Today I'm angry about.....

[Lost Leopard Spot]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-42618958

This councillor...unbelieveable.

Tweets this... with respect to the royal wedding

Sadly there is an epidemic of rough sleeping and vagrancy in #Windsor @RBWM. I will be writing to @StansfeldPCC copying @TVP_Chief @Bhupinderrai70 at @ThamesVP @TVP_Windsor asking for them to focus on dealing with this before the #RoyalWedding

Then after the outcry, claims he wasn't talking about homeless people but "anti-social behaviour".

Thats right. There are literally loads of people sleeping on the streets in freezing conditions just to be anti-social.

What a deeply unpleasant individual he must be.

You may have missed (or deliberately ignored) an article in the Sunday Times that 'followed' thirteen of the rough sleepers/beggars in Windsor. It turns out that only three out of the 13 were to be found on their pitches (which consist of mounds of sleeping bags and cardboard boxes in strategic, money earning spots) after 11pm. The three who remained all admitted they'd been offered Accomodation by the council - one turned it down because it was an entire TWO MILES away from his mother's sheltered housing - and all three were in the least financially lucrative central pitches. Of the 10 not there at night, the Sunday Times followed two of them home... yep, 'home', to addresses they live in full time, and in at least one of the cases actually own. These 'rough sleepers' take taxis to and from their pitches each day, which was also (in the article) confirmed by the local taxi firms, who have them down as regulars.
So to be fair, you can take your indignation and comments about "what a deeply unpleasant individual he must be" and shove them.
[Edit: Unfortunately the investigative journalism that the Sunday Times employed did not include charts, graphs or statistics, so no doubt you'll just dismiss this as you have with stuff I've written as being just 'I reckon so bollox'].

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... nsing-plan

You can take your ultra right wing opinions and shove them where the sun doesn’t shine cocker.

I’m appalled at Windsor councils’ clear attempts at social cleansing and obvious disdain for poor people and the homeless. So long as the royal wedding goes off without any poor people bringing down the tone.

Hope the councillor enjoyed his skiing holiday though. Must be a tough life for him having to send an inflammatory tweet from the USA over his extended break.

You really are a bit of a dick aren't you?
A) It wasn't my "ultra right wing opinions", it was a piece of investigative journalism by the Sunday Times, you thick cxnt.
B) the obvious disdain for "poor people and the homeless" was dismissed and addressed within the article: ten of them weren't poor or homeless but were scamming the public. At least one of the ten owns his own house, and the other nine 'commute' to work by taxi to 'their' 'homeless pitches'.
C) the 3 that were actually homeless, and no doubt poor, needn't be homeless: All three have been offered accomodation, but all three turned it down. One used the pathetic excuse that the offered accomodation was two miles from where he wanted to live - oh my, if all of us rich be-homed nice people could be so picky, eh?

[BWFC_Insane]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-42618958

This councillor...unbelieveable.

Tweets this... with respect to the royal wedding

Sadly there is an epidemic of rough sleeping and vagrancy in #Windsor @RBWM. I will be writing to @StansfeldPCC copying @TVP_Chief @Bhupinderrai70 at @ThamesVP @TVP_Windsor asking for them to focus on dealing with this before the #RoyalWedding

Then after the outcry, claims he wasn't talking about homeless people but "anti-social behaviour".

Thats right. There are literally loads of people sleeping on the streets in freezing conditions just to be anti-social.

What a deeply unpleasant individual he must be.

You may have missed (or deliberately ignored) an article in the Sunday Times that 'followed' thirteen of the rough sleepers/beggars in Windsor. It turns out that only three out of the 13 were to be found on their pitches (which consist of mounds of sleeping bags and cardboard boxes in strategic, money earning spots) after 11pm. The three who remained all admitted they'd been offered Accomodation by the council - one turned it down because it was an entire TWO MILES away from his mother's sheltered housing - and all three were in the least financially lucrative central pitches. Of the 10 not there at night, the Sunday Times followed two of them home... yep, 'home', to addresses they live in full time, and in at least one of the cases actually own. These 'rough sleepers' take taxis to and from their pitches each day, which was also (in the article) confirmed by the local taxi firms, who have them down as regulars.
So to be fair, you can take your indignation and comments about "what a deeply unpleasant individual he must be" and shove them.
[Edit: Unfortunately the investigative journalism that the Sunday Times employed did not include charts, graphs or statistics, so no doubt you'll just dismiss this as you have with stuff I've written as being just 'I reckon so bollox'].

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... nsing-plan

You can take your ultra right wing opinions and shove them where the sun doesn’t shine cocker.

I’m appalled at Windsor councils’ clear attempts at social cleansing and obvious disdain for poor people and the homeless. So long as the royal wedding goes off without any poor people bringing down the tone.

Hope the councillor enjoyed his skiing holiday though. Must be a tough life for him having to send an inflammatory tweet from the USA over his extended break.

You really are a bit of a dick aren't you?
A) It wasn't my "ultra right wing opinions", it was a piece of investigative journalism by the Sunday Times, you thick cxnt.
B) the obvious disdain for "poor people and the homeless" was dismissed and addressed within the article: ten of them weren't poor or homeless but were scamming the public. At least one of the ten owns his own house, and the other nine 'commute' to work by taxi to 'their' 'homeless pitches'.
C) the 3 that were actually homeless, and no doubt poor, needn't be homeless: All three have been offered accomodation, but all three turned it down. One used the pathetic excuse that the offered accomodation was two miles from where he wanted to live - oh my, if all of us rich be-homed tw*ts could be so picky, eh?

Well so long as they spoke to 13....

Reading the article I posted, it's clear to me that the council are only interested in moving on homeless an poor people rather than actually dealing with the problem. Note the fact that they are offering accommodation in another local authority area 12 miles away.

Anyone who thinks people sleep rough out of sheer choice, wants their bumps feeling, or wants to take themselves out onto the streets tonight and give it a go...just to see what it's like.

[boltonboris]

Note the fact that they are offering accommodation in another local authority area 12 miles away.

And that's a bad thing, because......................................

[BWFC_Insane]

Note the fact that they are offering accommodation in another local authority area 12 miles away.

And that's a bad thing, because......................................

Because rather than dealing with the issue themselves they simply want to "move it on". It doesn't seem like they are even co-operating with neighbouring councils given the comments from nearby councils.

In-conjunction with the initial tweet it seems like Windsor's answer is "get them out of the way of the rich people and the royals any way we can". And their answer seems to be lets just move them elsewhere so that we don't have unsightly poor people here.

Additionally 12 miles is a fair old distance to be apart from your family/people you know if you're homeless and presumably cannot afford bus/train fares that easily.

[boltonboris]

They're offering Homeless people accommodation - It doesn't matter why. It's better than their current arrangement.

Yeah, because homeless people just pop home and see the fam don't they - Again, they're homeless. Surely not being homeless 12 miles away from where they were homeless is a better solution?

There are no negatives to be found in sheltering homeless people

[BWFC_Insane]

They're offering Homeless people accommodation - It doesn't matter why. It's better than their current arrangement.

Yeah, because homeless people just pop home and see the fam don't they - Again, they're homeless. Surely not being homeless 12 miles away from where they were homeless is a better solution?

There are no negatives to be found in sheltering homeless people

I mean that shows quite a lack of understanding about the circumstances of many homeless people. Of course homeless people have families, friends and networks in many, many cases. For example I used to volunteer with a shelter charity and there was a homeless man who had been offered accomodation several times in a nearby town - there happened to be inadequate temporary housing where he lived. But he repeatedly turned it down because his mum lived in sheltered accomodation for the elderly in the town he was in. He spent every day with his mum and sometimes he'd even manage to evade the wardens and kip on her kitchen floor (she begged them to let him sleep there). It was actually quite emotional talking to him and I cannot convey this adequately on a forum post. I welled up as he talked to me. The point is, he clearly had some issues, but he loved his mum. And she loved him. And he wasn't going to go somewhere he couldn't see her. You may rationally argue he should have, I did at the time, but all I can say is, its very different when you talked to him and he made it seem very obvious that he was far better off staying where he was. Even though that meant most nights he was in the freezing cold, or if lucky a shelter space for the night.


And they aren't offering adequate provision. What they're offering is moving people on to someone else who does. They're literally not wanting the problem on their doorstep.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

They're offering Homeless people accommodation - It doesn't matter why. It's better than their current arrangement.

Yeah, because homeless people just pop home and see the fam don't they - Again, they're homeless. Surely not being homeless 12 miles away from where they were homeless is a better solution?

There are no negatives to be found in sheltering homeless people

I mean that shows quite a lack of understanding about the circumstances of many homeless people. Of course homeless people have families, friends and networks in many, many cases. For example I used to volunteer with a shelter charity and there was a homeless man who had been offered accomodation several times in a nearby town - there happened to be inadequate temporary housing where he lived. But he repeatedly turned it down because his mum lived in sheltered accomodation for the elderly in the town he was in. He spent every day with his mum and sometimes he'd even manage to evade the wardens and kip on her kitchen floor (she begged them to let him sleep there). It was actually quite emotional talking to him and I cannot convey this adequately on a forum post. I welled up as he talked to me. The point is, he clearly had some issues, but he loved his mum. And she loved him. And he wasn't going to go somewhere he couldn't see her. You may rationally argue he should have, I did at the time, but all I can say is, its very different when you talked to him and he made it seem very obvious that he was far better off staying where he was. Even though that meant most nights he was in the freezing cold, or if lucky a shelter space for the night.

Well there we go then... Society (in the form of his 'local district council') offered him housing/accomodation/notabusshelter but the picky cxnt (and you agree with him) thought he was better off sleeping in a gutter.
Words fail me.

[Bijou Bob]

Feckin housing inflation, or actually, the lack of it up here. My next door neighbour has just put her house up for sale, for about 20 grand more than I paid for mine 7 years ago. Given all the hype in the papers, i was planning to retire on the dosh I'd made, but clearly, there's been precious little capital growth up here.

My ex sister in law (Bless her) bought a 2 bed terrace in Walthamstow 20 years ago for 64k. She had it valued late last year at £685k. I'll let that sink in........

[Bruce Rioja]

i was planning to retire on the dosh I'd made, but clearly, there's been precious little capital growth up here.

Donald Trump coined the mot juste for your area only yesterday.

Now get back to work.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Feckin housing inflation, or actually, the lack of it up here. My next door neighbour has just put her house up for sale, for about 20 grand more than I paid for mine 7 years ago. Given all the hype in the papers, i was planning to retire on the dosh I'd made, but clearly, there's been precious little capital growth up here.

My ex sister in law (Bless her) bought a 2 bed terrace in Walthamstow 20 years ago for 64k. She had it valued late last year at £685k. I'll let that sink in........

Doesn't need to sink in. I once worked for Barnet Library services. One of the Library Assistants (wage ~£6,000 p/a at the time I'd worked with her circa 1978) had with her husband bought a four bedroom house in North London. She struggled with the mortgage at first, and had one or two really bad years when they thought they'd never make it. But, however, they cleared the mortgage eventually and lived there while all her kids grew up, and kept it on for a further twenty years. They finally sold up at the turn of the millenium. They bought a place in Scotland with turreted castle for just over a million quid. I still know her and go up for her birthday, and in the wee drunken hours we still argue about the 'fairness' of it all.

[Bijou Bob]

i was planning to retire on the dosh I'd made, but clearly, there's been precious little capital growth up here.

Donald Trump coined the mot juste for your area only yesterday.

Now get back to work.

Thanks. The next time I'm strolling through Adlington on my way up to the Bay Horse for a fireside pint, I'll think of you shuffling round the scenic rural idyll that is Harwoood precinct........

[Bruce Rioja]

i was planning to retire on the dosh I'd made, but clearly, there's been precious little capital growth up here.

Donald Trump coined the mot juste for your area only yesterday.

Now get back to work.

Thanks. The next time I'm strolling through Adlington on my way up to the Bay Horse for a fireside pint, I'll think of you shuffling round the scenic rural idyll that is Harwoood precinct........

Harwood what?

I haven't encountered that whilst strolling to my local for a fireside selection of six or seven ales, or when I've strolled up to Affetside for same (and a very decent nosebag).

Have you been in jail for a while or something?

[Bijou Bob]

Has it gone then?? Not been brave enough to venture round there for years. I did wander into Bolton town centre last spring but found it so depressing I can't see me ever going again tbh.

[Harry Genshaw]

]

Has it gone then?? Not been brave enough to venture round there for years. I did wander into Bolton town centre last spring but found it so depressing I can't see me ever going again tbh.

Did you cheer yourself up by walking into Blackpool?

