FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Losing their council house
Losing their council house
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Families of violent criminals should lose their council homes to help combat the rise in knife crime , a Tory MP has suggested.
Victoria Atkins, a Home Office minister, says evicting violent offenders from social housing would deter young people from becoming involved in a life of gangs."
.
Is that a good idea or bad idea? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
That would be a silly idea. I’ve worked in social housing for the past 5 years and I’ll tell you. Ow evicting someone from there home is an awful thing to be apart of regardless of why the eviction has taken place.
Why would we punish other family members for what one family member has done?
And where would these now homeless families go once evicted for someone else’s crime? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
This is where politicians are so out of touch, they have no clue about gang dynamics and why kids can fall into such crimes.
Tackle the issue at source.
Support the families, don't evict them. Not all kids suckered into gangs and crime come from maladaptive households, some come from very loving and stable environments, why disjoint that stability.
Harsher sentences, for the criminals.
Or bring back National Service, if they want to play violent games allow them to play the ultimate violent gang game. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
""Families of violent criminals should lose their council homes to help combat the rise in knife crime , a Tory MP has suggested.
Victoria Atkins, a Home Office minister, says evicting violent offenders from social housing would deter young people from becoming involved in a life of gangs."
.
Is that a good idea or bad idea?"
Bad idea. Just a really stupid idea that wont work and create futher problems. So now homeless sleeping on the streets. Brilliant just the inspiration a youngster needs to be a law abbiding citizen |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
""Families of violent criminals should lose their council homes to help combat the rise in knife crime , a Tory MP has suggested.
Victoria Atkins, a Home Office minister, says evicting violent offenders from social housing would deter young people from becoming involved in a life of gangs."
.
Is that a good idea or bad idea?"
How about the MP's that fiddled expenses lose their homes instead? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
No. Because it doesn’t address the root causes of why people get involved with gangs.
(Also, a Fab improvement I’d like is an edit button for the same duration of time as the delete button) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
""Families of violent criminals should lose their council homes to help combat the rise in knife crime , a Tory MP has suggested.
Victoria Atkins, a Home Office minister, says evicting violent offenders from social housing would deter young people from becoming involved in a life of gangs."
.
Is that a good idea or bad idea?
How about the MP's that fiddled expenses lose their homes instead?"
Send the offenders to live with the tax fiddling MPs |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
""Families of violent criminals should lose their council homes to help combat the rise in knife crime , a Tory MP has suggested.
Victoria Atkins, a Home Office minister, says evicting violent offenders from social housing would deter young people from becoming involved in a life of gangs."
.
Is that a good idea or bad idea?
How about the MP's that fiddled expenses lose their homes instead?"
Far more sensible idea! Suggesting all people who commit crime are from council houses is just ridiculous  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
...and the homeless would go where?!!
Wouldn't it be nice if we could pigeonhole everyone and make life simple. Unfortunately, this clueless government continues with its sledgehammer to crack a nut approach. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
""Families of violent criminals should lose their council homes to help combat the rise in knife crime , a Tory MP has suggested.
Victoria Atkins, a Home Office minister, says evicting violent offenders from social housing would deter young people from becoming involved in a life of gangs."
.
Is that a good idea or bad idea?
How about the MP's that fiddled expenses lose their homes instead?
Far more sensible idea! Suggesting all people who commit crime are from council houses is just ridiculous "
My point exactly! Insulting also. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I think national service is a brilliant idea ....
Its the gang culture , kids are sucked into it ... perhaps gpod old fashioned disciplines in the army life will get them back on track , then also prisons would be less full to the brim ....
Punishing families is a silly idea , lots of out of control gang members come from respectable families ...  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Gang crime stems from social deprivation, so placing families into more poverty will only increase the gang problem. The only way to reduce the gang and crime problem we have is to give young people a future with well paid employment |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eesideMan
over a year ago
margate sumwear by the sea |
""Families of violent criminals should lose their council homes to help combat the rise in knife crime , a Tory MP has suggested.
Victoria Atkins, a Home Office minister, says evicting violent offenders from social housing would deter young people from becoming involved in a life of gangs."
.
Is that a good idea or bad idea?"
It's a good idear i think.
So if you do a crime you pay for it not just in jale but it also end up on the street. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
""Families of violent criminals should lose their council homes to help combat the rise in knife crime , a Tory MP has suggested.
Victoria Atkins, a Home Office minister, says evicting violent offenders from social housing would deter young people from becoming involved in a life of gangs."
.
Is that a good idea or bad idea?"
So these criminals will go somewhere you cant track them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Homelessness is already a significant problem and this would exacerbate it.
Families punished for the actions of one member. Homelessness is a trauma, people in homelessness have a shorter lifespan and children are unsettled by the displacement from their communities and supports not to mention the impact on mental health and addictions
Education at a young age and invest in younger people to show them there is an alternative .. we need to start teaching our young people better values |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oodmessMan
over a year ago
yumsville |
It was no doubt a throw away comment as it will never get passed into law but councils and landlords in London have been trying to find way of freeing up housing stock for years. If something like this does get passed they'll get rehoused in places like Birmingham, Manchester or Leeds on a 'take it or leave it' basis, reducing crime in London spreading crime around the country. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"No. Because it doesn’t address the root causes of why people get involved with gangs.
(Also, a Fab improvement I’d like is an edit button for the same duration of time as the delete button)"
Yes and yes  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Bit harsh on the family that live there.
Be a better deterrent if they lock the crims up for longer."
You might be surprised by the statistics for reoffending, I haven’t checked recently but I doubt they’ll have improved much  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Shockingly clever Tory idea, it will further spilt communities apart.
Some of those living with their adult sons and daughters, some with kids + partner, squashed together in council/private homes will silently approve of this.
Violent criminals don't restrict where they act violently.
