A Recharge

is in order.  More on that in a second.

Occupy Eugene continues, for now almost exclusively as a homeless encampment.  What this may mean is unclear, but my earlier suspicions--that at least some elements in the city are actively working to narc out Occupy for health and safety violations--are being confirmed by a sharp attorney who camps at the site. I haven't met him or her yet; s/he tells me via email that "Passers-by" frequently snap photos of garbage on the ground, people smoking pot (which is legal in Oregon so long as you ponied up for a hefty license fee, and physician exam, which effectively places medical marijuana out of reach of the poor), an unfortunate instance of local "Juggalos" (yes, the Deadheads-on-methedrine-and-STP followers of Insane Clown Posse) dealing out a bit of street justice to an accused thief in their midst, discarded needles (you would not believe the injectable drug abuse that happens here) and so on.  S/he tells me these are undercover.  Uniformed police also show up at the slightest provocation and start the conversations with something like "Looks like you've lost control of the camp."

Official cooperation notwithstanding, obviously, they are building their case, and if I know lawyers, they want to wrap this thing up before the holidays, which is roughly December 23rd or 18th this year, depending.  How they will try to achieve this anyone's guess, though one douchebag-owner-of-a-Starbucks has already lawyered up.

It's a bitter irony, really, that the most effective way to bring attention to homelessness (which is a rapidly growing problem and one which I currently escape by the barest of whiskers) is to camp in public spaces. Yet the Supreme Court may well rule that homeless camping can be banned in all public spaces for health and safety reasons.  Most homeless would then literally have nowhere to go.

So actual homeless people will once again be subject to arrest for being in the only place, by definition, that they CAN  BE--in public.

I suspect that the phone lines have been humming between State Attorneys' offices on How They Shall Challenge the Occupations in court.

Trust me.  We did this shit all the time with our competitors--when there was a big lawsuit against any of us that threatened the industry as a whole, we responded, as an industry.  Indeed, the three times I've authored amicus briefs to the SCOTUS was on behalf of the industry as a whole, not the specific client/slab-of-the-monolith my firm represented. I guaranfuckingtee the lot of them have decided to bring challenges to the Occupation in states where the federal courts will look less favorably on the First Amendment, to position the case better for an appeal to the SCOTUS in a few years.  The State Attorneys General are not an industry, per se, but they do benefit from advocating as a cohesive unit, and picking the right cases to bring.

I'm going to head to the hills today.  I'll pick up the narrative on how I became an occupy supporter tomorrow. Don't know when I'll get another chance this year to have a look at stuff like this:

All photographs are clickable to enlarge, BTW.

Peace.