It's amazing to me how many people have opinions on things they have not read. More than one responder who seem to be very intelligent, quite conservative, seem to think they can formulate an educated opinion on Homelessness for Stupid People based entirely on one or two blog posts, specifically those where I have tended to be critical of the LPD.
By the way, LPD, you will always have my full support and cooperation. But when I see something that bothers me (involving your interaction with the Homeless) I'll be talking about it. That goes for any government institution.
One poster had not read the blog he was answering. How do I know this? It was on the Police Failure at the Livermore Library. He posted that he could find no law supporting what my problem was. I had pasted both relevant laws into the blog itself! They were there! In italics! Too lazy to read... hmm...
Find out what's happening in Livermorewith free, real-time updates from Patch.
But, yesterday, I was very amused when a taxpayer funded worker from ABODE told me that, in her opinion, these blogs were destructive.
I asked her how they were destructive.
Find out what's happening in Livermorewith free, real-time updates from Patch.
She told me that when I air the private business of people, it is hurtful.
I told her I don't do that. I air the public business of people who abuse others in public.
No, it's still private, she told me. It doesn't matter that it's in public!
Uhm... can you tell me which blog post you have the biggest problem with?
I haven't read them, she tells me... and she will not be...
What would I expect from someone who gets an income provided for by the Government who is basically a paid advocate?
Okay, for this person who doesn't bother to read these blog postings, hopefully this will get back to her:
What is done in PUBLIC is PUBLIC!
When you abuse others in public it is public! People see it! It is fair game! When you are abusive to people around you your expectation of privacy is NIL! As in NON-EXISTENT!
I'd venture to say that any government funded worker should have zero expectation of privacy by virtue of being government funded period... that's my attitude toward a lot of these people. They very often bother me with their holier than thou attitudes... I've often noticed that taxpayer funded employees tend to act as though you work for them when they're providing you with a service... especially one you're for which you may be paying a fee. Do I have a bias against them? Yeah... I tend to regard them poorly through a great deal of experience... mostly bad. It doesn't seem to matter whether they work for a government agency or private, taxpayer funded non-profit... the attitudes seem to be the same.
Funny how the Librarians I see most days seem to be the exception. And Cops are Cops... they have a culture all their own that the rest of us will never understand. Librarians probably do as well...
I could argue that public employees (including those tax funded types working through non-profits) have no expectation of privacy involving anything connected to their jobs... but that's for another time, I suppose. They'd tell you different, of course. Their notion of privacy reminds me a great deal of how my grandfather used to describe the Bolshevik Doctrine:
What's yours is mine and what's mine is none of your business!
The attitude of this person I spoke with seems to be that a homeless person's bad behaviour in public should be considered private just by virtue of their being what...? Homeless?
Just so everyone knows, the message I'm trying to send to these people who practice bad behaviour is this: if they stop, people won't see them practising bad behaviour.
I would refer this woman to my very first blog entry... what I worry about most is the bad behaviour of other homeless people. She won't read it... but she'll have an opinion about it, I'm sure...
