Milo

David, what is legal theft? Care to offer a definition, or is it just a broad term you use to describe anything you don't like? My understanding of a legal loophole is an area in law which the legislature has failed to address, typically a grey area. The laws protecting squatters have been clearly thought through, by parliament and approved by the HofLs, hardly a loophole, or is loophole another term you use to describe anything you don't like? The squatters are enjoying the use of an 'asset' (is that how you think of property?) which is not being used by its owner, in fact has been abandoned. Despite Cameron's poor performance on TV last night, with this level of critical thinking, the Tory's are going to breeze the general election.

So Huguenot, what you're saying is, 'society's self-imposed regulations' (whatever the hell they are, sounds like a phrase from a tabloid newspaper) should take precedence over legal rights, but the government should create systems to run our society, and we should follow them. But by the government, you don't mean the Legislature because you've already made it clear that laws are subsidiary to 'society's self-imposed regulations'. But 'society's self-imposed regulations' are not the same as we the people making our own laws because we should 'not just take what we want'. It seems to me that the inconsistency is in your thinking, but at least you didn't make any spelling mistakes.

Well, one might argue that the owner is in effect consenting by leaving their property empty for five months. Opinion would probably vary according to political position - how much responsibility an individual has to the broader society etc. I would certainly not be happy if my immediate neighbour abandoned their home in deteriating condition, would prefer if squatters did take over providing they were responsible. I think the law is present to stop people being 'screwed over', in my opinion the current legislative balance is probably about right.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Milo Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I think the squatters have a point here, how > would > > you feel if you were renting and the landlord > came > > along and demanded agressively that you get > out? > > I wouldn't be very happy. But squatting is not the > same as (or even analogous to) renting. They're analogous to the extent that their right to reside is protected in law against eviction by agressive owners without due process.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > goosegreenteam Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > We will have to see how we are approached by > the > > owners, if they are forcefull and agressive > then > > we will be less reluctant to cooperate. > > And that's where you lose my sympathy! But > hopefully it won't come to that. I think the squatters have a point here, how would you feel if you were renting and the landlord came along and demanded agressively that you get out? You probably wouldn't want to cooperate and would insist on staying for as long as you legally could to allow time to sort out somewhere else to live. Isn't this situation the same? Brendan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Access to housing is a right not a privilege. As far as I?m concerned that point is not up for debate. > How you provide that housing is another matter > which is. But if people end up having to squat it > is just an indication that something isn?t > working. I agree Brendan. Can I ask The Goose Green Sqautters, do you know why the property has been left empty by the owner? Good for you for committing to improving an empty house too, hope the diy is going well.

> Isnt it trespass and therefore illegal ?? yes, it > is. No it's not trespass, that is something quite different. Squatting is perfectly legal.

Brilliant :)

TheAllSeeingEye Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Is it their house ?? No. I sense someone above is > almost approving of the squatting process. I approve of it, houses left unlived in for a long period should definitely be squatted.

BelowtheBelt Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ... and violent crime and offences against the > person ? Listen, you can get stats to say > whatever you want .. and reading through many of > these threads and you often pick up on the fact > that many do not want to report their experiences > - apply this to those not even frequenting these > forums and how many do you think then go > unreported around here in Dulwich ? Truly ?? I've no idea, which is why I'm not going to go making the figures up.

BelowtheBelt Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The problem is, our system does not work. Until > we get 'more brutal' - yep, I darn well said it - > with many of these young thugs, then little will > change ! Sorry, but all the 'lilly-livered > liberal-lets-try-and-understand-them' approach has > failed and will continue to do so. The problem > for many of these youth is that they have already > degraded themselves to a violent state of mind and > trying to re-programme them is nigh on impossible > when you are doing it with little more than empty > threats and harsh words ( although I don't even > think many of them get this ?!! ). Much of the > behaviour has little to do with 'utter need' and > is bourne out of downright dissrespect and evil > motives, nothing more or less. The crime figures for Southwark have gone down in the last five years.

Good post Solutions. Probably the best way to make a charitable donation is not to set up a DD, but to volunteer some time, perhaps some of the time spent on this forum complaining about how difficult it is being made to feel guilty by BI sellers!

I had some building work done a few months ago, so my front door was ajar whilst the builders went to and fro and were working in the kitchen. I came down my stairs to find the guy described by the OP in my hall, when challenged he offered to sell some dodgy DVDs!

EDOldie:Thats good news. Renaissance of the Plough (shopping area that is) Yes, even Le Moulin has a new sign! Actually, I ate there the other night for the first time, the food is really good and the owner nice too.

Yep, great big opening now cut into the back of the buildings. Not much use to the flats above, but just the right size for deliveries by artic. Deadline for planning objections is the 12th Dec I think (hope).

Sean wrote: In a couple of months you will be reminiscing about the building noise, as yet another delivery truck reverse-beeps at 4am LordLane said a while back that deliveries wouldn't be made at the back, just from the Lordship Lane shopfront. Now, I'm looking at the back of the building out of my window and a series of steel girders have been inserted in the manner used to support a wall prior to the construction of a large lintel based doorway. Such a doorway would be big enough to offload from an artic-lorry. LordLane?

I wouldn't make any cuts, just increase (mainly income and progressively) taxation. Presumably we'll get most of the bank bail-outs money back when they are re-privatised, any losses take through city windfall taxation. But the already existing budget deficit should have been delt with through tax increases anyway (New Labour wanting to increase public spending yet not increase taxation was unsustainable). I probably would cut (mainly unemployment) benefits, but increase the minimum wage fairly substantially - having the dual effect of getting greater numbers working and shifting a burden from the tax payer over to industry, the current situation where it's financially better to stay on benefits than work is crazy and destroys peoples lives.

Maybe cut the heads off some banksters?

Beautiful graphic, well done The Guardian. When illustrated like this the 'financial stablilty' spending is totally shocking, ...and the bonuses roll on.

In foreign policy? Suez.

Fortunately that's unlikely ever to happen to me as drunken psychopaths are very few and far between. A more genuine threat to my safety and liberty is the election of an unpleasant government whose legislature, informed by reactionary zealots, bring to law a bunch of draconian civil order acts. I've read enough European history to know where that can lead.

I'm not trying to shout anyone down, I just want to be clear about what your question is before giving my opinion. In you OP you say you want people's opinion on legalisation of pepper spray, are you saying that legislation is being reviewed in parliament? If so provide a link, I can't find any record. You state the problem as being a rise in 'street violence' and offer a solution. I would like to know why you think there has been such a rise, if you have evidence, show it. I posted Southwark data because this is a forum which relates to East Dulwich, if you have 'countrywide' statistical source and are referring to a national problem, then post a link. Or are you saying that there has actually been no rise in the incidence of street crime but you would like citizens to have the right to carry pepper spray anyway? If so, count me out.

Hi Barry, Someone may have requested this already (as this thread is now 18 pages!); are there any plans to build a covered waiting area at East Dulwich station, it's very cold in the mornings now and the platform is so high the wind is strong. Thanks for listening.

Regarding data I have access to, the Met police site contains stats for 'serious crime against the person' which I guess covers the kind of violence you refer to in your OP. http://maps.met.police.uk/tables.htm The data for Southwark goes back to 2000 and the most recent figures are the same as 2003 after a continuing downward trend from a high in 2004/05. Hardly a crime wave and in no way justifying a change in the law. Perhaps the police should just continue doing what they have been doing for the last few years. I have a solution to crime fear; how about placing restrictions on the sale of the Daily Mail?

No, Y'man, there is no inference on my part, you said: "The police are having difficulty maintaining control of the streets." November 27, 04:09PM "The way things are going in the UK, Silverfox, your sister is wise beyond, well, beyond East Dulwich Forum." November 29, 09:11AM "It's a sad reflection but it's coming to that, the police can't stop the mindless violence and the judicial system is no deterrent." November 29, 09:11AM By using sentences like; 'The way things are going', 'it's coming to that', you are clearly suggesting that crime is getting worse. As that is your position, I would like to know which statistics have led you to that belief. If your position is not based on any data but rather your own internal state, perhaps you could be more open about that in your postings? [sorry posted under my partner's login before]

Hi Y'men, You've said that street violence is out of control and that it's got to the stage where the police have lost control and the public now need to arm themselves for safety - your comments infer a rise in crime. Can you send me a link to the stats for this rise. Thanks