Get out or we'll take you out...

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by iGary, Sep 9, 2005.

  1. iGary Guest

    iGary

    Joined:
    May 26, 2004
    Location:
    Randy's House
    #1
    I've ben thiking ove rthe last few days after seeing some people ripped from their homes in N.O.

    Now, admitted, the one lady pulled a gun on the cops, and was a couple of french fries short of a Happy Meal™...

    What would you do? I mean my sister's house is perfectly OK - a pot fell off the back patio. What if I had a huge supply of water, an outhouse generator...respirator, everything I needed to be safe...do you think the government has a right to rip me from my home?
     
  2. cooknwitha macrumors 6502a

    cooknwitha

    Joined:
    May 5, 2005
    Location:
    London
    #2
    If I'm wrong, I apologise but isn't the reason they are evacuating people due to health reasons and risk of disease?

    That said, when a government has acted as poorly as the Bush administration, I think you'd want to deny them evacuating you just out of spite. You've had to look after yourself for the last week, why stop now?
     
  3. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #3
    It needs a suspension of Habeas Corpus to do it.
     
  4. Lacero macrumors 604

    Lacero

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    #4
    I'm of the laissez faire mindset, if people want to stay let them, if they want to leave, so be it.

    Nobody should force me to do anything, and if I want to live or die in my house, I should have that choice.

    If I am infirm and unable to express my opinion, then fine, take me out, however, if I am on the verge of death, do not keep me alive and let me pass away naturally.
     
  5. clayj macrumors 604

    clayj

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Location:
    visiting from downstream
    #5
    I agree that they need to extract everyone from NO... after those contractors got shot at last week, it's clear that there are some folks running around in NO who aren't quite as law-abiding as you might hope. The people who are being sent in to work on restoring the city need some reassurance that they're not going to run into anything else like that.

    Plus, the public health concern has got to be priority #1. The entire city is now the EPA equivalent of Chernobyl, without the radiation.
     
  6. iGary thread starter Guest

    iGary

    Joined:
    May 26, 2004
    Location:
    Randy's House
    #6
    I'm kind of with you on this one. As long as I am not infringing on the rights of anyone else, and not mentally incapable...
     
  7. wordmunger macrumors 603

    wordmunger

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Location:
    North Carolina
    #7
    I was of a similar mind to you until I read this article in the New York Times. There are lots of people who are in dry, intact houses with plenty of supplies. If the police can maintain law and order in a city of 500,000, why can't they do it with 20,000? Why not arrest the hoodlums and let those who want to stay with their homes do what they wish? Couldn't these people be enlisted to help with the recovery efforts?
     
  8. iGary thread starter Guest

    iGary

    Joined:
    May 26, 2004
    Location:
    Randy's House
    #8
    My sister's house is totally dry, totally intact in the Garden District.
     
  9. drison macrumors regular

    drison

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    Location:
    Chicago
    #9
    I agree to a certain extent, assuming you stay to yourself and abide by laws, ie. not looting to survive. But, what if you contract some disease, decide to leave to get treatment and start spreading that disease among the healthy populations outside of NO?
     
  10. wordmunger macrumors 603

    wordmunger

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Location:
    North Carolina
    #10
    How would that be different from anyone who catches a disease anywhere? Aren't all the recovery workers facing the same issues? I just think it's a bit extreme to go to the effort to remove thousands of people when there's so much other work that needs to be done.

    Plus, did you see the woman in the NYT article? She's providing a valuable service and improving morale by exposing her breasts to any police officer that passes by her apartment :eek: ;) :)
     
  11. drison macrumors regular

    drison

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    Location:
    Chicago
    #11
    Heh, no I didn't but maybe I should. :D
     
  12. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #12
    I dunno... that's a tough one. I don't want to see anyone forcibly evicted from their homes ever. But are you really going to be able to take care of yourself? Will there be grocery stores open, or will you be relying on food and water being brought to you? Is is safe?

    If there is any way possible to leave those who have the means to sustain themselves, we should try and accomodate that. But at some point the government does have the right to boot your ass out.

    If this was a smallpox or other highly infectious disease situation you would see quarantines and forced evacuations, so yes it can and will happen if necessary. But that's the kind of threshold we need to see. If these survivors can sustain themselves without burdening anyone else, let them be.
     
  13. Lyle macrumors 68000

    Lyle

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Location:
    Madison, Alabama
    #13
    It is a no-win situation for the government. If it comes down to removing these people forcibly, the media will be saturated with photographs of armed soldiers dragging some poor African-American person from their home because, as you may have heard, George Bush doesn't care about black people. If we allow people to stay where they are, it seems unlikely that they'll be unable to take care of themselves for an extended period of time (for the reasons you mentioned), and then we'll see news stories about those "left behind" in New Orleans (again, because George Bush doesn't care about black people).
     
  14. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #14
    Best comment yet.

    I might add that the idea that those left behind are going to be able to bathe and cook with bottled water for weeks, perhaps even months, is pretty far-fetched. Those who would become ill -- and be assured, some would -- would only serve to complicate an already bad situation.
     
