The reasoning for people who disagree with this law appears poor.
'Campaigners argue that criminalising squatting in residential buildings will lead to an increase in some of the most vulnerable homeless people sleeping rough.
Homeless charity Crisis said the new law would criminalise vulnerable people, leaving them in prison or facing a fine they cannot pay.'
That's such bad reasoning. Homelessness doesn't mean it's ok to essentially steal someone else's home. Used or not, it is not their own. It'd make far more sense to pay the homeowner a sum of money (from the council or government) allowing the government or council to use the home to house homeless people, but not grant ownership to those homeless people. It'd save the costs of building new council homes whilst also benefitting the owner of the unused home with a new revenue stream. The government wastes far more money on other far less important things anyway.
