MP attempts to stop squatting in empty shops (From The Argus)

We can only wish Mike every success in breaking what seems like a very strange habit for an elected politician.

Mike Weatherley would rather see people freezing to death on the streets rather than using buildings that are often derelict as shelter.

The number of squatters and homeless by far exceeds the available shelter that charities and government is able to provide each night.

I do understand that sometimes squatters do cause some damage to property but the manner that Mike Weatherley just wants to label all squatters as criminals is morally reprehensible.

Many people who squat have addiction problems and/or have mental health issues -some have grown up in care or do not have any family support . To brand them all as criminals is far to simplistic.

Much like the current Tory trend of labelling all those that are presently unemployed and claiming benefit as "scroungers", Weatherley's law is narrow-minded and does not accept that there are bigger issues and that homelessness is a growing issue.

uniteagainstparkingc
harges wrote:
Mike Weatherley would rather see people freezing to death on the streets rather than using buildings that are often derelict as shelter. The number of squatters and homeless by far exceeds the available shelter that charities and government is able to provide each night. I do understand that sometimes squatters do cause some damage to property but the manner that Mike Weatherley just wants to label all squatters as criminals is morally reprehensible. Many people who squat have addiction problems and/or have mental health issues -some have grown up in care or do not have any family support . To brand them all as criminals is far to simplistic. Much like the current Tory trend of labelling all those that are presently unemployed and claiming benefit as "scroungers", Weatherley's law is narrow-minded and does not accept that there are bigger issues and that homelessness is a growing issue.

The usual suspects are all up a tree or down a hole along Hastings way at the moment so I cannot imagine that squatting in B&H is a huge issue just now.

fredaj wrote:

uniteagainstparkingc

harges wrote:
Mike Weatherley would rather see people freezing to death on the streets rather than using buildings that are often derelict as shelter. The number of squatters and homeless by far exceeds the available shelter that charities and government is able to provide each night. I do understand that sometimes squatters do cause some damage to property but the manner that Mike Weatherley just wants to label all squatters as criminals is morally reprehensible. Many people who squat have addiction problems and/or have mental health issues -some have grown up in care or do not have any family support . To brand them all as criminals is far to simplistic. Much like the current Tory trend of labelling all those that are presently unemployed and claiming benefit as "scroungers", Weatherley's law is narrow-minded and does not accept that there are bigger issues and that homelessness is a growing issue.

The usual suspects are all up a tree or down a hole along Hastings way at the moment so I cannot imagine that squatting in B&H is a huge issue just now.

"The usual suspects are all up a tree or down a hole along Hastings way at the moment so I cannot imagine that squatting in B&H is a huge issue just now."

@fredaj and the usual puerile Argus comments begin...

Much better that people are in shop doorways and/or parks. With any luck they'll die in this weather and they won't be a problem any more eh? Just how horrible and nasty do you have to be to deny someone shelter in an EMPTY and unused building. You got the residential law through Aren't you happy enough with that? You really are a nasty piece of work Mike Weatherley..

uniteagainstparkingc
harges wrote:
Mike Weatherley would rather see people freezing to death on the streets rather than using buildings that are often derelict as shelter.

The number of squatters and homeless by far exceeds the available shelter that charities and government is able to provide each night.

I do understand that sometimes squatters do cause some damage to property but the manner that Mike Weatherley just wants to label all squatters as criminals is morally reprehensible.

Many people who squat have addiction problems and/or have mental health issues -some have grown up in care or do not have any family support . To brand them all as criminals is far to simplistic.

Much like the current Tory trend of labelling all those that are presently unemployed and claiming benefit as "scroungers", Weatherley's law is narrow-minded and does not accept that there are bigger issues and that homelessness is a growing issue.

It's not about that, and its not about people being homeless. The people in that place on London road have been there months and choose to live there, I don't believe any of them have to be there. They must have jobs. They just choose not to pay rent and bills like the rest of us and think freeloading is a right of theirs. The place was broken into and is used to live in when it's not theirs. I fully support a squatting ban. They are illegally occpying someones property. Still if you feel as strongly as you do, why dont you let a few live with you? I'm sure they wont steal or wreck the place!!

Perhaps he could use some of his hot air and energy into leading councils to look after and help the people who squat, no matter where, shops, houses or bus shelters. Very easy to have ideals when you live in a warm home and work from a better than nice office. Maybe a night on the street would set him straight on the issues. Of course people shouldn't squat but they need to be given reasonable humane options. I am no beeding heart and appreciate that not all are just and good but some people need real help.

Cass wrote:
Perhaps he could use some of his hot air and energy into leading councils to look after and help the people who squat, no matter where, shops, houses or bus shelters. Very easy to have ideals when you live in a warm home and work from a better than nice office. Maybe a night on the street would set him straight on the issues. Of course people shouldn't squat but they need to be given reasonable humane options. I am no beeding heart and appreciate that not all are just and good but some people need real help.

Maybe you could provide a room for one of these drunks in your house? Or are you not that charitable? NIMBY? I certainly would NOT do so!

Weatherly scum. He'd rather people freeze to death on streets than upset his rich, property-owning, tax-evading scum.

What the hell is the matter with this guy Weatherly??....Someo
ne must have SQUATTED in his little botton some time, and won't go away????

Andy R wrote:
We can only wish Mike every success in breaking what seems like a very strange habit for an elected politician.

My thoughts exactly. Is he raising money for charity with this attempt, I wonder?

What the hell is the matter with this guy Weathersley??..Someo
ne must have squatted up his bottom sometime and won't go away?? Aye??

Same old nasty party member...

The fact that some people find their life hasn't turned out exactly as they planned doesn't seem to register with Weatherly!

Just got in. Has anybody mentioned stealing a car yet?

bogs wrote:

Cass wrote: Perhaps he could use some of his hot air and energy into leading councils to look after and help the people who squat, no matter where, shops, houses or bus shelters. Very easy to have ideals when you live in a warm home and work from a better than nice office. Maybe a night on the street would set him straight on the issues. Of course people shouldn't squat but they need to be given reasonable humane options. I am no beeding heart and appreciate that not all are just and good but some people need real help.

Maybe you could provide a room for one of these drunks in your house? Or are you not that charitable? NIMBY? I certainly would NOT do so!

you sound like a nice person ....

“My colleagues in parliament have been very supportive of the rights of property owners over those who choose squatting, and its destructive consequences, as a way of life.”

Few indeed are those who would elect squatting over living in a nice, comfortable and safe home. Not all have the option of choice. When you and your parliamentary colleagues can assure me that you have made it possible for all those not wanting to sleep on the streets have got a decent reasonable, safe alternative, then I will take note of what you have to say about the destructive consequences of squatting. For now, it only seems to me a return to the old feudal values where property matters, ownership matters and let the lowly peasants reap the whirlwind.

It strikes me that Mike Weatherly must be some sort of sociopath.

So, empty and derelict shops, or people squatting in them? What's it to be? If someones desperate enough to squat an empty shop because they've no other choice, don't cause problems in the area, and agree to move when or if it turns back into a shop, what's the problem? If they just squat it because they think they're making a statement against society, and use it as a 24 hour party place, and trash it, then my answer, as with most things is....TURN THE HOSES ON THEM!

My views exactly, Porkboat.

Buckers10 wrote:
Much better that people are in shop doorways and/or parks. With any luck they'll die in this weather and they won't be a problem any more eh? Just how horrible and nasty do you have to be to deny someone shelter in an EMPTY and unused building. You got the residential law through Aren't you happy enough with that? You really are a nasty piece of work Mike Weatherley..

These parasites who squat are the nasty pieces of work. Just how many are REALLY homeless, or just choose to squat in Brighton instead of living with their families?

Sussex jim wrote:

Buckers10 wrote:
Much better that people are in shop doorways and/or parks. With any luck they'll die in this weather and they won't be a problem any more eh? Just how horrible and nasty do you have to be to deny someone shelter in an EMPTY and unused building. You got the residential law through Aren't you happy enough with that? You really are a nasty piece of work Mike Weatherley..

These parasites who squat are the nasty pieces of work. Just how many are REALLY homeless, or just choose to squat in Brighton instead of living with their families?

I dunno, why don't you try asking a few of them? They don't bite, and who knows maybe you'll actually learn something about life in the real world... It's worth a try. Go on. Be brave :-D

ARealBessie wrote:

Sussex jim wrote:

Buckers10 wrote:
Much better that people are in shop doorways and/or parks. With any luck they'll die in this weather and they won't be a problem any more eh? Just how horrible and nasty do you have to be to deny someone shelter in an EMPTY and unused building. You got the residential law through Aren't you happy enough with that? You really are a nasty piece of work Mike Weatherley..

These parasites who squat are the nasty pieces of work. Just how many are REALLY homeless, or just choose to squat in Brighton instead of living with their families?

I dunno, why don't you try asking a few of them? They don't bite, and who knows maybe you'll actually learn something about life in the real world... It's worth a try. Go on. Be brave :-D

What an unusual comment from someone who I suspect provides no direct support to this population and probably is claiming benefits whilst contributing very little.

Mike W, please keep up the great work and on behalf of those who do care and don't want something for nothing; thank you!

Somethingsarejustwro
ng wrote:

ARealBessie wrote:

Sussex jim wrote:

Buckers10 wrote:
Much better that people are in shop doorways and/or parks. With any luck they'll die in this weather and they won't be a problem any more eh? Just how horrible and nasty do you have to be to deny someone shelter in an EMPTY and unused building. You got the residential law through Aren't you happy enough with that? You really are a nasty piece of work Mike Weatherley..

These parasites who squat are the nasty pieces of work. Just how many are REALLY homeless, or just choose to squat in Brighton instead of living with their families?

I dunno, why don't you try asking a few of them? They don't bite, and who knows maybe you'll actually learn something about life in the real world... It's worth a try. Go on. Be brave :-D

What an unusual comment from someone who I suspect provides no direct support to this population and probably is claiming benefits whilst contributing very little.

Mike W, please keep up the great work and on behalf of those who do care and don't want something for nothing; thank you!

Lol. There was me thinking the Argus's resident one-brain-celled wonder was missing the party! Keep trolling Spankie. You're always good for a laugh :-D

Perhaps you might care to explain the relevance of of your post?

Perhaps if the council pulled their finger out and made the many council-owned properties available for the homeless (and by homeless, I mean the really desperate souls who have lost their way in life and need a helping hand to get back into normal society), there wouldn't be the need for squatting. However, I suspect that quite a few are the posh boys and girls who have dropped out of society by choice. These are the people that need to be stopped. The amount of money needed to be spent on legal costs to get these freeloaders out of commercial premises is very high and I have seen first hand how badly this can have an impact on decent hardworking people who have bought commercial property intending to use it to use it to earn a decent living and then have to go through the stress and cost of getting rid of these good for nothing freeloaders. The council need to sort out its support network to help the people that need it and send the others packing

ARealBessie wrote:

Somethingsarejustwro

ng wrote:

ARealBessie wrote:

Sussex jim wrote:

Buckers10 wrote:
Much better that people are in shop doorways and/or parks. With any luck they'll die in this weather and they won't be a problem any more eh? Just how horrible and nasty do you have to be to deny someone shelter in an EMPTY and unused building. You got the residential law through Aren't you happy enough with that? You really are a nasty piece of work Mike Weatherley..

These parasites who squat are the nasty pieces of work. Just how many are REALLY homeless, or just choose to squat in Brighton instead of living with their families?

I dunno, why don't you try asking a few of them? They don't bite, and who knows maybe you'll actually learn something about life in the real world... It's worth a try. Go on. Be brave :-D

What an unusual comment from someone who I suspect provides no direct support to this population and probably is claiming benefits whilst contributing very little.

Mike W, please keep up the great work and on behalf of those who do care and don't want something for nothing; thank you!

Lol. There was me thinking the Argus's resident one-brain-celled wonder was missing the party! Keep trolling Spankie. You're always good for a laugh :-D

As usual you were already mistaken as the person you describe... 'Spankie'? sounds very much like yourself.

A number of posters are questioning your comments and clarification on earlier posts appreciated.

As already mentioned Mike W we are grateful and please do continue your great work.

Somethingsarejustwro
ng wrote:

ARealBessie wrote:

Somethingsarejustwro


ng wrote:

ARealBessie wrote:

Sussex jim wrote:

Buckers10 wrote:
Much better that people are in shop doorways and/or parks. With any luck they'll die in this weather and they won't be a problem any more eh? Just how horrible and nasty do you have to be to deny someone shelter in an EMPTY and unused building. You got the residential law through Aren't you happy enough with that? You really are a nasty piece of work Mike Weatherley..

These parasites who squat are the nasty pieces of work. Just how many are REALLY homeless, or just choose to squat in Brighton instead of living with their families?

I dunno, why don't you try asking a few of them? They don't bite, and who knows maybe you'll actually learn something about life in the real world... It's worth a try. Go on. Be brave :-D

What an unusual comment from someone who I suspect provides no direct support to this population and probably is claiming benefits whilst contributing very little.

Mike W, please keep up the great work and on behalf of those who do care and don't want something for nothing; thank you!

Lol. There was me thinking the Argus's resident one-brain-celled wonder was missing the party! Keep trolling Spankie. You're always good for a laugh :-D

As usual you were already mistaken as the person you describe... 'Spankie'? sounds very much like yourself.

A number of posters are questioning your comments and clarification on earlier posts appreciated.

As already mentioned Mike W we are grateful and please do continue your great work.

Funnily enough I didn't see you at PACA parents' evening. Mind you
In your imaginary life I should think it is quite hard to keep up

Those people who back the illegalisation of squatting fail to see that they are supporting their own further enslavement. Ponder this: What truly is property?

I think the true problem here lies in the lack of people taking an interest in philosophy or sociology? Ever wondered why these subjects are not taught in schools? (Plato's cave would be a good place to start, seeing as many of the commenters here seem to believe without question the propaganda that is thrust in their minds by the people whose interest it is to make you believe that squatting is a problem).

Mr Davis wrote:
Those people who back the illegalisation of squatting fail to see that they are supporting their own further enslavement. Ponder this: What truly is property?

I think the true problem here lies in the lack of people taking an interest in philosophy or sociology? Ever wondered why these subjects are not taught in schools? (Plato's cave would be a good place to start, seeing as many of the commenters here seem to believe without question the propaganda that is thrust in their minds by the people whose interest it is to make you believe that squatting is a problem).

Oh Jesus I've heard it all now - save it for your next Socialist Workers meeting mate.

There's only one question that needs to be asked here and it's very simple:

Do they in any way pay to be in the property? If the answer is no then chuck them out. All this rubbish about freezing to death and being vulnerable has already been shown to be a big lie.

Plato's Cave is actually quite an interesting allegory. It has to do with perception, interpretation, reality and truth being limited by the inability/unwillingn
ess to empathise.

The allegory is related during a conversation that takes place between Socrates and Glaucon. It addresses the value of accepted reality (based on individual perception/experienc
e) and reality as it factually is.

There are some additional issues that are raised, such as truth vs Truth, 'Goodness' (or what we would now refer to as humanitarianism) and duty but that is by the by I daresay to anyone who would automatically assume it is relevant only to a Socialist Workers meeting ;-)

AmboGuy wrote:

Mr Davis wrote:
Those people who back the illegalisation of squatting fail to see that they are supporting their own further enslavement. Ponder this: What truly is property?

I think the true problem here lies in the lack of people taking an interest in philosophy or sociology? Ever wondered why these subjects are not taught in schools? (Plato's cave would be a good place to start, seeing as many of the commenters here seem to believe without question the propaganda that is thrust in their minds by the people whose interest it is to make you believe that squatting is a problem).

Oh Jesus I've heard it all now - save it for your next Socialist Workers meeting mate.

There's only one question that needs to be asked here and it's very simple:

Do they in any way pay to be in the property? If the answer is no then chuck them out. All this rubbish about freezing to death and being vulnerable has already been shown to be a big lie.

Would you not agree that shelter from the elements is one of our basic human rights? And undeniably our current society views this right rather as a privilege to be profited from.

What would motivate somebody to keep a property empty? One of the reasons is the fact that they don't have to pay for any services or taxes. I've seen whole streets in London empty, and through investigation found out that they were mostly owned by offshore property companies. And concurrently, it is undeniable that choking supply with respect to demand increases a things worth.

You see, properties are being viewed more and more as lucrative assets, and offshore property companies are additionally avoiding paying Capital Gains Tax when dealing with these assets. To emphasise: The three richest people in the UK operate in real estate (the richest being almost three times richer than Richard Brandson).

As the number of empty properties rise, proportionally so will your rent. So by supporting this law you are actually supporting the criminalisation of fighting for your human rights. When the time comes that rent is too high for you, you will be forced to abide by this aspect of enslavement that you now foolishly support.

Condemnation without investigation is the highest form of ignorance.