Home > Protest > Occupy Eureka camp cleared by police for second time

Occupy Eureka camp cleared by police for second time

The Eureka Police Dept. staged an early morning raid on the Occupy Eureka camp in front of the Humboldt County courthouse this morning.  About 20-25 people were arrested according to various sources.

Photo by Kay Recede.

The raid follows a Saturday night clash between Occupiers and EPD.  Activists say one of their group, Hans Ashbaucher was arrested and denied medical care after complaining of injured ribs after cops arrested him for shooting video.  Another video of the incident is online but impossible to see what happened due to darkness.

North Coast Journal: Occupy Eureka Wiped Out (PHOTOS)

  1. November 14, 2011 at 9:29 am

    This Hans guy claimed to be injured last time as well. I sense someone crying wolf. That aside, LEO’s do not have a right to arrest someone for shooting video of them. That has been settled in court many times. Is there more to this story?

  2. November 14, 2011 at 9:31 am

    Is there more to this story?

    Good question. No follow-up information has been put out by Occupy or EPD.

  3. Re Pete
    November 14, 2011 at 9:32 am

    Yes there is more to the story.

    Eureka and Tyson are going to get their asses sued….again.

    Eureka and Tyson are going to pay out big bucks….again

    Thats a patterb that you can understand.

  4. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 10:04 am

    4 pete’s sake. This is all BS. It’s about damn time this crap was moved out. If anyone wants to protest let them do it. Just not an encampment.

  5. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 10:08 am

    I support protesting. I don’t support illegal camping disguised as protesting.

  6. Bolithio
    November 14, 2011 at 10:14 am

    Assuming the majority of these demonstrators are not homeless or transient, they should consider just protesting during business hours. What is the point of the protest anyways? To raise attention amongst us regular folk, right? To get the word out? Surely Occupy Eureka doesn’t think that our courthouse is the equivalent of big money Walstreet… Camping out isnt helping their cause, nor does it appear to be necessary. I get it in DC or Walstreet because people theoretically have traveled from all over the country to participate, so they camp. But here it seems over the top.

    Demonstrate during appropriate hours and go home for the night. There will be less conflict and less BS for the media to criticize you for.

  7. Big Boss Man
    November 14, 2011 at 10:29 am

    Absolutely 10:04. Sometimes pararsites require repeated treatments to produce a cure. EPD will probably have to entertain another lawn scraping or two to effect that cure. Funny, but this is not unique to our locale as most big cities are moving in on these Disease and Crime Vectors. This group nationwide has only succeeded in effecting shootings, rape, vandalism, drug use and overdoses, health hazards, and direct confrontations with law enforcement. Police are often forced to use chemical agents and impact weapons to get it done. The only people who are unhappy about this lurk on this blog- the rest of us just go about our daily business and don’t give a shit.

  8. Doork Bogarde
    November 14, 2011 at 10:32 am

    Big Boss Man is High Finance after a couple of drinky-poos for courage. Same shit, diffrent alias.

  9. MLK
    November 14, 2011 at 10:41 am

    “Demonstrate during appropriate hours and go home for the night.”
    Bolithio 10:14

    Gandhi didn’t do it that way.
    Whose handbook are you using?

  10. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 10:48 am

    I understand the right to protest and I certainly understand the purpose of Occupy Wall Street . However as I undesrtand it , the illegal and deplorable actions of some of the protesters do not represent the true purpose of the protesting . I do not wish to be negative but I am wondering if people continue to put uo tents and engage in some of their illegal and deplorable activity , how long it is going to be before some citizens take action while there are not very many Police Officers around to protect them . For example , if someone wants to go into US Bank and they have a problem entering , what if they are not very tolerant and are the type of person capable of defending themself phsically and decide to take matters into their own hands ? I hope that does not happen but I am just wondering if anyone has thought about that ?

  11. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 10:54 am

    Gandhi was also a racist a-hole, not quite so much peace-and-love when it came to the (in his mind) inferior African race. So, good question, whose handbook are you using? … the handbook of a world-renown racist or a handbook based on common decency that will endear you to a majority of Humboldt County residents by protesting a worthy cause while not being jerks in the process?

  12. John Quill, Esq.
    November 14, 2011 at 10:56 am

    No, if you are capable of defending yourself then there is no legal justification to “take matters into your own hands” unless your life is provably under threat.

    BTW you may note I have obtained an internet law degree and I am proud of it.

  13. some101
    November 14, 2011 at 10:56 am

    About the time Hans was injured, a woman activist was assaulted across the street by two drunks. Her head was put through a plate glass window. Afterward, she approached officer Sanchez who was parked across the street hassling activists and trying to take down signs. Officer Sanchez shooed the young woman away. The drunks got away. She was assessed by EMT’s with City ambulance.

    By the way, at night, that area of town, yes in the area of your county courthouse and Sheriff’s station, is often populated by impaired folks, otherwise troubled folks and those the jail releases into the night when the buses aren’t running and nothing is open. At night people at the Occupy could see and hear all the troubled of Eureka passing through. The Occupy was safe and quiet, and they’d try to help those they came in contact with. The problems in the downtown area at night existed prior to Occupy Eureka by many years.

  14. Big Boss Man
    November 14, 2011 at 11:00 am

    That’s exactly what those dirtbags want 10:48- confrontation and illegal activity. Then they whine like babies that they were somehow wronged and are the real victims. Bunch of crap. But you’re right, some agitated vigilantes could definitely do a number on that group if they keep inviting aggression and confrontation. Resisting arrest and police interference is not “peaceful”, no matter what those filthy hippies say.

  15. Bolithio
    November 14, 2011 at 11:00 am

    Gandhi didn’t do it that way.
    Whose handbook are you using?

    There’s a handbook??!!

    If Gandhi simply camped at the British consulate in his home town no one would no who he was today. Thats my point, the oppression isn’t deriving from our Eureka courthouse.

  16. Doork
    November 14, 2011 at 11:04 am

    Easy there, Hi Fi, errr “Big Boss Man” ya got a little spittle on your chin tough guy.

  17. 69er
    November 14, 2011 at 11:08 am

    The tone here today is more to my way of thinking, good job EPD. These people need to be dispersed at night and be welcome to return during the day to do their thing peacfully and in a manner not objectionable to the decent moral populace.

  18. Rick Siegfried
    November 14, 2011 at 11:11 am

    The U.S. Constitution TRUMPS the City’s anti-camping ordinance. Our city council and county supervisors are being anti-American traitors and they should be treated as such.

  19. some101
    November 14, 2011 at 11:13 am

    Too bad an injured citizen is ignored by Eureka’s finest because removing signs is more important.

  20. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 11:18 am

    What’s the point of protesting at 3 a.m.? The Donut Mill is closed for renovations. No one will hear your valiant cry for justice.

  21. Chuckie Cheese
    November 14, 2011 at 11:30 am

    The lawn at the courthouse is public commons for public use, it is illegal for the county government to “fence it off.” If they do there will be a lawsuit from the ACLU.

  22. November 14, 2011 at 11:33 am

    What they used to tell little childre: “Be seen, but not heard.” Children should not speak in the presence of adults. Those that do can go stand in the corner.

  23. Black Flag
    November 14, 2011 at 11:33 am

    It is illegal to video tape the occupational forces as they beat and detain “citizens”. This has been settled in court and falls under wiretapping laws. What do you expect under a babylonian system of debt service to offshore banks?
    If you neo-hippies had any balls you would go “occupy” the cop shop, or the tax collector’s office. Bring the fight to the enemy in their own halls of bullshit, don’t stand outside with a silly sign.
    Order the EPD to surrender by a certain time and you’ll give them safe passage back to their homes once they turn in their weapons and promise to not take up arms against Citizens again. Turn their cop cars into septic tanks and use their bunkers as root cellars…

    Take action you stupid hippies! Don’t be taken for a ride!

  24. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 11:35 am

    it is illegal for the county government to “fence it off.”

    Actually, it’s perfectly legal to fence off the lawn while the lawn is being repaired/restored. That the lawn has been seriously damaged is without question. You really shouldn’t make claims from ignorance.

  25. tra
    November 14, 2011 at 11:46 am

    I wonder if Black Flag has tried the tactics that he urges others to engage in? My guess is “no,” he’s just lecturing others that they should take extreme actions that he has never, and probably would never, dare to try himself.

  26. RefFan
    November 14, 2011 at 12:12 pm

    Our tax dollars pay for the upkeep of that lawn and we are already paying too much as it is for those jobless hippies to collect welfare and gov assistance, etc. They have no right to camp there!!
    I want to have the freedom to go into my bank without seeing, smelling and stepping in poop and pee, IT IS MY RIGHT AND YOU CAN NOT DENY ME OF IT!! If one more person argues that the poop and pee was there before Occupy, I am going to blog smack you. Ive used that bank for 10+ yrs and it has never been like this.

  27. The Big Picture
    November 14, 2011 at 12:31 pm

    There’s always been poop and pee distributed indiscriminately in Eureka. (Toured Zoe Barnum lately?) It reminds me of my last visit to a zoo in 1967 when demoralized Great Apes threw their feces at their captor/oppressors.

    It’s always a hoot to read Reich-Winger’s traitorous diatribes against protesting….while they simultaneously enjoy the countless privileges won by protests past.

  28. Plain Jane
    November 14, 2011 at 12:32 pm

    Please cite article and section of the constitution for those rights, RelFan.

  29. really?
    November 14, 2011 at 1:09 pm

    I’m only entitled to rights listed in the constitution?

  30. What Now
    November 14, 2011 at 1:17 pm

    IRefFan says:
    November 14, 2011 at 12:12 pm

    “I’ve used that bank for 10+ yrs and it has never been like this.”

    Perhaps US Bank shouldn’t have dropped it’s custodial contracts in favor of having tellers and cashiers do that work.

  31. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 1:21 pm

    The longer protests and their violent repression continue, the sooner mainstream media will fail to contain the obvious tyranny of a corrupted system of justice.

    Citizens eventually realize (too late) that their taxes are being used by police to violently repress them, while the same police protect industry (logging, banking…etc. ) regardless of industry’s chronic violations of law.

    Despite illegal clearcuts, toxic defoliants, headwaters devastation, home foreclosures, and the bailouts and worldwide economic collapse that resulted, it’s our Constitutionally protected protests and wilted grass that must be stopped at all cost!!!???

    Unequal enforcement of law, by the repression of Constitutional rights, is what leads to violence, and, without exception, led to every fundamental right, liberty, and justice won by average citizens in America.

    It makes me sick, and I will not go to work tomorrow.

    It’s time we follow PJ’s old advice and stop shopping at well-known business supporters of the current city hall/manager/police chief Trifecta.

    It’s common knowledge who they are, and a look at the last election’s financial reports reveals some of their names.

  32. Ben
    November 14, 2011 at 1:26 pm

    The Constitution gives the right to peacefully assemble, not the absolute right to camp or gather anywhere you want. In general most regular people are just tired of the meaningless mess and noise. The most noticable cause seems to be to push law enforcement into a confrontation hoping to make the news like Oakland. Shouting and slogans without any meaningful goals is sad and counterproductive to any meaningfull change. I do not see how creating a mess in Eureka or Arcata can have any connection to changing behaviors of the very few people they oppose that are not even paying attention to our local area. Time to find a new cause.

  33. Big Boss Man
    November 14, 2011 at 1:26 pm

    Rats always flee to another building once theirs is razed. Arcata welcomes them with open arms. We just need cans of WD-40 and lighters to combat the next infestation. Works on ant hills too I might add. Well, unlike many of you who O’Bamarama calls lazy, I’m off to work so I can create tax dollars to help fund the clean up effort by police.

  34. Ben
    November 14, 2011 at 1:30 pm

    I do not know who 1:21 is talking to but everyone I know wondered why the police were so slow in taking action. We are all tired of the mess. Love to debate the ideas, but not the mess.

  35. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 1:37 pm

    Why are people so upset about the condition of the lawn? That area should be paved over and turned into a protesters plaza. The numerous protests at the courthouse could then be held without damaging any grass.

  36. Joe Blow
    November 14, 2011 at 1:49 pm

    11:11 said “The U.S. Constitution TRUMPS the City’s anti-camping ordinance. Our city council and county supervisors are being anti-American traitors and they should be treated as such.”

    Actually it has been ruled on at least twice by the Supreme Court that camping during a protest is not covered under the 1st amendment. Sorry.
    Thank you EPD!

  37. Bolithio
    November 14, 2011 at 1:56 pm

    Despite illegal clearcuts, toxic defoliants, headwaters devastation, home foreclosures, and the bailouts and worldwide economic collapse that resulted, it’s our Constitutionally protected protests and wilted grass that must be stopped at all cost!!!???

    All of this was implemented by the dictators inside the Eureka court house. Who knows? If you camp there long enough the world may finally have peace!

  38. November 14, 2011 at 2:24 pm

    I have WAY better photos and video of this incident.
    Check the times standard and KIEM for the pictures and video.

  39. Plain Jane
    November 14, 2011 at 2:34 pm

    You got it “Really.” While it’s possible the founders didn’t think the right to shop and bank without seeing and smelling feces of one kind or another was even possible given the condition of their streets, even if they thought it possible I don’t believe they would have put your “right” not to be offended by unpleasant sights and smells above the absolute right of free speech and protest. Of course, you have the right to claim any right you like. Even the rantings of the delusional are protected speech.

  40. What Now
    November 14, 2011 at 2:45 pm

    Here’s a link showing a beautifully organized and choregraphed example of effective civil disobedience:


  41. jr
    November 14, 2011 at 2:51 pm

    Readers may be interested in the latest posting at http://www.noyonews.net of Veterans Day at Occupy Sacramento.

  42. High Finance
    November 14, 2011 at 2:59 pm

    All decent folks in Eureka are cheering the Eureka Police Department on in ridding our courthouse lawn of those bums.

    And “Dork” you idiot, this is the first time I have posted on this subject. You would be surprised at what a tiny minority you are in this town. Most feel as I do. In fact, I wonder how many of those “protestors” are even from Eureka ?

    What is the purpose of “protesting” anyway ? It is to turn public opinion to your side by raising attention and knowledge about your cause. These homeless bums are destroying any goodwill you people might have had originally. PJ, “Dork” and one or two others here are on the leftwing lunatic fringe. Even the usual liberal posters here have stopped suporting the Occupy Eureka nuts.

    A lot of taxpayer dollars have been spent to landscape the front area of the courthouse and make it pretty. Now the plants are smashed, the lawn destroyed and vegetation poisoned with human waste.

  43. really?
    November 14, 2011 at 3:05 pm

    I understand your point. I admit I was having a bit of fun with your question. I was trying to point out that not everyone believes your individual “rights” are defined by the constitution. I believe they existed before 1788.

  44. Plain Jane
    November 14, 2011 at 3:12 pm

    Then maybe you can explain why everyone in the world doesn’t have them, Really. Rights don’t exist without people deciding to give them the force of law and protecting them, with their lives if need be.

  45. November 14, 2011 at 3:30 pm

    P.J. wrote, “…the absolute right of free speech and protest.“.

    Nowhere does it say you have an absolute right to free speech. You have a right to freedom of speech, meaning you won’t be arrested for peacefully criticizing government. Just as you don’t have the right to yell FIREHOUSE in a crowded theater, you don’t have the RIGHT to destroy or interfere with others use of property to make your point.

    Going beyond free speech is civil disobedience. If you decide to go that route, expect to be arrested.

    Besides, as I have written elsewhere, how illegal camping in front of the courthouse is going to convince those in the next tax bracket above you to give you money is beyond me.

  46. tra
    November 14, 2011 at 3:37 pm

    It’s true that Constitution guarantees the rights to free speech and peaceable assembly. It’s also true that the courts, including the Supreme Court, have long allowed governments to create “reasonable restrictions” on the way those rights are exercised, including reasonable restrictions on the “time, place and manner” of the speech and assembly.

    Just what counts as a reasonable restriction versus what counts as an unconstitutional infringement of rights is, of course, open to judicial interpretation. At one extreme, most people would agree that free speech rights do not include the right to hover in a helicopter over someone’s house at 3 a.m. shouting obscenities at them through a bullhorn. At the other extreme, most would agree that an outright ban on protests for strictly aesthetic reasons would clearly be unconstitutional. But there’s a lot of gray area in between, and the question always becomes one of balancing everyone’s rights. It’s the classic situation of “your right to swing your fist stops somewhere short of my nose.”

    The situation with Occupy Eureka is that the protesters (or at least some of them) have decided that the form of protest they want to carry out — a constant 24 hour vigil, continuing indefinately — ends up, on the ground, overlapping with the definition of “camping.” The legal issue is whether, in the context of the protests, this ban on camping is interpreted as an unconstitutional ban on freedom of speech and assembly or whether such a ban is allowable as a “reasonable restriction” on the “time, place, and manner” of the speech and assembly.

    The protesters claim is that maintaining a continuous occupation is an important symbolic aspect of their protest, and that as a practical matter this kind of occupation requires tents, sleeping bags and other survival gear, and that therefore banning the use of these items restricts their freedom of speech. The counter-argument is that since erecting tents and maintaining a semi-permament encampment is not the only way for protesters to get their message across, therefore enforcing the ban on camping does not amount to an infringement of the protesters’ rights and instead falls within the parameters of “reasonable restrictions” on the “time, place, and manner” of the assembly.

  47. tra
    November 14, 2011 at 3:44 pm

    I should have added that even the “reasonable restrictions” on the “time, place and manner” of assembly and speech have to be based on a “compelling governmental interest” in order for them to be justified in the first place. In this case, I guess the argument is that preventing the courthouse lawn from being damaged is the “governmental interest.” Just how “compelling” that interest is, well I guess that’s a matter of opinion.

  48. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 3:44 pm

    I was driving by the courthouse a couple of hours ago and saw the protesters on the sidewalk. I think the presence without the tents is much more impressive. If you are from out of town and know about the nationwide protest and see Eureka “without the encampment”, it actually looks better and makes more sense to all. What is scarey is what is around the rest of town and on Highway 101- the increase in bums, psychos and criminals coming for free showers at Betty’s, clean needles and a meal at St. Vinney’s. Makes Eureka look like a Hell Hole.

  49. really?
    November 14, 2011 at 3:49 pm

    So you are saying that basic human rights only exist because of a document? I would argue that the rights have always existed and the document is only there because we have a government that, for the most part, tries to protect them.

  50. Chuckie Cheese
    November 14, 2011 at 3:51 pm

    Eureka is a Hellhole. A fascist hell hole but that’s gonna change.

  51. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 3:52 pm

    hellhole? hellhole? I thought Eureka was a cesspool. There’s a difference!

  52. Ben
    November 14, 2011 at 3:55 pm

    Chckie, what are you specifically going to change? And, how will you do that?

  53. Plain Jane
    November 14, 2011 at 3:58 pm

    By “absolute right” I didn’t mean completely unrestricted. I meant it is guaranteed by the Bill of Rights as opposed to those “rights” that people think they have which are not.

    As far as the “camping,” since a part of the protest is certainly over the banks getting bailed out and people thrown out into the streets, making a display of homelessness (and the lack of sanitary facilities) is more appropriate in an Occupy protest than in, say, an anti-war protest. It stands to reason that people who were camping in a different part of town who moved to the Courthouse probably changed their “toilet” location as well. Now instead of doorways on 2nd Street, they’re using US Bank. People have to poop and when there is no legal place to poop, they’ll do it illegally.

    That being said, the people who support the movement (the majority) don’t have to support campers. The sort of people who would change their minds about how the 99% are getting screwed because they find homeless campers distasteful aren’t likely to be much support anyway.

  54. really?
    November 14, 2011 at 3:58 pm

    I think you guys need to travel more if you think Eureka is that bed.

  55. Agnostic
    November 14, 2011 at 3:59 pm

    Up above there you can see “Libertarian” Fred channel his inner authoritarian. Garbage in, garbage out.

  56. Plain Jane
    November 14, 2011 at 4:01 pm

    When and where did these rights ever exist without them being protected by the force of law, Really?

  57. jr
    November 14, 2011 at 4:05 pm

    Hellhole, cesspool, maybe that is why Eureka shares its name with a vacuum cleaner! As does Orick.

  58. tra
    November 14, 2011 at 4:18 pm

    I think you guys need to travel more if you think Eureka is that bad.

    I’m going to second that emotion. The handwringing and hyperventilating about how Eureka is supposedly “overrun” by homeless and transient folks, and how the whole City is supposedly becoming some kind of hellish, blighted post-apocalyptic wasteland — this does make me wonder which cities these handwringers would prefer to live in. Sacramento? Oakland? LA? As if they have no homelessness or blight in those places.

    Get a grip, folks. Eureka is just another one of the thousands of cities impacted by the Great Recession, struggling with unemployment, poverty and all the usual associated social problems, including homelessness — just like many other communities around the country and around the world. It seems to me that overall, Eureka and Humboldt are actually in better shape than a lot of other small cities and rural counties.

  59. Plain Jane
    November 14, 2011 at 4:29 pm

    The emotion is carried. Can we have a show of hands?

    Where are there no homeless people? Where should they go? Even when they hide in bushes out of site they aren’t left in peace. What do you expect them to do?

  60. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 4:38 pm

    Hellhole, cesspool, septic tank, sewer. This town could have been a beautiful destination for tourists and new self sufficient residents. Instead it is a warehouse which is used to store various types of undesirable freeloaders along with the infirm, the insane and a huge criminal element. There are the professional parasites that make a living out of enabling human trash, allowing and helping the unfortunate to come here and remain at the bottom of society. Social services are ruining many towns but Eureka is hands down the biggest mess they have created. Job security for those in the business of “helping” the perpetual needy has ruined Eureka. This is what the problem is with Eureka, not a few protesters.

  61. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 4:45 pm

    tra – you should get away from your computer once in a while. If you think this town is normal you must have been born in a pig sty. To compare Eureka to big any city such as Oakland and Sacramento is a real reach. You are running low on excuses.

  62. Plain Jane
    November 14, 2011 at 4:57 pm

    Because there are all those jobs going unfilled 4:38? What is your solution for the homeless? County seats are where social services are generally located so it makes sense that people who need them would try to be within reasonable proximity. But Eureka has always been the county seat where social service offices are located and only recently have the numbers of homeless exploded. They have, of course, always been numerous in large cities. Why are there so many homeless people today compared to just 10 years ago?

  63. Cassandra
    November 14, 2011 at 5:18 pm

    Quoted without comment.

    “This is all BS. It’s about damn time this crap was moved out. ”

    “Sometimes pararsites require repeated treatments to produce a cure.”

    “Gandhi was also a racist a-hole,”

    “…some agitated vigilantes could definitely do a number on that group…”

    69er: “The tone here today is more to my way of thinking, good job EPD.”

    “Rats always flee…”

    Hi Fi: “All decent folks in Eureka are cheering the Eureka Police Department on in ridding our courthouse lawn of those bums.”

  64. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 5:21 pm

    Plain Jane must be one of those parasitical social service welfare mongers. There are 58 counties in California. Which means there are 58 county seats. Tell me how many county seats of towns our size are over-saturated with homeless and welfare trash the way Eureka is. Using that tired BS as an excuse for this mess of a town is old and tired.

  65. tra
    November 14, 2011 at 6:02 pm


    How about we compare Eureka to Crescent City? Is Eureka in worse condition than Crescent City? I don’t think so.

    I do think it’s likely that Eureka probably has somewhat more homeless folks and transient people than the average city of its size, but probably not by much (I’m sure there are Census statistics on homelessness that could be consulted if someone wants to take the time to look it up).

    I suspect that whatever difference there is is mostly due to the fact that our climate is relatively mild, and that Eureka is the largest city within a very large geographical area. I seriously doubt that it’s because people are traveling hundreds of miles to get here because they heard we had a shower and a soup kitchen.

    But since it’s obviously futile to rage against the weather or geography, those who have such strong negative feelings toward homeless and transient folks seem to need to direct their anger somewhere, and I guess those who help the homeless are an easy target for that anger. I think that anger is completely misdirected, to say the least.

  66. Dan
    November 14, 2011 at 6:28 pm

    What Anon 5:21 is exposing of himself is that not only has he not a grasp of history but he has a cruel and mean streak, stupid with gusto and pride- almost lords his circumstance over those not so fortunate.
    I want nothing of this persons America.

  67. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 6:34 pm

    Those that help the homeless direct them to Eureka. Most of those welfare mongers do not live in the areas where the homeless, druggies and welfare recipients are warehoused. Get out and talk to some of the homeless and druggies. You will find that they are not from here and have come here because we are on the homeless and welfare circuit. Get up from your computer and go see and talk to these people and find out for yourself. Quit living in a dream world.

  68. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 6:36 pm

    good ! way to go EPD !

  69. jr
    November 14, 2011 at 6:37 pm

    Crescent City is also a county seat, but has much fewer homeless than Eureka. As to the economy, Eureka probably has the edge as there is more retail options in Eureka and stores in Crescent City must deal with a no sales tax state with Medford less than two hours away. (But California residents still must pay the appropriate sales tax by declaring same on their tax return, but few–if any–do.)

  70. Plain Jane
    November 14, 2011 at 6:47 pm

    5:21 sounds like he’s rehersing a scapegoating speech for a fascist rally.

  71. tra
    November 14, 2011 at 6:48 pm

    6:34, That’s nonsense. Welfare, Medicaid/Medical, Food Stamps and so on are all federal-state programs that people could get whether they’re in Eureka or not. And many cities have soup kitchens and shelters, not just Eureka. But I guess some don’t have showers that the homeless can use, so if you really want to try to argue that homeless people come all the way here because they heard we had a shower they could use, well I guess you could make that argument.

