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

No

No, and make it a criminal offense

No, but this should incentivize the gov. to try to at least provide proper housing for them

Yes unless they are creating annoyances in public

Yes

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

To a Certain Extent

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)

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

What responsibilities do we have to ensure the safety and dignity of all individuals in our neighborhoods, including those who prefer to stay on public land?

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.

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.

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.

How might your perception of public spaces change if you saw someone sleeping there, and what does that say about society's collective space?

No, but do not make it a felony

If you had no home and didn't feel safe at available shelters, where would you go, and why might public property seem like the only option?

In your opinion, should comfort and personal preference play a role in whether people without homes can use public spaces for encampment?

No, but should not be made a crime

Imagine being given housing options that didn't meet your needs; how would you want communities to support you in a way that respected your choices?

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

How can society balance compassion for those without homes with the interests of the community at large, especially regarding public property usage?

Why do you think someone might choose the insecurity of the streets over the security of a shelter, and what does that decision reveal about shelter systems?

What's the importance of having a personal space to you, and how does that influence your view on individuals seeking such space in public areas?

How might a community's approach to homelessness reflect its values, and what would you suggest as an ideal solution for all parties involved?

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.

I don't really have a stance on this.

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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

Only if employed

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

NZ and 27 country Brazil and Spain with us states increase homeless people's and offer

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

they should be allowed on public property if everyone else is

Yes, within designated areas

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

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

Depending on location.

No, not if they refused help.

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

Reflect on a time you felt out of place; how would you feel if you were asked to move just because you were trying to find a resting space?

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.

Have you ever seen someone living in a public space, and what was your first reaction to that situation?

Do you think removing encampments makes homelessness less visible but does nothing to solve the issue, or do you think it helps the community? Why?

How do you feel public spaces should be shared among people with different needs, including those seeking shelter?

If you were living in an encampment, what daily challenges do you think you would face that others might not realize?

Do you believe cities should provide designated areas for encampments instead of moving people around, and why or why not?

If a homeless encampment existed near your home or school, how would you feel about it, and why?

No but they should be persuaded into living there.

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

No, but we should help them get jobs.

How does your view of public safety tie in with the idea that some may need to use public spaces as temporary shelter?

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

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 you were in a situation where you lost your home, what kind of support would you hope to receive from the community?

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.

Yes, but just if they needed.

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

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

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

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.