This amuses me


Surely all the bailiffs have to do is just wait for about three days and they will be desperate for someone to cut them free?
(Bazongaloid, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:05, 3 replies, latest was 14 years ago)

When I read about them concreting themselves in
I thought "Hmm, when concrete sets it's a pretty fierce exothermic reaction, I wonder if it'll burn their skin off?".
( Labia Majora You keep on talking but it makes no sense at all, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:08, Reply)

I'm assuming there is a pipe inside that barrell with their hands inside it
if there isn't then they won't actually have functioning hands by now.
(Bazongaloid, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:09, Reply)

"Fingers crossed"

( Naked Ape call me Caitlyn, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:10, Reply)

From the pic it looks like they've used expanding foam
Set fire to their other hands, then see what they do.
( Labia Majora You keep on talking but it makes no sense at all, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:11, Reply)

I'm terribly behind on the news.
Anyone feel like saving me the time of googling and letting my know what actual law they are breaking? I assume it's squatting or suchlike.
( CQ Knows the truth, all of it., Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:12, Reply)

Being gypsies.

(PsychoChomp, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:13, Reply)

gypsies a poor helpless ethnic minority whose quirky way of life needs protecting
( Naked Ape call me Caitlyn, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:13, Reply)

I read something about this earlier.
They offered to sell the land and move out for something like £1million split between the 400 people living there. The council said no and instead decided to spend £18 million on the legal fight to get them removed.
Sounds stupid to me.
(PsychoChomp, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:14, Reply)

if the council agreed rthen every pikey in the country woulkd demand money to leave the land tht they have invaded

( Naked Ape call me Caitlyn, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:15, Reply)

There is some merit to that argument, but not £17 million worth of merit.

(PsychoChomp, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:17, Reply)

I would like to see some proof of this £18 million that's being bandied around
I reckon a lot of that is the legal costs which came from them refusing to accept every court judgement.

If that were the case you are saying that anyone with enough money can do what they like as they just escalate the court costs.
(Bazongaloid, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:19, Reply)

I'm saying that councils should take more time to work this shit out before resorting to the courts.
I also think they should be more pragmatic and less principled when it comes to spending that amount of tax payers money. The fact it's taken 10 years and (apparently) cost that much is not saying anything good about either side.
(PsychoChomp, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:23, Reply)

How exactly should they "work this out" when these people are breaking the law and refusing to accept the judgement of the courts?
What you're suggesting is that the level of justice should be dependant on how much a twat the defendant is prepared to be about admiting they are in the wrong or not.
(Bazongaloid, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:27, Reply)

Well the laws they were breaking was building without permission
and building on the green belt. www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/sep/16/dale-farm-concreted-basildon-council-owner?INTCMP=SRCH This suggests it wasn't really green belt the idea that small chalets are less desirable in the country than a scrap yard is a push.
And I think they did get temporary planning permission which was then withdrawn during the labour years. Which does change some things in my mind.
And justice shouldn't be blind to the fact you're basically making children homeless. You're not only punishing the people who broke the planning laws but the people they live with.
(PsychoChomp, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:38, Reply)

You would have more of a point if they hadn't set out to build this without getting planning permission in the first place
Your saying it's okay to build something, then apply for permission, and then when it's refused say "don't make my kids homeless". They have been offered council accomodation but they are refusing it as they say living in houses makes them ill. Which is just a lie.
(Bazongaloid, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:47, Reply)

Living in some of the council housing I've seen would make anyone ill

( Roota zweeeeeoooooowm, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:49, Reply)

Then that's a wider issue with council accomodation
but that's not a reason why they be allowed to ignore court judgements.
(Bazongaloid, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:50, Reply)

having kids is not a valid argument
oh, i had sex without a condom, now you have to let me break the law.

i see tenants who have pocketed 3 months' of housing benefit payments and then don't want to pay their rent or move out use this old chestnut ALL THE TIME.
( rachelswipe with a fork, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:53, Reply)

How I would have solved the problem:
1. Go drinking in the same pub as the main traveller types, and casually mention that Liam Neeson's daughter is loaded.
2. Wait for them to kidnap Liam Neeson's daughter.
3. Record Liam Neeson going to get his daughter back.
4. Half of the travellers will be dead or injured, and I'll make a fortune from the film.
( Labia Majora You keep on talking but it makes no sense at all, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:29, Reply)

You should become a professional bailiff.
I'll be your cameraman.
(Bazongaloid, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:31, Reply)

Just don't do that 'quick, jarring camera movement' bullshit
I hate when action films use it to make fight scenes seem more visceral.
( Labia Majora You keep on talking but it makes no sense at all, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:34, Reply)

It certainly made "This Life" seem more visceral.

