This an articulate endorsement of traditional Western liberal principles. Have you considered on how lack of a social safety net and government compassion as well as ruthless suppression of American democracy might contribute to this dysfunctional American individualism? The Scandinavian countries seem to do better while still being liberal societies.
Thanks for the comment, Jeffrey. I alluded to it briefly in the piece—the "abdication of responsibility" to those who can't support themselves. The systems we have to address homelessness, mental illness, and drug abuse are not serving those people well. We have tested solutions on the housing front, but I'm not sure we have consensus about the other two.
Thanks for the article. Perhaps a summation would be freedom has traditionally relied on rights and responsibilities, but of late too many places are light on responsibility (personal and societal). Canada is experiencing the same issues as the US - as usual, not as severely, but still not great.
Two areas where order is breaking down in cities--public nuisance behavior (public intoxication, street harassment, etc.) and dangerous use of electric bikes and scooters on sidewalks and shared use paths--are very different urban challenges, yet there's a shared reason that they aren't being enforced. In each case, there are existing laws and rules against the problematic behavior.
Both public nuisances and illegal e-bike riding are viewed by police as under the threshold for them to get involved. To be fair, given that police have to catch bank robbers and burglars, it's understandable that they don't want to spend time giving $60 tickets for public intoxication or riding an e-bike at 40 mph on a sidewalk.
What could help with enforcement might be the creation of a several lower-paid bylaw enforcement units, in which the officers do not carry firearms and have limited arrest powers, to enforce street and roadway laws.
Since they don't carry firearms, their approach would be more about engaging with people, de-escalating, and, as needed, calling in the police or other first responders (e.g., mental health team if a person is showing signs of psychosis, or ambulance if it's an overdose).
Thanks for the comment, Nathan. Yes, I think something like this is definitely in the right direction...it's in the category of crossing guard or traffic cop, someone whose role is to enforce the rules of the road but not necessarily with lethality. In Austin, we've been piloting a program to deploy teams with a police officer, paramedic, and mental health clinician to respond to certain mental health emergencies downtown. I think there's a lot of room for experimentation here.
This an articulate endorsement of traditional Western liberal principles. Have you considered on how lack of a social safety net and government compassion as well as ruthless suppression of American democracy might contribute to this dysfunctional American individualism? The Scandinavian countries seem to do better while still being liberal societies.
Thanks for the comment, Jeffrey. I alluded to it briefly in the piece—the "abdication of responsibility" to those who can't support themselves. The systems we have to address homelessness, mental illness, and drug abuse are not serving those people well. We have tested solutions on the housing front, but I'm not sure we have consensus about the other two.
The Scandinavian societies all have universal health care, including mental health care and drug treatment. If only we did too!
Thanks for the article. Perhaps a summation would be freedom has traditionally relied on rights and responsibilities, but of late too many places are light on responsibility (personal and societal). Canada is experiencing the same issues as the US - as usual, not as severely, but still not great.
I think that’s right. Thanks, Sean!
Also, this might be the type of response you are thinking of in terms of society taking more responsibility: https://www.cbc.ca/lite/story/1.7652653
This is deliberately moving mental health response away from the police, unless the situation is clearly dangerous.
Two areas where order is breaking down in cities--public nuisance behavior (public intoxication, street harassment, etc.) and dangerous use of electric bikes and scooters on sidewalks and shared use paths--are very different urban challenges, yet there's a shared reason that they aren't being enforced. In each case, there are existing laws and rules against the problematic behavior.
Both public nuisances and illegal e-bike riding are viewed by police as under the threshold for them to get involved. To be fair, given that police have to catch bank robbers and burglars, it's understandable that they don't want to spend time giving $60 tickets for public intoxication or riding an e-bike at 40 mph on a sidewalk.
What could help with enforcement might be the creation of a several lower-paid bylaw enforcement units, in which the officers do not carry firearms and have limited arrest powers, to enforce street and roadway laws.
Since they don't carry firearms, their approach would be more about engaging with people, de-escalating, and, as needed, calling in the police or other first responders (e.g., mental health team if a person is showing signs of psychosis, or ambulance if it's an overdose).
Thanks for the comment, Nathan. Yes, I think something like this is definitely in the right direction...it's in the category of crossing guard or traffic cop, someone whose role is to enforce the rules of the road but not necessarily with lethality. In Austin, we've been piloting a program to deploy teams with a police officer, paramedic, and mental health clinician to respond to certain mental health emergencies downtown. I think there's a lot of room for experimentation here.