Chat Forum
What a massive crock
-
Posted 9 months ago #
-
Good!
Posted 9 months ago # -
Beyond belief.
Will have many fans on here no doubt
Posted 9 months ago # -
*waves*
Posted 9 months ago # -
yeah nottingham council were harping on about this in the news this morning....
so are they going to do the same to other families who smembers have committed
burglary
arson
vandalism
sexual offenses
affray
breach of the peace
gbh
abh
twocetc, etc
?
Posted 9 months ago # -
David Cameron : "I think for too long we have taken too soft an attitude to people who loot and pillage their own community"
Does that muppet have no shame whatsoever ? How can he allow himself to come out with such bollox suggesting that for too long we've been soft on looters ? And he makes it sound as if looting is a daily occurrence - ****.
Britain has never been "soft" on looters. This idiot is our prime minister ffs
Posted 9 months ago # -
so are they going to do the same to other families who smembers have committed
burglary
arson
vandalism
sexual offenses
affray
breach of the peace
gbh
abh
twocWe should do
Posted 9 months ago # -
how about
drunk and disorderly
possession.
jay walking.Posted 9 months ago # -
Sounds good to me
Posted 9 months ago # -
jay walking.
Is that a crime in the UK or have you just picked it up from an old Kojak?
Posted 9 months ago # -
Speeding?
Non payment of TV licence?Posted 9 months ago # -
What halfwit put the "Can't do the time don't do the crime" tag ?
This is not about a prison sentence, nor is it about the one who's done the crime being punished.
That is the whole point of this thread......Durrrr
Posted 9 months ago # -
Which half wit can't understand the meaning behind it? Oh that'd be you ernie
Posted 9 months ago # -
Heard the sound-bytes on this earlier, couldn't believe my ears. Leader of the council confirmed that when these families become homeless they are not eligible for any emergency housing because the eviction was somehow voluntary. The PM came on next with his full backing.
Reminds me of North Korea where they send the whole family to the concentration camp if any of them break the law.
Calls to bring back the workhouse will follow soon enough, prolly from the same ones that were suggesting National Service earlier in the week. It's like we've regressed 100 years.
Posted 9 months ago # -
Oh, so it was you Houns !
Posted 9 months ago # -
Isn't it about breaking the downward spiral and taking responsibility for your actions. If you can't bring you children up properly. The family is not going to be homeless, they have had the council tenency removed, they are now free to exercise their new found freedom and find another home in the private sector. Something they should have thought about before breaking the tenancy agreement.
Posted 9 months ago # -
So what happens to the evicted family- they end up in some shitty private let still paid for by the local authority.
Whats the point? Just to make Call Me Dave and the Daily (Hate)Mail feel good?Posted 9 months ago # -
Thought for a second this was an F1 thread
Theft
Sex
Money
Possible corruption ...Posted 9 months ago # -
But no a simple storey of British society
Posted 9 months ago # -
I predict more riots.
Posted 9 months ago # -
wow, that's some proper objective justice there. Meanwhile rich and powerful tax and expenses fiddlers point and laugh. What a joke. Proportionality my ass.
Posted 9 months ago # -
I think for too long we have taken too soft an attitude to people who loot and pillage their own community"
Is he talking about MPs again?
Bankers?
Non dom tax exiles?
Michael green making money here and then tax gifting it abroad to avoid his responsibilities to the wider communityOn issue how is this meant to help ? She was not even involved and he has not been convicted. Will be like a press version of hanging people from lamps
Posted 9 months ago # -
I suppose if the parent/guardian has been somehow complicit in the offences carried out, for example by being highly irresponsible in their attitude towards the offender's discipline and upbringing, and they have signed a tenancy agreement and are now in breach of that agreement then I could almost, in very clear and extreme cases, see a justification for eviction, even more so if the family is already known to the authorities.
Whether that's the case here I don't know but it feels quite arbitrary in its application and very wrong to me to force people out of their homes in what appears to be a vengeful & vindictive way.
Posted 9 months ago # -
How can he allow himself to come out with such bollox suggesting that for too long we've been soft on looters ?
I don't think he is referring specifically to looters but to the outcome relative to the crime, in which case he is correct. Irrelevant of their excuse they are in the wrong. In this specific case, the parent should also be responsible for the actions. The parent of the Olympic hopeful took her daughter to face her actions and it will no-doubt result in her not appearing at the Olympics. = fairness
You simply cannot accept what they did as being acceptable based on a dislike of the ruling political party. What would you propose as a suitable punishment? Jail is not going to do anything other than cost us more money.
I wish there was an easy answer to this, but unfortunately the problem is now three it four generations deep and simply removing the parents income stream is not the final answer but will be more affective long term than jailing them.
