
Are you a QOTWer? Do you want to start a thread that isn't a direct answer to the current QOTW? Then this place, gentle poster, is your friend.
( , Sun 1 Apr 2001, 1:00)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread

However, I stand by the point that if a building is genuinely disused then logically it should be used for some purpose, I am not making a case for people to use buildings that are being renovated or have a planned usage. There is a difference,
( , Wed 20 Nov 2013, 15:33, 3 replies, latest was 12 years ago)

I have some empty boxes, would you like keep your stinking vegan shit in one? Maybe use another to store the miscarried fetus your drug addled skank whore of a girlfriend shat out?
( , Wed 20 Nov 2013, 15:36, Reply)

I would rather have a free house than an empty box please
( , Wed 20 Nov 2013, 15:41, Reply)

If it's owned by somebody, then the owner. Not a bunch of fucking junkies who want somewhere to not get eaten by foxes for a few nights.
( , Wed 20 Nov 2013, 15:38, Reply)

why should the owner be forced to put it to use? if he wants to leave it empty, isn't that his choice? how would you feel if someone said that you had to let people live in your garden?
( , Wed 20 Nov 2013, 15:41, Reply)

I appreciate that and as I have tried to state a number of times the damage is key issue, I am sure you will be able to correct me but prior to the November law last year wasn't there something regarding the violence of occupation, so as long as there was no damage and you leave when asked (as many squatters did) then I don't see the issue with utilising the property. The problems all arise when violence is used and rights are violated and this goes both ways.
( , Wed 20 Nov 2013, 15:45, Reply)

Some bunch of cunts living in my building and stopping me from being able to do what I want with my own property is the key bloody issue.
Or simply, you're there when I don't want you to be. Trespass, in other words.
( , Wed 20 Nov 2013, 15:47, Reply)

I am of the opinion that as long as a building is not in use then it should be utilised.
( , Wed 20 Nov 2013, 16:05, Reply)

they all require a court order, because they know it buys them at least a few days, weeks in a busy court district, and during that time they mostly trash the place. look at the comments the LABOUR mp's have made in response to chris grayling's requests for stories as to whether commercial squatting should also be criminalised. even the hand wringers are in favour of it.
( , Wed 20 Nov 2013, 15:47, Reply)

( , Wed 20 Nov 2013, 15:56, Reply)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread