sugarplant's comments

>and the number involving guns is much smaller.

lol. a threat of violence can exist without the gun. im glad you are confident in your ability to beat any random, unknown stranger (especially tweakers) in a tussle. as someone with bjj and boxing experience i would say this is unbelievably arrogant though.

>look up the statistics instead of getting scared watching the news.

ive seen the same ones that the other guy replied to you with. this is almost not worth replying to because you are just being snide and dismissive. to reciprocate, do you realize that the statistics (which you havent actually read) aren't the governing force of what happens to you in your life? statistics are a model of reality. for example, what do you think the odds would say that between when i replied to your post yesterday and now, that i experienced a break in where someone was trying to climb into my son's room at 3 in the morning? do you think my first thought was about the statistical likelihood of it? for the record i live in one of the safest states in the US. life isn't a spreadsheet with numbers on it, genius. if you are comforted by those numbers, good for you. telling others to not be scared of bad things happening to them is peak dork arrogance.

im curious where you live where home invasions dont happen. i live in one of the safest states in the US and home invasions happen here.

people actually do commit random violence in home invasions by the way. your having chosen not to look into it at all or read the news ever doesnt negate this. its to say that random violence in home invasions is common, but the point is that it does happen. and i think people should have a very effective means to defend themselves.

theres even been a serial killer that committed home invasions by claiming to be police upon breaking in. this also happened recently with those politicians that got assassinated.

if you dont want to have a firearm thats your choice. dont see why you think this is necessary for other people though.

people have such insane opinions on this despite the knowledge out there. there are so many videos of self defense shootings out there now, including videos with analysis etc.

people posting talking about combat rolling and chambering after their assailant misses a shot. what the fuck lmao

there are plenty of videos online showing situations where it did matter.

if you google around for "Ring camera video appears to show man shoot assailant in self-defense" you can find one.

some people do live in legitimately very dangerous places. whether one should carry chambered is a function of that.

there are hundreds upon hundreds of videos online of self defense shootings, including some where the victim draws second and successfully defends against a shooter. a lot of them happen in brazil too. coming to a thread about guns to state a ridiculous opinion about conceal carry strikes me as something someone mentally ill would do.

>In those situations, if there was time to chamber a round then there was time to escape.

500ms, just enough time to open up console and type noclip to escape

>The study, reported in Nature Human Behaviour, was designed to test the effects of the four-day workweek with no reduction in pay.

>The researchers compared work and health-related indicators – including burnout, job satisfaction, and mental and physical health – before and after the intervention using survey data.

so they surveyed people after having them work less about whether or not they liked working less and getting paid the same? wow thats pretty compelling stuff there. maybe we could see if a 1 day work week "RULES" next

so you dont have these sorts of housing projects in your area and are telling the guy who grew up around them how they actually work?

people wonder why these projects get shot down so often. there's no accountability for the people that move into the units and then people just pretend junkies and dealers dont end up in these units. a lot of these affordable housing projects have "housing first" units baked into their plans which is a type of unit that houses active junkies and refuses to kick them out for any reason. thats the type of stuff people are afraid of. nobody wants to live around drug dealers and tweakers especially if they have kids.

how high were you when you made this post?

>Your local community implemented a thing poorly, hence nobody should ever attempt to improve anything?

the original context was a ridiculous characterization of anyone being against a needle program. i am giving you one context of why someone might be against one, from the perspective of how it has been going in my city. whether standard protocol or poorly implemented, that is how it has been going.

>You spend a lot of time accusing others of dishonesty and condescending, but your own comments read much more in that spirit.

the condescension is hard to avoid when replies are posing snarky rhetorical questions which make understanding or addressing anything difficult. if you felt i've been dishonest, feel free to point it out. but preferably not in the way you did a second ago which took the form of "SO WE SHOULDN'T DO ANYTHING TO IMPROVE EVER?" which was clearly a good faith interpretation.

>Outside the Helsinki metropolitan area real estate prices are not bad at all.

outside the area where 30% of the entire country lives? ok. the actual number of years for helinski metropolitan area appears to be 10, and is higher than boston and nyc which are both INCREDIBLY expensive places to live. note that is generously comparing the actual cities to the metrpolitan area of helsinki.

the next largest metropolitan area is tampere, which is 6.9 years at median salary. this is very slightly cheaper than where i live which is also a very expensive city to live in. the city i live in is straight up not affordable to buy a house in at median salary.

>Either way if you're top 5% income you can easily afford to buy a house.

they are able to, but this wasnt the point of what they said. you have to be top 5% to comfortably own. doing some number crunching with chatgpt (lets pretend its accurate) to own at median salary in tampere requires more than 50% of your post tax income. that's with a 20% downpayment on a 300k house.

if i got any of those numbers wrong, feel free to correct. in the interest of time, they were done with chatgpt. i believe the prompts and data asked for should be simple enough to be accurate.

>and I'm not too concerned about the top earners starving

should also be noted that this top earning income is the equivalent of 80k USD. if they lived in the US they would be making double that. in the us, this is near median in a lot of places, and quite attainable in most.

there are different ways of accomplishing a needle program. around here they hand out packs of 100 without any stipulation. to everyone's surprise, our city is now littered in stray needles and requires constant cleanup. they're everywhere. the various programs do attract people from other states. this much is evident by our shelter logs which survey where they are from.

it's important to note that it's probably not a very large set of them that dump their needles publicly. this is outright sociopathic and evil, which i don't think most of them are. this distinction is important because the sociopathic homeless do make it a much more taboo issue to deal with.

>I'm sure there are extreme cases but the vast majority of homeless are not much different than you and I.

i have seen estimates saying 50% are addicted to substances. in any case housing first prioritizes the most unstable and mentally ill to give immediate housing. this is a very typical feature of the program. if you are finnish, you should check out some videos of what our homeless are like. it's obviously not the same for multiple reasons.

>Actually I think it's beneficial if addicts are not lumped together in a stigmatized "housing first development".

again, to everyone else's detriment.

>An essential part of the housing first approach (that seems to be entirely neglected in the US) is to build enough affordable homes.

this is a funny statement considering wages in finland vs real estate prices. ive been told by a top 5% income finn that buying a house is not really possible for most people there currently. you can only inherit. the wages are lower, the taxes much higher, and real estate more expensive. of course you probably mean the technical "affordable housing" definition which just means housing for anyone making under median area income. the money to fund these things comes from somewhere, and it seems to typically always be the middle class.

>me? find a gal? nope siree. i simply have too many video games to play and anime to watch! this wolf rides solo. at the end of the day i simply couldnt imagine myself with a sweet little missus in my arms... honestly, i retch at the thought! id much rather hotglue my hatsune miku figurine

trust me brother, the day will come when video games, anime, and surrogate friendships get boring. the copes and distractions dont last forever.

>marginal decrease in for example medical expenses

why would there be a decrease rather than an increase? they're linked up with a full time care team as well as paths for more healthcare services. they also are allowed to continue to destroy their body with drugs. a local newspaper just ran an article here about how many health problems they have when they get into the local program.

yes i am very bias about the topic, and it wouldnt matter to me if it were much cheaper. but it truly doesnt sound plausible. i do not think setting up society so that people can comfortably get high all day, for free, at everyone else's expense, is a good or fair setup. there are many people struggling to stay afloat. maybe we could focus on solving that first. or focusing on the sober homeless.

maybe if you act just a little more condescending i will have a clue what you are trying to say

you should carefully reread what he wrote and reread what you linked

i like how condescending this post is while just casually asserting multiple ridiculous things. ie: nobody ever acts decadently, all meth addicts actually have adhd, staying up for 4 days smoking meth is actually "self medicating", that the healthcare in usa (one of the most lenient places to be prescribed stims in the world) is somehow the reason why they cant get a stimulant prescription. just ridiculous.

this is such a dishonest characterization. the issue people have with free needles is that they end up everywhere but a sharps container. they throw loose needles in every park, walking path, bus stop, etc. in the entire city. my city has had this issue for years now.

you should use some of the superhuman empathy you have to explore other perspectives on the issue. even for just a minute.

do people really believe this claim up front?

providing active junkies:

1) completely free units to destroy 2) 24/7 emergency care teams 3) completely free healthcare and mental healthcare 4) no sobriety expectations of any sort 5) no possibility to be kicked out of the program for any reason

is going to be cheaper than putting them in jail or an institution? wow sounds almost too good to be true

it would be interesting (or funny) to get a summary on exactly how they are deriving the cost metric for this. i would just about guarantee they've taken creative liberties to make the numbers fit.

according to HUD[0] infestations, flooding, and fires are "typical behavior problems" in housing first programs. only in "extreme circumstances" does this warrant switching them to another unit. there is no way these are cheap damages to fix.

housing first programs are often mixed into ordinary developments too. i bet families living near or adjacent to these units really enjoy living next to completely unstable addicts. housing first programs explicitly prioritize the least stable, most mentally ill addicts too. but it's the humane thing to do at everyone else's expense.

a lot of cities in the US have a housing first program, among many other programs in a similar vein (ie safe injection sites). take san francisco for example. they spend billions of dollars every year on programs for the homeless. from what i hear the situation is still terrible. there are even businesses moving out of SF directly citing quality of life.

the cost of living in my city is so expensive that there are adults that work full time who have to have roommates to live at subsistence level. there are also housing first programs here that give junkies units for free to continue getting high in indefinitely. this is a ridiculous situation. either way i would rather it cost more to have people institutionalized or put in jail for breaking the law. this would also do good for actually having resources to help the ones who are actually down on their luck.

[0]https://www.huduser.gov/portal/publications/hsgfirst.pdf