Re: Bad reporting Hazards to Homeless article

On Sat, 13 Apr 2024 19:12:03 -0000 (UTC)
"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

Sat, 13 Apr 2024 14:03:55 -0000 (UTC) Adam H. Kerman
<ahk@chinet.com>: 

 

Uptown viaduct fire reminder of hazards to homeless: 'There really
is no peace'
By Caroline Kubzansky and Rebecca Johnson
Chicago Tribune
April 13, 2024 at 5:00 a.m.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/2024/04/13/uptown-viaduct-fire-reminder-of-hazards-to-homeless-there-really-is-no-peace/
 

 

Despite the headline, we learn IN THE THIRD PARAGRAPH that the
hazard in question to other homeless people was from a homeless
woman who, with either reckless disregard or murderous intent, set
her own tent on fire, which led to all the other tents catching
fire fire. Note that one of the homeless men interviewed stated
that the area under the viaduct is usually fried, so there are
fires set repeatedly. 

 

"The area under the viaduct is usually fried": what exactly does that
mean? I assume that the area isn't literally fried but I'm not sure
what euphemism you're attempting here. 

 
It's what the homeless guy said. He meant that other homeless people
have set fires under that viaduct and there are scorch marks on the
abutments and sidewalks and underside of the viaduct.
 

Thanks for clarifying what the guy meant and sorry that I misunderstood
you as saying it in the first place.

That headline was misleading, and I'd say who set the fire should
have been stated in the first paragraph. 

 

In paragraph six, the murder of a well-known homeless man (who
walked without disturbing others rather than just sitting in a
doorway) was conflated. But the crime against him was attempted
murder by someone who was not homeless; he was set on fire while
sleeping. It became a murder as he later died of injuries
sustained. 

 

This was just bad reporting entirely. The danger from homeless
encampments under viaducts is that one or more individuals will set
fires, and fires spread. Gee. Fires can even destroy viaducts. Maybe
allowing "permanent" encampments once people start fires is
horrifically bad public policy. 

 

There was a major fire in a homeless encampment close to the
Kitchener and Cambridge boundary. It's a miracle there weren't some
fatalities. There's a homeless encampment in Kitchener that is very
close to the transit hub that is supposed to be built that has
serious problems with rats. The residents have also done significant
property damage to nearby businesses. The city and region have tried
to evict them but when it went to court, the judge was persuaded
that the residents couldn't be evicted because it violated their
rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That case now
serves as a precedent for the whole country making it hard to do
much about homeless encampments.  

 

Three cheers for our bleeding-heart activist judges: fooey! fooey!
fooey! 

 
Was that judicial activism or is such a right created in law?

--
Rhino