Hence the 'violent' aspect of this idea/suggestion. Those living with it on their doorstep will have little sympathy regard for the children.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It's an ok idea, most these life crimes come from young boys raised by shitty parents who have everything handed to them by the state. They take no responsibility for anything. They are not part of the community, they are ripping apart the community.
The real problem is that the government wouldn't be able to implement it per se. No judge is going to evict a child into the streets in the literal sense. They'd have to provide alternative accommodation, the benefit of that is that it would probably be located away from their gang and they might break the cycle.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It's interesting to me that living in council or social housing has been demonised recently.
Both of us grew up in council houses as did most of our friends. It seems to be viewed as an achievement to have come from such a background and live a life similar to those whose parents could afford a mortgage. I would find it amusing if it didn't play into this idea that anyone who has less than a certain income must be either a criminal or at least responsible for most of the bad things that happen in the world. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"This is where politicians are so out of touch, they have no clue about gang dynamics and why kids can fall into such crimes.
Tackle the issue at source.
Support the families, don't evict them. Not all kids suckered into gangs and crime come from maladaptive households, some come from very loving and stable environments, why disjoint that stability.
Harsher sentences, for the criminals.
Or bring back National Service, if they want to play violent games allow them to play the ultimate violent gang game."
Wonder if there are any studies that track the level of violent crime against countries that have National Service and those that don’t
It would be interesting read lol |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
""Families of violent criminals should lose their council homes to help combat the rise in knife crime , a Tory MP has suggested.
Victoria Atkins, a Home Office minister, says evicting violent offenders from social housing would deter young people from becoming involved in a life of gangs."
.
Is that a good idea or bad idea?
How about the MP's that fiddled expenses lose their homes instead?"
Absolutely
I cannot understand how they are allowed expenses in the first place
If I try to claim living expenses the HMRC tax me for the pleasure
Like any job they know they will be working away before taking on the job.
So should not be paid for it
The rest of “Worker” do not have the same liberties |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It's interesting to me that living in council or social housing has been demonised recently.
Both of us grew up in council houses as did most of our friends. It seems to be viewed as an achievement to have come from such a background and live a life similar to those whose parents could afford a mortgage. I would find it amusing if it didn't play into this idea that anyone who has less than a certain income must be either a criminal or at least responsible for most of the bad things that happen in the world."
Actually the stereotype is that 90% of people living on council estates are fine and 10% are so bad that they drag down the entire estate. So quite far away from what you're saying. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It's interesting to me that living in council or social housing has been demonised recently.
Both of us grew up in council houses as did most of our friends. It seems to be viewed as an achievement to have come from such a background and live a life similar to those whose parents could afford a mortgage. I would find it amusing if it didn't play into this idea that anyone who has less than a certain income must be either a criminal or at least responsible for most of the bad things that happen in the world.
Actually the stereotype is that 90% of people living on council estates are fine and 10% are so bad that they drag down the entire estate. So quite far away from what you're saying. "
99% of my experience has been different |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Well from wT I know here in Ireland there could be siz or seven in a family and only one could have a record so y treat them all as criminals.anyhow if there success full criminal s they'd own there own houses |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *rFunBoyMan
over a year ago
Longridge |
""Families of violent criminals should lose their council homes to help combat the rise in knife crime , a Tory MP has suggested.
Victoria Atkins, a Home Office minister, says evicting violent offenders from social housing would deter young people from becoming involved in a life of gangs."
.
Is that a good idea or bad idea?"
It's a lot better than having 20 minutes to clear your house before it is demolished as the Israelis do in Gaza. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
""Families of violent criminals should lose their council homes to help combat the rise in knife crime , a Tory MP has suggested.
Victoria Atkins, a Home Office minister, says evicting violent offenders from social housing would deter young people from becoming involved in a life of gangs."
.
Is that a good idea or bad idea?"
Just shows how fucking niave the government is. Idiots.
But a nice soundbite to link social housing with knife crime and subtly attack the poor. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
""Families of violent criminals should lose their council homes to help combat the rise in knife crime , a Tory MP has suggested.
Victoria Atkins, a Home Office minister, says evicting violent offenders from social housing would deter young people from becoming involved in a life of gangs."
.
Is that a good idea or bad idea?
Just shows how fucking niave the government is. Idiots.
But a nice soundbite to link social housing with knife crime and subtly attack the poor."
I don't think it's naievtey. It's deliberate and has been going on for a long time. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
""Families of violent criminals should lose their council homes to help combat the rise in knife crime , a Tory MP has suggested.
Victoria Atkins, a Home Office minister, says evicting violent offenders from social housing would deter young people from becoming involved in a life of gangs."
.
Is that a good idea or bad idea?
Just shows how fucking niave the government is. Idiots.
But a nice soundbite to link social housing with knife crime and subtly attack the poor.
I don't think it's naievtey. It's deliberate and has been going on for a long time. "
No I genuinely think that the government are daft enough to think that kids will turn their backs on gangs because they fear their parents being evicted. They don't have a clue about the reasons kids end up in gangs or how to tackle it.
The agenda if demonising the poor has been a very clear and deliberate policy though to make people believe that we need austerity and to scapegoat people as if they are to blame |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
""Families of violent criminals should lose their council homes to help combat the rise in knife crime , a Tory MP has suggested.
Victoria Atkins, a Home Office minister, says evicting violent offenders from social housing would deter young people from becoming involved in a life of gangs."
.
Is that a good idea or bad idea?
Just shows how fucking niave the government is. Idiots.
But a nice soundbite to link social housing with knife crime and subtly attack the poor.
I don't think it's naievtey. It's deliberate and has been going on for a long time. "
^ This |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Social housing being of a premium such as it is.
Saves building affordable housing.
The youth are just dead in the home market! can't afford to buy or rent, employed or otherwise.
