[fbdab103]

>A removal of resources for the majority, because of concerns over “misuse” of less than one percent of residents.

Ah yes, the American way. The same justification I have heard as to why bathroom stalls need to have gaps and be unpleasant, "What if someone were to have sex and/or do drugs in there?!" Let them do it, just let me have a minor moment of privacy while I am pooping.

[permo-w]

it’s not just in America. all over Europe you have "hostile architecture"[1]; for example, benches designed to be uncomfortable so that homeless people don’t sleep on them

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_architecture

[rippercushions]

There is a lot more of this in the US than anywhere else in the world though, and that's because the US also has by far the worst homeless problem.

[goodpoint]

...very rarely to the extent of US.

[high_priest]

Well. Allowing for 'safe haven' for drug abusers in 'private' spaces comes with the side effect of attracting unsanitary behavior aswell, not letting you have a 'poopoo-peepee' time whatsoever.

[Georgelemental]

"Anarcho-tyranny" describes this so perfectly. If a tiny minority of bad behaving people of people is making things worse for all of us, we could choose to help, punish, or sequester that minority, as appropriate. But instead, it's the majority that must suffer in accommodation.