  15. ham_man macrumors 68020

    ham_man

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    #15
    That one of the best comments in this forum. Ever. Great post.
     
  16. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #16
    Um, really?

    If the emergency workers continue to go house-to-house, just as they are doing now, and continue to tell the handful who choose to stay that they're on their own, then I have a hard time envisioning any scenario where officials get blamed for "leaving people behind." I mean, I think this is such a cynical conclusion. It assumes that people can't comprehend Fact One about this sort of situation. The real downside is the potential need to go back in and rescue people who should have evacuated when their houses catch fire or they've been injured or become ill. Nobody but nobody is going to blame emergency workers or officials in that situation.
     
  17. ~loserman~ macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Location:
    Land flowing with Milk and Honey
    #17
    Um, really?

    Hasn't this already happened once or twice?
    Didn't the City during the first mandatory evacuation tell people to leave? and if they didn't leave they would be on their own?
    Didn't they tell people to leave and also tell them that as a last resort if they had nowhere else to go they could go to the Superdome.?

    Hmmm. I guess we all know how well that turned out.
     
  18. Lyle macrumors 68000

    Lyle

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Location:
    Madison, Alabama
    #18
    Yes, really. I can almost hear the voice of Katie Couric reading the copy on the story, if I ask the other voices in my head to pipe down for a moment.
    Regardless of what you or I personally feel about the role that racism has played in the mishandling of the relief effort, there are a lot of Americans who believe that George Bush (and by extension, the Republican party) doesn't care about black people. They would eat this story up.
    Well, I would hope not, but I'm not as confident as you are. Maybe I'm just especially cynical on this Friday afternoon. ;)
     
  19. Lyle macrumors 68000

    Lyle

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Location:
    Madison, Alabama
    #19
    I think the people who IJ is skeptical about not comprehending "fact one" about the situation are the people who would (in my scenario) buy the story that survivors were maliciously left behind by an uncaring administration.

    And by the way, if you're living well below the poverty line and don't own an automobile, it's gotta be kind of tough to evacuate even if the mayor orders you to. :mad: I don't blame the people who are still there (for whatever reason) for not getting out of Dodge in time, but I do have trouble working up sympathy for those who won't evacuate now that the cavalry has arrived.
     
  20. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #20
    Exactly. The original evacuation order was quite a different deal than what's going on now. Presumably, everyone now is being given the opportunity and the means to go elsewhere. Also, just as a matter of clarification, I don't think "the administration" is being blamed for the disparities in who was and who was not able to participate in original evacuation. They are being saddled with at least some of the blame for the feeble response after the hurricane passed.
     
  21. Don't panic macrumors 603

    Don't panic

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Location:
    having a drink at Milliways
    #21
    i agree on this,
    however i also can understand those who don't want to leave because their house is ok and they think they can provide for themselves, whit some minimal help from the authority in charge (and note this would be fair because we always get some sort of 'help' as infrastructures from the local/state/fed government).
    the point is that i still have not understood whether some of the neighborhoods are, indeed liveable. If they are, people should be allowed to stay. but the people clinging to severely damaged area should be forced to leave.
     
  22. Lyle macrumors 68000

    Lyle

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Location:
    Madison, Alabama
    #22
    I'm not sure how you define "liveable", or what amount of help from the authorities you consider a reasonable minimal amount. I think it may indeed be the case that in some parts of New Orleans, there was little or no flooding and the houses may not be all that damaged. But I assume it's still the case that there's no running water, no electricity, no telephones, no gasoline, no public transportation, no grocery stores, no hospitals ... well, you get the idea.

    Don't misunderstand me: It's not that I don't feel sorry for these people who are being asked to leave their homes behind. I truly can not imagine what they've been through and what they're continuing to go through. But I just don't see how staying there at this time is a viable option.
     
  23. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #23
    I'm trying not to judge either way. I'm also having difficulty imagining what these people have been through over the last two weeks. I expect the urge to stay put is strong. Once you've survived what must surely seem like the worst of it, a little more comfort deprivation probably seems like such a relatively small thing. It's the fight or flight instinct. Very basic, very human. I think anybody who claims to know for certain how they'd react under similar circumstances is just fooling themselves.
     
  24. Don't panic macrumors 603

    Don't panic

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Location:
    having a drink at Milliways
    #24
    i'm not sure, i don't have a clear definition.
    but aren't some entire neighborhoods basically completely unscathed (including stores)? i'm thinking some parts south of the river, or the west side. hospitals are already running.
    so if the roads are driveable, and they have/can restore power, I think that make it basically 'liveable' (i think water should be provided by the authorities, both bottled and by trucks, for a while).
    If they could get a partial "town" going in some areas, that would greatly facilitate the job of crews there (who i guess could enjoy an after-work beer), give perspective and i think enhance security overall (by not having a complete 'ghost' city). Not to mention save money and reduce the number of people whose live is completely on hold.
     
  25. wordmunger macrumors 603

    wordmunger

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Location:
    North Carolina
    #25
    Well, the most recent news is that there's no forced evacuation, that many parts of the city now have electricity and running water (though not safe to drink), and so this all turned out to be a bit of a non-issue.
     

Share This Page