Police have forced entry.

Andypandyboy

missbiggles1 wrote: »

And I used to work with someone who held down a responsible professional job whilst dealing in quite a big way in cocaine so it cuts both ways.:)

Not quite sure what your point is here. I haven't suggested that drug dealers are always the obvious ones, living in run down bed sits, in fact, I would say it is often quite the reverse. I know of one or two now, who live in very large houses in the best part of town, they deal, but not personally.....

Save

missbiggles1

Andypandyboy wrote: »

Not quite sure what your point is here. I haven't suggested that drug dealers are always the obvious ones, living in run down bed sits, in fact, I would say it is often quite the reverse. I know of one or two now, who live in very large houses in the best part of town, they deal, but not personally.....

Save

No, I wasn't aiming it at you because you didn't suggest that. There were several people talking about drug dens and junkies who seemed to think that this way the way it usually worked.

kinger101

missbiggles1 wrote: »

No, I wasn't aiming it at you because you didn't suggest that. There were several people talking about drug dens and junkies who seemed to think that this way the way it usually worked.

Quite. The type of client interested in scoring a few grams of coke isn't interested in visiting some squalid rat infested hole, or the type of person that would reside in one. For that matter, anyone with common sense wouldn't allow clients to visit the property if they were dealing. Though you have to be pretty big before the Met can be bothered to visit you.

mumps

SDW he might be innocent. It seems unfair to make him homeless if he hasn't done anything wrong, the police make mistakes sometimes. On a purely practical note if he is a good tenant is it worth evicting him if it turns out that he had done nothing wrong? I wouldn't rush into anything if I was you, and I am a landlord, talk to the man. If this is all a mix up making him homeless might be the last straw for him.

If you have never had anything to do with the police it is easy to over react to this sort of thing.

seven-day-weekend

I said I was willing to wait and see. My husband and son do not think we should. It's their decision too. My son said 'mom, whether he has been involved in drugs or not, he has brought trouble to our door, he should go'.

Just wish I'd never asked for advice here, I never thought I would get the character assassination, thanks to those who have been helpful.

missbiggles1

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I said I was willing to wait and see. My husband and son do not think we should. It's their business too. My son said 'mom, whether he has been involved in drugs or not, he has brought trouble to our door, he should go'.

Just wish I'd never asked for advice here, I never thought I would get the character assassination, thanks to those who have been helpful.

I'm afraid I think you're overreacting - you must know you're going to get a range of opinions on here, or why did you ask?

I just don't think you can separate your ethical and religious views from your business in the way you seem to want to do - that isn't character assassination, that's just pointing out certain contradictions.

Anyway, I'm sorry if I've upset you.

seven-day-weekend

missbiggles1 wrote: »

I'm afraid I think you're overreacting - you must know you're going to get a range of opinions on here, or why did you ask?

I just don't think you can separate your ethical and religious views from your business in the way you seem to want to do - that isn't character assassination, that's just pointing out certain contradictions.

Anyway, I'm sorry if I've upset you.

Thanks for the apology. Accepted.

moneyistooshorttomention

I dont think its "character assassination". I think its that there are some people who have very much taken on board the "flavour de jour" of late 20th/early 21st century thinking that goes "Well - its all relative - there are no absolute moral standards any more etc etc".

That's a currently fashionable way of thinking - and its that that I think some people are saying (rather than doing a personal attack) iyswim.

To me - I dont understand why anyone would be convinced by a currently fashionable way of thinking (as its only so temporary). Even though I'm someone who is very well aware of fashion in some respects and likes things contemporary and my food ultra-fashionable - I still dont understand why people would change their thinking to match current "fashionable" thinking.

To me - there are ways of looking at things/a way of thinking to form from that that is absolutely regardless of what century we live in/what country we live in and one holds those views regardless of whether living in 5th century France, 25th century Spain or, in this case, early 21st century Britain. I would hope my own views on things would be absolutely identical - regardless of whatever way some in that society were currently thinking. But one has to acknowledge that many people will think/form their views in accordance with current fashions in thinking. So I think that is what is happening here - rather than a personal attack iyswim.

seven-day-weekend

It certainly felt like character assassination but you are probably right and it is just the 'zeitgeist' that I do not understand nor subscribe to. Some posts however, I think WERE aimed at me personally and were along the lines of 'call yourself a Christian'.

Thanks anyway everyone for contributing.

moneyistooshorttomention

That's the word I was after - zeitgeist.:)