    It’s a ridiculous argument, of course, but at least it makes some kind of logical sense, whereas arguing that people come here for St. Vinny’s soup kitchen or for a cot at the Rescue Mission (despite the fact that many cities have similar amenities) or to collect welfare benefits (which are really no different than they could collect anywhere in the state), well that just makes no sense at all.

    So quit living in your paranoid, parochial, victimhood nightmare and face up to the fact that these are hard economic times all across the country, and lots of communities are facing the very same challenges that you for some reason seem to think are unique to Eureka and Humbolt County.

  72. Plain Jane
    November 14, 2011 at 6:48 pm

    rehearsing too

  73. Plain Jane
    November 14, 2011 at 6:50 pm

    Is it time to read The Grapes of Wrath again?

  74. tra
    November 14, 2011 at 7:03 pm

    “Crescent City is also a county seat, but it has much fewer homeless than Eureka.”

    Well it’s also a smaller city, population-wise. My question is whether the per-capita homeless population is actually any larger than Eureka’s, and if so, by how much?

    My own (unscientific) estimate, just based on personal observation, is that it looks to me like Eureka probably has a somewhat higher number of homeless people, per-capita, than Crescent City does, but not by all that much. And the overall appearance of Crescent City — in terms of how well the properties are kept up, how many storefronts are empty, and so on — seems worse to me than Eureka.

    Again, this is just my impression, and admittedly I don’t get up to Crescent City all that often, but if I’m accurate in both those observations, then it doesn’t seem like there’s much correlation between the presence of homeless people and the overall condition of the town.

    basically my point is that homeless people don’t produce a ruined economy, ruined economies produce homeless people. So getting angry at the victims, and at those who try to help them survive, doesn’t make a whole lot of sense from a practical point of view. But it’s easy and safe to attack those who alreeady have little power, so I expect the scapegoating will continue

  75. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 7:16 pm

    It’s not scapegoating the homeless. The blame lies upon those that enable them. This was going on here well before the economy tanked.

  76. Plain Jane
    November 14, 2011 at 7:17 pm

    Bravo, Tra!

  77. Jack Sherman
    November 14, 2011 at 7:22 pm

    I had to go to the county courthouse today while people were begin released from this morning’s arrests.

    It would have been nice to see some media there interviewing them since media keeps repeating the same fallacy that OWS lacks purpose. Why not ask those willing to sacrifice their freedom?

    Anyone claiming that a majority of citizens support the police violence are liars. The number of vehicles driving by and showing support is phenomenal.

    Had WWI vets not “camped” on the White House lawn for many months, they would have had to wait additional generations for America’s first Veteran’s Bill of Rights.

    Those who argue that camping cannot be Constitutionally protected protest are ignorant traitors.

  78. jr
    November 14, 2011 at 7:23 pm

    I concur with the analysis of Crescent City vis-a-vis Eureka. When I drive through many Eureka neighborhoods I am impressed how well- kept many of the houses are, including having actual landscaping. I am amazed when driving around Crescent City the condition of homes that are obviously inhabited. There seems to be little pride of ownership exhibited, excepting those that live along Pebble Beach Drive. As to vacant stores, Crescent City does seem to have more, most likely owing to the city’s proximity to Oregon and courtesy of Wal-Mart and Home Depot.

  79. tra
    November 14, 2011 at 7:25 pm


    Again, if the argument is that the provision of social services to homeless people in Eureka is supposedly acting as a “magnet” to draw homeless people here, you’d need to persuade me that the services in Eureka are SO much more generous than in other communities — to the point that this disparity would actually “attract” more homeless people to Eureka.

    Aside from the showers, what services, benefits or amenities do homeless people get here that they can’t get in Ukiah, or Redding, or elsewhere?

  80. Back On Earth
    November 14, 2011 at 7:27 pm

    Eureka ranks very high in California, and the nation, for a litany of problems because it is a city of 50,000 with the public-funding for a city of 28,000.

    Residents of Myrtle Town, Humboldt Hill, Cutten, and Pine Hill, rely on downtown Eureka for the majority of their needs.

  81. Plain Jane
    November 14, 2011 at 7:28 pm

    The economy tanked because so many people were already out of work and too many who were working were making less. The numbers of homeless have been increasing steadily for years as more people fell below the poverty rate, pushing those already in poverty further down, taking their minimum wage jobs and subsidized apartments when their industrial jobs disappeared, the worst of it hidden by easy credit until the crash.

  82. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 7:47 pm

    Plain Jane and gang. Take a trip out of Humboldt. Especially Eureka and look around. Open your eyes. This town is full of drugged out wasted freaks. Dare you to tell us of another town that is this screwed up.

  83. Jethro Bodeen
    November 14, 2011 at 8:25 pm

    Dang, I thought I’d wander by the courthouse after fishin’ to get myself a free meal, a bag o’ dope, and some sex, but much to my chagrin it’s all been chained up and man were all them real smart people pissed! The guy standin’ next to me smelled like a stack of Uncle Jed’s ‘coon hides so I didn’t hand around long. There was a girl there who actually said she had a job too, yes, legal and all. Hey, what’s this heroin stuff anyway, chewin’ tabacco??