People best start buying/building their sheds for beds, I personally know of three families that have.
Some councils are simply turning a blind eye.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea."
Lol, as if the parent(s) work  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work "
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively "
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
This makes the assumption that all knife crime is related to persons in social housing, it isn't. People who live with their families in owned houses and houses rented in the private housing sector can become knife criminals too.
I don't think it would be particularly helpful in preventing knife crime. Maybe move the families to a different area instead to split them up that way.XXX |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? "
I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required. "
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required.
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder. "
I knew you couldn't list another crime you felt that that parents and siblings should be punished for the crimes of another family member.
How about murder?R@pe ? Hit and run ,should you lose your council house?
What's good for the goose |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required.
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder. "
That statue was ghastly. I’m still not okay with it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required.
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder.
I knew you couldn't list another crime you felt that that parents and siblings should be punished for the crimes of another family member.
How about murder?R@pe ? Hit and run ,should you lose your council house?
What's good for the goose "
What part of 'it's not your house' isn't clear? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required.
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder.
That statue was ghastly. I’m still not okay with it."
And all those wankers who jumped to the conclusion that the valuation was real or that a statue that crap would actually be in an art gallery |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required.
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder.
I knew you couldn't list another crime you felt that that parents and siblings should be punished for the crimes of another family member.
How about murder?R@pe ? Hit and run ,should you lose your council house?
What's good for the goose
What part of 'it's not your house' isn't clear? "
What part of punishing parents for the crimes of their children doesn't cover collective punishments. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required.
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder.
That statue was ghastly. I’m still not okay with it.
And all those wankers who jumped to the conclusion that the valuation was real or that a statue that crap would actually be in an art gallery "
Well, art is subjective. And one of my favourite things about going to the Summer Exhibition at the RA is the “which piece do you love, which piece do you hate?” game in each room.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
If they carry knives or any other weapon they clearly don't think about the consequences of their actions whether it be killing someone or losing their house. Can't see how it will make any difference what so ever |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *m3232Man
over a year ago
maidenhead |
Something needs to be done but no one wants to do it that’s the problem.
They would rather bull shit about brexit and the fallout that stand up and be counted and do something that will change the problem. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required.
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder. "
So a family of 4 in social housing. Parents hold down jobs, 1 kid is straight A, the other us completely out of control.
It's okay to take the home away and not a collective punishment in that scenario?
Oh and before you say 'well that would never happen' it does. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required.
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder.
So a family of 4 in social housing. Parents hold down jobs, 1 kid is straight A, the other us completely out of control.
It's okay to take the home away and not a collective punishment in that scenario?
Oh and before you say 'well that would never happen' it does."
Have you read the original context or not? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"If they carry knives or any other weapon they clearly don't think about the consequences of their actions whether it be killing someone or losing their house. Can't see how it will make any difference what so ever "
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required.
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder.
So a family of 4 in social housing. Parents hold down jobs, 1 kid is straight A, the other us completely out of control.
It's okay to take the home away and not a collective punishment in that scenario?
Oh and before you say 'well that would never happen' it does.
Have you read the original context or not? "
I'm just asking you to explain how a family losing their home because of 1 child's actions isn't "collective punishment"...
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
After reading through the thread , we have on the one hand a poster saying we need to give the perpetrators well paid jobs , and a future . On the other we have multiple people saying bring back national service , and penalise the families too .
What has the world come to ?
Perhaps the families are in some way to blame . We have a culture now that protects the kids from virtually any punishment as they grow up now . Human rights this , human rights that , don’t dare shout at the dear little child . Instead of punishment we offer treats and incentives for them to behave .
Well I’m sorry to say it just doesn’t work does it ? The kids that join the gangs and deal drugs etc... do it because the punishment in no way deters them from joining . The pressure the vulnerable are put under by the older kids is way stronger than the deterrent society and their families offer .
Simple as that .
So unless things change is some way or another it’ll just get worse and worse , and I certainly won’t be surprised .
Do I think it’s right for the worst offenders to lose their social housing ? It’s a start I guess , and I actually think the reasoning behind it s to move them away from the area they are committing the crime in . The parents have to take some responsibility for raising the vermin that drag vulnerable kids into the world of drug dealing , knife crime and murder . They must have some idea what’s going on in their own homes . So if they get moved from London to Carlisle at least the offenders aren’t a part of the gang culture any more . I would feel pretty bad for Carlisle though !
I’ll probably get slated for these opinions , but at the end of the day I’m of a generation where there was punishment for crimes , and I despair at times when I see nothing being done to deter this kind of thing from happening . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
its kind of right
if you want to live in this country and your local community abide by the laws , act and carry out day to day life in a civilised manner or risk losing your families home . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required.
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder.
So a family of 4 in social housing. Parents hold down jobs, 1 kid is straight A, the other us completely out of control.
It's okay to take the home away and not a collective punishment in that scenario?
Oh and before you say 'well that would never happen' it does.
Have you read the original context or not?
I'm just asking you to explain how a family losing their home because of 1 child's actions isn't "collective punishment"...
"
That's another 'No' then. Thanks for clarifying. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"After reading through the thread , we have on the one hand a poster saying we need to give the perpetrators well paid jobs , and a future . On the other we have multiple people saying bring back national service , and penalise the families too .
What has the world come to ?
Perhaps the families are in some way to blame . We have a culture now that protects the kids from virtually any punishment as they grow up now . Human rights this , human rights that , don’t dare shout at the dear little child . Instead of punishment we offer treats and incentives for them to behave .
Well I’m sorry to say it just doesn’t work does it ? The kids that join the gangs and deal drugs etc... do it because the punishment in no way deters them from joining . The pressure the vulnerable are put under by the older kids is way stronger than the deterrent society and their families offer .
Simple as that .
So unless things change is some way or another it’ll just get worse and worse , and I certainly won’t be surprised .
Do I think it’s right for the worst offenders to lose their social housing ? It’s a start I guess , and I actually think the reasoning behind it s to move them away from the area they are committing the crime in . The parents have to take some responsibility for raising the vermin that drag vulnerable kids into the world of drug dealing , knife crime and murder . They must have some idea what’s going on in their own homes . So if they get moved from London to Carlisle at least the offenders aren’t a part of the gang culture any more . I would feel pretty bad for Carlisle though !
I’ll probably get slated for these opinions , but at the end of the day I’m of a generation where there was punishment for crimes , and I despair at times when I see nothing being done to deter this kind of thing from happening ."
Can i just say, regarding national service, that the Army is a professional fighting force and not some boot camp to reform chavs. The army doesn't want these people and it's not their job to take them either. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Should benefit cheats lose their council houses.Should those on the sex offenders register lose the right to council houses.
Do we need a new set of rules to define citizenship and entitlement to council services.Should any criminal activities prevent you or your family having any entitlement to council services and housing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Should benefit cheats lose their council houses.Should those on the sex offenders register lose the right to council houses.
Do we need a new set of rules to define citizenship and entitlement to council services.Should any criminal activities prevent you or your family having any entitlement to council services and housing."
Go on, just Google the original context. It'll answer most your questions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"After reading through the thread , we have on the one hand a poster saying we need to give the perpetrators well paid jobs , and a future . On the other we have multiple people saying bring back national service , and penalise the families too .
What has the world come to ?
Perhaps the families are in some way to blame . We have a culture now that protects the kids from virtually any punishment as they grow up now . Human rights this , human rights that , don’t dare shout at the dear little child . Instead of punishment we offer treats and incentives for them to behave .
Well I’m sorry to say it just doesn’t work does it ? The kids that join the gangs and deal drugs etc... do it because the punishment in no way deters them from joining . The pressure the vulnerable are put under by the older kids is way stronger than the deterrent society and their families offer .
Simple as that .
So unless things change is some way or another it’ll just get worse and worse , and I certainly won’t be surprised .
Do I think it’s right for the worst offenders to lose their social housing ? It’s a start I guess , and I actually think the reasoning behind it s to move them away from the area they are committing the crime in . The parents have to take some responsibility for raising the vermin that drag vulnerable kids into the world of drug dealing , knife crime and murder . They must have some idea what’s going on in their own homes . So if they get moved from London to Carlisle at least the offenders aren’t a part of the gang culture any more . I would feel pretty bad for Carlisle though !
I’ll probably get slated for these opinions , but at the end of the day I’m of a generation where there was punishment for crimes , and I despair at times when I see nothing being done to deter this kind of thing from happening ."
well you did invite a slate.
You also come from an age group that had opportunities leading to the future you have lived.
LIke.
Secure lifelong employed
Banks throwing money at you for pretty much any purpose.
Streets that were not running with drugs.
A mindset that fighting with a weapon, any weapon, was seen as shameful.
Etc
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required.
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder.
So a family of 4 in social housing. Parents hold down jobs, 1 kid is straight A, the other us completely out of control.
It's okay to take the home away and not a collective punishment in that scenario?
Oh and before you say 'well that would never happen' it does.
Have you read the original context or not?
I'm just asking you to explain how a family losing their home because of 1 child's actions isn't "collective punishment"...
That's another 'No' then. Thanks for clarifying. "
It amazes me that a you are ignoring a question about what you posted and asking nothing more than you expand on it by belittling people asking the question.
I don't what to Google anything. I don't need to Google anything. I asked a question about your post which for reasons I can't understand you seem to want to deflect away from |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
""Families of violent criminals should lose their council homes to help combat the rise in knife crime , a Tory MP has suggested.
Victoria Atkins, a Home Office minister, says evicting violent offenders from social housing would deter young people from becoming involved in a life of gangs."
.
Is that a good idea or bad idea?"
Two issues I can see with this straight away. Firstly,it will push a family,already possibly not doing too well,even further into difficulties (homelessness,poverty,deprivation). There is definitely a correlation,even if not causation,between poverty, alienation and crime.
Secondly,it is a punishment for the innocent. By all means,punish the offenders but,their families too??
That is not any form of justice that any decent person would recognise,surely. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required.
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder.
So a family of 4 in social housing. Parents hold down jobs, 1 kid is straight A, the other us completely out of control.
It's okay to take the home away and not a collective punishment in that scenario?
Oh and before you say 'well that would never happen' it does.
Have you read the original context or not?
I'm just asking you to explain how a family losing their home because of 1 child's actions isn't "collective punishment"...
That's another 'No' then. Thanks for clarifying.
It amazes me that a you are ignoring a question about what you posted and asking nothing more than you expand on it by belittling people asking the question.
I don't what to Google anything. I don't need to Google anything. I asked a question about your post which for reasons I can't understand you seem to want to deflect away from"
I know you prefer to talk about a completely abstract world, but context matters. If you knew the context then you wouldn't ask fictious questions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"After reading through the thread , we have on the one hand a poster saying we need to give the perpetrators well paid jobs , and a future . On the other we have multiple people saying bring back national service , and penalise the families too .
What has the world come to ?
Perhaps the families are in some way to blame . We have a culture now that protects the kids from virtually any punishment as they grow up now . Human rights this , human rights that , don’t dare shout at the dear little child . Instead of punishment we offer treats and incentives for them to behave .
Well I’m sorry to say it just doesn’t work does it ? The kids that join the gangs and deal drugs etc... do it because the punishment in no way deters them from joining . The pressure the vulnerable are put under by the older kids is way stronger than the deterrent society and their families offer .
Simple as that .
So unless things change is some way or another it’ll just get worse and worse , and I certainly won’t be surprised .
Do I think it’s right for the worst offenders to lose their social housing ? It’s a start I guess , and I actually think the reasoning behind it s to move them away from the area they are committing the crime in . The parents have to take some responsibility for raising the vermin that drag vulnerable kids into the world of drug dealing , knife crime and murder . They must have some idea what’s going on in their own homes . So if they get moved from London to Carlisle at least the offenders aren’t a part of the gang culture any more . I would feel pretty bad for Carlisle though !
I’ll probably get slated for these opinions , but at the end of the day I’m of a generation where there was punishment for crimes , and I despair at times when I see nothing being done to deter this kind of thing from happening .
well you did invite a slate.
You also come from an age group that had opportunities leading to the future you have lived.
LIke.
Secure lifelong employed
Banks throwing money at you for pretty much any purpose.
Streets that were not running with drugs.
A mindset that fighting with a weapon, any weapon, was seen as shameful.
Etc
"
All very true , although the anti Thatcher brigade may have something to say about that !
But at the same time , we had the cane being used at school , local bobbies who instilled fear in us as we grew up , and anyone caught with drugs or weapons wasn’t glorified , he was vilified by the community from youngsters to the elderly . Chances are his parents would have sorted him out when he started secondary school . Yes , that used to happen folks , parents would undertake the responsibility for their kids ! A strange notion theses days I know .... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required.
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder.
So a family of 4 in social housing. Parents hold down jobs, 1 kid is straight A, the other us completely out of control.
It's okay to take the home away and not a collective punishment in that scenario?
Oh and before you say 'well that would never happen' it does.
Have you read the original context or not?
I'm just asking you to explain how a family losing their home because of 1 child's actions isn't "collective punishment"...
That's another 'No' then. Thanks for clarifying.
It amazes me that a you are ignoring a question about what you posted and asking nothing more than you expand on it by belittling people asking the question.
I don't what to Google anything. I don't need to Google anything. I asked a question about your post which for reasons I can't understand you seem to want to deflect away from
I know you prefer to talk about a completely abstract world, but context matters. If you knew the context then you wouldn't ask fictious questions. "
Perhaps you could explain the context. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required.
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder.
So a family of 4 in social housing. Parents hold down jobs, 1 kid is straight A, the other us completely out of control.
It's okay to take the home away and not a collective punishment in that scenario?
Oh and before you say 'well that would never happen' it does.
Have you read the original context or not?
I'm just asking you to explain how a family losing their home because of 1 child's actions isn't "collective punishment"...
That's another 'No' then. Thanks for clarifying.
It amazes me that a you are ignoring a question about what you posted and asking nothing more than you expand on it by belittling people asking the question.
I don't what to Google anything. I don't need to Google anything. I asked a question about your post which for reasons I can't understand you seem to want to deflect away from
I know you prefer to talk about a completely abstract world, but context matters. If you knew the context then you wouldn't ask fictious questions. "
I have asked a question about why you think it's not collective punishment.
I really have no idea what is so difficult about that. They were your words. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required.
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder.
So a family of 4 in social housing. Parents hold down jobs, 1 kid is straight A, the other us completely out of control.
It's okay to take the home away and not a collective punishment in that scenario?
Oh and before you say 'well that would never happen' it does.
Have you read the original context or not?
I'm just asking you to explain how a family losing their home because of 1 child's actions isn't "collective punishment"...
That's another 'No' then. Thanks for clarifying.
It amazes me that a you are ignoring a question about what you posted and asking nothing more than you expand on it by belittling people asking the question.
I don't what to Google anything. I don't need to Google anything. I asked a question about your post which for reasons I can't understand you seem to want to deflect away from
I know you prefer to talk about a completely abstract world, but context matters. If you knew the context then you wouldn't ask fictious questions.
Perhaps you could explain the context."
So basically there's a part of north London where 14 rival gangs are all kicking off and it's a hell hole for everyone living there. This is actually a policy being trialled by the local council there because the situation is never going to get better unless their wait for enough people in the gangs to commit crimes and go to prison, or better still, break them up and physically seperate them.
The 'friendships' people form in gangs are not real friendships and simply won't last over a long distance relationship. But the council can't force them to move under the current set of laws. At present, all the gang members know where each other live and so leaving them is literally impossible because they'll turn up on your doorstep.
As i mentioned earlier, no judge will stick a family with an under 16 on the street (believe me, I've tried) and and so the reality is that that council will do a swap with another council at the other end of the country. Of course the looney lefties who can't be arsed to fact check, would just prefer the gang war went on until everyone is dead or in prison. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"After reading through the thread , we have on the one hand a poster saying we need to give the perpetrators well paid jobs , and a future . On the other we have multiple people saying bring back national service , and penalise the families too .
What has the world come to ?
Perhaps the families are in some way to blame . We have a culture now that protects the kids from virtually any punishment as they grow up now . Human rights this , human rights that , don’t dare shout at the dear little child . Instead of punishment we offer treats and incentives for them to behave .
Well I’m sorry to say it just doesn’t work does it ? The kids that join the gangs and deal drugs etc... do it because the punishment in no way deters them from joining . The pressure the vulnerable are put under by the older kids is way stronger than the deterrent society and their families offer .
Simple as that .
So unless things change is some way or another it’ll just get worse and worse , and I certainly won’t be surprised .
Do I think it’s right for the worst offenders to lose their social housing ? It’s a start I guess , and I actually think the reasoning behind it s to move them away from the area they are committing the crime in . The parents have to take some responsibility for raising the vermin that drag vulnerable kids into the world of drug dealing , knife crime and murder . They must have some idea what’s going on in their own homes . So if they get moved from London to Carlisle at least the offenders aren’t a part of the gang culture any more . I would feel pretty bad for Carlisle though !
I’ll probably get slated for these opinions , but at the end of the day I’m of a generation where there was punishment for crimes , and I despair at times when I see nothing being done to deter this kind of thing from happening .
well you did invite a slate.
