• gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    247
    ·
    24 days ago

    A spokesperson for SpartanNash, the parent company of Family Fare, said store employees responded “with the utmost compassion and professionalism.”

    “Ensuring there is ample safe, affordable housing continues to be a widespread issue nationwide that our community needs to partner in solving,” Adrienne Chance said, declining further comment.

    Warren said the woman was cooperative and quickly agreed to leave. No charges were pursued.

    “We provided her with some information about services in the area,” the officer said. “She apologized and continued on her way. Where she went from there, I don’t know.”

    I feel like there’s very few opportunities these days to say this, but the cops and business owners in this situation actually seem to have behaved in a very humane and decent way here, so that’s a nice surprise

      • ZeroCool@vger.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        71
        ·
        24 days ago

        Yeah, it’s messed up that nearly everyone from the US would read that headline and make the same assumption without batting an eye because we’ve been conditioned to expect nothing else from police. It sure would be nice if we lived in a country where policing was actually a civil service and not a damn street gang.

        • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          23 days ago

          It sure would be nice if we lived in a country where policing was actually a civil service and not a damn street gang.

          The cases you hear in the media are the ones that provoke outrage.

          On a day to day basis the police have hundreds of interactions with the public that aren’t remarkable or noteworthy.

    • Sentient Loom@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      63
      ·
      24 days ago

      cops and business owners in this situation actually seem to have behaved in a very humane and decent way

      Well it’s nice that they didn’t beat her to death. But they still kicked her out and didn’t actually provide any more help. “Services in the area” probably will be less adequate than what she’d had before they booted her.

      I don’t expect them to actually take care of her, but they don’t get a gold star for declining to bludgeon, strangle, or imprison her. She’s on her own.

      • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        46
        ·
        24 days ago

        I mean, I would add on not sticking her with a criminal charge as an important thing they didn’t do here, because the whole story of “oh you missed a court date because we sent the notice to an address you haven’t lived at in years, so now we’re fining you on top of the original criminal charge that brought you in here, [soon] wow, you’ve got a lot of missed court dates and unpaid fines, you look like a career criminal who needs the book thrown at them” happens a lot,

        And there’s a very real chance that the contractors looked the other way and then this woman’s residence got discovered they could have lost their licenses or otherwise gotten in trouble

        Like, I think what you’re pointing out is a really important perspective and we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that a woman with a home was made homeless here, but I think a lot of relatively powerless people here tried to be as humane as an inhumane system would let them be, and I think that’s important too. I think the way this world gets less shitty is when more people start making these little steps towards revolutionary kindness and then those little steps start getting bigger and bigger.

        • Sentient Loom@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          24 days ago

          Again, it’s not praiseworthy that they merely declined to abuse her. I’m not scorning them, but they get zero credit for declining to abuse her (beyond the abuse of kicking her out with no help).

          there’s a very real chance that the contractors looked the other way

          Without evidence, there’s no point in this speculation unless you’re hired by their PR to praise them (which seems unlikely).

          the way this world gets less shitty is when more people start making these little steps towards revolutionary kindness and then those little steps start getting bigger and bigger

          Sorry, but this is absolute nonsense. It’s meaningless. She is homeless.

          a woman with a home was made homeless

          This is the only story. Let’s not waste time praising the heroic saints who kicked her out.

          • dot0@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            28
            ·
            24 days ago

            mate it’s ok and good to acknowledge a small measure of good that may exist in a very terrible situation.

            humans are not meant to focus on only the doom, gloom, and cynicism of it all 100% of the time.

            • Sentient Loom@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              ·
              24 days ago

              a small measure of good

              There was no measure of good whatsoever. Her situation was made objectively worse, and we’re presuming to praise those responsible merely for not making it even more worse. I’m not the one who created any doom or gloom. I didn’t kick her out. And it’s not cynical to sympathize with the homeless woman instead of with the people who kicked her out. Mate.

              • InternetUser2012@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                24 days ago

                So you’re saying it would have been better for her if she was charged with crimes? She would be stuck with fines and probably jail time. You do realize SHE was breaking multiple laws by being there right? So yeah, it is a small measure of good because they looked the other way rather than filing charges.

              • LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                24 days ago

                And she’s also a homeless woman. Women need private spaces when they are homeless, they can’t just be on the street as safely as men are. They space was probably VERY safe for her compared to a shelter.

              • dot0@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                23 days ago

                nature. our brains get fucked up when stuck in the doom and gloom for too long.

                pedantry is an ugly quality btw.

      • skeezix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        38
        ·
        24 days ago

        This is where it’s at in the US: people feel a warm sense of happiness when a marginalized person isnt beaten to death or shot by authorities.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        24 days ago

        I agree it sucks, but they can’t reasonably let her continue living there after they found out. There’s so many legal and ethical issues with that. They are not qualified to provide housing. We need to provide better alternatives.

        • cogman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          24 days ago

          Legal problems? Yes. Ethical problems? Fuck no.

          She was living rent free pulling resources from a company that likely fights against social programs for homelessness. That, to me, 1000% ethical.

          It would only be unethical if the US has an adequate social safety net.

          • Cethin@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            24 days ago

            The ethical problems are that it’s not designed to be lived in, so it’s probably not safe. It’s also an ethical problem to kick her out without a safety net, but there’s plenty of reasons why I could think of that would make it not OK for her to be there.

            • cogman@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              24 days ago

              We aren’t talking about a toxic waste dump or a steel mill. This is a grocery store attic.

              I’d agree that if they rented the space to her that would be unethical as they aren’t providing essential utilities like water and sewage. However, this location was likely safer and more private for her than camping out on the street. Her situation was not improved by being evicted. She was harmed. That’s why it’s unethical to evict on discovery.

          • VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            24 days ago

            ‘That likely’ so you’ve decided based on nothing except your preconceived opinions which are likely based in the first place on nothing more than ‘it makes me feel good to believe this’

      • Guy_Fieris_Hair@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        24 days ago

        Would you like the officer to take a second mortgage out on his home and build her a room on his house? The system is broken, the cop did his best to not make it worse.

      • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        24 days ago

        They behaved kindly because they were in the wrong - it’s almost certain that if they’d used force and she’d resisted that it’d end up in front of a judge and she would be able to claim the area as a residence.

              • dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                13
                ·
                24 days ago

                Correct, and Squatter’s Rights are meant to apply to properties abandoned by their owners, i.e. they’re meant to prevent absentee landowners from just hoarding buildings wherever and never visiting or maintaining them. Or traditionally, if a property owner has died with no next of kin, or someone believed they inherited a property from a dead relative and this was not contested. Somebody simply hiding in a thoroughly used and very much frequented and maintained building in such a way that they’ve managed to escape notice for some amount of time doesn’t allow them to magically put the deed in their name.

                To make a successful claim this woman would have had to occupy the premises for 15 years, or do so for 10 years while also paying the property taxes on it. Further, their occupation has to be “open and notorious,” i.e. it cannot be in secret (she failed that requirement right off the bat) and occupation must be exclusive, i.e. others don’t have access to the property. That requirement was obviously failed as well.

                Relevant statute:

                https://www.legislature.mi.gov/Laws/MCL?objectName=MCL-600-5801

    • Snapz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      24 days ago

      No, the humane and decent thing would have been to leave her the fuck alone. She’s not hurting anyone.