We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Council evictions begin
Comments
-
Graham_Devon wrote: »They will get re-housed. They have to be re-housed. BUT, they will lose the home they currently live in. They will lose their right to life long tenancies.
This is an important point.
The fact of the matter is we have a housing shortage in this country, and the old style subsidised life long tenancies are rare and valuable.
People living in one should appreciate what they have, and be under no illusions that if they commit crime, or let their kids/family commit crime, then under the terms of their lease it should be revoked.
Meaning they'll end up in less secure accommodation for which they'll have to pay more.
It would certainly do no harm to have council estates full of parents keenly aware that if they let their 11 year old kids roam around unsupervised committing crimes, they can lose their house over it.“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
If you kill someone thru deliberately speeding you can be charged with causing death by dangerous driving, which I believe can carry a life sentance.
No, the maximum sentence is fourteen years.
In the Birmingham case, the likely charge is one of murder-the allegation is not that the car was speeding, but that the car was used as a weapon, and the victims were deliberately run down.No free lunch, and no free laptop
0 -
Another important point is people signed contracts. Part of that contract was about antisocial behaviour.
We all need to take responsibility for our own actions. What is the point in carrying on talking tough, while doing nothing? All that does is prove these people right, and part of the reason they were rioting (they said so themselves) is there was nothing stopping them.
When people are using that as a reason, and to show us they CAN riot and CAN take what the "rich" have, we need to take action. Not doing so would be a grave mistake.
As I stated, people signed up to these contracts. It is unfair for the people living around them to have to live through this criminal behaviour. If we can make just a few people think about their responsibilities, before carrying out their actions, in my mind, that can only be a good thing.
No one on this website feels bad when a landlord decides to serve notice on a family as the landlord wants to sell up. That's just business and part of the contract. Yet it's abhorrent others who have commited serious criminal actions should put lives as risk should find themselves losing a rented home. I can not get my head around this. Julie is one of those who sees absolutely nothing wrong with a landlord serving notice on their tenants and saying they have to leave within a month. Yet evicting these people is wrong?? Doesn't compute in my mind.0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »Can't believe you have the nerve to suggest that, after suggesting others want these people, and 8 year old girls chucked out on the street and dieing in the winter.
You've linked riots to speeding, which is absurd. No one speeding PURPOSELY runs themselves into buildings and PURPOSELY aims at pedestrians. SOME OF These people purposely set fire to, vandalised, and stole items.
Sense & proportion? Should use it yourself and stop trying to trivalise these riots, murder, bodily harm, stealing and vandalism.
Graham, I have corrected it for you
'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher0 -
-
It's not justice. It's about vengeance. And it's not punishing all rioters equally because most are not actually in council accomodation, and inequal justice is a non-sequitur. And actually you'll be punishing people who didn't even riot in many cases, on the basis of association. And if these people are housed privately and needed social housing, they end up costing us in terms of housing benefit anyway. So what is the point.
What you are fundamentally implying is that the problems were caused by an underclass of people who must be the low lives in council housing. Well that's rubbish. There were too many of them for that. It was actually people not so very different from you or me, with jobs and families and a wide spread of backgrounds.
It is obviously going to be impossible to reason with a lynch mob gripped by moral panic. But it is still important to make these points before we just panic ourselves into making things worse.
And incidentally this didn't equate to the Blitz. It looked a little like the Blitz on TV, but what it actually was was a few hundred teenagers running around and setting fire to a few buildings while stealing from others. The Blitz involved hundreds of aircraft each dropping tons of high explosive and incendiary bombs for weeks on end. So again, can we please get a bit more of a sense of proportion?
Oh please, you clearly have your head in the clouds if you think these riots where majorly "ordinary people". Just because you've seen a few news stories about teachers and paratroopers, you jump to the conclusion that they represent the majority. Ever thought that headlines like "Unemployed man of 19 charged for riotting" dont sell papers??
These riots were organised by criminal gangs, and the majority participating were criminals anyway. If they're living in council housing then the council has every right to turf them out. There are plenty of others waiting for those houses so this b0ll0cks about it costing more money to pay HB doesn't wash I'm afraid.
The public aren't in panic, and they aren't in fear. We want justice and we don't want to see it happen again. If this had continued for a couple of weeks you can bet that the streets would be filled with local residents and vigilantes giving their own form of justice. A few hundred teenagers are no match for the might of the people when united. These riotters are lucky its over, because that outcome would have had a bloody end.Faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »Some of what people? I am talking about those who took part.
Therefore all of those people who took part in the riots vandalised, stole, or set fire to buildings.
Am I missing something?
Sorry I missed the OR your original post BTW does that include the women that was in bed when it was all kicking off?These people purposely set fire to, vandalised, and stole items.'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher0 -
.
The public aren't in panic, and they aren't in fear. We want justice and we don't want to see it happen again. If this had continued for a couple of weeks you can bet that the streets would be filled with local residents and vigilantes giving their own form of justice. A few hundred teenagers are no match for the might of the people when united. These riotters are lucky its over, because that outcome would have had a bloody end.
So do we all but unfortunately that is not what we are getting.'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher0 -
-
So do we all but unfortunately that is not what we are getting.
Justice has gone out of the window over the last couple of decades. A big factor in the looting is that many of the participants felt they were untouchable. This needs to be addressed if we do not want it to happen again and again.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards