Even if she had somehow survived, being a victim of violence like this would’ve pushed her further into homelessness and make it so much harder to get her life back on track.

People who dismiss crime concerns as a fabrication from the media should be aware of the harm it actually causes.

And this subreddit is wondering why the homeless aren’t flocking to the shelter system.

It’s a double edged sword. Many homeless shelters. Absolutely refuse to provide security because it effects their bottom line.

Example the BRC at 127 west 25 street in Manhattan at one point got DHS police onsite. That lasted for a few years until Covid. Then after they were unable to get DHS police back because the facility was for clients of Jack Ryan who were exclusively for those with psych history. They soon after didn’t renew their private security and the building has operated like a thunder dome since 2021.

This is very overlooked. Homeless or not, violent crime victims who survive may face long term injuries both physical and mental. Loss of income from not working, careers ended, thier families affected. The impact is felt often long after the crime is commited.

In NYC most cases now the criminal is freed to commit more crime, and continue to be a drag on society as a whole. Very sad to keep seeing this.

[deleted]

Yeah as I said. DHS made a new rule that they’d no longer cover any facility that was exclusively for homeless with psychiatric issues. So the BRC decided in their infinite wisdom to also remove their security in their generally sleazy operation.

I have had dealings with this building for the last decade. I have never seen it more poorly run, both clients and personnel are at risk to violence, clients with Covid are routinely kicked out for Covid and told to go to their Covid shelter but then told “we don’t know where that is so you’re on your own”

The shelter system needs legitimate government oversight. Or just be city run entirely.

[deleted]

Sadly no

you can be stabbed on the street too

Its one of the reasons why I said the “police defund” would fail.

People pushed for police to have no contact with the homeless. These groups either have been incapable of undertaking the homeless issues in their own facility. OR intentionally don’t want to take control and because they want to force responsibility on the NYPD.

*affects. Sorry. But you’re totally right.

> The shelter system needs legitimate government oversight. Or just be city run entirely.

Most city run services are just as broken. Public housing, NYPD, DOB, DOE, public hospitals, hell even the street sweepers don’t want to do their jobs lately.

And since when has Ruperts Rag ever cared about a homeless woman? This is a tragedy and sad. But not news. It's fuel in the Adams forced hospitalization crap.

That’s exactly it. Fear mongering.

Why the fuck is the department of Homeland security policing homeless shelters? Are they a hotbed of radicalization or something?

These same people are championing “housing first” for the people who create dangerous environments in shelters. Would you want the person who stabbed this woman as your neighbor?

The book should be thrown at someone who commits a violent crime in a homeless shelter, full stop. These are people trying to get their lives back on track and those who create a dangerous environment should removed from society.

They need some more enforcement happening in these shelters. They only come, after something goes wrong.

I’d want them to get the care they needed. Wouldn’t you? Preventing violence requires investing in shelter, education, and housing.

Many homeless people are addicts, which is why they ended up homeless in the first place. There’s a reason why their family doesn’t want them staying with them. If you violently assault someone in a homeless shelter you should have the book thrown at you.

I agree crime should be prosecuted. No one argued otherwise. Addiction is a treatable disease too.

Not everyone wants to get clean tho, we can’t allow those people to destroy society.

Have you ever stopped and thought about why the united states so consistently and so obviously has way more of "these people" than most other places in the world? We have been consistently trying to throw the book at crime since the 1980s if not the 1880s. We have consistently failed to reduce crime in the long term. Crime can be stitched up by police and justice systems but it can be prevented by socioeconomic prosperity for those most vulnerable to cycles of crime. When do we finally realize that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure? We can do both.

It's the department of homeless services.

Flip side people on this sub wonder why we arent super cool with the homeless in the streets.

No I'm wondering why the mayor's office for multiple administration's doesn't fix the shelter system. This is a can kicked down the road by every mayor.

Because it’s expensive and there’s no will to help these people.

The NYPD used to do warrant sweeps in shelters. City council said that was inhumane.

The Dept of Homeless services used to put peace officers in some non city run sites. They have since receded. I think the unarmed DHS police (legitimate peace officers) should be in every shelter. To provide security for clients and for staff.

You’ll be hard pressed to find anyone who says they want people to be homeless or on the streets. The mayors plans so far have been short sighted at best.

Well said.

