Should homeless individuals, that have refused available shelter or housing, be allowed to sleep or encamp on public property?

Yes, but if they continuously refuse the help given, then there should be no need to force it upon them (unless they're mentally unstable)

i believe they should make shelter more save for the homeless and they shouldn't be able to sleep or encamp on public property

Yes, but only if the owners signed something allowing for the homeless to encamp on their property, as long as they don't hurt or bother anybody. Also, create more social programs to provide basic necessities such as food, water, clothing, and shelter if they need it.

To a Certain Extent

Yes, because some of them might have refused because how they didn't like how the shelter or house is.

Yes, but designated areas. Increase social programs for food, clothing and medicine and do not allow panhandling. Give people the resources they need to get back on their feet but don't allow panhandling to be a way of life.

Yes

I don't really have a stance on this.

Yes, but only if the owners signed something allowing for the homeless to encamp on their property, as long as they don't hurt or bother anybody. Make sure they have access to food, water, basic necessities, and shelter if they need it.

There should be more programs to benefit homeless Americans and create free housing for these individuals.

No, and those using drugs should be beaten up.

Only if that place does not have scheduled hours

It's ruthless to send them to jail but I don't think they should sleep on public property, If it's free shelter and food then they should take it. It gives them a better second chance so they can get their life back on track.

No, not if they refused help.

i think that the government should have a designated spot for them so there not all over the city

No, but do not make it a felony

No, but should not be made a crime

It depends on how close the public property is to a residential home or neighborhood.

They should be moved where they do not disturb the public.

Yes, but to a certain extent. They should not be penalized for sleeping in an open field or an alley way, but we should create more social programs to provide free food, clothing, and medicine.

Depending on location.

they should be allowed on public property if everyone else is

I feel as if , we as a goverment made more programs and made it easier for them to get section 8 and employment then they wouldnt have to sleep outside. The shelters are gross and infested , women often get assulted in these shelters too.

We shouldn't allow it, but instead highly encourage them going to shelter and housing.

Yes, only if the homeless individuals are allowed to loiter.

Yes, if they can do so without obstructing others' use thereof, because most homeless shelter/housing comes with strings attached.

Yes, however it should be decided within the town government which public properties can be occupied at which ours of the day or night. Example: Some parks near peoples houses and businesses shouldn't allow people to be there from 11pm-4am.

These individuals should be moved toward housing and integrated into society again, only then should they receive public assistance due to cooperation and the interest to reform and improve.

Yes, we can only offer, we can not force them to take help that they do not want.

No, but we should help them get jobs.

it’s up to the people i guess

Yes, but the location should to be monitored as well as a source of mental health and/or asocial service program (?) to follow-up with them.

yes, even though they refused it, they should be limited to where they can stay. They should not be able to stay anywhere.

No, and make it a criminal offense to sleep or encamp on government property

It should be up to the owner of the property

Yes, as long as the owner of the public property consents and the homeless person isn’t harming others.

They should not but don't make it a criminal offense.

Yes as along as they are disrupting the public by being violent

No, but increase shelter funding and availability

Yes, and create more social programs to provide free food, clothing, and medicine

Depends on what kind of public property. Camps of over 10 people shouldn't be allowed.

Sometimes whether if the owner of the property is ok with it, but they should at least have a place to stay at.

Yes, but only if the owners signed something allowing for the homeless to encamp on their property, as long as they don't hurt or bother anybody. And make sure they have access to food, water, basic necessities, and shelter if they need it.

Yes, but only if the owners signed something allowing for the homeless to encamp on their property, as long as they don't hurt or bother anybody. Also, make sure they have access to any basic necessities such as food, water, clothing, and shelter if they need it.

Yes because where are homeless people supposed to sleep when shelters and jails are overcrowded?

Each major city needs a designated fenced open air camping area, with showers and bathrooms and a security guard. Las Vegas has one.

No, I think that they should get medical help and work on their problems.

No, because they refused the available shelter or housing in the first place

I think its ok to a certain extent but should be put amount allowed on certain properties

No, and make it a criminal offense

As long as they don't get in other peoples way.

Yes, within designated areas

Yes and No. Should there be a place to house the homeless? Absolutely. Do I want them occupying public spaces intended for recreation (ie. parks)? No

Yes, but if they are creating an enviornment that endangers public health or safety, they should be removed.

Yes but only on public property set aside for that purpose. It should not be allowed if it is impacting the publics ability to use the property for its intended use.

Yes, but make the options readily available to them if they decide not to or change their minds.

Yes: it's public property. They can't be forced to leave without committing a crime.

It should depend on local policies

No, but create more social programs to provide free food, clothing and medicine as well as better and safer shelters as current are not at all "safe" spaces, which is why many refuse to stay.

No but they should be persuaded into living there.

Create housing developments, i.e. mobile home "villages", with Social Services on site.

Yes, but just if they needed.

Should be decided on by county law

I was homeless for 2-1/2 years in NJ and it was horrible. I slept in my car in the parking lot of a hotel. I had to make sure I parked in a dark spot to avoid notice by staff. Yes, but not for those that refuse shelter. I was afforded such shelter. I worked for the government and wasn't allowed to stay in the building after punching out because they thought I was stealing money, thinking I didn't punch out. So, if the homeless person has no available resource available to them, they should be allowed to sleep wherever they feel safe.

If they aren't creating a disturbance to others, actively engage in improving or maintaining the property, then I don't see an issue with their presence.

No, but if they are refusing available shelters, then we should find out why so we can improve them.

create programs that allow them to get help to better themselves

No but there should be other areas like parks for those types of people and more social programs to provide more services for them.

yes, but efforts to end homelessness should be stronger, and homless facilities should be more inclusive and beneficial

yes as long as they dont distrub or mess with anything on the property,it depends.

No, it will increase our crime rates if we do so

Yes, if they don't want to accept our help, we should leave them alone

Only if employed

If they have no other option, yes.

No, because every human being needs some sort of shelter and public spaces do not provide that, a hybrid project between the city and the homeless could be the answer to this issue.

No, but create more social programs for group homes and free food, clothing, medicine

is but is not

No, but they should add more and improved homeless shelters

They shouldn't get criminal records or anything, but it also depends on the area. There should be areas designated for homeless people to be able to encamp or sleep. Some shelters don't allow dogs/cats and their owners need them for emotional support because there is probably mental health issues going on too.

No, but instead of making it a criminal offense require that they receive aid from a recognized charity or state-sanctioned care facility.

Yes, Homeless people do not have anywhere else to sleep if they refuse shelter or housing so it would be better to accept than deny because they will do it anyway.

Yes, but create a program to link homeless people to the utilities they need to find jobs and shelter.

Yes, but as long as they do not cause any issues

Then we need to improve shelter and housing to allow everyone to have a home

Yes, but depends on the public property

No, provide psychological and mental health support to help provide the right assistance they require.

Yes, but not public property within city limits.

We should create a program to give all homeless citizens somewhere to live

Regardless, should be decided by the state.

No, but open outdoor spaces where it is allowed should be provided

Individuals have a right to traverse and loiter on public property, regardless of whether they are homeless or not, so long as they are not damaging property or otherwise depriving the rest of the public of their ability to enjoy those spaces safely. Large groups of people creating "pop-up villages" within a space not designed and designated for the purpose create a hazard for those living there, deprive the rest of the general public of its use of the property, and can create an undue and unintended burden on surrounding infrastructure. I support the rights of individuals to traverse and loiter as well as the rights of local governments to protect public assets and ensure public safety.

Yes, but consistently arrest and prosecute violent individuals and admit substance induced-unconscious individuals to rehabilitation facilities.

Yes, as long as it is a safe distance from roads/private property

No, but increase funding and resources to shelters and housing to include food, clothing, and health care.

Yes, in designated encampment areas that do not interfere with public businesses. Create more social programs to provide free food, clothing and medicine, utilize the existing local programs, and continue to offer available shelter or housing

Yes, because it is our own fault dense public housing is banned in many states/cities and that public healthcare isn't already in place with our stupid amount of spending on the trashy infrastructure that doesn't cover their needs. Hiding the homeless doesn't fix the problem, it just shows your true egotism and lack of empathy.

No, force them to join military

Yes, but we should prioritize more social programs to provide shelter, free food, clothing, and medicine to help limit this

Yes, and create more social programs to provide free food, clothing, and medicine along with job opportunities. Do not give any aid to those who refuse to work.