Cable Forum
Page 66 of 98 « First 165662636465 66 6768697076 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   Riots (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33680220)

denphone 12-08-2011 10:24
Re: Riots
 
Well its seem that Mr Cameron talks tough but actions are better then words in my mind and it seems like there are many rioters getting away near enough scot free and the question is when we learn in this country to punish people properly for their crimes.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...lap-wrist.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...ns-pledge.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/ar...E-victims.html

Gary L 12-08-2011 10:28
Re: Riots
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparkle (Post 35287055)
Met Police confirm that should riots threaten London's fashion district they will adopt a size zero tolerance.
It's a bit like the bloke who gets beat up telling his mates I'll kill him next time :)

at least they've learned from this. we're always learning from things that happen. it's just when they happen again we say I thought you learned from previous events?

gazzae 12-08-2011 10:32
Re: Riots
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35286991)
R.I.P Richard Mannington Bowes.

It was mentioned this in a debate and I cannot remember where I watched this now but they were talking about how some of these rioters are turning up at court, dressed in the full blown chav gear, tracksuits and the like. Kinda shows the lack of respect for authority, when criminals show up in normal every day wears.
Being someone whos never been arrested I don't know the process, but are they not taking them from the police cells straight to court so they would turn up in whatever they were wearing when arrested.

Welshchris 12-08-2011 10:52
Re: Riots
 
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/08...riot_benefits/
It states here that Clegg has stated that Councils should have the right to evict rioters from council properties and they they would have to declair themselves as homeless and the local council would have to rehome them... Errrmmm wouldnt this just cost more tax payers money and be a total waste of time.

You evict someone so your gonna have to get a court order for that which will take time and cost money. You get the order and they are evicted and chances are these people will not go quietly so you may need police presence which again will cost money. Councils will then have to get staff in to make sure property is fit and upto date or work will have to be done. Then the people they have just evicted would declair they are homeless to the SAME! Council and the SAME! Council would have to spend money on rehoming the same people. Is it me or is this pointless?

Gary L 12-08-2011 11:04
Re: Riots
 
It is pointless. and they might even rehouse them to a property near you.

it would be ok if they could juggle it around so they're all in the same area. and hopefully they might kill each other off over time.

Saying that. it's going to cost money whatever you do to them. so I think really we shouldn't be looking at the cost of things. and just look at it as causing them plenty of distruption.

gazzae 12-08-2011 11:18
Re: Riots
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Welshchris (Post 35287085)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/08...riot_benefits/
It states here that Clegg has stated that Councils should have the right to evict rioters from council properties and they they would have to declair themselves as homeless and the local council would have to rehome them... Errrmmm wouldnt this just cost more tax payers money and be a total waste of time.

You evict someone so your gonna have to get a court order for that which will take time and cost money. You get the order and they are evicted and chances are these people will not go quietly so you may need police presence which again will cost money. Councils will then have to get staff in to make sure property is fit and upto date or work will have to be done. Then the people they have just evicted would declair they are homeless to the SAME! Council and the SAME! Council would have to spend money on
rehoming the same people. Is it me or is this pointless?
No because they would be declared as intentionally homeless and as such the housing assication would have no duty to rehouse them.

---------- Post added at 12:18 ---------- Previous post was at 12:17 ----------

This applies to NI but I'm sure its similar across the UK.

Quote:
If you lost your home because of something that you deliberately did or failed to do, you may be seen as intentionally homeless. The Housing Executive uses an intentionality test to see if you lost your home as a result of your actions.

You may have problems passing this test if:
•your home was repossessed due to mortgage arrears;
•you had significant rent arrears;
•you were evicted because of antisocial behaviour.

If any of the above applies, the Housing Executive may consider you intentionally homeless and will not have any duty to offer you accommodation
http://www.housingadviceni.org/homel...-homeless.html

danielf 12-08-2011 11:40
Re: Riots
 
So more treating of the symptoms in a manner that is likely to worsen the causes then.

Smashing...

Osem 12-08-2011 13:36
Re: Riots
 
Might the fact that a judge in Manchester feels strongly enough to comment on the absence of parents at the court proceedings involving young children explain quite a lot about the upbringing many of them have had and why they were out and about in the first place? I dare say quite a few of their parents were similarly antisocial not that long ago so can we expect their offspring to be any more responsible? Yes we must be tough on those who've done wrong but we must also get a grip of the reality that far too many people are having children they seemingy can't cope with and/or couldn't care less about.

denphone 12-08-2011 13:53
Re: Riots
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35287130)
Might the fact that a judge in Manchester feels strongly enough to comment on the absence of parents at the court proceedings involving young children explain quite a lot about the upbringing many of them have had and why they were out and about in the first place? I dare say quite a few of their parents were similarly antisocial not that long ago so can we expect their offspring to be any more responsible? Yes we must be tough on those who've done wrong but we must also get a grip of the reality that far too many people are having children they seemingy can't cope with and/or couldn't care less about.
Yes l have to agree with you on that there are parents out there who do not give two hoots about having children and without any idea about bringing them up to know right from wrong then is it any wonder that their children turn out with just the same anti-social attitude as them.

Gary L 12-08-2011 15:06
Re: Riots
 
Are you ready for the weekend?

Quote:
Complaints Commission has admitted it may have mistakenly given "misleading" information to journalists in the wake of the Mark Duggan shooting, it has emerged.
The body admitted that it may have inadvertently led media organisations to believe that Mr Duggan, who was shot dead in Tottenham last Thursday, fired at police first.
I heard a bit about this on the radio earlier. a woman involved with all this said that he wasn't assassinated. makes him sound like a president or something.

http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16049023

Osem 12-08-2011 16:48
Re: Riots
 
Quote:
Complaints Commission has admitted it may have mistakenly given "misleading" information to journalists in the wake of the Mark Duggan shooting, it has emerged.
The body admitted that it may have inadvertently led media organisations to believe that Mr Duggan, who was shot dead in Tottenham last Thursday, fired at police first.
Oh dear, perhaps we'll need an emergency enquiry into the IPCC's standards....

martyh 12-08-2011 17:41
Re: Riots
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35286976)
Well, first off. Those who aren't on benefits won't be affected.
No they won't .As i said these people don't work and don't claim ,they live off the proceeds of crime so they will continue stealing ,mugging ,dealing ect as they always have done .Those who do claim some may turn to crime and some may surprise us all by getting work ,either way i doubt the petition will have any effect as i suspect there may be legal issues with stopping benefits because someone has a criminal record ,i don't think legaly that they could single out rioters from other criminals who do get benefits .So although the petition is popular and does show the feeling of a large number of people ultimately it won't have the desired effect imo

danielf 12-08-2011 18:07
Re: Riots
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35287198)
No they won't .As i said these people don't work and don't claim ,they live off the proceeds of crime so they will continue stealing ,mugging ,dealing ect as they always have done .Those who do claim some may turn to crime and some may surprise us all by getting work ,either way i doubt the petition will have any effect as i suspect there may be legal issues with stopping benefits because someone has a criminal record ,i don't think legaly that they could single out rioters from other criminals who do get benefits .So although the petition is popular and does show the feeling of a large number of people ultimately it won't have the desired effect imo
Actually, my last comment was about evicting rioters from their houses wich is equally pointless as stopping their benefits.

denphone 12-08-2011 18:11
Re: Riots
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35287210)
Actually, my last comment was about evicting rioters from their houses wich is equally pointless as stopping their benefits.
l agree as remember one of those who appeared in court was a daughter of a millionaire and are they going to evict her.

Chris 12-08-2011 18:15
Re: Riots
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35287187)
Oh dear, perhaps we'll need an emergency enquiry into the IPCC's standards....
I don't see the problem here. The IPCC Press Office seems to have been passing on information, when asked, in good faith. It did not proactively issue information until it was reasonably sure of the facts. Certainly, no reference to Duggan firing first appeared in any press release put out by the IPCC.

If journalists will insist on off-the-cuff briefings to feed their 24-hour operations, they are going to have to expect information released while an enquiry is barely begun to be preliminary and unreliable.

And yet, all the main media outlets are suddenly throwing the word "misled" around as if giving duff information to pushy hacks was some sort of a criminal offence.

The British media, the Press media in particular, is sitting in its very own glass house at the moment, and it had better think twice before throwing rocks at the IPCC or anyone else.


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:41.
Page 66 of 98 « First 165662636465 66 6768697076 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum