2887-ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? | View Thread

Published time: 27 Oct, 2015 03:06

A tangle of skyrocketing rents, stagnant wages, evictions and a lack of affordable housing has led to a boom in homelessness in New York City. The latest figures show 57,448 people sleeping in shelters, and approximately 40 percent are children.

According to the latest Department of Homeless Services (DHS) figures, more than 23,000 of the 57,448 people sleeping in New York City shelters are children. There are nearly 12,000 families in the shelter system. Organizations that help aid homeless people are getting worried that as the cold weather sets in, the numbers will return to the record high of seen in December 2014, when the homeless population numbered 59,068.

Another point of concern is that homeless people are staying in shelters longer and returning to them within a given year. The DHS said adults are staying an average of 11 months, up 24 days on last years’ data. Families with children are staying 14 months (up three days) and couples are staying an average of nearly 18 months (up 19 days).

Caught in the crosshairs is Mayor Bill de Blasio, who ran a campaign vowing to address income inequality in the city. His administration, however, inherited a homeless population of more than 53,000 people from the Michael Bloomberg administration. Mayor Bloomberg oversaw cuts to three shelters systems and the creation of the dysfunctional Advantage public program, which was intended to help struggling families before its funding was cut. That decision led to a ballooning homeless population – from 37,000 in 2011 to 53,000 within three years, according to the New York Times.

Compounding the problem is that city rents have continued to escalate. Between 2002 and 2011, 39 percent (385,300) affordable apartments were lost. A number of myths persist about homelessness – that people are substance abusers or suffer from mental illness – but the major reason is more fundamental.

“More than two-thirds of the people in our shelters are families with vulnerable children, and the most common cause of their homelessness isn’t drug dependency or mental illness. It’s eviction,” wrote Mary Brosnahan, president and chief executive of the Coalition for the Homeless, in a recent New York Times op-ed.

“If we can slow the pace of evictions, we will make a major dent in the homelessness crisis.”

Brosnahan said the number of families forced from their homes by court order has risen over the past 10 years and is now close to 29,000 annually. Thousands more leave under duress midway through eviction proceedings. She said New Yorkers in housing court currently have no right to counsel, resulting in only 10 percent who hire attorneys to help protect their rights. Meanwhile, close to 100 percent of landlords have attorneys.

In cases where a tenant does have an attorney, they are less likely to get evicted, and landlords simply drop their cases when a tenant is represented.

In September, de Blasio announced an additional $12.3 million in funding, representing a tenfold increase over 2014, for a program that helps provide tenants attorneys,. It costs about $2,500 to provide a tenant with an attorney in an eviction proceeding, while the city spends on average of more than $45,000 to shelter a homeless family.

There is also a bill pending in the City Council that would create the right to counsel for all low-income tenants in housing court. If passed, it would make New York City the first in the nation to guarantee representation for tenants. Sponsors feel this would lead to decrease in the number of families forced into homelessness.

What the shelter figures don’t include are the estimated 3,000 – 4,000 more people who sleep on city streets. Some advocates estimate the real number is somewhere between 6,000 and 12,000 people. A recent report found that 300 full-time municipal workers are homeless.

