In the article “The Criminalization of Homelessness”, Celine-Marine talks about more than 50 cities in U.S have adopted the new ordinance and have the power to effectively punish the poor people who live on the streets. She argues that passing this ordinance is the best solution to solve the problems of the homelessness people sleep along sidewalks.
The main purpose of this new ordinance that against homelessness people is to keep the sidewalks clear, since “the sidewalks in front of stores [are] belong to the store owners” (P.4, pp258). Therefore, under this ordinance, the police have the right to arrest the homelessness when they occupy the sidewalks and refuse to leave. This new legislation works perfectly because the number of crimes has dropped significantly in San Francisco, in 1993.
After I read over and study the article, I put myself in the position, and I agree with Celine-Marine; I agree with her argument since I find this article is effective and logical enough.
In this article, the author provides a lot of evidence and statistics to supports the entire article. “radio station KPFA… reported that only 20 robberies were committed at ATMs in San Francisco last year.”(P.3, pp.258). This piece of evidence shows that the new law works effectively and the criminal rate of the homelessness people is decreasing. The evidence is also trust worthy because KPFA 94.1fm is a very famous broadcast radio channel in California and I am sure the information is accurate.
“The San Francisco alternative weekly Bay Guardian (Dec. 29, 1993) has quoted from a police spokesperson that ‘the city considers the sidewalks in front of stores to belong to the store owners’. … A person who refuses to leave the area when requested to do so by police can be arrested and charged with a misdemeanor.” (P.4, pp 258). This quote shows the author’s argument is reasonable because everyone does not want to get in jail due to sleeping along sidewalks. This ordinance can threat the homelessness people gather in front of stores, and the homelessness people will not cause any trouble to the nearby stores.
In conclusion, the author has successfully brought up her argument and convinced me that the new law against the homelessness people is the final solution to keep them away from stores.