You also come from an age group that had opportunities leading to the future you have lived.
LIke.
Secure lifelong employed
Banks throwing money at you for pretty much any purpose.
Streets that were not running with drugs.
A mindset that fighting with a weapon, any weapon, was seen as shameful.
Etc
All very true , although the anti Thatcher brigade may have something to say about that !
But at the same time , we had the cane being used at school , local bobbies who instilled fear in us as we grew up , and anyone caught with drugs or weapons wasn’t glorified , he was vilified by the community from youngsters to the elderly . Chances are his parents would have sorted him out when he started secondary school . Yes , that used to happen folks , parents would undertake the responsibility for their kids ! A strange notion theses days I know ...."
In short.
A solid community. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required.
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder.
So a family of 4 in social housing. Parents hold down jobs, 1 kid is straight A, the other us completely out of control.
It's okay to take the home away and not a collective punishment in that scenario?
Oh and before you say 'well that would never happen' it does.
Have you read the original context or not?
I'm just asking you to explain how a family losing their home because of 1 child's actions isn't "collective punishment"...
That's another 'No' then. Thanks for clarifying.
It amazes me that a you are ignoring a question about what you posted and asking nothing more than you expand on it by belittling people asking the question.
I don't what to Google anything. I don't need to Google anything. I asked a question about your post which for reasons I can't understand you seem to want to deflect away from
I know you prefer to talk about a completely abstract world, but context matters. If you knew the context then you wouldn't ask fictious questions.
Perhaps you could explain the context.
So basically there's a part of north London where 14 rival gangs are all kicking off and it's a hell hole for everyone living there. This is actually a policy being trialled by the local council there because the situation is never going to get better unless their wait for enough people in the gangs to commit crimes and go to prison, or better still, break them up and physically seperate them.
The 'friendships' people form in gangs are not real friendships and simply won't last over a long distance relationship. But the council can't force them to move under the current set of laws. At present, all the gang members know where each other live and so leaving them is literally impossible because they'll turn up on your doorstep.
As i mentioned earlier, no judge will stick a family with an under 16 on the street (believe me, I've tried) and and so the reality is that that council will do a swap with another council at the other end of the country. Of course the looney lefties who can't be arsed to fact check, would just prefer the gang war went on until everyone is dead or in prison. "
That's what understood from what I read. Except the loony lefties bit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
And were are these families meant to live? These blooming MP's have no idea how difficult it is for some people to get onto the housing ladder.
Not the families fault they have a bad egg in the basket. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required.
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder.
So a family of 4 in social housing. Parents hold down jobs, 1 kid is straight A, the other us completely out of control.
It's okay to take the home away and not a collective punishment in that scenario?
Oh and before you say 'well that would never happen' it does.
Have you read the original context or not?
I'm just asking you to explain how a family losing their home because of 1 child's actions isn't "collective punishment"...
That's another 'No' then. Thanks for clarifying.
It amazes me that a you are ignoring a question about what you posted and asking nothing more than you expand on it by belittling people asking the question.
I don't what to Google anything. I don't need to Google anything. I asked a question about your post which for reasons I can't understand you seem to want to deflect away from
I know you prefer to talk about a completely abstract world, but context matters. If you knew the context then you wouldn't ask fictious questions.
Perhaps you could explain the context.
So basically there's a part of north London where 14 rival gangs are all kicking off and it's a hell hole for everyone living there. This is actually a policy being trialled by the local council there because the situation is never going to get better unless their wait for enough people in the gangs to commit crimes and go to prison, or better still, break them up and physically seperate them.
The 'friendships' people form in gangs are not real friendships and simply won't last over a long distance relationship. But the council can't force them to move under the current set of laws. At present, all the gang members know where each other live and so leaving them is literally impossible because they'll turn up on your doorstep.
As i mentioned earlier, no judge will stick a family with an under 16 on the street (believe me, I've tried) and and so the reality is that that council will do a swap with another council at the other end of the country. Of course the looney lefties who can't be arsed to fact check, would just prefer the gang war went on until everyone is dead or in prison. "
So it is collective punishment.Thanks  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required.
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder.
So a family of 4 in social housing. Parents hold down jobs, 1 kid is straight A, the other us completely out of control.
It's okay to take the home away and not a collective punishment in that scenario?
Oh and before you say 'well that would never happen' it does.
Have you read the original context or not?
I'm just asking you to explain how a family losing their home because of 1 child's actions isn't "collective punishment"...
That's another 'No' then. Thanks for clarifying.
It amazes me that a you are ignoring a question about what you posted and asking nothing more than you expand on it by belittling people asking the question.
I don't what to Google anything. I don't need to Google anything. I asked a question about your post which for reasons I can't understand you seem to want to deflect away from
I know you prefer to talk about a completely abstract world, but context matters. If you knew the context then you wouldn't ask fictious questions.
Perhaps you could explain the context.
So basically there's a part of north London where 14 rival gangs are all kicking off and it's a hell hole for everyone living there. This is actually a policy being trialled by the local council there because the situation is never going to get better unless their wait for enough people in the gangs to commit crimes and go to prison, or better still, break them up and physically seperate them.
The 'friendships' people form in gangs are not real friendships and simply won't last over a long distance relationship. But the council can't force them to move under the current set of laws. At present, all the gang members know where each other live and so leaving them is literally impossible because they'll turn up on your doorstep.
As i mentioned earlier, no judge will stick a family with an under 16 on the street (believe me, I've tried) and and so the reality is that that council will do a swap with another council at the other end of the country. Of course the looney lefties who can't be arsed to fact check, would just prefer the gang war went on until everyone is dead or in prison.
