MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
Had a bit of a disagreement with my friend sho lives on a sink estate over the weekend, this is the abridged version of events:
Friend buys her son & daughter a couple of new bikes with money she recieved from our glorious benevolent government.
Some "known" scumbags from the estate, with a track record of antisocial behaviour stole the kids bikes and broke the door of her (crappy) shed in the process. (No ground anchors here!)
Kids destraught, her new fella is livid and she's less than delighted.
Turns out her new fella went around to the "alledged theifs" property smashes up thrir shed and returns with two kids bikes, not the ones originally stolen!
They are all "a bike for a bike" and all this and flatly dismiss the "two wrongs don't makd a right" concept out of hand.
In my opinion the "alledged theifs" were innocent and they have just turned them over worse than they'd had done to them, I'm in proper danger of falling out with my friend and her fella about yhis which is a damn shame because before this she/they were completly innocent.
What does the moraltrackworld think?
Hob Nobs of choc digestives, pot of English breakfast and a dose of fence sitting.
I before E if it rhymes with key 🙂
A lesson in look before you leap ?
Cant you just keep out of it?
Nice, so ignore it because it's none of my business??
I think its disgusting personally, why should those other peoples kids suffer because someone else stole someone elses bikes?!?
Eyes of the law technically it wouldn't be theft potentially if the bikes were the same value as the ones stolen, however he no doubt has committed other criminal offences in the mean time including criminal damage. Not right though just encourages people to beat the sh** out of each other. if they know who has taken their bikes phone the frigging police that's what they are there for. Problem the police have with bike theft is there is normally no evidence of who took them!!! FFS shakes head some people .... as Mr Nutt says.
Why not shop everyone ionvolved to the police, thus treating the criminals and innocents evenly and fairly. Then the police can decide and you can wash the moral blood from your hands.
They claim that the police wern't interested and had almost implied that it was their own fault and that they were over stretched in the area as it was.
My friend was actually moved to this house by the council because the last place she lived was burgled and her partner of the time was hospitalised. She a lovely lass that wouldn't hurt a fly, I guess some folk are just born in the wrong placd at the wrong time!
She a lovely lass that wouldn't hurt a fly
I understand that she is your friend and I sympathise with the situation she found herself in, but she is also someone who condones kicking someone's shed in and stealing children's bikes.
This whole situation stinks if I'm honest and doesn't sound like we know the full story IMO. As Bigyinn says anonymous phone call let the old bill sort it out. Plus I'm not sure they've reported it to the police, not as he'll be thinking he's getting nicked as he's gone and smashed someone else's door in.
I really can't believe sometimes what people think is right or acceptable.
The apparent destruction of the shed was "to set an example", which was exactly the same reasoning that was given by the scumbags that hospitalised her Exfella!!
I can't believe nobody has posted about smashing (back) doors in yet. Oh! 😆
Putting dubious morals to one side, is she really going to let her kids ride around on a pair of bikes that will be easily identifiable to the (presumed) scumbags they were nicked off?
Her kids will get a kicking and the bikes will be gone again.
"To set an example" great skills that FFS! Need I say anymore, this story stinks, clearly they are setting a great example to the kids as well.
Eyes of the law technically it wouldn't be theft potentially if the bikes were the same value as the ones stolen
Eh? Now, I'm no expert on theft, but taking something which isn't yours with the intention of permanently depriving the owner has always been considered theft, right?
In which case, just because he may have 2 bikes in his hands of similar value to those stolen *but aren't actually the bikes stolen* tells me that there have been two thefts here: the original and this one.
The apparent destruction of the shed was "to set an example", which was exactly the same reasoning that was given by the scumbags that hospitalised her Exfella!!
Law of the jungle, innit.
Moraltrackworld? MiddleClassWorld more like?
Having lived in quite a few 'sink' estates myself, this is just the way these 'societies' function. Its just the way it is.
If you lived on one, you'd either be extracting similar summary police-free justice against the alleged perpetrators, if it was common knowledge around the estate who they were
.... or you'd be perceived as a ****-house (and hence soft-touch easy target) and the next thing you're getting your car vandalised, and your widows put through every other night
And going to the police is a non-starter, quite frankly
I'm not justifying it BTW. Just pointing out the sad, but harsh realities of life in a lot of places in this country EDIT: actually, sod it. I am justifying it. Sounds reasonable to me. Like the Israeli's are fond of pointing out, its about 'facts on the ground' that count
This is why we used to have the stocks.
Okay I didn't explain myself propery, did he intend to permanently deprive? I suggest not as he's taken them wanting his in return, I'm sure he would return the bikes once he has his bikes. No permanence there. He's taken them as they are a similar value to the ones they took therefore he believes he has a right to those 2 additional bicycles. There is no way this would go anyway as a theft unless he said "yup I was keeping em forever"... anyway this still stinks and we aren't getting the full story, therefore it doesn't really matter at all!
I'm a Scouser... i'm all for this 🙂
I only hope he gave the theif a slap too 🙂
It's a shock to see how the other half live...
And going to the police is a non-starter, quite frankly
Yep...
i guess it comes down to did the alleged thieves actually do it. or is it just his opinion stated as fact!
Like binners said, in some places it is a very sad fact of life. I believe that they also use "instant" coffee...
i guess it comes down to did the alleged thieves actually do it. or is it just his opinion stated as fact!
In my experience, the jungle drums in places like this are rarely, if ever, wrong. This is due to the 'criminals*' generally being so staggeringly, breath-takingly thick, they'll probably have been down the pub, laughing/bragging with their mates about having done it, half an hour later, within ear-shot of half the estate.
Again... this is the reality
* This word actually affords them a status they barely deserve. They're just opportunist scrotes
What Biineers says in the main
Having lived in some questionable areas it was usually easier to use the grape vine to get yor stuff returned
Often with a a lame excuse of yes i got it from x etc and a few quid as thanks to the "friend" for them helping you
This was better than violence IMHO but not so much tha it was tempting to keep "taxing" you
I think its disgusting personally, why should those other peoples kids suffer because someone [s]else stole someone elses bikes[/s] stole the price of the original purchase from the taxpayer?!?
Fixed, etc...
Not really Woppit. If these frightful chavs are busy robbing off each other, then they're not robbing any expensive bikes from nice leafy, middle class, suburban sheds. So... who cares?
There is no doubt in my mind that that is exactly how the Police view it
Coyote - Member
Like binners said, in some places it is a very sad fact of life. I believe that they also use "instant" coffee...
faints in disgust
robbing any working people's [s]nice leafy, middle class[/s], [s]suburban sheds[/s] bank accounts
Wrong.
You can't just lynch whoever you assume is responsible for something.
It's not the wild west.
It's not the wild west.
That's very naive Molly. I think you'll find, that in a lot of places, that is [i]exactly[/i] what it is. See my description above.
Woppit - I thought they were Nigerians that did that?
Is this about exhuming Yasser ?
gah, beaten by geoffj
Woppit - I thought they were Nigerians that did that?
Rarsecyst!
It's NOT the wild west.
People might behave like it is - this is wrong.
What geoffj said - thought the same when I saw the first post earlier today but didn't want to spoil the fun so early.
So what does this one relate to?
It's not ideal but under the circumstances (assuming the apparent perpetrator really did it) it's understandable IMO.
If I had the bouncy balls I'd do the same as blokey. I know it's not right but ringing the fuzz will achieve precisely **** all squared. What goes around comes around. At least the kiddies are happy.
Just build walls round places like this.
And fill it with water.
At least the kiddies are happy
What about the second lot of kiddies who had their bikes stolen?
It seems there are now 3 wrongs done to the other person (shed broken + two bikes taken) yet only 2 wrongs done to your friend (2 bikes taken) so presumably to even up the moral-mathematics, you just need to smash your friends shed up then everyones equally wronged and everythings fine?
Round here nothing gets stolen ever. Because being a proper "sink" estate, nobody takes a jobbie on their own doorstep. If anything was to get stolen, they would get it back pronto and the thief would get a wee message to say dont do it again.
I don't agree that its ok....however, mine were nicked recently and ive though that if I see them about instead of going to the police who may take days to attend if at all and will they actually look or just ask perpetrator "have you got this mans bikes?" then I would seriously consider following them home and nicking them back if they were obtainable. I know it,s not without risk but if the situation presents it's self i'll be very tempted.
donks - my neighbour did (something a bit like) this.
A mates BMX was stolen, he saw it outside the local Greggs, confronted the young lad who came out to it (who said he'd bought it for £20).
Neighbour stated it was stolen and took it off him & back to his mates.
This might have gone differently if dealing with an adult 🙂
It's NOT the wild west.
Molly - You've clearly never lived to Salford 6, Lower Broughton, Ordsall, Moss side, etc, etc, etc, etc
Actually... the wild west would be infinitely preferable to the feral, lawless vacuum that presently exists in places like this. Lofty morals rarely (if ever) stand up to the cold harsh realities of life in these places. If you think that the rule of law and 'policing by consent' is either applied, respected, or in some cases even acknowledged, as they are in leafy suburban cul-de-sacs then, I'm sorry, but that's just the most hopeless naivete.
Different sets of rules apply. And if you don't play by them, you won't last 5 minutes!
they also use "instant" coffee...
Oh the humanity
Have tried the confrontation method when i saw a fella on a work colleagues bike years ago...I chased him, caught him and demanded the bike back at which point he picked up a handy half brick and (ironically) his bike lock and came at me windmill style. I backed away and we had our selves a Mexican stand off. I had to let him go in the end (before mobile phones) and that was that...so I decreed that I would covertly follow the scally next time and then would have the option of call for back up..call police..or just fire bomb his house.
Molly - You've clearly never lived to Salford 6, Lower Broughton, Ordsall, Moss side, etc, etc, etc, etc
You misunderstand.
It IS not the wild west, by virtue of not being west of the Mississippi and this not being the 19th century.
It may well be worse than the wild west, I am not disputing that. I am not as naive as you think.
What I am saying is that it should not be like the wild west. General lawlessness is not an excuse for lawlessness. It may be the reason, but it's not an excuse.
If you think that the rule of law and 'policing by consent' is either applied, respected, or in some cases even acknowledged, as they are in leafy suburban cul-de-sacs
I don't think that - obviously.
with money she recieved from our glorious benevolent government.
So your friend is a sponging benefit scrounger?
Why should the taxpayer pay for 2 bikes?
Best the two innocent kids don't ride the two stolen bikes otherwise this will end in misery.
So your friend is a sponging benefit scrounger?Why should the taxpayer pay for 2 bikes?
You are Paul Dacre and I claim my 5 illegal immigrant, lesbian single mothers
Best the two innocent kids don't ride the two stolen bikes otherwise this will end in misery.
True. they might be Islabikes? Imagine the whole Class Confusion issues? It'd take years of therapy to rectify. Imagine the disapointment when they end up getting sent to the local sink Comprehensive instead of the Grammar School Scholarship they were expecting? 😆
You are Paul Dacre and I claim my 5 illegal immigrant, lesbian single mothers
www.binnerstshirts.com
well Coyote, in short it's a:
Scenario loosely based upon the Palestine/Israel conflict
well spotted geoffj, scaredypants, beej you all win extra internet points!
cheers for playing folks....