You read the last line of that report.
Action = consequence. Yes, the parents are contemplating that now but is that not the case with every crime that had gone to court?
Posted 9 months ago # -
Love it how the first word in the article is "conservative"
Posted 9 months ago # -
I don't think he is referring specifically to looters but to the outcome relative to the crime, in which case he is correct.
No. He was specifically referring to looters. The quote was very clear, and I heard him say it myself on Radio 4 news. Read it again, it couldn't be clearer :
"I think for too long we have taken too soft an attitude to people who loot and pillage their own community"
If he had meant to say something else, then he would have said something else - obviously.
Posted 9 months ago # -
In this specific case, the parent should also be responsible for the actions.
Yes all parents of 17 year old children are responsible for all their actions and approve of everything they do,everyone knows thatPosted 9 months ago # -
Bit a knee jerk reaction from the PM but there is some sense in what he says, in that parents have to take responsibility for their children.
I've just come back from the local shops and there are at least 15 kids hanging around, a few who were definitely well under 10 ranging to 14 or 15 max. WTF are kids that age doing out after 10pm ?
Posted 9 months ago # -
On my mobile so don't have full cut and paste etc.
Ernie,
Yes, but he is obviously not classing burglars and drug dealers in the same light, that are obviously free to carry on as previous?
Any change of law will be overuling and will apply to all. The opportunity is there and as politicians, they will take it.Junkyard, I agree whole heartedly, but I also assume your 17 year old would not feel the same due to their upbringing and would not be allowed out of the house if riots were taking place?
Posted 9 months ago # -
Agree with ernie, this idea that Britain is a soft touch forlooters is farce.
I can't see that making these people homeless is likely to assist. This all throws into rather stark relief the fact that (like it or not) a proportion of welfare is the price everyone else pays for a quiet life. You give the dim, strong, violent guy a house, because you really don't want him to start thinking he needs yours.
Posted 9 months ago # -
simply removing the parents income stream is not the final answer but will be more affective long term than jailing them.
If you remove an income stream (or increase housing costs) from someone who has shown criminal tendencies, I would have thought the most obvious response would be an increase in criminal behaviour.
Actually, that's far too polite. It's as **** obvious as the bright blue arse of a baboon that if you cut the benefits of burglars they're going to be doing more burglary.
Posted 9 months ago # -
I actually don't think a local council will be able to ride roughshod over established tenancy law, and I imagine that a decent judge will sling this out. Making people homeless is a big step and unless the tenant is continuing to perpetrate some kind of crime/tenacy breach (as in not payment of rent, trashing the property or carrying out criminal enterprise from the property) then I think it would come under a judges discretion. Assuming its an AST, then in tenancy law there are mandatory and discretionary grounds for eviction. I feel sure that when this has died down a proper tenancy judge will not allow this to go ahead. I also think the counciller who announced this intention probably knows this and is just spouting this rhetoric to score a few points.
Posted 9 months ago # -
Ernie,
Yes, but he is obviously not classing burglars and drug dealers in the same light, that are obviously free to carry on as previous?The topic being discussed was the looting. Cameron was talking about looting. Britain has never been "soft" on looting, never mind about "for too long".
And you don't deny that this is the case kevj, you are simply defending Cameron's right to say something which is patently untrue.
The reason he said it I have no doubt, is that he gave no thought whatsoever to what he was saying. I'm sure he thought to himself, "I'm a Tory, so I must say that we've been too soft on looters" ....it'll show them how tough I am. Unfortunately however, it's complete bollox. This what happens when you engage your jaw without bothering with your brain.
But for me the cherry on the icing was the "for too long" comment - as if to suggest that Britain had been experiencing problems with looting for years ..... what a ****
Posted 9 months ago # -
can someone go through David Camerons back catalogue. Find some minor misdemeanour. Maybe he farted in front of The Queen, surely that's proportionally equal to nicking water from lidls?
look, DC is a posh, naive, priviledged bloke with no idea about ordinary people living ordinary lives. Why the hell he was chosen to represent the population I have no Idea. What I am sure of is he has no **** clue and just reads stuff that sounds good.
Posted 9 months ago # -
If you remove an income stream (or increase housing costs) from someone who has shown criminal tendencies, I would have thought the most obvious response would be an increase in criminal behaviour. Actually, that's far too polite. It's as **** obvious as the bright blue arse of a baboon that if you cut the benefits of burglars they're going to be doing more burglary.
Baboons arses are pink.
Yes, I agree. There lies the problem. Years of not providing for themselves has spawned a feral individual which will rob themselves temporarily rich. How do you propose we fix this? You have to start somewhere and why not start now and give the people who house the ferals a reason to question what they do?
Posted 9 months ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