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 10/27/2015 6:03:13 PM
	RT: New York City homeless population nears 60,000, over 40% are children – report Posted on October 27, 2015 [by J. Haines]by Jean Published time: 27 Oct, 2015 03:06 © Carlo Allegri / Reuters A tangle of skyrocketing rents, stagnant wages, evictions and a lack of affordable housing has led to a boom in homelessness in New York City. The latest figures show 57,448 people sleeping in shelters, and approximately 40 percent are children. According to the latest Department of Homeless Services (DHS) figures, more than 23,000 of the 57,448 people sleeping in New York City shelters are children. There are nearly 12,000 families in the shelter system. Organizations that help aid homeless people are getting worried that as the cold weather sets in, the numbers will return to the record high of seen in December 2014, when the homeless population numbered 59,068. Another point of concern is that homeless people are staying in shelters longer and returning to them within a given year. The DHS said adults are staying an average of 11 months, up 24 days on last years’ data. Families with children are staying 14 months (up three days) and couples are staying an average of nearly 18 months (up 19 days). Caught in the crosshairs is Mayor Bill de Blasio, who ran a campaign vowing to address income inequality in the city. His administration, however, inherited a homeless population of more than 53,000 people from the Michael Bloomberg administration. Mayor Bloomberg oversaw cuts to three shelters systems and the creation of the dysfunctional Advantage public program, which was intended to help struggling families before its funding was cut. That decision led to a ballooning homeless population – from 37,000 in 2011 to 53,000 within three years, according to the New York Times. Compounding the problem is that city rents have continued to escalate. Between 2002 and 2011, 39 percent (385,300) affordable apartments were lost. A number of myths persist about homelessness – that people are substance abusers or suffer from mental illness – but the major reason is more fundamental. “More than two-thirds of the people in our shelters are families with vulnerable children, and the most common cause of their homelessness isn’t drug dependency or mental illness. It’s eviction,” wrote Mary Brosnahan, president and chief executive of the Coalition for the Homeless, in a recent New York Times op-ed. “If we can slow the pace of evictions, we will make a major dent in the homelessness crisis.” Brosnahan said the number of families forced from their homes by court order has risen over the past 10 years and is now close to 29,000 annually. Thousands more leave under duress midway through eviction proceedings. She said New Yorkers in housing court currently have no right to counsel, resulting in only 10 percent who hire attorneys to help protect their rights. Meanwhile, close to 100 percent of landlords have attorneys. In cases where a tenant does have an attorney, they are less likely to get evicted, and landlords simply drop their cases when a tenant is represented. In September, de Blasio announced an additional $12.3 million in funding, representing a tenfold increase over 2014, for a program that helps provide tenants attorneys,. It costs about $2,500 to provide a tenant with an attorney in an eviction proceeding, while the city spends on average of more than $45,000 to shelter a homeless family. There is also a bill pending in the City Council that would create the right to counsel for all low-income tenants in housing court. If passed, it would make New York City the first in the nation to guarantee representation for tenants. Sponsors feel this would lead to decrease in the number of families forced into homelessness. What the shelter figures don’t include are the estimated 3,000 – 4,000 more people who sleep on city streets. Some advocates estimate the real number is somewhere between 6,000 and 12,000 people. A recent report found that 300 full-time municipal workers are homeless. “We live in a city with 1.5m people living below the poverty line – that means we have 1.5m people at risk of being homeless,” said Jeff Foreman, policy director of Care for the Homeless, an advocacy group in the city.
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 10/27/2015 11:49:20 PM
	The Corey Jones police shooting: What we know about the death of a Florida church drummer Updated by German Lopez on October 22, 2015, 11:42 a.m. ET Corey Jones, 31-year-old victim of a police shooting, plays the drums.Corey Jones's family It may have been a tragic misunderstanding, but it also may have been yet another example of what Black Lives Matter protesters say is racial bias in police shootings. Corey Jones, a 31-year-old black man, was waiting for a tow truck by his disabled car on I-95 in Florida on Sunday, October 18. A plainclothes police officer arrived on the scene, and got out of his unmarked car to investigate what he thought was an abandoned vehicle. Jones, who was licensed to carry a gun and was reportedly carrying at the time, allegedly confronted the cop. Minutes later, the police officer shot Jones dead. But Jones's family and attorney say there's much more to the story. For one, they say Jones very likely thought he was being attacked by the plainclothes cop. "I believe Corey Jones went to his grave never knowing that that the person who was there was a police officer," Jones family attorney Benjamin Crump said, USA Today's Yamiche Alcindor reported. "The thing that seems reasonable is that he thought he and his car were being vandalized and attacked." The Jones shooting has drawn local protests and nationwide scrutiny, elevated by the Black Lives Matter movement that's protested racial disparities in police use of force following the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, in August 2014. But just as much as the shooting could have been another act of a racially biased police officer, it could also have been a huge misunderstanding. Jones was on his way home after a gig with a band Watch video Jones was a musician who worked with a local housing authority and played drums for his church. As USA Today's Alcindor reported, Jones was reportedly on his way home to Boynton Beach, Florida, after a late-night gig with his band, the Future Prezidents, on Sunday, October 18, when his SUV broke down. He called one of his fellow band members to help, but they were unable to get the car started, so they called roadside