Dale Farm Cleared Tomorrow?
- Thread starter philip2009
- Start date
How old are you?
They haven't made any laws up, there has been a hugely long and drawn out protest, with the rights of the gypos maintained by the law and plenty of do-gooding outside help. In the end, after lots of appeals the decision was made to remove the illegal site, starting with the people, it's no big conspiracy, this is hundreds of years of law in effect!
I would not be massively surprised to find Radiation spearheading all of their action. There are definite similarities to their thought process and ignorance.
It's all part of the same system of control, call it what you want, they can make up all sorts of laws, doesn't mean they're all right or reasonable and it doesn't mean they should be above them or be able to make them up on a whim, most laws can be broken down to loss and harm, most other stuff is more about control than whats best.
This happens on a smaller scale i would bet a few times a week, you dont see people moaning then. Its only because this is in the media people are up in arms.
You're right, they should just cut the wood he's standing on and sit back.
He'll either let himself down, or the undertakers will.
Either that or the Police and Bailiffs are working to enforce a court order, which will include the ability to damage property if need be (in the same way they can break down your door if they have the right warrant), to carry out the order and enforce the laws of the land.
Not to mention the fact it could very easily be argued they are working to protect a member of the public from his own stupidity (although by doing so they are doing a massive disservice to the gene pool).
I personally think when the police come across such idiots they should move them on, but leave them locked to whatever they are attached to.
I suspect if the protesters had to cut the locks off themselves they might not be quite so quick to lock themselves to things.
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 45
Planning permission can be for anything deemed to have a high degree of permenance.
for example an marquee tent, a big enough one that is anchored and fixed down has a high degree of permenance, even though it is a glorified tent, and may require permission. Also things like air craft shelters (big steel structures with wheels) you could argue the same thing, they can move, why do i need planning permission. At the end of the day you will not be able to roll this off the site, so will need permission as it has a high degree of permenance.
As they have built illigally and the stuctures were spotted within 5 years, the council have full, legal right to have them removed.
what really annoys me is that any "normal" person who got caught without permission would have had been acted upon much much faster. this has taken 10 years!!
for a good case about planning permission have a Google for the guy who built his house in a barn (no permission for the house). after 5 years (after this time they cannot ask you to remove the stucture) he removed the barn and had his house there legally.
Ben
Wow, just wow. Seriously, take his advice. There is not a big book of law that says "should a farm that has developed a traveller community where half are living legally and half illegally be brought to our attention, the following will happen."
The law is very strict in places and must be interpreted and applied as the courts see fit in other cases.
I really hope that you are no older than 15 or I do dispair. If you don't understand something, don't argue with everyone else. Go aways and learn about it. Its much more rewarding and you might find that people don't think you quite such a retard.
Please walk away from the computer.
Their buildings are not on wheels, they went ahead and built houses on the land without permission! Are you trolling or just normally dumb?
If you want to build a house you need permission it's that simple really.
Oh boo hoo. Typical fat ***** trying to garner XFactor-like sympathy. Bawl a bit on TV, tell the cameras you're doing it for your 'children, your babies', little Rat and Vermin.
You were offered a place, GTFO.
What if the house vehicle is floating above by magnetic levitation or by baloon?
Anyway when someone buys land all rights to do what they want with it should be part of it otherwise whats the point?
It's all just about control as usual, i really don't see the problem, the next person interested will either buy the land or not if they see a structure on it, perhaps it might be a bonus to the next buyer, who knows, why should the government care and have a say?
God, go read up on it. You do not get all rights. You get very limited rights when buying land. Hence why some land is wort nothing and other land is worth millions.
Wouldn't make any difference if it was held up by Harry Potters magic wand or anything else. A structure with permeant residency needs planning permission.
For a start buildings need planning permission to insure minimum standards for safety. So residents, future residents and public are not endangered. Also most people font want homes being built every where. Hence laws like green belt land. To ensure some countryside is left as such.
Wouldn't make any difference if it was held up by Harry Potters magic wand or anything else. A structure with permeant residency needs planning permission.
For a start buildings need planning permission to insure minimum standards for safety. So residents, future residents and public are not endangered. Also most people font want homes being built every where. Hence laws like green belt land. To ensure some countryside is left as such.
Last edited:
I don't want to be drawn in to this but I was under the impression that the word "negotiations" wasn't exactly what happened.
Anyone got any sources (that aren't **** newspapers) about the offers put on the table?
Again, I'm not picking a side so keep the abuse to a low, I don't want this to be *** for tat, I want it to be a bit more intelligent.
What deals were put on the table? What was offered?
What was the reason they were rejected? Unsuitable?
They've spent ~£12 million on removing these people, of which they are an ethnic minority, doesn't look too good to the International community.
I'm sure if they've had ~10 years, ~£12 million they could have surely come to a better conclusion then this?
Also, I've only had the news on very briefly (I'm on holiday in Portmeirion at the minute) but most of the protestors didn't seem to be travellers?
Again, no stupid derogatory replies, just a nice reply helping me understand as I've paid little attention to this.
Anyone got any sources (that aren't **** newspapers) about the offers put on the table?
Again, I'm not picking a side so keep the abuse to a low, I don't want this to be *** for tat, I want it to be a bit more intelligent.
What deals were put on the table? What was offered?
What was the reason they were rejected? Unsuitable?
They've spent ~£12 million on removing these people, of which they are an ethnic minority, doesn't look too good to the International community.
I'm sure if they've had ~10 years, ~£12 million they could have surely come to a better conclusion then this?
Also, I've only had the news on very briefly (I'm on holiday in Portmeirion at the minute) but most of the protestors didn't seem to be travellers?
Again, no stupid derogatory replies, just a nice reply helping me understand as I've paid little attention to this.
I'd laugh at you if you weren't quite so pathetic. Definite "Troll of the First Order".
Last edited:
Pretty sure I would have asked that sort of question when I was 5 and bugging my dad about something. Based on the fact that you are not 5 I have to concede that no-one is this idiotic naturally so you are just doing this for a rise.
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 45
the next buyer could put a building on it. As long as it has PLANNING PERMISSION and conforms to the BUILDING REGULATIONS all will be fine. However the problem with the gypos didnt bother with any of legislation they other have to abide by, then when they get pulled up on it they **** and moan about it.
Its all well and good looking back and saying it cost this much over this time scale, but hindsight is allways 20/20. When this process was started it wasnt intended to go this way. All the do gooders and red tape have made this situation into a total shambles.
Ben
Its all well and good looking back and saying it cost this much over this time scale, but hindsight is allways 20/20. When this process was started it wasnt intended to go this way. All the do gooders and red tape have made this situation into a total shambles.
Ben