So it is collective punishment.Thanks "
I know the looney left think that if they chant a slogan enough times then it makes it true, but I'm afriad it doesn't. Every tenancy agreement has preconditions and this is a perfectly reasonable one. What's your short term solution to this gang war? You don't have one. You just say " Oh well if we spend more money on youth services then it'll be better in 15 years". Until then, the residents have to live in hell. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
After just a quick look at UK law sites - the law allows seizing of property, including owned homes, if the house dweller is convicted of crimes of a sufficient magnitude. Private landlords are also allowed to do this. As far as I can see, local councils are also counted as landlords, so why shouldn't they also have the ability to evict people in these circumstances? What about the rights of the residents living in neighbouring houses? Don't they have the right to live in relatively crime-free areas? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"After just a quick look at UK law sites - the law allows seizing of property, including owned homes, if the house dweller is convicted of crimes of a sufficient magnitude. Private landlords are also allowed to do this. As far as I can see, local councils are also counted as landlords, so why shouldn't they also have the ability to evict people in these circumstances? What about the rights of the residents living in neighbouring houses? Don't they have the right to live in relatively crime-free areas?"
If the criminals have paid for the homes using profits from their crimes.
This is about using the loss of someone's home, if one of the family is involved, but only if they rent from the council. If they private rent, or rent from a housing association, the threat doesn't include them.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I think the gang member has to be considered a big threat to society, and not just hanging around the streets with a gang.
You can already be evicted from your council property or housing association property for causing a nuisance. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
So to solve the problem they move a gang member and his family out of London, I'd be fuming if they moved next to me or surrounding area, What's stopping him from joining another local gang and showing them how its done down in London,
We have enough wanna be gangsters we don't need another,
Drugs,knives and guns, Deal/use them and you go away for a very long time |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So to solve the problem they move a gang member and his family out of London, I'd be fuming if they moved next to me or surrounding area, What's stopping him from joining another local gang and showing them how its done down in London,
We have enough wanna be gangsters we don't need another,
Drugs,knives and guns, Deal/use them and you go away for a very long time "
Of course you'd be fuming. But what about if you are already one the unfortunate neighbours of a gang member? Should you be moved out or be forced through circumstance to live next to a potential threat to you and your family? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required.
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder.
So a family of 4 in social housing. Parents hold down jobs, 1 kid is straight A, the other us completely out of control.
It's okay to take the home away and not a collective punishment in that scenario?
Oh and before you say 'well that would never happen' it does.
Have you read the original context or not?
I'm just asking you to explain how a family losing their home because of 1 child's actions isn't "collective punishment"...
That's another 'No' then. Thanks for clarifying.
It amazes me that a you are ignoring a question about what you posted and asking nothing more than you expand on it by belittling people asking the question.
I don't what to Google anything. I don't need to Google anything. I asked a question about your post which for reasons I can't understand you seem to want to deflect away from
I know you prefer to talk about a completely abstract world, but context matters. If you knew the context then you wouldn't ask fictious questions.
Perhaps you could explain the context.
So basically there's a part of north London where 14 rival gangs are all kicking off and it's a hell hole for everyone living there. This is actually a policy being trialled by the local council there because the situation is never going to get better unless their wait for enough people in the gangs to commit crimes and go to prison, or better still, break them up and physically seperate them.
The 'friendships' people form in gangs are not real friendships and simply won't last over a long distance relationship. But the council can't force them to move under the current set of laws. At present, all the gang members know where each other live and so leaving them is literally impossible because they'll turn up on your doorstep.
As i mentioned earlier, no judge will stick a family with an under 16 on the street (believe me, I've tried) and and so the reality is that that council will do a swap with another council at the other end of the country. Of course the looney lefties who can't be arsed to fact check, would just prefer the gang war went on until everyone is dead or in prison. "
You could have said that just said that so many posts ago. And without the insults or air of superiority
Thanks for the clarification But I think this thread has reminded me why the mods so often advise people to ignore those that they don't get on with and I think I'll go back to doing just that |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So to solve the problem they move a gang member and his family out of London, I'd be fuming if they moved next to me or surrounding area, What's stopping him from joining another local gang and showing them how its done down in London,
We have enough wanna be gangsters we don't need another,
Drugs,knives and guns, Deal/use them and you go away for a very long time
Of course you'd be fuming. But what about if you are already one the unfortunate neighbours of a gang member? Should you be moved out or be forced through circumstance to live next to a potential threat to you and your family?"
Moving the problem family or family member around won't solve the issue, Maybe for their previous neighbours but what about the next |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
You could have said that just said that so many posts ago. And without the insults or air of superiority
"
Where's the fun in that
"
Thanks for the clarification But I think this thread has reminded me why the mods so often advise people to ignore those that they don't get on with and I think I'll go back to doing just that"
Thanks for the , nice to have some common ground |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So to solve the problem they move a gang member and his family out of London, I'd be fuming if they moved next to me or surrounding area, What's stopping him from joining another local gang and showing them how its done down in London,
We have enough wanna be gangsters we don't need another,
Drugs,knives and guns, Deal/use them and you go away for a very long time
Of course you'd be fuming. But what about if you are already one the unfortunate neighbours of a gang member? Should you be moved out or be forced through circumstance to live next to a potential threat to you and your family?
Moving the problem family or family member around won't solve the issue, Maybe for their previous neighbours but what about the next "
Won't it? When you move to a new area then that's the perfect time for a fresh start. It's very hard to leave a gang once they know where you live. I a new city then they aren't going to come knocking for you. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So to solve the problem they move a gang member and his family out of London, I'd be fuming if they moved next to me or surrounding area, What's stopping him from joining another local gang and showing them how its done down in London,
We have enough wanna be gangsters we don't need another,
Drugs,knives and guns, Deal/use them and you go away for a very long time
Of course you'd be fuming. But what about if you are already one the unfortunate neighbours of a gang member? Should you be moved out or be forced through circumstance to live next to a potential threat to you and your family?
