I get it, but if they had housing, the excuses fall apart. Cops won’t bother them if they are in a shelter not causing issues. The housing would provide its own protections via securely locked doors and shelter staff.
I’ve also seen enough police killing dog videos to question the first point.
This is a terrible strawman. I haven't seen anyone here make a claim that homeless have no moral worth or being unworthy of respect. I think there's a case made for the opposite: expecting someone to be actively working towards self-sufficiency (if they're capable) is treating them with a modicum of decency and respect by not infantilizing them.
People are actively arguing that they don't deserve to have the right to keep pets. People are also arguing that they should be forcibly housed and their agency takes from them. How are those not saying that they don't deserve basic human decency?
Because in the current situation, they can’t be forcibly housed unless they prove to be a danger. They can’t just be swept up and incarcerated. Nobody is taking away their pets unless they are trying to go to a shelter that has a no-pets policy (often for good reason).
Hell, I know a behavioral health supervisor who has an angry patient wielding a machete come to their office and the police didn’t think it warranted taking them in. I feel like this is a made up false dichotomy that society either needs to create homeless internment camps or give away free housing, no questions asked. It’s a bad faith narrative.
I’ve also seen enough police killing dog videos to question the first point.