  84. Hoodoo Chile
    November 14, 2011 at 8:42 pm

    Just go down to the sheriff and apply for a job Jethro you’ll fit right in. The EPD’s standards may be too high for you.

  85. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 8:42 pm

    I support the Police and am glad the occutards are gone, from the Courthouse that is. Now go home, take a shower, get a haircut, quit smokin dope and get a job.

  86. Fortuna Salad
    November 14, 2011 at 8:49 pm

    Will you support the police when they knock on your door to collect your fair share of the taxes?

  87. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 8:52 pm

    I watched the video posted on the daily KOS. The female doing the video is an extremely obnoxious person. It is obvious she is spouting propaganda for the camera. Moreover it would appear that she, and at least one other, are trying to incite the crowd. She seems to be trying to get someone else to commit an act of voilence against the polic, hoping the police will over react and she can video it. That makes her a coward in my book.

    That officer Sanchez sure is a level headed guy to be so calm with these kind of people

  88. Load Me Another
    November 14, 2011 at 8:55 pm

    Professor Plain Jane compares the plight of the Joad family and the human condition in the “Grapes of Wrath” to the circus at the courthouse. Actually, Jane, the courthouse clowns are quite a contrast to what is depicted in Steinbeck’s classic. The Joad family would be insulted with the comparison. Read it again Jane. And again.

  89. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 9:10 pm

    Del Norte County has been sending its poorest people to Humboldt County since God was young.

  90. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 9:16 pm

    Most towns do not have a free needle exchange for the heroine addicts. Most towns don’t build showers for the homeless. Most towns do not have St Vinny and the Rescue Mission located in their downtown tourist area. Most towns don’t have HSU turning out new social service workers with their new degrees. Most towns have a better visitors bureau and Chamber of Commerce to bring tourists instead of homeless. Most towns do not have the food bank begging people to get food stamps. Most towns do not line their gateway to their town with motels mostly for the homeless. Most towns don’t have welfare as their biggest business. Most towns don’t have a medical mobile bus for the homeless. Most towns are not run by good old boys and social working parasites. Most towns don’t think they owe everyone a handout. Most towns have not been taken over by a bunch like Plane Janes and other welfare mongers that hide behind the skirts of non profit status.

  91. Rexified
    November 14, 2011 at 9:42 pm

    It’s all true, but EVERY town has at least one bitter old biddy like you. Jumpin Jehosephat!

  92. Anonymous
    November 14, 2011 at 9:56 pm

    The Joad family were hard workers wanting to better themselves within the system. There are minimum wage jobs (still paying gobs more than what farm workers earned during the depression) that go unclaimed in Humboldt County and so illegals take the unwanted jobs. Somehow, I don’t think the free campers hanging out on the lawn are remotely close to Depression-era workers. Nice try linking the two in order to give the free campers some semblance of credibility, but, umm, no.

  93. tra
    November 14, 2011 at 10:49 pm

    Anon 9:16 said: “Most towns do not have a free needle exchange for the heroine addicts.”

    Yes, but they still have IV drug users, so they just end up with more cases of HIV and Hepatitis C. Yeah, that’ll really help improve the quality of life in Eureka.

    “Most towns do not have St Vinny and the Rescue Mission located in their downtown tourist area.”

    So your theory is that homeless people move here because they like the idea that the soup kitchen and the homeless shelter are in a quaint tourist area? They’re flocking to the Rescue Mission in order to soak up that Old Town ambiance!? I guesss next you’ll be telling us how the homeless are attracted by the opportunity to shop for antiques.

    Basically the only thing on your list of amenities available to homeless people in Eureka that is really unusual for a city of Eureka’s size, is the showers. So again, your argument really boils down to: “Homeless people are traveling hundreds of miles to hang out in Eureka because they heard they can take a shower.”

  94. 69er
    November 14, 2011 at 11:41 pm

    Think it is about time for PJ to come out with her address and invite the homeless, the druggies, the occupiers and their ilk to camp, poop and pee in her front yard. I am sure her neighbors would be appreciative of her generosity!

  95. November 15, 2011 at 5:45 am

    “….homeless and druggies. You will find that they are not from here and have come here because we are on the homeless and welfare circuit.” Anon 6:34

    Get that? The homeless and welfare ‘circuit.’

    You are damn smart Mr. Anon. Now please explain how the hell this circuit works for anyone?

    It doesn’t, because that ‘circuit’ doesn’t exist. But the ‘story’ is good and fits when one needs to show need for Brown Shirters. But it is a story.

    Kick ’em while they are down Anon, eh?

  96. Percy
    November 15, 2011 at 9:32 am

    My hope is that all you homeless haters have a period in your lives where you or your kids develop a drug or alcohol dependency or your wonderful well paying job with benefits goes to an Indian (the country) that is willing to work twice as hard for on tenth the pay and the three minimum wage jobs that you took on to pay for your ratty little apartment after loosing your house to foreclosure is still not enough to pay the rent and you find yourself evicted and on the street and looking for a shower. In addition I wish you cancer without health insurance.

  97. Sick & tired of local radicals
    November 15, 2011 at 9:33 am

    I’m sure the County Supervisors and Eureka City Councilmembers are quaking in their boots over what “which supervisors voted to harrass protesters?” wrote on an anonymous blog.

    I got three bits of advice for our Occupy Eureka protesters.

    Get a shower
    Get a job
    Get a point

    Make that four – harrass is spelled harass (with one “R”), unless you’re talking about her ass.

    Next time you run into a 25-year old protester with a nose ring, tattoos and a beanie on his head, ask this simple question:

    What do you do for a living that allows you to stand out here 24/7?

    This was not a movement
    This was a moment and your time is up

    See advice #2 above

    November 15, 2011 at 9:38 am

    The day of corporate fascism is over in America. We are not afraid of you anymore.

    What is it going to be, Tunisia or Libya?

  99. which supervisors voted to harrass protesters?
    November 15, 2011 at 9:40 am

    I want to know which supervisors voted to harrass the protesters. Those kinds of decisions are among the most important to many, if not most, when it comes to integrity and the future of their leadership.

    Let Humboldt’s city council members and board of supervisors come forward to be proud or ashamed of their decision. Protesters are gathering en masse across the country RIGHT NOW and Humboldt’s representatives should be in the spotlight.

  100. Plain Jane
    November 15, 2011 at 9:40 am

    I heard a Rush clip where he was complaining about even Republicans starting to repeat the “lies” from Occupy Wall Street. The movement is in its infancy and already a large majority of Americans support it. If it did nothing but break down the wall of silence over the dangers of growing income / wealth inequality and corporate corruption of our govt, it would be a success. People’s concern over that issue is not going away until it is addressed in a satisfactory manner.

  101. Big Boss Man
    November 15, 2011 at 9:41 am

    Liberal Democrat mayors across the country are cracking down on the Occupy mobs. Why? Because it doesn’t bode well to be connected with them as elections approach- proof that these shenanigans are not popular with the average American. Otherwise, the democratic party would have booths set up at every site. What is popular is the removal of that eco-unfriendly presence.

  102. which supervisors voted to harrass protesters?
    November 15, 2011 at 9:44 am

    “Liberal Democrat mayors across the country are cracking down on the Occupy mobs.”

    What about our representatives here in Humboldt? Whatever your opinion, can you find that out, asshole?

  103. HaHa
    November 15, 2011 at 9:50 am

    Big Boss Man is Hi Fi on Ten High Bourbon. But you are right he is an asshole no matter which stupid name he’s using.

  104. Percy
    November 15, 2011 at 10:00 am

    Big Boss Asshole, worried about an “eco-unfriendly presence”. What a hoot!

  105. Fact Checker
    November 15, 2011 at 10:55 am

    •In Eureka, Calif., more than 50 Eureka police officers, Humboldt County sheriff’s deputies and California Highway Patrol officers moved in on Occupy Eureka early Monday, arresting more than 20 protesters. No warning or order for dispersal was given.


  106. Fact Checker
    November 15, 2011 at 10:56 am

    “In Eureka, California, a Pacific coast city 270 miles (430 km) north of San Francisco, police arrested 33 people in dismantling a protest camp there on Monday.”


  107. anonymous
    November 15, 2011 at 11:05 am

    Re: 10:55 & 6…

    That gives at least 53 people and their supporters the right to protest their unjust arrest, representing themselves physically on the lawn of the courthouse or like establishment until ALL charges and associated moneys against them are dropped.

  108. robash141
    November 15, 2011 at 12:20 pm

    Some of the anons here sound as if they are trying to warm up the crowd at the Nuremburg Rallies..

  109. Eureka Resident
    November 15, 2011 at 12:20 pm

    There’s not one poll showing that regulations or taxes, or any other issue, is more important to American businesses today than their loss of customers.

    Those who deride the poor and homeless aren’t simply bigots, they’re anti-growth, anti-business, anti-American traitors.

    Off with their heads!

  110. really?
    November 15, 2011 at 1:34 pm

    You guys really do need to get out more. I travel extensively for business and have driven through 10 to 12 states this year alone. I have seen far, far worse than Eureka. I’ve seen far, far better also. But we are in no way unique.

    Crescent City also has an extensive homeless population. Comparing it to Eureka is pretty tough as Eureka alone, even without the outlying neighborhoods, has the population of all of Del Norte county. Humboldt county has 5 times Del Norte’s population.

    And showers for the homeless are not a rare thing.

  111. really?
    November 15, 2011 at 1:38 pm

    San Rafael, pop 57,000, has a few problems of their own. They had to spend $45,000 to clear brush around their homeless camps as they had already had 8 fires by July of this year.


  112. Harris
    November 15, 2011 at 2:39 pm

    Really, maybe on your next trip out of state, you could stop and live there instead of here. I believe the hack blogs, newspapers, NBC reports etc. that homeless fires plaqued that area like I believe Humboldt’s media that the protesters at the courthouse are plaquing this area with vandalism. I’ve seen more than 12 states worth of bullshit from police reports and NBC over why they try to sweep their own mess under our rug.

  113. really?
    November 15, 2011 at 2:56 pm

    I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to say. I can’t tell if you are trying to agree with me or not. My point was that there are problems all over and Eureka is just one many municipalities with homeless issues.

    i’m not clear if you want me to live somewhere else because you don’t agree with my position or if you think I need to live somewhere else to understand a different place.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s