Moving the problem family or family member around won't solve the issue, Maybe for their previous neighbours but what about the next
Won't it? When you move to a new area then that's the perfect time for a fresh start. It's very hard to leave a gang once they know where you live. I a new city then they aren't going to come knocking for you. "
I agree to a point, But that's if he/she wants to leave the gang or change, Most of these people want everything but don't want to earn it legally, If they are not educated enough to do that they will find other ways, Usually drugs, So they do it themselves or join a gang either way they will come into conflict with other gangs and the cycle begins but in another area |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So to solve the problem they move a gang member and his family out of London, I'd be fuming if they moved next to me or surrounding area, What's stopping him from joining another local gang and showing them how its done down in London,
We have enough wanna be gangsters we don't need another,
Drugs,knives and guns, Deal/use them and you go away for a very long time
Of course you'd be fuming. But what about if you are already one the unfortunate neighbours of a gang member? Should you be moved out or be forced through circumstance to live next to a potential threat to you and your family?
Moving the problem family or family member around won't solve the issue, Maybe for their previous neighbours but what about the next
Won't it? When you move to a new area then that's the perfect time for a fresh start. It's very hard to leave a gang once they know where you live. I a new city then they aren't going to come knocking for you.
I agree to a point, But that's if he/she wants to leave the gang or change, Most of these people want everything but don't want to earn it legally, If they are not educated enough to do that they will find other ways, Usually drugs, So they do it themselves or join a gang either way they will come into conflict with other gangs and the cycle begins but in another area"
I do think that's a valid point. But as it stands, I can't see any other short term fixes. Most of what people have said on here are long term solutions. Gangs are notorious for preventing people leaving. Once they know where you lived, you're fucked really. Obviously this policy can't solve the whole problem, but the problem won't go away on its own. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea."
Wouldn’t have to re house as they would more than likely be considered as intentionally homeless |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Daft idea.Youll have to rehouse the entire family at greater cost.You are also punishing the siblings by moving them from their school and also this family will probably moved out of their inner city neighbourhood causing huge upheaval if the parents work.
A collective punishment is always a terrible idea.
Lol, as if the parent(s) work
Never assume.
Also would you be in favour of collective punishment on white collar crime?Which crimes should we punish parents and siblings ?
Are we going the North Korea route where 3 generations must be punished collectively
I bet you haven't read the full context of the MPs original statement, have you? I bet you can't list another white collar crime you feel a collective punishment is required.
The OP did a thread about a kid who broke a shitty statue the other day and right until the end of it, people kept posting without even understanding that the boy wasn't in a fecking art gallery. This thread is the same.
It's not collective punishment because it ain't their fucking house. They simply stop receiving a privilege, not having their own property taken away. Try harder.
So a family of 4 in social housing. Parents hold down jobs, 1 kid is straight A, the other us completely out of control.
It's okay to take the home away and not a collective punishment in that scenario?
Oh and before you say 'well that would never happen' it does.
Have you read the original context or not?
I'm just asking you to explain how a family losing their home because of 1 child's actions isn't "collective punishment"...
That's another 'No' then. Thanks for clarifying.
It amazes me that a you are ignoring a question about what you posted and asking nothing more than you expand on it by belittling people asking the question.
I don't what to Google anything. I don't need to Google anything. I asked a question about your post which for reasons I can't understand you seem to want to deflect away from
I know you prefer to talk about a completely abstract world, but context matters. If you knew the context then you wouldn't ask fictious questions.
Perhaps you could explain the context.
So basically there's a part of north London where 14 rival gangs are all kicking off and it's a hell hole for everyone living there. This is actually a policy being trialled by the local council there because the situation is never going to get better unless their wait for enough people in the gangs to commit crimes and go to prison, or better still, break them up and physically seperate them.
The 'friendships' people form in gangs are not real friendships and simply won't last over a long distance relationship. But the council can't force them to move under the current set of laws. At present, all the gang members know where each other live and so leaving them is literally impossible because they'll turn up on your doorstep.
As i mentioned earlier, no judge will stick a family with an under 16 on the street (believe me, I've tried) and and so the reality is that that council will do a swap with another council at the other end of the country. Of course the looney lefties who can't be arsed to fact check, would just prefer the gang war went on until everyone is dead or in prison.
So it is collective punishment.Thanks
I know the looney left think that if they chant a slogan enough times then it makes it true, but I'm afriad it doesn't. Every tenancy agreement has preconditions and this is a perfectly reasonable one. What's your short term solution to this gang war? You don't have one. You just say " Oh well if we spend more money on youth services then it'll be better in 15 years". Until then, the residents have to live in hell. "
I'm off to read some Karl Marx sitting round a camp fire in a forest wearing something itchy .You enjoy the neo con circle jerk brother . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Families get evicted from social housing everyday. I've seen families evicted because the kids were running riot on the streets. I've also seen a family evicted because they didn't know how to turn the stereo down. So it does happen ever day of the week,it's nothing new. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Families get evicted from social housing everyday. I've seen families evicted because the kids were running riot on the streets. I've also seen a family evicted because they didn't know how to turn the stereo down. So it does happen ever day of the week,it's nothing new."
Yet, if you own your own house they can only confiscate your equipment. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"London councils are already socially cleansing parts of London. This would be just another way of doing it. "
What makes you say that? The biggest trend is that white people are moving out to and commuting in for work. But that's nothing to do with councils. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Families get evicted from social housing everyday. I've seen families evicted because the kids were running riot on the streets. I've also seen a family evicted because they didn't know how to turn the stereo down. So it does happen ever day of the week,it's nothing new.
Yet, if you own your own house they can only confiscate your equipment. "
This is true,and owning your own home you don't sign a tenancy agreement like you have to do with social housing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