assistance for help. Then, Jones waited. According to the police report, Palm Beach Gardens police officer Nouman Raja, who wasn't in uniform but was on duty, got out of his unmarked police van around 3:15 am to investigate what he believed was an abandoned vehicle. Jones, reportedly carrying a gun at the time, confronted Raja. The police officer shot Jones, killing him. Jones's body was found about 80 to 100 feet away from his vehicle, and his gun was reportedly found between the vehicle and his body. Jones's family said Raja fired six times, hitting Jones three times, according to WPTV's Jason Hackett. Jones never fired his weapon, the family's attorney told USA Today. Jones reportedly bought a gun a year to a year and a half ago for self-protection, because he often played late-night gigs and carried expensive band equipment. Raja was not wearing a body camera, and the Palm Beach Garden Police Department's cars are not outfitted with dashboard cameras, so the shooting was not caught on any police video. Raja is on paid administrative leave as the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office investigates the shooting. The simplest explanation for the events, as Reason's Scott Shackford wrote, is that it was all a horrific misunderstanding: So should we apply Occam's Razor at this point and consider the likelihood that both men incorrectly identified the other as a potentially dangerous threat? Raja was not in a police uniform and was not in a marked police vehicle. If the police description is accurate, Raja didn't see or even realize Jones was there when he stopped his car and must have been startled. But what actually happened next is what we don't know. Beyond what is obviously going to end up being a tragic and unnecessary death, here's what's worrisome: Let's assume everybody is being honest (I know it's difficult with the current level of police distrust), and let's assume Raja opened fire after seeing the gun for fear of his own safety. And let's assume the best of Jones, and the reason he had his gun out was for fear of his own safety being stranded on the side of the road. There has been presented so far no evidence that either of these men had any malicious intentions. But it's also the case that black men like Jones are more likely to be shot and killed by police than their white peers — and racial bias, even subconscious prejudices, may play a role. That has driven some activists, under the banner of Black Lives Matter, to claim the shooting as yet another example of racial bias in the criminal justice system. Black people are much more likely to be killed by police than their white peers Joe Posner/Vox An analysis of the available FBI data by Vox's Dara Lind shows that US police kill black people at disproportionate rates: They accounted for 31 percent of police shooting victims in 2012, even though they made up just 13 percent of the US population. Although the data is incomplete, since it's based on voluntary reports from police agencies around the country, it highlights the vast disparities in how police use force. Black teens were 21 times as likely as white teens to be shot and killed by police between 2010 and 2012, according to a ProPublica analysis of the FBI data. ProPublica's Ryan Gabrielson, Ryann Grochowski Jones, and Eric Sagara reported: "One way of appreciating that stark disparity, ProPublica's analysis shows, is to calculate how many more whites over those three years would have had to have been killed for them to have been at equal risk. The number is jarring — 185, more than one per week." The disparities appear to be even starker for unarmed suspects, according to an analysis of 2015 police killings by the Guardian. Minorities made up about 37.4 percent of the general population and 46.6 percent of armed and unarmed victims, but they made up 62.7 percent of unarmed people killed by police. There have been several high-profile police killings since 2014 involving black suspects. In Baltimore, six police officers were indicted for the death of Freddie Gray while in police custody. In North Charleston, South Carolina, Michael Slager was charged with murder and fired from the police department after shooting Walter Scott, who was fleeing and unarmed at the time. In Ferguson, Darren Wilson killed unarmed 18-year-old Michael Brown. In New York City, NYPD officer Daniel Pantaleo killed Eric Garnerby putting the unarmed 43-year-old black man in a chokehold. One possible explanation for the racial disparities: subconscious biases. Studies show that officers are quicker to shoot black suspects in video game simulations. Josh Correll, a University of Colorado Boulder psychology professor who conducted the research, said it's possible the bias could lead to even more skewed outcomes in the field. "In the very situation in which [officers] most need their training," he said, "we have some reason to believe that their training will be most likely to fail them." Police only have to reasonably perceive a threat to justify shooting Jewel Samad/AFP via Getty Images Legally, what most matters in these shootings is whether police officers reasonably believed that their lives were in danger, not whether the shooting victim actually posed a threat. In the 1980s, a pair of Supreme Court decisions — Tennessee v. Garner and Graham v. Connor — set up a framework for determining when deadly force by cops is reasonable. Constitutionally, "police officers are allowed to shoot under two circumstances," David Klinger, a University of Missouri St. Louis professor who studies use of force, told Vox's Dara Lind. The first circumstance is "to protect their life or the life of another innocent party" — what departments call the "defense-of-life" standard. The second circumstance is to prevent a suspect from escaping, but only if the officer has probable cause to think the suspect poses a dangerous threat to others. The logic behind the second circumstance, Klinger said, comes from a Supreme Court decision called Tennessee v. Garner. That case involved a pair of police officers who shot a 15-year-old boy as he fled from a burglary. (He'd stolen $10 and a purse from a house.) The court ruled that cops couldn't shoot every felon who tried to escape. But, as Klinger said, "they basically say that the job of a cop is to protect people from violence, and if you've got a violent person who's fleeing, you can shoot them to stop their flight." The key to both of the legal standards — defense of life and fleeing a violent felony — is that it doesn't matter