It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by mr-lizard
LIzard, while I agree that if someone wants to bed down in a genuinely disused building, crack on, but this is not what we see is it? I could, if I was so inclined, trawl through the web and find many stories of ordinary people who have gone away, only to come back and find that either someone has set up home in their house or worse, someone has actually rented it out, then to get the kick in the nads that they are the ones with no legal recourse!
It's all very well taking the high road and saying this is all about the "rich" (and there may well be an element of truth in that!), but ordinary people are being diddled. What would you suggest is the best way to deal with that sort of situation?
Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by mr-lizard
What would you suggest is the best way to deal with that sort of situation?
Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by VoidHawk
Again, someone taking a highly opinionated stance on an issue that has been doing the rounds since long before Cameron and chums. Squatting has been a problem for years and was made worse by section 6 of the Criminal Law Act 1977:
" it is an offence for a person, without lawful authority, to use or threaten violence to secure entry to premises against the will of those inside. The offence is committed where the person who uses or threatens such violence knows that there is someone inside the premises who is opposed to the entry which can include someone who
may themselves be a trespasser....."
Which essentially sanctions unlawful entry, provided that those who gained said entry can prevent the rightful owner from getting back in.
Yes, some rich folk got diddled recently, but over the years there have been many cases of ordinary folk, like you and me, being done over and people have been campaigning for years to have the law changed. Is this not what a "democratic" Government is about? I'm sure if you took a poll (a proper one, not one of your like minded friends) you'd find there was overwhelming support for this.
What is ironic is the Head lady from the Squatters Rights Association (odd that they are "homeless" yet have a Union!) saying this law is unjust. I wonder how she would feel if I decided to squat in her house today? She would be in a tough pickle, wouldn't she? If she stands by her convictions, she must allow me to take over her home, otherwise she is a hypocrite. I wonder what she would do....
Originally posted by seethetruth
reply to post by mr-lizard
I remember a place in Wales called the teepee village were homeless people had made teepee's to live in ,,so they was not squatting but still the police and council didn't like it ,,the last time i heard they was trying to close it and make them leave
Now, if you poor down trodden Limeys had some guns left you might be able to do something to stop the totalitarian set of your ugly goverment....
.only the IRA and criminals remain armed......
It very plain that the house of Lords is a left over from feudalism,
and its appalling that people get appointed to goverment BECAUSE THEY ARE ROYALTY.....FOR LIFE!...thats just sick....
Like i said too bad you gave up your only defense against a totalitarian goverment which it apears we are all gonna get sooner or later.....