Dale Farm Cleared Tomorrow?

I'm waiting for public opinion to sink even further below rock bottom, after they've lobbed a gas canister at a balliff or copper who's just doing their job, and blinding them for life, or worse.
 
I actually left my house this morning (nowhere near Dale Farm, thankfully) and parked out in our residential car park was a caravan, curtains drawn, people most likely inside, no road tax, calor gas canister attached, looks like its there for the long haul.

Will be knocking on the door later and asking on when they are planning to do one.
 
I've not paid much attention to the goings on - has there been any talk of where they are off to? Has anywhere been recommended by the council?

(I genuinely don't know).
 
I'm not debating that's the case, but I really struggle to feel good about it. Many people seem to be eliciting some kind of pleasure from what's effectively some kind of small-scale civil war with our society pitted against theirs, and one I have a sense will end badly, yet not at all solve any of the underlying problems.

They are breaking the law and due to be dealt with. I also feel good when a con man gets found out etc. I don't see whats so hard to grasp about enthusiasm for this situation?
 
Watching the news just now, sees to be more activists/hippies/do-gooders than travelers there now.
 
They are breaking the law and due to be dealt with. I also feel good when a con man gets found out etc. I don't see whats so hard to grasp about enthusiasm for this situation?
You seem to be asserting that all law is just, all legal punishment and ramification is just, and as such you have some kind of enthusiam for the consequences. I don't personally think that's a particularly good position to take, not only because the law has made many mistakes and served much disproportionate justice in the past, but it continues to do so; it's just harder to spot it when in the context of contemporary thinking at the time.

If I run the idea of a conman against my own personal morals, then I think such a person should be prevented from conning people. I would have some enthusiasm for a result where people aren't conned, though ideally this would be without prison or similar. I don't quite feel the same enthusiasm for some bricks not existing in a field, and as such little enthusiasm for the corrective measures that are being taken that will potentially result in violence and much continued anguish, just to move the problem elsewhere, even if these actions are necessary. It's not really a good situation and we have no solution.

I very much struggle to feel anything other than sad about the whole thing. What a mess, right?
 
Last edited:
I bet they are only kicking up a fuss about having to move because they've heard they can't get broadband in the place they are being moved to. That and they will all have to retune their Sky boxes.
 
You seem to be asserting that all law is just, all legal punishment and ramification is just, and as such you have some kind of enthusiam for the consequences. I don't personally think that's a particularly good position to take, not only because the law has made many mistakes and served much disproportionate justice in the past, but it continues to do so; it's just harder to spot it when in the context of contemporary thinking at the time.

If I run the idea of a conman against my own personal morals, then I think such a person should be prevented from conning people. I would have some enthusiasm for a result where people aren't conned, though ideally this would be without prison or similar. I don't quite feel the same enthusiasm for some bricks not existing in a field, and as such little enthusiasm for the corrective measures that are being taken that will potentially result in violence and much continued anguish, just to move the problem elsewhere, even if these actions are necessary. It's not really a good situation at all and we have no solution.

It is clear as daylight they are breaking the law, a law that is just. I don't know does this need to be spoon fed to you? Maybe we should pay for a public inquiry into this specific law.
 
At least with all the police around it *might* convince a *few* of them not to go out thieving thonight. Operation may end up paying for itself.
 
There are laws I do not agree with, I still abide with them.
You have never intentionally driven at all over the speed limit? I like bringing this one up because most people have. It's a good example of where a law is regularly flouted by the majority of people subject to it. I like to think independently as much as I can, and as such if I don't think a law is just or reasonable I will not follow it. The vast majority of the time my own thinking is in step with the law (for probably complex reasons that we needn't explore now).
It is clear as daylight they are breaking the law, a law that is just. I don't know does this need to be spoon fed to you? Maybe we should pay for a public inquiry into this specific law.
I find your post quite ironic. It is clear they are breaking the law, but it's a quite complex situation and the law was not designed with such situations in mind. As such I think the actions being taken and the law being enforced should be subject to some scrutiny to help avoid such problematic situations in the future.
 
Last edited:
You have never intentionally driven at all over the speed limit? I like bringing this one up because most people have. It's a good example of where a law is regularly flouted by the majority of people subject to it. I like to think independently as much as I can, and as such if I don't think a law is just or reasonable I will not follow it. The vast majority of the time my own thinking is in step with the law (for probably complex reasons that we needn't explore now).I find your post quite ironic.

I have driven over the speed limit, if I get caught I will pay up and take it on the chin, not whine about it. ;)

However we are talking about planning law, they used the right of law to fight their eviction and lost, they should now abide by the law. After all if they won they would be championing the law. ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom