92
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 May 2024
92 points (91.8% liked)
United Kingdom
4002 readers
249 users here now
General community for news/discussion in the UK.
Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.
Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
That's not what the quote you posted says, it says it tackles that two things, not that it makes them illegal.
It does mention some things that are to be made criminal offences right before this bit though, to trick people into posting such headlines, I suspect.
This whole thing sucks anyway, but I think we could use some clarity on exactly what will be made illegal?
Oh I think you're right actually -- it looks like from the PDF that they will be issued notices
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-04/0010/230010.pdf
Still, this is the UK, so I claim "slippery slope".
๐ or like, you could admit you were wrong, remove the propaganda, and not resort to your head cannon ๐คทโโ๏ธ
Seems extremely reasonable for dealing with aggressive homeless individuals.
"aggressive homeless individuals"
There it is.
There's the problem.
You're assuming this will be used when needed, and not used in excess, trampling down people who are already underfoot.
All cops are bastards, no exceptions for location.
If they CAN abuse a law, they WILL abuse it. At every opportunity.
I know. There are issues with the police, so now we can't have laws on the books either. Despite circumstances many homeless don't take no for an answer and threaten people. There needs to be a law to detain those people. That's regardless of the help they will or wont get or accept before or after.
Yep you can have the laws.
By keeping them precise in what they allow police to apply.
When the gov use terms like nuisance. It is intentionally verge.
If its about aggressive begging or homelessness. Define it as such. Don't intentionally leave it to a stressed officer to decide.
but you'll leave your not-factual headline up?
forgot, fixed, cheers
Slippery slope? All it does is provide an enforcement option for orgs who don't want people begging on their property.
you don't see that as an avenue for more and more orgs to do this by default, and given the lack of public spaces in our cities, essentially making it impossible to beg anywhere?
Bro wtf are you on about? There's tons of public spaces in the UK, cities included.
At least where I live, you'll be hard pressed to find a spot in the city where a homeless person can sleep unnacosted, either by spikes being put down on flat surfaces, parks being closed at night, and benches that aren't on a main road.
I don't think you've ever been to the UK. Most of those "public" spaces are corporate property and if you and your homelessness damage their brand they'll escort you off.
The homeless camps on high street ken during the pandemic had this happen to them all the time, as if the cruel irony of rough sleepers next to wholefoods and dyson shit blower 3k ads wasn't enough to make humanity unevolve powered solely by cringe alone and let trilobites, or some particularly feisty proto-moss take the top spot instead.
I've lived up and down the UK for nearly 30 years. In both the north and the south you can basically bump into public spaces that can be used by the homeless. Just because your city ain't got them doesn't mean it's the same for the rest of the UK.
So have I and your "can" gives away that you don't actually know, you're just assuming so.
My "can" includes infrastructure that I've actually seen being used by the homeless and setups that can feasibly be used by the homeless.
Stop pulling things out of your ass. It doesn't make your argument stronger.
Ah yes the classic strategy for when you get caught pulling stuff out of your ass: accuse the other person of doing the same, the wordier equivalent of simply going "no u".
You can stop now, it's just embarrassing
Well, you pulled out of your ass that I've never been to the UK when I lived there for nearly 30 years, you pulled out of your ass that I've never actually seen public infrastructure being used by the homeless, which I obviously have given how long I've lived there.
So now that we've established that my accusations of you pulling stuff out of your ass is well founded, do you have anything to say that isn't an attempt at setting up a straw man or 'no u'?