[Bijou Bob]

Blackpool/Thornton Cleveleys is akin to Eccles/Worsley and Harwood/Breightmet!

[Bruce Rioja]

Has it gone then?? Not been brave enough to venture round there for years. I did wander into Bolton town centre last spring but found it so depressing I can't see me ever going again tbh.

Long since. Come round - you can get them in

[Lost Leopard Spot]

A stolen car travelling at high speed ploughs into a bus stop and kills three people. Ten or so others escape annihilation. Four cxnts scramble out of the stolen car and try to disappear into the night. The driver, badly injured is assaulted by two of the ten left standing. The police turn up and arrest the two who have kicked shit out of the moron who has just seconds before slaughtered three of their mates. The assaulted self-injured cxnt is transported to hospital. The police have experience/knowledge/circumstantial evidence of who the other 3 cxnts who've legged it are but have done nothing about it in case it sets off some kind of Tottenham riot shit.
So, so far three innocent dead, two outraged traumatised innocent arrested, one cxnt comfortable in hospital, three other wankers at large giving it big.
Justice needs not only to be seen to be done, but to actually be done.

[Montreal Wanderer]

A stolen car travelling at high speed ploughs into a bus stop and kills three people. Ten or so others escape annihilation. Four cxnts scramble out of the stolen car and try to disappear into the night. The driver, badly injured is assaulted by two of the ten left standing. The police turn up and arrest the two who have kicked shit out of the moron who has just seconds before slaughtered three of their mates. The assaulted self-injured cxnt is transported to hospital. The police have experience/knowledge/circumstantial evidence of who the other 3 cxnts who've legged it are but have done nothing about it in case it sets off some kind of Tottenham riot shit.
So, so far three innocent dead, two outraged traumatised innocent arrested, one cxnt comfortable in hospital, three other wankers at large giving it big.
Justice needs not only to be seen to be done, but to actually be done.

Your version is a little different from the BBC, where only one passenger was said to have fled and the police are trying to identify him. The Driver, whether comfortable in hospital or not, has been charged with dangerous driving causing death. No mention is made of arresting the bystanders. Obviously your information is more up to date. Presumably the driver will be dealt with according to the law. Did the two bystanders have the right to violently assault the injured driver? Your call. As for the police doing nothing, I'd need to see your source. As I noted BBC seems way behind you on details.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

A stolen car travelling at high speed ploughs into a bus stop and kills three people. Ten or so others escape annihilation. Four cxnts scramble out of the stolen car and try to disappear into the night. The driver, badly injured is assaulted by two of the ten left standing. The police turn up and arrest the two who have kicked shit out of the moron who has just seconds before slaughtered three of their mates. The assaulted self-injured cxnt is transported to hospital. The police have experience/knowledge/circumstantial evidence of who the other 3 cxnts who've legged it are but have done nothing about it in case it sets off some kind of Tottenham riot shit.
So, so far three innocent dead, two outraged traumatised innocent arrested, one cxnt comfortable in hospital, three other wankers at large giving it big.
Justice needs not only to be seen to be done, but to actually be done.

Your version is a little different from the BBC, where only one passenger was said to have fled and the police are trying to identify him. The Driver, whether comfortable in hospital or not, has been charged with dangerous driving causing death. No mention is made of arresting the bystanders. Obviously your information is more up to date. Presumably the driver will be dealt with according to the law. Did the two bystanders have the right to violently assault the injured driver? Your call. As for the police doing nothing, I'd need to see your source. As I noted BBC seems way behind you on details.

I'm not particularly bothered with the in and outs of whether anybody has 'the right' to violently assault somebody you've just seen murder three people. That was my point. I'd be particularly aggrieved when the 'vigilantes' are the only ones in custody. Ok there is a difference between in custody and arrested, but the grievance is still valid. My source is neither here nor there but your BBC source is sadly misinformed.
Edit: Let me make my meaning plain: When somebody is murdered in front of your eyes it is not unjust to attack the murderers. And it is particularly galling when the only ones in custody are those who responded to the murder.

[Harry Genshaw]

It would be an odd police force that witnessed 2 or 3 guys knocking hell out of someone and didn't respond. Irrespective of the assailants reason's for the attack.

I suspect the cps will decide it's not in the public interest to pursue any charges against them. So long as they've not half killed him