1. I’ve got complicated feelings about the Post—including a total lack of patience for the times when they play fast and loose with the facts, for instance—but they actually report these stories (and lots of other stories too), so I don’t see how you can say they “don’t care”. At this point most cities don’t even have a decent newspaper, so I’m grateful to have the Post and the Daily News in addition to the various little local Queens papers I read every week. It’s not that hard to filter out the tabloidese from a Post story, read it with a skeptical eye, and then you’re left with an actual news story. I know people who work there (and a couple of people who used to), and despite their contempt for Murdoch’s politics, they’ll admit that it’s an actual newspaper. A tabloid, sure, but a tabloid newspaper.

2. I don’t see what this has to do with the involuntary-hospitalization thing. That program, at least as I understand it, is for people who are severely mentally ill and living on the streets and in the subways and so on, not for women living in shelters who commit crimes. I don’t see the link between the two things.

It is incredibly dangerous work for security that is working for close to minimum wage and unsatisfactory benefits.

Oh really? I didn’t know that. I totally agree. They need to do more, in terms of keeping everyone safe. It’s really sad that some people’s lives are deemed less worthy and therefore, they need less protection.

How do you segregate potentially violent people? Put them with themselves so when they inevitably kill each other you can just handwave it off by saying they were already violent? I’m not saying this as a gotcha, it’s just that the city is not equipped to deal with permanently violent people.

Well, enforcing a crime before it occurs has historically never been taken well.

That’s a recipe for major headlines on police brutality on innocent homeless people.

If that’s the case, then maybe they could bring in more security. It doesn’t have to be the police. The residents of these shelters, need more protection.

They only come when the body drop then leave

Yep. That is New York’s Finest, for ya! 🫡

[deleted]

There are many other much more expensive social issues having limitless funding poured into them.

No the extreme left finds protection invasive and worse than the chaos at the shelters.

How exactly? People have cried out they don’t want cops in these situations, in their homes/shelters, don’t stop or frisk anyone, drug use decriminalized so that lovely crack smell is something you should ignore along with the discarded needles. Everyone is gleefully excited over casinos and legalized drug use. Whole city has gone cray, lol.

Well, not everyone is on the extreme left.

OK, so do you have a better solution in mind?

Yes, it’s called enactment of agreed upon rules, we’ll call them laws. And we can have penalties when people break them and send people to jail. Except now everyone said that’s not nice so we have to coexist with people who are ok with stabbing each other.

Shelters should have cops assigned, no drug use permitted, warrant checks and cameras. Pretty simple actually.

If you read my initial comment, then this is the same solution that I originally had. 🤷🏻‍♀️

Not really. If you want to stop violence and bring people out of poverty we’ll need housing, education, and health care. How we get these things is a debate but we can all agree we lack them.

The country isn’t equipped for it. If we can’t medically treat people to the point where they’re functional, long term care is needed. We simply don’t have those facilities. Investment is necessary but the financial will to help them is not. Prison isn’t the place for mentally disturbed individuals.

Book should be thrown at violent crime in general

The attacker is 42. Totally possible that it’s a psychotic break. In this city, though, just as likely there are things she did that were never reported or tried in court that might have warranted prison time or time in psychiatric care. If so, then this may have not happened.

Private security (either a contractor or off-duty NYPD) is very expensive, especially when you're talking about hiring a contractor for a high-risk detail like a homeless shelter.

Any attempt at NYPD presence in a formal capacity at these shelters is always met with aggressive activist pushback, so official shelter patrols aren't going to happen anytime soon.

You could increase unarmed security or boost staff, both of which costs money and who would just end up calling NYPD if/when shit gets violent.

A murder in a homeless shelter is objectively newsworthy, esp. since it overlaps the issues of homelessness, the shelter crisis, and violent crime in this city.

Murders in NYC are routinely covered by every local news outlet in the city.

Why is it suddenly not newsworthy if a murder occurs at a homeless shelter?

So, some idiot was bullying me yesterday on another post, here on this sub, about how he believes that using taxpayer money to prevent people from stealing his coffee at Starbucks, is money very well spent. How about this city make Starbucks pay for that and then spend our money on helping their citizens, in a real way? Like, preventing women from getting stabbed to death? Does that sound like a good idea?

Sometimes, the care they need is the housing, education, and shelter provided by extended inpatient treatment.

Its about the where and why its being reported. Its not about this woman who was murdered, its a hammer on a wedge, that creates anxiety, anger, hatred, and fear. The Post is USING this woman to sell crap. And that to me is despicable. Compare the tone of the Post to CBS's report for instance. Notice the caustic tone over at The Post?
https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/woman-stabbed-to-death-at-project-renewal-shelter-in-manhattan/

>Its about the where and why its being reported

It is reported in a local paper (where) because it is a newsworthy event (why).

​

>Its not about this woman who was murdered, its a hammer on a wedge, that creates anxiety, anger, hatred, and fear.

Hatred, anger, anxiety, and fear is what shelter residents experience when there is a shelter murder.

That isn't because of The Post reporting on the story. It is because someone got murdered.

​

>The Post is USING this woman to sell crap. And that to me is despicable.

Do you think The Post is the only paper that uses stories "to sell crap"?

Do you also find it "despicable" when papers like Gothamist, NYDN, NYT, WaPo, etc. use stories to sell crap and push agendas? Or is it selective outrage?

Because buddy, this is hardly exclusive to a single NYC tabloid. It is the lifeblood of American media.

​

>Notice the caustic tone over at The Post?

How does The Post's story have a "caustic tone"?

The entire article is 6 sentences long, and written in the style of a news wire where it just provides the basic, relevant details of the story.

It doesn't sensationalize anything and there is zero commentary in the article.

Quote the part of the article you find "caustic".

Thanks for your thoughtful response. I used caustic because everything at The Post is caustic (and will never read it, so yes, you "caught me"). And all those news outlets are NOT on my daily reading list. Check out Democracy Now. NY1 is pretty good too. NY1 chose not to cover this, nor did Democracy Now.

The Post uses these "news" (not news) stories to appear like a "news" outlet. Something happens that furthers their agenda, and they'll put it in (divisive fear mongering tabloid peppered with some reporting). I know reporters there, and have been quoted in articles at The Post.

I'll always call out the toxic news. The Post is just the best at it. Back to the world cup

>about how he believes that using taxpayer money to prevent people from stealing coffee at Starbucks, is money well spent

What "taxpayer money" is used to prevent coffee order theft from Starbucks?

​

>How about this city make Starbucks pay for that and then spend our money on helping their citizens, in a real way?

Starbucks does pay for it.

They eat the cost of any theft at their stores (and pass it onto customers by raising prices) and if you see NYPD working security @ a Starbucks (or any other business), that is privately paid for by the company.

​

>Like, preventing people from getting stabbed to death? Does that sound like a good idea?

Involuntary inpatient holds for clearly unhinged people would segregate them from the broader homeless population and prevent stabbings, but there are people very much opposed to it.

More security, either private contractors or NYPD, at shelters would also help, but again, the same people are very much opposed to police presence in shelters.

Read the post with the article about the city trying to help billion-dollar corporations from shoplifting loss, and then also say that they can’t afford help the “little people”.

If you have a better solution, then I would love to hear it. Otherwise, it sounds like you’re saying that if innocent civilians get murdered, then “Oh well.”. I’m listening.

Our system doesn’t have that either.

>Read the post with the article about the city trying to help billion-dollar corporations from shoplifting loss, and then also say that they can’t afford help the “little people”.

Going after serial shoplifting and improving shelters are not mutually exclusive.

89% of NYC businesses have less than 20 employees AKA "the little people", and they will also benefit from NYC's efforts to curb serial shoplifting.

​

>Otherwise, it sounds like you’re saying that if innocent civilians get murdered, then “Oh well.”. I’m listening.

No, I'm saying boosting security/NYPD at shelters and screening out dangerous people makes them safer options for homeless New Yorkers seeking refuge.

(EDIT)

LOL @ u/G2046H blocking me after being incapable of having an answer to my suggestion of more security (including NYPD) @ NYC shelters.

Then again, this is someone who thinks coffee theft is somehow impeding shelters getting more resources, so u/G2046H was never capable of putting together a coherent perspective on this matter.

Dude, you don’t have a leg to stand on anymore. You are just embarrassing yourself at this point. Also, maybe try bringing solutions to the table, next time. Instead of just standing there like a whiny, little elitist and critiquing others for their’s. That literally serves no purpose. You need to try harder.

Whatever, it’s Sunday. I have better things to do with my time, than continue on with this low-level debate, with a total stranger. I’m sorry that you are so bothered. Try and chill out. OK?

Have a great day :)

Rip poor girl 🙁

Name some social issues getting "limitless funding"?