there goes the neighborhood

[bigbird]

I wonder if any of these harsh responses would be tempered if one of you has ever needed addiction help.
Everyone wants a facility to help those in need, but no one ever wants one in their neighbourhood.
Do as I say; not as I do. Have your cake and eat it too.
I've heard those statements way too many times.
I'm with you, GiddyupF6B.

[taxfree4]

There are countless other options and places where they can put recovering heroin addicts , inside residential neighborhoods where children and families are is not one of them., not to mention property values and the theft of property to feed that habit. Addicts relapse no matter how good the rehab is. Some are there because they HAVE to be there as part of a plea deal and not because they have the inner desire to do so. People who bought the homes surrounding this property didnt anticipate a halfway house popping up in the middle of it and if it had been there how many would have bought, mmmm none. This has nothing to do with compassion and everything to do with the security and serenity and protection of a home. Just like if a crackhouse or pothouse moved in the neighborhood just the same. Do whatever it takes to get rid of it. Most of the time the local politicians or their relatives are involved monetarily in these particular ventures. Here's an idea, ship them to Denver there's plenty of empty homes and space, if you're getting it for nothing you really can't complain. BTW you'll never see these places in areas where the median income is $250,000 and up, know why? Because the people have the resources to get up and leave the place barron. Middle class doesn't have the luxury to do that, and the sleazy local pols know that.

[GiddyupF6B]

The opinions in this post are ones I'm choosing not to further comment on because nothing good can come out of it. It's just a shame this housing is viewed as a "problem" when it's actually a method of solution...it's a shame the way some people think.

[bigbird]

And I will add....
In my city, population of .75M, there exists a very trendy, heavily populated high rise and infill housing area. My daughter and son-in-law used to live there before they had their first child. Right across the street from their apartment is an in and outpatient addiction centre. In the 4 years they lived in that area, never once was there an incident involving the addiction centre. About a half block away is Winnipeg's most prestigious riverfront condo building, with sales starting at over $1M and only going up.

Needless to say, the political and economic clout those condo owners carry could have that addiction centre gone in no time if it were in an urban US city.

But this is Canada, and apparently by the sounds of this topic, we are a kinder, more compassionate group than the free for all, take no prisoners attitude of the masses of the USA, who rely on the second amendment to their bill of rights to allow their country to be so dangerous and threatening to their own citizens.

[tinknocker]

I am not arguing the need for such a facility in my town it is riddled with these drugs yet another argument as to not bring the fat kid to the candy store. We only found out about this after it was leaked subsequently after the closing in this property was suppose to have happened. They tried to sneak this into our neighborhood without any input or answering questions of the ones who will be most affected by this. I have said I don't think this should go into my neighborhood or ANY neighborhood so close to small children...the risk is not worth the reward. My neighborhood is zoned for a single family residence only and they are using the Americans with disabilities act to force it in....that's just my two pennies worth but maybe I'm just the close minded one who only has my families safety at heart

[taxfree4]

Noone, in their right mind, would move on a block, into a neighborhood where this facility would. That is why they put these in existing neighborhoods. Let's try an experiment, pass a law that these facilities can only go into new construction and all prospective home buyers have to be notified before they buy that this facility will be in this new construction. Now how many new home buyers, who are planning to start a family would buy, venture to say 0.

[hoglaw]

There are countless other options and places where they can put recovering heroin addicts , inside residential neighborhoods where children and families are is not one of them., not to mention property values and the theft of property to feed that habit. Addicts relapse no matter how good the rehab is. Some are there because they HAVE to be there as part of a plea deal and not because they have the inner desire to do so. People who bought the homes surrounding this property didnt anticipate a halfway house popping up in the middle of it and if it had been there how many would have bought, mmmm none. This has nothing to do with compassion and everything to do with the security and serenity and protection of a home. Just like if a crackhouse or pothouse moved in the neighborhood just the same. Do whatever it takes to get rid of it. Most of the time the local politicians or their relatives are involved monetarily in these particular ventures. Here's an idea, ship them to Denver there's plenty of empty homes and space, if you're getting it for nothing you really can't complain. BTW you'll never see these places in areas where the median income is $250,000 and up, know why? Because the people have the resources to get up and leave the place barron. Middle class doesn't have the luxury to do that, and the sleazy local pols know that.

+1

[53driver]

....than the free for all, take no prisoners attitude of the masses of the USA, who rely on the second amendment to their bill of rights to allow their country to be so dangerous and threatening to their own citizens.

Why did you bring the 2nd Amendment into this? Your logical argument was fine, but by "adding" this tidbit, I'm so sorry, you have lost credibility.
This thread had NOTHING to do with the Constitution, let alone Amendments, but "blaming guns" is the first fallback position for anyone who cannot make logical points.
You are better than that, BigBird. I have seen your other posts and followed your logic completely, both on and off the F6B. I'm a more than a bit disappointed.

[taxfree4]

Just to clear up the handgun thing with some facts:

According to data from the*FBI’s uniform crime reports, California had the highest number of gun murders in 2011 with 1,220 — which makes up 68 percent of all murders in the state that year and equates to 3.25 murders per 100,000 people AND the strongest gun control laws*in 2011 by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence

Since the outset of the Chicago handgun ban, the Chicago murder rate has averaged 17% lower than it was before the law took effect, while the U.S. murder rate has averaged 25% lower.

A 1994 survey conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that Americans use guns to frighten away intruders who are breaking into their homes about 498,000 times per year.

In the US 200,000 times a year women use a gun to defend themselves against sexual abuse

Nations with*strict gun control laws have substantially higher murder rates*than those who do not in general.*In fact, the 9 European nations with the*lowest*gun ownership rate have a combined murder rate 3x that of the 9 European nations with the*highest*gun ownership rate.

In the decade following the Labor party's election and banning of handguns in 1997 in the UK, the number of recorded violent attacks soared by 77% to 1.2 million in '07- or*more than 2 attacks every minute!

In 1982, Kennesaw, Georgia passed a law*requiring*heads of households to*keep at least one firearm*in the house. The residential*burglary rate subsequently dropped 89%

Every public mass shooting*in the USA since 1950 has taken place*where citizens are banned from carrying guns.

[shooter]

Boys let me tell you its OK to say that it will be all hunky dory and everything but the ugly truth is you're not the one with young children whose property butts up next to this facility. Its always OK for someone until they are offended. To the OP I feel your pain. I would talk to local LE for some assurances on stepped up patrols during meeting times and maybe organize a neighborhood watch. And to those who say live and let live , if you think that works your head is in a bag.