• thehatfox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    7 months ago

    There’s poo in the rivers and it’s now going to be illegal to be homeless, did I wake up in the past?

    I think it’s time the Conservative Party had a rebrand because they really don’t seem to be conserving much these days. Except for established wealth that is.

    • FunkyMonk@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      How and terry from the american colonies, I hear in the past the french found a solution to this.

      • tetris11@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        The French still have a solution to this. If Brits were more on board with damaging property we’d get more done.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          If you want to go and start a riot be my guest. But in no way shape or form will it help with the current situation. So really you’re just starting to riot because you want one.

          • tetris11@lemmy.mlOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            I don’t think sitting and suffering (the english way) is to be applauded either, and since we have tentative control of our democracy, I’m not sure what other meaningful options we have

  • HelloThere@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    7 months ago

    As yes, because that will solve poverty. Bring back debtors prison I say, and we’ll party like it’s 1824!

  • Obinice@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    7 months ago

    That’s not what the quote you posted says, it says it tackles that two things, not that it makes them illegal.

    It does mention some things that are to be made criminal offences right before this bit though, to trick people into posting such headlines, I suspect.

    This whole thing sucks anyway, but I think we could use some clarity on exactly what will be made illegal?

      • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        🙄 or like, you could admit you were wrong, remove the propaganda, and not resort to your head cannon 🤷‍♂️

        Seems extremely reasonable for dealing with aggressive homeless individuals.

        • Transporter Room 3@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          “aggressive homeless individuals”

          There it is.

          There’s the problem.

          You’re assuming this will be used when needed, and not used in excess, trampling down people who are already underfoot.

          All cops are bastards, no exceptions for location.

          If they CAN abuse a law, they WILL abuse it. At every opportunity.

          • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            7 months ago

            I know. There are issues with the police, so now we can’t have laws on the books either. Despite circumstances many homeless don’t take no for an answer and threaten people. There needs to be a law to detain those people. That’s regardless of the help they will or wont get or accept before or after.

            • HumanPenguin@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              7 months ago

              Yep you can have the laws.

              By keeping them precise in what they allow police to apply.

              When the gov use terms like nuisance. It is intentionally verge.

              If its about aggressive begging or homelessness. Define it as such. Don’t intentionally leave it to a stressed officer to decide.

      • 520@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        Slippery slope? All it does is provide an enforcement option for orgs who don’t want people begging on their property.

        • tetris11@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          7 months ago

          you don’t see that as an avenue for more and more orgs to do this by default, and given the lack of public spaces in our cities, essentially making it impossible to beg anywhere?

          • 520@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Bro wtf are you on about? There’s tons of public spaces in the UK, cities included.

            • tetris11@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              7 months ago

              At least where I live, you’ll be hard pressed to find a spot in the city where a homeless person can sleep unnacosted, either by spikes being put down on flat surfaces, parks being closed at night, and benches that aren’t on a main road.

            • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              I don’t think you’ve ever been to the UK. Most of those “public” spaces are corporate property and if you and your homelessness damage their brand they’ll escort you off.

              The homeless camps on high street ken during the pandemic had this happen to them all the time, as if the cruel irony of rough sleepers next to wholefoods and dyson shit blower 3k ads wasn’t enough to make humanity unevolve powered solely by cringe alone and let trilobites, or some particularly feisty proto-moss take the top spot instead.

              • 520@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                I’ve lived up and down the UK for nearly 30 years. In both the north and the south you can basically bump into public spaces that can be used by the homeless. Just because your city ain’t got them doesn’t mean it’s the same for the rest of the UK.

                • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  lived north and south

                  So have I and your “can” gives away that you don’t actually know, you’re just assuming so.

  • 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Soon to be frowned upon

    Better than illegal, which it currently is

    Also nuisance begging is defined as:

    begging where it is causing a public nuisance, such as by a cashpoint, in a shop doorway, on public transport, approaching people in their cars at traffic lights, and any broader incidence that cause harassment or distress

    I’d personally say that’s ok to try and get people to move along from - it’s completely anecdotal but at least in Central London it’s often the most aggressive beggars who you also see doing hard drugs come night, having honed their techniques after years due to the even higher difficulty of getting out of homelessness while addicted as well as the increased difficulty of building a support structure or getting temporary accommodation while addicted. That means just enforcing this law would do little other than probably increase pickpocketing, as the government needs to intervene at the root cause rather than symptoms, however it’s still generally not people who are being honest who are doing what is defined here as nuisance begging so even if support structures were in place it should be a crime, while begging and sleeping rough aren’t.