Homeless man uses machete to settle encampment dispute

While some activists push for more homeless encampments in neighborhoods that they don’t live in, an incident alongside the Puyallup River is another sobering reminder that maybe we ought to rethink where we’re placing these camps.

According to the News Tribune, a homeless man didn’t feel like sharing the homeless camp with newcomers. So he used a machete to attack another homeless person living at the camp in the 2800 block of River Road East. They report:

“The victim, dressed only in pants, jumped out of his tent and the defendant chopped the victim in the forearm with a machete,” according to court records.

The wounded man fled to a nearby casino after the other man allegedly continued to swing the machete at him.
The victim was treated at a local hospital; he had a bone-deep, six-inch cut. The homeless man with a machete was arrested.

Now, this particular incident is pretty rare, but let’s be clear: would you want this encampment near your home? What about near a school or a business?

There is an obvious danger in allowing homeless encampments space wherever progressive activists want them set up (and, unsurprisingly, they never seem to be set up near the homes of the loudest bloggers and Twittervists calling out everyone who opposes these camps as NIMBYs).

Related: This is how you help solve homelessness

It’s not that homeless people are inherently dangerous; they’re not. But sometimes, a reason they are homeless is untreated mental illness, a dangerous addiction to drugs or alcohol, or a criminal record – none of which is addressed by homeless encampments, and all of which activists pretend don’t actually exist.

Now, I believe the majority of the homeless community are willing to work and get their life together and I’m a supporter of tent cities (including free WiFi), just not near vulnerable neighbors. Because as great as a lot of these encampments can be in self-governing, what ends up happening is it’s existence attracts all elements of the community and the people who are not allowed in for a variety of reasons don’t simply leave the neighborhood. They linger and, if they’re dangerous, the safety implications are clear.

Now, we’re not supposed to have this conversation because of the aforementioned bloggers and Twittervists – whom almost never have any actual real-life experience living near these encampments – want to shame anyone from engaging in a conversation about this issue. They’re mind is made up, so it must be right (they tell us how great of a human being they are by supporting the humane concept… of living outside in a tent).

If you speak out against an encampment, you’re bullied by these activists who’s only power comes from the fact that they apparently have enough time to go online and throw insults at people, rather than engage. And, yes, I could link to a bunch, but trolls thrive on the attention – it’s why sometimes these same people will tweet at me or KIRO Radio, to beg for our attention – so I won’t give it to them here.

Related: Election shows just how little support progressive activists have

But, you assume because they have some followers on Twitter or comments on their blog page that these people are influential. They’re not; you have the power, but you let them wield it. They’re followed by the same, small group of like-minded bullies, indoctrinated by their own self-righteous beliefs, and purposefully insulated from all reasonable alternatives. And they love the power they think they have; that you give them.

Unfortunately, it took a machete attack to remind us to revisit this conversation – the one too many activists don’t want to have. If you have an encampment coming to your neighborhood, think about it, be rationale, voice your opinion in a civil way (no matter what it is), and become more involved. Don’t settle for a potentially unsafe solution to a problem these activists have no concrete plan to fix.