Tapping into Homeless Discourse

For this Short Assignment I will be looking into the text “Homes Not Handcuffs.”  The portion of the text we will be looking into only contains up to the conclusion of the executive summary. Within this portion we see a number of details about the dilemma of homelessness in the US as well as the negative (and positive) ways it has been dealt with. What I want to do is look into the set-up and the connotation that the author uses to provide the argument, as well as the thought process behind it. 

Firstly, after the air is cleared of the “about the law center” and the “about the coalition,” the text quickly jumps into the argument without so much as a forward. This submersion into the topic at first might overwhelm the reader, especially with the plethora of percentages and bullet points of laws enacted against homelessness. This tactic of outpouring the bad news before anything else is integral into getting the interest of the reader or anyone coming in contact with the piece. Why else would the cover be a set of handcuffs? 

This sense of immediacy gives rise to the kairos of the issue. Homelessness permeates the country. As stated on page eight of the text, “On March 27, 2008, CBS News reported that 38 percent of foreclosures involved rental properties, affecting at least 168,000 households.” These numbers are shocking in that of themselves, but in spite of the kairos, the average individual tends to ignore the problem. 

However, there is a metaphorical light at the end of the metaphorical tunnel. It begins with the ‘about’ sections, where it is explained that the members are individuals ranging from lawyers to the homeless themselves. This accumulation of varied individuals shows that even the basest of citizens can help in the cause. Also, after the horrors of the criminalizing laws and their effects have been explained, the text puts to light the cities and organizations working to positively affect the issue. This discourse allows the reader to understand the different spectrums of the issue and-through careful organization and wording- agree or disagree with the given argument on the grounds of tether they believe more in police force or charitable giving. 

-Melissa DeHart