Posted on 08/12/2011 7:37:01 PM PDT by Niuhuru
A suspected looter in this week’s riots and his mother are being thrown out of their council home.
In the first case of its kind, Daniel Sartain-Clarke, 18, and his mother have been served with an eviction notice as council bosses seek to turf them out of their £225,000 taxpayer-subsidised flat.
Sartain-Clarke is charged with violent disorder and attempting to steal electronic goods from the Currys store at Clapham Junction, South London, on Monday night.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
“They have been buying votes and power since Johnson’s Great Society mistake...”
Generally, I don’t debate politics with liberals. It’s not because I can’t articulate my views as well as defend them. Usually, it’s just a waste of time.
But several years ago, I said to a white liberal “You know, many of you have no real interest in solving poverty, reducing single-mother pregnancies, etc. If you did, you’d have no one who’d vote Democrat. You essentially provide programs that really don’t give anyone a helping hand up. You develop and maintain prgrams that keep classes of people dependent on you.”
The guy looked at me like I was on mushrooms and after a minute said “Well, you may have something there”.
I doubt I converted him but hopefully, I gave him some food for thought.
Thanks. That clears up the article. Hey, there are a few other English words that are confusing. What’s a bonnet and an boot?
These looters were caught and convicted, not just accused.
If that's the case, then the Council has every right to evict, and I agree they should. Conviction of a felony can cause cause the loss of many rights and privileges, and free housing is probably one of them.
However, the riot was only last week, how could there have been a trial and conviction (due process)? Furthermore, the article states that the youth was a "suspected" agitator and thief, not a "convicted" one.
Gov't should not be in the housing business, but since they are, they should follow the law and finish the paperwork before they boot tenants out.
Well, taxpayer subsidized housing isn’t the same as private property and as for him standing accused, he was apparently videotaped. Either way, this to me is a good idea and a perfect way to start taking a tough love stance.
After the LA riots, many store chose not to re open in those neighborhoods. Then there were complaints that “the community had to go to far for groceries”... Irony that you can choke on....
They’re lucky the Queen is merciful. At one point in Britain’s history the kid would have been hung as a thief...
When Queen Besse 1 was in charge, Tyburn hill was bussy and the tower was crowded, but drawing and quartering might be a little over the line, perhaps sending them to the colonies like Rawleys land or Botany Bay would be a acceptable solution aaahh, I forgot, that was then and now is now what to do
What’s a bonnet and an boot?
Bonnet is Hood and boot is trunk
My goodness, now they'll have to find some private person's flat, break in and squat while he is on vacation. The authorities will allow them to stay there.
Most bemusing comment at the site: "What about their human rights?"
Um… they looted and pillaged and burned them to the ground sir!
Obviously there was a disconnect when it came to the concept of actions having consequences.
What confuses you?....lol
The Royals have had no real power since 1649 thankfully.
And we are citizens not subjects.
Methinks he was winding you up.
The point he was making is that people who dont work get enough benefits that they can save up and have a US holiday every year, and thats the problem.
And speaking during a visit to riot-hit businesses in Manchester, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg made it clear that it was right that local authorities should consider evicting the families of vandals and looters.
He said: ‘If you go out and trash other people’s houses, you burn cars, you loot and smash up shops - in other words, if you show absolutely no sense of respect to your own community - then, of course, questions need to be asked whether the community should support you in living in that community.
‘I think that is a perfectly fair question to ask, but how you apply it needs to be done in a case-by-case way.
‘The principle that if you are getting some support from the community, you are going to have to show some loyalty to that community is a really, really important one.’
Earlier this week a petition calling for the thieves to lose all their welfare handouts became the first to be passed to Parliament under a new scheme.
It gathered more than 100,000 signatures – the threshold to trigger a Commons debate. The petition received so much web traffic that it crashed under the strain.
She had/has a responsibility to raise up respectful children, even if she is on the dole. If her 18 yo adult/child was so difficult to handle...she should have evicted him for the benefit of her family. If they found the 'goods' in their apartment being enjoyed by the family...guilty.
I don't see it as 'spiteful.' I say it is about time to hold dole mothers and fathers accountable. If she was taking steps to reign in her unruly adult-child before the rioting, then it is a whole other issue. But, likely she was not and she was enabling even supporting criminal behavior in her home.
here’s some advice lady.. close your legs and stop making babies you can’t take care of yourself.
No, she was not winding me up....because I re-asked the question because I thought it was crazy....she said it’s true.
Believe me, ‘poor’ people here dont get ‘free holidays’.
As I said, what actually happens is that people on benefits can ‘earn’ enough to go away to Florida for a fortnight (it being the cheapest American holiday for British people).
That in its itself a massive failure of the benefits system.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.