Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Telegraph)   Latest design trend in urban architecture? "Homeless spikes" in the concrete to prevent people sitting or sleeping around buildings (pics)   (telegraph.co.uk) divider line 245
    More: Stupid, homeless  
•       •       •

17039 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Jun 2014 at 6:00 PM (47 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



245 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-07 12:13:33 PM  
....or, they could have spent that city funds to actually help the homeless have shelter instead.

BAH HAHAHAHAAA! RIGHT!
 
2014-06-07 12:17:42 PM  
The growing practice of "security architecture" was covered extensively by Mike Davis in City of Quartz.

This book also garnered a lot of attention for basically predicting the LA riots 6 months before they happened. In any event, it is a good read, albeit probably a bit outdated now.
 
2014-06-07 12:21:01 PM  
Just wait till someone who lives there seed their kids get hurtnon these things.
 
2014-06-07 04:59:07 PM  
David Wells said on Twitter: "These Anti homeless studs are like the spikes they use to keep pigeons off buildings. The destitute now considered vermin [sic].

The crackheads that break into and hang out in the lobbies of apartment buildings in winter here  are vermin.   Criminal, thieving, raping, tagging vermin.
 
2014-06-07 05:03:55 PM  

Aarontology: Just wait till someone who lives there seed their kids get hurtnon these things.


Are you perhaps having a stroke?
 
433 [TotalFark]
2014-06-07 05:26:19 PM  
I think I'm OK with this.

I don't care for the spikes.  Those seem harsh.  Some other object, or objects, strategically placed, could perform the same function without looking so terrible.  Perhaps some small planter boxes.  I can't tell if the low spikes are place to allow for the door to open wide - that might be a problem.

I don't have an issue with a building trying to dissuade someone from parking out front overnight.
 
2014-06-07 06:04:11 PM  
Private property owner installing a device on their own property to prevent random homeless people from using their property as a crashpad?

The horror! Everyone knows private property owners are not allowed to act like they actually own the property.
 
2014-06-07 06:07:48 PM  
Approves, but thinks they need to be longer.
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2014-06-07 06:10:23 PM  
This is hardly any different than cities installing park benches with armrests in the middle to keep the homeless from sleeping on them.

1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-06-07 06:10:24 PM  
What? No electricity?
 
2014-06-07 06:10:29 PM  

Elegy: Private property owner installing a device on their own property to prevent random homeless people from using their property as a crashpad?

The horror! Everyone knows private property owners are not allowed to act like they actually own the property.


i.imgur.com
 
2014-06-07 06:10:42 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: David Wells said on Twitter: "These Anti homeless studs are like the spikes they use to keep pigeons off buildings. The destitute now considered vermin [sic].

The crackheads that break into and hang out in the lobbies of apartment buildings in winter here  are vermin.   Criminal, thieving, raping, tagging vermin.


Not to mention using those doorways as their toilets, which unfortunately won't be stopped by the installation of spikes.
 
2014-06-07 06:11:12 PM  
I foresee a liability lawsuit in the future.

Someone is going to fall on those soon or later, and suit the shiat off whoever owns that property. Rightly. 

Would have been cheaper to just hire security.
 
2014-06-07 06:12:20 PM  

Elegy: Private property owner installing a device on their own property to prevent random homeless people from using their property as a crashpad?

The horror! Everyone knows private property owners are not allowed to act like they actually own the property.


They don't own the property - they are caretaking it for the government.  Nobody owns any land.  The existence of Eminent Domain laws and the necessity of private property owners getting permits to build things on their property shows this, as do property taxes. 

Yes, those people should still be able to decide they don't want the homeless sleeping and pooping on the space they are living on.  Making it seem like those people are the Kings of little patches of land, however, is inaccurate fantasy.
 
2014-06-07 06:13:34 PM  

Elegy: Private property owner installing a device on their own property to prevent random homeless people from using their property as a crashpad?

The horror! Everyone knows private property owners are not allowed to act like they actually own the property.


Like the poster above you said, the problem isn't entirely about them deterring the homeless. They are well within their right to keep them off their property. But they could have taken different steps to do so that aren't so blatantly "fark the poor!" Put in something decorative that makes the area inaccessible. Putting in spikes is just being an asshole and going out of your way to give a finger to the homeless.
 
2014-06-07 06:13:44 PM  

TV's Vinnie: ....or, they could have spent that city funds to actually help the homeless have shelter instead.

BAH HAHAHAHAAA! RIGHT!


That'd be wrong and communist, because Jesus.
 
2014-06-07 06:13:46 PM  
This is brutalist architecture, of a sort that is particularly dumb and lazy.

It's dumb because the homeless already sleep on cardboard; this will just hold down the cardboard sheets nicely for them.  It's dumb because I'd hate to step on one of those accidentally, and just wait until a toddler stumbles and falls face-first into one.

It's lazy because if you want people to not sleep or loiter there, put something nice there, like a flowerbox or a sculpture.
 
2014-06-07 06:13:57 PM  
A few pieces of cardboard over the top of that and you're all set.  Or just wait til someone important hurts themselves on the spikes and they get banned.
 
2014-06-07 06:15:45 PM  
The British have such quaint names for things.

You're not homeless, you're "sleeping rough," like an adventure! Urban camping, if you will.
 
2014-06-07 06:16:40 PM  
Homelessness charities said the use of metal studs to prevent rough sleepers is widespread...

Is that the new euphemism for "bums"? It really sucks... makes it sound like those guys just like a high number on their Sleep Number bed.
 
2014-06-07 06:16:48 PM  
Replace with spits, build a fire, and the homeless and hunger problems solve themselves
 
2014-06-07 06:17:09 PM  
Hunt the homeless.
 
2014-06-07 06:17:49 PM  

Pattuq: They don't own the property - they are caretaking it for the government.  Nobody owns any land.  The existence of Eminent Domain laws and the necessity of private property owners getting permits to build things on their property shows this, as do property taxes.


chemtrails
 
2014-06-07 06:19:42 PM  
That seems awfully obnoxious. Couldn't have put a planter there instead?
 
2014-06-07 06:20:48 PM  
rough sleeping?? Da fark language are these people using?
 
2014-06-07 06:21:03 PM  

433: I think I'm OK with this.

I don't care for the spikes.  Those seem harsh.  Some other object, or objects, strategically placed, could perform the same function without looking so terrible.  Perhaps some small planter boxes.  I can't tell if the low spikes are place to allow for the door to open wide - that might be a problem.

I don't have an issue with a building trying to dissuade someone from parking out front overnight.


How about fortified emplacements  with surplus German PaK 40s?
 
2014-06-07 06:22:04 PM  
These have been around for ages and ages in NYC. I bet they've been around for longer than the Telegraph thinks in London, too.
 
2014-06-07 06:23:08 PM  
"We will never tackle rough sleeping with studs in the pavement. Instead we must deal with the causes."

WhyNotBoth.jpg

/they really should have gone with bumps instead
 
2014-06-07 06:23:12 PM  
I feel like the time is right to simply kill the homeless. I would suggest south American death squad style assassinations, surely candidates could be recruited from any major law enforcement agency. Maybe just recruit militia members if we don't want to waste professional help. farking doorway pissers.
 
2014-06-07 06:23:49 PM  

Pattuq: They don't own the property - they are caretaking it for the government.  Nobody owns any land.  The existence of Eminent Domain laws and the necessity of private property owners getting permits to build things on their property shows this, as do property taxes.
Yes, those people should still be able to decide they don't want the homeless sleeping and pooping on the space they are living on.  Making it seem like those people are the Kings of little patches of land, however, is inaccurate fantasy.


Good job at reading Libertarianism for Dummies, so many of your brethren fail at even that simple task.

But there is a not unsubtle legal distinction between owning and renting a piece of property, at least in America (this story happens to be in England, be we will ignore that, because England).

The fourth amendment, for one. The right to secure your property against any and all trespass, for two. And a host of others rights and privileges that come with being a land owner.

You have to pay taxes, yes. You also have to pay taxes on your car. There are regulations concerning what you can and cannot do to your car.

Does this mean you don't actually own your car, the government does? Of course not. That would be a stupid and illogical claim.

So while "no one owns any land they just rent it from the government" is a popular libertarian crutch for lazy thinkers, like most libertarian crutches if you examine it for longer than 10 seconds, it turns out to be a really, really stupid talking point.
 
2014-06-07 06:24:08 PM  
img2u.info

If Britain is anything like Canada, there is no real reason for people to be homeless, other than their choice. Worst case, I'm sure there are shelters the homeless could go to instead of begging or intimidating people for money. I saw Toronto get progressively worse as homeless kids grew in numbers on the street, unwilling to abide by the rules of the shelters. Mental health issues are another thing that drive homeless people away from shelters (and psychiatric help), which is a problem for everybody. That said, there is no reason that any of them should be welcome to camp out in a building entrance, lobby or restroom.
 
2014-06-07 06:25:02 PM  
I'd rather brick it up and make it into a closet than just have an unusable piece of sidewalk.
 
2014-06-07 06:26:30 PM  

letrole: Pattuq: They don't own the property - they are caretaking it for the government.  Nobody owns any land.  The existence of Eminent Domain laws and the necessity of private property owners getting permits to build things on their property shows this, as do property taxes.

chemtrails

 
2014-06-07 06:30:13 PM  
"We will never tackle rough sleeping with studs..."

Is it just me, or does "tackling rough sleeping with studs" sound like a particularly unappealing sex act?

/unless you're into that sort of thing
//NTTAWWT
 
2014-06-07 06:31:45 PM  
Eh, at my building in SF I use a combination of caged overhead sprinklers and lights on a random timer. No one likes getting soaked at unpredictable intervals or getting woken up by 500 lumen strobing spotlights.
 
2014-06-07 06:34:11 PM  

AbiNormal: As someone who has been homeless, there is a lot of stupid on Fark.


So how about you set everyone straight on the realities of the situation then?  Do you have something other than "Being homeless sucks and therefore thinking that property owners have the right to put up spikes on their own land is stupid"?  Honestly curious here to here your point.
 
433 [TotalFark]
2014-06-07 06:34:28 PM  

Bslim: How about fortified emplacements with surplus German PaK 40s?


Tower defense!
 
2014-06-07 06:35:29 PM  

wxboy: This is hardly any different than cities installing park benches with armrests in the middle to keep the homeless from sleeping on them.

[1.bp.blogspot.com image 400x300]


JIMO, that's still a dick move.
 
2014-06-07 06:36:52 PM  
When someone's kid hurts themselves on these things, they'll be gone quick.
 
2014-06-07 06:38:43 PM  
I'm all in favor of adopting the "punji stick" approach.
 
2014-06-07 06:38:58 PM  
So now that piece of concrete can't be used for ANYTHING. Why not just wall it off?
 
2014-06-07 06:39:18 PM  
Spikes? Lame. I prefer fire. Hook an old gas line up to a few spigots, and voila. No more folks huddling up to your building for warmth.
 
2014-06-07 06:45:58 PM  

The My Little Pony Killer: Not to mention using those doorways as their toilets, which unfortunately won't be stopped by the installation of spikes.


Might as well have put up a sign, 'Toilet For The Homeless'.

Bleating about how great capitalism is, then complaining about its inevitable by-products is just hypocritical.
Man-up and deal with it, 1%.
 
2014-06-07 06:46:42 PM  
You think this is a good idea *now*, but don't come crying to me when you have husks roaming all over the city, enslaving humanity for the Reapers
 
2014-06-07 06:48:26 PM  
A lot of homeless disappeared from NYC after 9/11.  I remember the subways in particular before 9/11 were full of all kinds of homeless and beggars.  Shortly afterwards, they disappeared.  Always wondered what happened to all those people but honestly don't give much of a shiat.
A person doesn't care enough to keep a roof over their head, why should I have to care?  Besides they beg and smell bad.
 
2014-06-07 06:48:59 PM  
If you look closely, which is hard to do from the potato quality pictures, the spikes dont seem sharp at all. Uncomfortable if you stepped on one directly, but i doubt they could cause injury.
 
2014-06-07 06:49:05 PM  

AbiNormal: As someone who has been homeless, there is a lot of stupid on Fark.


Weren't you complained about not having a warning put on a Pony Thread?

But yeah, lot of stupid on Fark.  It's the summer.
 
2014-06-07 06:49:31 PM  

Catlenfell: Spikes? Lame. I prefer fire. Hook an old gas line up to a few spigots, and voila. No more folks huddling up to your building for warmth.


"Build a man a fire, you keep him warm for a day.  Now set a man on fire, and you'll keep him warm for the rest of his life."
 
2014-06-07 06:50:51 PM  
The building I worked in a while ago had those for a little while. The problems they ran into was that the homeless are incredibly adaptable and thy found ways of sleeping on them anyway. And they also had a few incidents of people slipping and falling on them and getting worse injuries than they normally would have from falling on a flat surface, and don't ask me how, but people actually tripping over them and falling on them. But I guess the spikes cost them enough money, and the homeless figured out a work around, that they decided to get rid of them.
 
2014-06-07 06:52:31 PM  
I can't wait for the first person who slips and falls on these spikes and sues the crap out of the building's owners
 
Displayed 50 of 245 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report