whether there is an actual threat when force is used. Instead, what matters is the officer's "objectively reasonable" belief that there is a threat. That standard comes from the other Supreme Court case that guides use-of-force decisions: Graham v. Connor. This was a civil lawsuit brought by a man who'd survived his encounter with police officers, but who'd been treated roughly, had his face shoved into the hood of a car, and broken his foot — all while he was suffering a diabetic attack. The court didn't rule on whether the officers' treatment of him had been justified, but it did say that the officers couldn't justify their conduct just based on whether their intentions were good. They had to demonstrate that their actions were "objectively reasonable," given the circumstances and compared to what other police officers might do. What's "objectively reasonable" changes as the circumstances change. "One can't just say, 'Because I could use deadly force 10 seconds ago, that means I can use deadly force again now,'" Walter Katz, a California attorney who specializes in oversight of law enforcement agencies, said. In general, officers are given lot of legal latitude to use force without fear of punishment. The intention behind these legal standards is to give police officers leeway to make split-second decisions to protect themselves and bystanders. And although critics argue that these legal standards give law enforcement a license to kill innocent or unarmed people, police officers say they are essential to their safety. For some critics, the question isn't what's legally justified but rather what's preventable."We have to get beyond what is legal and start focusing on what is preventable. Most are preventable," Ronald Davis, a former police chief who heads the Justice Department's Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, told theWashington Post. Police "need to stop chasing down suspects, hopping fences, and landing on top of someone with a gun," he added. "When they do that, they have no choice but to shoot." Police rarely get prosecuted for shootings Watch video Police are very rarely prosecuted for shootings — and not just because the law allows them wide latitude to use force on the job. Sometimes the investigations fall onto the same police department the officer is from, which creates major conflicts of interest. Other times the only available evidence comes from eyewitnesses, who may not be as trustworthy in the public eye as a police officer. "There is a tendency to believe an officer over a civilian, in terms of credibility," David Rudovsky, a civil rights lawyer who co-wrote Prosecuting Misconduct: Law and Litigation, told Vox's Amanda Taub. "And when an officer is on trial, reasonable doubt has a lot of bite. A prosecutor needs a very strong case before a jury will say that somebody who we generally trust to protect us has so seriously crossed the line as to be subject to a conviction." If police are charged, they're very rarely convicted. The National Police Misconduct Reporting Project analyzed 3,238 criminal cases against police officers from April 2009 through December 2010. They found that only 33 percent were convicted, and only 36 percent of officers who were convicted ended up serving prison sentences. Both of those are about half the rate at which members of the public are convicted or incarcerated. The numbers suggest that it would be a truly rare situation if the officer who shot and killed Jones were charged and convicted of a crime. But without a conviction, it's likely tensions will remain high as Jones's family and Black Lives Matter activists demand justice.
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Luis Miguel 1162 61587 Lima	RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES? 10/28/2015 12:10:24 AM
	Netanyahu: “We Will Forever Live By The Sword”, Indefinitely Control All Palestinian Territory The prime minister also spoke about possible plans to revoke Israeli citizenship or residency from the Arab residents of east Jerusalem. By IMEMC News \| October 27, 2015 Benjamin Netanyahu (Debbie Hill/Pool Photo via AP) Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has announced his plan to control “all of the territory” and “live forever by the sword.” The remarks were reported in Haa’retz newspaper, according to PNN, in an article by journalist Barak Ravid. Mr Ravid wrote: “Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Monday that although he doesn’t want a binational state, “at this time we need to control all of the territory for the foreseeable future.” MKs who took part in the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee meeting – today (Monday) – reportedly told Mr Ravid that Netanyahu had turned to the politicians present and said: “You think there is a magic wand here, but I disagree. I’m asked if we will forever live by the sword – yes.” The prime minister also spoke about possible plans to revoke Israeli citizenship or residency from the Arab residents of east Jerusalem. He complained that there had not been any “progress” on the matter because of delays at the Justice Ministry, headed by Minister Ayelet Shaked (Habayit Hayehudi). Dr Hanan Ashwari, a committee member of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), said of the idea: “This alarming escalation, an inhuman and illegal measure, must be immediately stopped. ” Should this be adopted, such a measure will transform the actual status of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to “non-existence,” and it will deprive them of the most basic rights and services, including shelter, healthcare and education. “This would also provoke confrontations with serious ramifications throughout the region and beyond.”
	"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
	+1

Menu

Forums

It's On: Obama Sends Destroyer To Chinese Islands, China Vows Military Response

RT: New York City homeless population nears 60,000, over 40% are children – report

FBI opens probe of violent arrest of black South Carolina student

CBS News Videos
S.C. deputy barred from high school campus after video surfaces

The Corey Jones police shooting: What we know about the death of a Florida church drummer

Jones was on his way home after a gig with a band

Black people are much more likely to be killed by police than their white peers

Police only have to reasonably perceive a threat to justify shooting

Police rarely get prosecuted for shootings

Netanyahu: “We Will Forever Live By The Sword”, Indefinitely Control All Palestinian Territory