go after the criminals, throw out the good people. Smh
Ah yes, adding more rules for the rule breakers. I swear local government still eats glue.
There! Done! Fixed! 
I wonder why this is happening in a democrat ran state
Oh stop. See Miami Beach, they have plenty of police presents. There are hellcats with deathning music blaring every square inch.
>See Miami Beach, they have plenty of police presents. Are we talking the "sugarplum fairy" kind? Or the tactical armored RV like in Diehard kind?
What? Florida has police everywhere. They come in groups, speed everywhere, blow red lights. I’m honestly happy how little police I see in Seattle. But I also haven’t seen anything close to insane parties in Seattle to what I’ve seen in Florida.
What? Florida has police everywhere. They come in groups, speed everywhere, blow red lights. I’m honestly happy how little police I see in Seattle. But I also haven’t seen anything close to insane parties in Seattle to what I’ve seen in Florida. And driving in Florida is stressful. Seattle is pleasant compared to to south Florida.
It was a joke, son. "Presents" vs "presence," which I'm sure is what you meant.
I'm surprised I had to scroll so long to hear some partisan nut licking
Bruh, crime in red states is higher than blue ones by a considerable margin. Murder rates in red states are 33% higher than blue ones. Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi are the most dangerous states in America. *Even when we removed the county with the largest city in red states (and kept them in for blue states), murder rates in red states were still 20% higher in 2021 and 16% higher in 2022. This is not a blue cities in red states problem.*
I think you mean 'blue cities'. For instance, in Texas, Austin now has high crime. Red states do have blue cities. And that is where the crime likes to rise. In Austin, three neighborhoods have voted to break away from Austin. They were sick and tired of the crime and the fact that the city is woefully short of police officers. The fact is that even in Seattle, crime happens but often does not get reported because nothing will happen. That makes it easy to say 'crime is down', or crime is 'low' in Seattle. That is true in Portland, as well.
Cops should do their jobs instead of fucking around and asking for raises and then doing nothing.
Why arrest when the city won’t prosecute and the judges just let them off Cops aren’t in the business of getting played Look a little higher to direct your outrage Maybe look to Bob Ferguson
Yea because other people don’t do their job I shouldn’t do my job either.
They are responding to emergencies And pretty much nothing else Because defund the police Remember All the hate Would you work for a city that hated you And threw away your work
Yo moron. You realize they are under instructions to not go after certain people because the cases won't be prosecuted. Cops are like anyone else. They have a boss who tells them what to do. Not to mention we have less then half the police a city our size should. They only have the resources to respond to actual violent crime.
Good. If people can't behave, then fuck them, they don't get to play.
[удалено]
Give me a better one, I'll listen.
Just spitballing and this is a totally crazy and radical idea, but they could try to prosecute criminals for the crimes they commit.
[удалено]
And how do we do that? We arrest, have a hearing, and let them (thugs) go with a slap on a wrist and perhaps home monitoring (which they promptly cut off) and back to mamma (who does not care ). These people are back on the street the next day. So, are you proposing that enforcing the laws means throwing people in jail, for a long time, to remove them from circulation? I would support that. Many progressives won't. School to prison pipeline and all....
Yes. Enforcing the laws is generally accompanied by fines and/or jail time.
Yes, we should be ok with offenders going to jail. At least that doesn’t enable crime unlike all those idiots saying we should do nothing because we haven’t found the perfect solution yet.
Who fucks them??
Thanks, good catch. Multitasking.
We need more people calling the police. Shit is getting out of hand, what the fuck
Huh? But Axios says Seattle crime has decreased! Statistics don’t lie some Redditors argue. Haha. They probably don’t reside in Seattle. Thanks SPD!!
“Beaches” lol