Rob1742 Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 Seems the gypos are not taking up the opportunity of renting places at the Redhill site at £90 a week due to the fact there is CCTV on site. Spokeswoman for the council says previous experience elsewhere highlighted the need to have cameras to ensure the public money that has been spent on the site is protected. Are the gypos turning down the opportunity because: A - they don't want the cameras to pick up on them bringing in stolen goods into the site? B- they don't want the cameras to pick up on them digging up the Tarmac and burying their laundered cash? C- they don't want the cameras to pick up on them bringing in the sheep they have stolen from the local farm? D- they don't want to pay the £90 a week and would just prefer to live on Redhill roundabout instead? E- All of the above?
MooseBreath Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 It's a bit un-pc to blame people for their own problems these days mate. Can't you find some way to link this into Tory public spending cuts?
Strokes Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 Who wouldn't want to live on a roundabout given a choice?
Harry - LCFC Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 It isn't right to demand that people live under constant watch in their own community. If the police can get a warrant then they can search the area but they must have a warrant. I'm not eager to see the UK become a surveillance state.
Buce Posted 1 May 2015 Posted 1 May 2015 It isn't right to demand that people live under constant watch in their own community. If the police can get a warrant then they can search the area but they must have a warrant. I'm not eager to see the UK become a surveillance state. Too late to worry about that - it already is.
Guest MattP Posted 1 May 2015 Posted 1 May 2015 It isn't right to demand that people live under constant watch in their own community. If the police can get a warrant then they can search the area but they must have a warrant. I'm not eager to see the UK become a surveillance state. We're already there, look at the amount of CCTV camera's we have. The gypos wouldn't tolerate it though, every crime caught on tape could be traced back seeing their face and every dog they have stolen would have to be returned to it's owners.
Bayfox Posted 1 May 2015 Posted 1 May 2015 We're already there, look at the amount of CCTV camera's we have. The gypos wouldn't tolerate it though, every crime caught on tape could be traced back seeing their face and every dog they have stolen would have to be returned to it's owners. Would it ****. The old bill don't want **** all to do with them. They are almost above the law at times.
Finnegan Posted 1 May 2015 Posted 1 May 2015 I'm pretty close to this as my section, being housing repairs, is responsible for the maintenance of the travellers site. Meynells Gorse was actually in my old patch and it used to be my team that drew the short straw for going. I also know one of the former team leaders for the site pretty well. One of the main reasons for the new sites and the moves is that the residents (or more accurately, one faction of them) caused no end of trouble and used to trash the place on a regular basis. There are site offices and amenity blocks there which have been sabotaged, ram raided, smashed up and damaged repeatedly. At one point we were going every week to repair damage done over the weekend. When we sent tradesmen, they'd get bricks thrown at them, their tires slashed, materials and gas canisters robbed of their vans and all sorts. For balance, I also need to point out that other occupants made them tea and cake and treated them very well. But at night times we got to the stage of suspending all visits that weren't with a police escort. That's pretty extreme. In addition, there's a dumping problem with the occupants insisting that it's dodgites coming on to the site to fly tip. When you consider the cost to the public, your rent if you live in a council house and your council tax if you don't is going towards constantly rebuilding these places and repairing them then frankly, tough shit. I'm a massive lefty socialist, you all know that, but even I think you draw a line somewhere. We offered a service, it was repeatedly abused, so we're toughening up the rules. If they don't like it, it's not a concentration camp, they're not being rounded up and forced to live there. They're not even actually "travelling", that's the bit I don't get, it's more like a US trailer park. They're our fixed statics, they're not like romantic story gypsies. They're basically council tenants. There's cctv everywhere on normal estates, I've been in the cctv control centre, it's ****ing weird, you can see most of the city. It's in the town tower blocks, it's in our flat blocks, everywhere. These cameras aren't aimed in to their windows, they're not watching their lives, they're watching our property which we have a history of being damaged. Rant over.
deejdeej Posted 1 May 2015 Posted 1 May 2015 I'm sure there are some decent travellers out there but I for one have never met one. Young and old... knobs.
ScouseFox Posted 1 May 2015 Posted 1 May 2015 don't think you can call em gypos fellas bit non-legit ain't it
Babylon Posted 1 May 2015 Posted 1 May 2015 don't think you can call em gypos fellas bit non-legit ain't it Exactly, you're supposed to call those c***s travellers.
MPH Posted 1 May 2015 Posted 1 May 2015 For balance, I also need to point out that other occupants made them tea and cake and treated them very well. But at night times we got to the stage of suspending all visits that weren't with a police escort. That's pretty extreme. In addition, there's a dumping problem with the occupants insisting that it's dodgites coming on to the site to fly tip. When you consider the cost to the public, your rent if you live in a council house and your council tax if you don't is going towards constantly rebuilding these places and repairing them then frankly, tough shit. I'm a massive lefty socialist, you all know that, but even I think you draw a line somewhere. We offered a service, it was repeatedly abused, so we're toughening up the rules. If they don't like it, it's not a concentration camp, they're not being rounded up and forced to live there. They're not even actually "travelling", that's the bit I don't get, it's more like a US trailer park. They're our fixed statics, they're not like romantic story gypsies. They're basically council tenants. There's cctv everywhere on normal estates, I've been in the cctv control centre, it's ****ing weird, you can see most of the city. It's in the town tower blocks, it's in our flat blocks, everywhere. These cameras aren't aimed in to their windows, they're not watching their lives, they're watching our property which we have a history of being damaged. Rant over. And with their backs turned eating cakes and drinking tea their vans were robbed... Travelers know how to work as a team!
Babylon Posted 1 May 2015 Posted 1 May 2015 It isn't right to demand that people live under constant watch in their own community. Anyone living in the city centre already is.
Babylon Posted 1 May 2015 Posted 1 May 2015 it's not a concentration camp, they're not being rounded up and forced to live there. Hmmmm.... that sounds like a plan.
Harry - LCFC Posted 1 May 2015 Posted 1 May 2015 Anyone living in the city centre already is. Slightly different as there are shops to protect but it's still not something I feel comfortable about.
RonnieTodger Posted 1 May 2015 Posted 1 May 2015 It isn't right to demand that people live under constant watch in their own community. If the police can get a warrant then they can search the area but they must have a warrant. I'm not eager to see the UK become a surveillance state. Depends what kind of things the community does and the way they make their money. I'm not comfortable with them getting away with nearly every little thing they do.
ADK Posted 1 May 2015 Posted 1 May 2015 They could always wear a tin foil suit and a mask, ought to work.
The Year Of The Fox Posted 1 May 2015 Posted 1 May 2015 They're all living in Beaumont Leys at the minute and are responsible for the high increase of tool theft from vans. Fact.
Finnegan Posted 1 May 2015 Posted 1 May 2015 While we're at it, how many people grumbling about cctv in general use Google maps, android or iphones, Facebook, or pretty much anything else on the internet? The great big "they" can watch you all the time, they know what you do, what you like and where you go. Your phone cheerily tells you how long it'll take you to get to work or get home today in traffic, tells you how long it'll take you to get to the gym on days it's worked out you go to the gym. It even counts how many calories you're burning per day via gps. And you're worried about some cctv watching you casually walking about? Christ. I'm not saying any of it is right but cctv can at least serve purposes in regards justice and safety.
Guest MattP Posted 1 May 2015 Posted 1 May 2015 I'm pretty close to this as my section, being housing repairs, is responsible for the maintenance of the travellers site. Meynells Gorse was actually in my old patch and it used to be my team that drew the short straw for going. I also know one of the former team leaders for the site pretty well. One of the main reasons for the new sites and the moves is that the residents (or more accurately, one faction of them) caused no end of trouble and used to trash the place on a regular basis. There are site offices and amenity blocks there which have been sabotaged, ram raided, smashed up and damaged repeatedly. At one point we were going every week to repair damage done over the weekend. When we sent tradesmen, they'd get bricks thrown at them, their tires slashed, materials and gas canisters robbed of their vans and all sorts. For balance, I also need to point out that other occupants made them tea and cake and treated them very well. But at night times we got to the stage of suspending all visits that weren't with a police escort. That's pretty extreme. In addition, there's a dumping problem with the occupants insisting that it's dodgites coming on to the site to fly tip. When you consider the cost to the public, your rent if you live in a council house and your council tax if you don't is going towards constantly rebuilding these places and repairing them then frankly, tough shit. I'm a massive lefty socialist, you all know that, but even I think you draw a line somewhere. We offered a service, it was repeatedly abused, so we're toughening up the rules. If they don't like it, it's not a concentration camp, they're not being rounded up and forced to live there. They're not even actually "travelling", that's the bit I don't get, it's more like a US trailer park. They're our fixed statics, they're not like romantic story gypsies. They're basically council tenants. There's cctv everywhere on normal estates, I've been in the cctv control centre, it's ****ing weird, you can see most of the city. It's in the town tower blocks, it's in our flat blocks, everywhere. These cameras aren't aimed in to their windows, they're not watching their lives, they're watching our property which we have a history of being damaged. Rant over. Starting to see a lot of these in your posts recently with a 'but' on the end.... We're waiting for you to join us on the dark side, you'll enjoy it far more than you think.
Finnegan Posted 1 May 2015 Posted 1 May 2015 Narh it's not a "but", I just think being left wing is misunderstood (or deliberately misrepresented) on here by a small section of the entrenched right. Being a socialist doesn't mean letting people walk all over you and take the piss. I'm all for people getting help when they need it, I'm happy for my taxes to help others in the state. But if you could be giving something back and you spend your time smashing up services that have been provided for you then you can bollocks. If you want to act repeatedly like criminals you can **** off pretending to be offended and indignant when you're treated like it.
Guest MattP Posted 1 May 2015 Posted 1 May 2015 Yeah I agree with that mate (although I do think in recent years it has leant towards allowing people to take the piss) but I do love how the left look at gypos and think...."hmmmm even we're not going there to defend that". I have a mate who is so left wing he'll defend anyone (proper old Labour/SWP almost type), but gypos lost their privledge with him when they mugged him of his dog, poor guy never saw him again either, awful thing to happen to a dog lover that as well, never get over it.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.