How do you know he had a fortunate station in life? Did I miss something? Sounds like just a man to me, not someone in a position to change anything with money.
He chose to make a documentary about homeless people. That, right there, the fact that he had the means to do that instead of concentrating on surviving in a world where not having a steady address, much less an income, means he was very fortunate compared to the people whose lives he wanted to portrait.
It could still have the effect of showing a future homeless person the realities of the situation, and give them some insight into how to survive, where before they would have been clueless and helpless.
By the time you become homeless, it is usually too late to prepare yourself for it. I know, I've been there.
Even if the footage is not released, maybe someone who's booted someone out of their house might reconsider after seeing one of the articles and take them back in.
Highly unlikely, to say the least.
I just think there's so much potential to make a difference, even a small one, that we mustn't condemn him for of all things leaving his dead body lying around and inconveniencing the emergency services.
What we must condemn him for, however, is insufficient preparation. Unlike the homeless people whose plight he wanted to portrait, he DID have a chance to educate himself on the topic. He was able to do research on the topic, as you would expect from someone making a documentary. He was able to arrange for emergency pickup in case things went unexpectedly south.
Yes, but not fortunate enough to make a difference that way. All he needed was a camera to shoot his footage, he didn't need anything big. He was doing it completely alone, this wasn't like your usual documentary with a presenter and a whole film crew. Using this method if it had been successful is by far and away the best he could have done to make a difference.
That's very interesting. I don't know if you want to elaborate. I can certainly understand not wanting to. I certainly can't comment on personal experience of such a thing, but surely it would still be useful, especially to someone living in that area, if he was filming the resources available and the places people sleep that are able to survive the nights and people talking about what you should do, and also how not to land yourself in the situation in the first place.
That specific scenario is not likely sure, but that was just one thing I could think of. The article with the comments section has been up for just several hours and already has 256 comments, and you need to be registered to comment. How many more people have either not commented or can't comment, but have seen it? The vast majority will continue on with their lives, but how many will decide to do something?
There is no way of knowing at this point, but I am confident that one body will be paid back in some way with interest.
It seems wrong to condemn him for that. Maybe his preparation was insufficient, but he's paid the price. You can state his lack of preparation cost him his life, but it's not something to condemn him for. He's already had his "punishment".
Lorric, you say his death has so much potential, but what about his life? Do you not think he could have saved at least one life had he lived another 80 years?
I'm actually speaking of the project rather than his death. He didn't complete the project, but he has still done something towards that end.