(Bazongaloid, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:49, Reply)

But it ruined Freddy vs Terrible Horse Porn XI

( The Light in Chains don't touch the Pope's boner, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:55, Reply)

I like the "Jizz's eye" view camera technique during the final money shot.
I heard they broke the actresses nose three times filming it.
(Bazongaloid, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:57, Reply)

that last sentence is not actually an inaccurate assessment
in some respects.
( rachelswipe with a fork, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:23, Reply)

So they own the land?
I had assumed it was someone else's, hence the eviction.
( CQ Knows the truth, all of it., Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:16, Reply)

They did own the land and about half of the houses had planning permission, the other half didn't

(PsychoChomp, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:17, Reply)

So it's a planning permission thing then?
Sorry to appear stupid, not been following the story and Goggling is not throwing much info on the legal side.
( CQ Knows the truth, all of it., Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:18, Reply)

Yeah pretty much,
there was a small area set aside in the green belt for the travellers, it grew until now it's the biggest in Europe.
(PsychoChomp, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:20, Reply)

So is it beacuse they went over the boundaries in to other people's land, of just because they built without permission?
I though building with out permission just meant they knocked your house down, not kicked you off the land.
( CQ Knows the truth, all of it., Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:25, Reply)

I think they did both, but I'm not really sure.
Either way, yes they were wrong but I have little sympathy for a council that couldn't get a handle on it for 10 years, that's just incompitant.
(PsychoChomp, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:27, Reply)

there is a certain irony to misspelling incompetent
that is only rivalled by the spelling of dyslexia.
( rachelswipe with a fork, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:29, Reply)

How have they not had a handle on it?
They applied for the court to grant an eviction order, they did, the travellers appealled and the appeal was turned down, so they kept appealing to higher and higher courts citing the fact that their human rights weren't being considered. It's taken this long so that he council can amply demonstrate that they have taken all these things into account.

Don't for a moment think I'm suggesting there is something wrong with them insisting their human rights be taken into consideration, but to demonstrate this effectively in the eyes of the law takes time.
(Bazongaloid, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:30, Reply)

ah the human rights act
you have to give old tony credit for a law that his wife just happens to make millions from...
( rachelswipe with a fork, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:51, Reply)

Yes, it's one of the few things you might want to give him credit for
It's an incredibly important bit of legislation in my view. By attacking the human rights act you are saying that only certain people are worthy of having rights, and by implication that only certain people are worthy of being classed as human.
(Bazongaloid, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:55, Reply)

this is very true, some people are not worthy of being classed as human
i should know, i've dated them.

the only problem with the human rights act is that it is open to abuse from some quarters and you end up with farcical claims. but the principal tenets are obviously too important not to have it; that's a no-brainer.

however i still think it stinks that cherie just happened to become an expert in it. if it had been a sale of shares, there'd be some insider dealing going on there.

much as i cannot bear that woman, i hear from colleagues that she is an outstanding lawyer.
( rachelswipe with a fork, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 13:08, Reply)

OK, cheers, this gives me a reasonable handle on it.
it's remarkably hard to sift the fact out of the sentiment (on both sides) in this story.

Appreciate your help.
( CQ Knows the truth, all of it., Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:31, Reply)

They are some of the people who are acting "in solidarity" with the "travellers" who are being evicted from Dale Farm
.
(Bazongaloid, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:13, Reply)

It's ironic that "travellers" are so anti moving

( Naked Ape call me Caitlyn, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:14, Reply)

hahaha
this made me do a real life LOL.
( rachelswipe with a fork, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:16, Reply)

OK, fine, I'll just Google it
as none of that answers the question.
( CQ Knows the truth, all of it., Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:15, Reply)

I think you'll find my comment addressed your question exactly.
They are not actually gypsies, they are protestors who have gone to Dale Farm to act in solidarity with the travellers who are being evicted.
(Bazongaloid, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:18, Reply)

I should have been more clear in my question then, I shall rephrase:
What is the legal reason for the evictions of the 'travellers' (of whom I erroneously believed those pictured to be two) being evicted from Dale Farm?

Answers like "because they were there illegally" or "because they are gypos" while possibly accurate are not particularly helpful
( CQ Knows the truth, all of it., Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:20, Reply)

they're morons
the law is the law and the travellers have broken it. they had 10 years to get it right.

they must somehow be distant cousins of those retarded women who fall in love with murderers on death row...
( rachelswipe with a fork, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:22, Reply)

again, quite possibly true, but not actually answering the question.
Never mind, Chompy is being helpful bless his little cotton socks.
( CQ Knows the truth, all of it., Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:26, Reply)

well yeah
you've given him the opportunity to EDUCATE you on something. he will be the definitive authority on it ALL.
( rachelswipe with a fork, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:27, Reply)

He may well not be.
But he's been the only person in this sub-thread to make any effort to to answer the question I asked.
( CQ Knows the truth, all of it., Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:33, Reply)

Are you selectively stupid?
I answered the question you asked quite clearly.
(Bazongaloid, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:48, Reply)

Maybe I missed it somehow
All I saw was you saying they were supporting the travellers being evicted from Dale farm.

Edit: to which I replied: "I should have been more clear in my question then, I shall rephrase:
What is the legal reason for the evictions of the 'travellers' (of whom I erroneously believed those pictured to be two) being evicted from Dale Farm?"
( CQ Knows the truth, all of it., Mon 19 Sep 2011, 13:02, Reply)

This bloke from the council hates Jewish people

( WormuIus, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:20, Reply)

Hold up a sec here, are have they actually cemented their hands to a barrel?

( G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:20, Reply)

www.b3ta.com/questions/offtopic/post1357930
(Bazongaloid, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 12:22, Reply)