billyray911

iTrader: (4)

Probably mentioned on the numerous other riot threads-but worthy of it's own thread...

http://www.google.co.uk/m/url?client...ydV4LUjA1kocLg

dpb

What about the rest of them ?

billyray911

iTrader: (4)

I think that they will all be linked under the umbrella of London rioters.

RobsyUK

iTrader: (2)

link no working... i like that idea - get arrested and you loose benifits.

What if she said she was 16.....

richs2891

Well if your under age and looting them parent lose the benefits then.
When (or if) said underage looter get to the age when claim benefits, then cant have them for a set period of time - say 5 years ?

Richard

RobsyUK

iTrader: (2)

Sorry I was refering to having sex.. she says shes 16 turns out shes 15.. you commit a crime unintentionally...

Coffin Dodger

The web site is experiencing high traffic level unsurprisingly. Apparently also if any of these No.10 epetitions get more than 100,000 signatures then they will table a debate about it. The petition linked did have over 90,000

ReallyReallyGoodMeat

I think it's fair enough for people found committing fraud or anti-social/violent crimes.

Ryan@Indigo-GT

iTrader: (4)

That's assuming all the rioters are on benefits, the only names I've seen mentioned have been undergraduate students, army recruits, daughters of wealthy middle class company directors and primary school teachers. I doubt these people are claiming benefits!

David Lock

OK fine, take their benefits away. So how are they going to get some money to live on? And getting a job as a youngster is difficult at the moment. Some petty drug dealing or shop lifting? Just end up going around in circles.

I'd rather they toughened up Community Service and did some real hard work that would benefit society - and may even do them a bit of good and it could, for a few of them, give them some purpose in life.

dl

ReallyReallyGoodMeat

They could start off by flogging their 42" tvs...

mylilscooby

Lol hahaha lol or get a job!

Trout

iTrader: (1)

BTW - anyone who is convicted will lose their benefits. Not sure they researched this that well!

speedking

I think that means that while you are in prison you don't get benefits, not if you are convicted but only fined. Would be an opportunity to impose community service, so many weeks litter picking, cleaning off graffiti etc. on subsistence diet, then re-apply for your benefits.

stilover

Signed

David Lock

All this stop benefits stuff is just tinkering at the edges.

So I suggest we get out of the European Human Rights' restrictions and pack a few serious rioters off to Afghanistan to work under the army for a few months (pain for them I know) and take their chances along with the rest of our boys. If they want to go looting some Taliban shops then that's fine by me.

I would guess that the next time trouble occurs the troublemakers might just step back and question whether they are at risk of being shot or maimed in Afghanistan.


dl

Funkii Munkii

Would it be such a good idea to take their benefits and kick them out of their council homes as some have suggested.

Do we really want these people on the streets left to their own devices ? if they were it would make the problems of this week seem like a teddy bears picnic.

There must be better ways of sorting them out.

Rob_Impreza99

iTrader: (3)

Like David says, if you take their benefits away (money) then your going to drive them towards crime to get some money.

The only thing that word work is sticking them in jail for 12 months if they have been found out to be involved in the rioting in any form, that way the goverment won't have to pay benefits whilst their inside and that money could be put into a pool to help people affected by the riots, also the students will get their grants taken away and the ones with jobs will lose their jobs which would create a job for someone else thats more law abiding.

Yeh i know we have a lack of prison space in this country, i'm just saying what would work more as 12 months minimum inside would make them think twice, a longer length of time if the crimes are worse. Also it will be on their criminal record which would make getting a job really hard in the long run with rioting and arson etc on their conviction sheet

Jamz3k

Lose their benefits and then off to concentration camps.

Leslie

They will be at a loose end if they lose their benefits!

Les

Jamz3k

the tight end of a noose would be preferred.

warrenm2

149,676 and counting

austinwrx

This is from a (social) housing journal today.


Proposals to fast track evictions for anti-social behaviour are to be amended in the light of the rioting this week, the housing minister has confirmed.

In an article setting out his reaction to the riots (see below), Grant Shapps says he will add a question on whether criminal and anti-social behaviour should be grounds for eviction even if it is committed outside the local area to a consultation paper on fast track evictions.

As the law currently stands, tenants on secure or assured tenancies can be evicted if they are found to have been involved in criminal activity in the ‘locality’ of the property in which they live.

Jonathan Hulley, a partner at law firm Clarke Willmott, said this could cause problems for landlords who want to evict tenants that were involved in the riots.

In an article for Inside Housing he says: ‘Care needs to be taken to ensure that only the appropriate cases which fall within the grounds are taken through the courts by councils and housing associations or else they may find themselves liable to pay costs to those who have been involved in this disgraceful behaviour.’

In his article Mr Shapps says: ‘As things currently stand, whilst thuggish behaviour against neighbours or in the immediate vicinity of their home provides a ground for evicting a tenant, looting or other criminal activity by tenants further from their homes can’t usually be taken into account.

‘This cannot be right. People who commit anti-social behaviour should feel the consequences regardless of whether their actions are taken within the immediate vicinity of their home or further a field.’

Grant Shapps’ article in full
No one could have failed to have been shocked and appalled at the despicable violence and vandalism that has taken place on Britain’s streets this week. Many of us will have been glued to our television screens, watching the terrible events unfold – some of us will have witnessed it in our own neighbourhoods. I want to pay tribute to the councils in affected areas who have acted quickly to help those people whose homes and businesses have been destroyed.

The people who rioted and looted must know that there are consequences to their actions, and I am as keen as anyone else to see justice being done. Since the weekend around 1,000 arrests have been made in London alone, police are going through pictures from CCTV cameras to identify those yet to be caught and courts have been sitting through the night to make sure perpetrators are swiftly brought to book.

So Britain’s fight-back is underway – and not just in the criminal justice system. I have been heartened by the thousands of residents that have come out in force to clean up their neighbourhoods across the country – from Birmingham to Brixton, and from Liverpool to Lewisham, we’ve made clear that this Government will stand four-square behind these communities in every sense.

That includes where councils themselves want to take action to ensure those who have caused such devastation to their communities face sanctions. Many will ask why rioters get their benefits from the State when they are not prepared to act like a normal member of society, and I strongly support those councils – such as Greenwich, Southwark and Hammersmith and Fulham – who’ve come out and said they will seek to evict those council tenants who are convicted for their involvement in the riots.

Most recently, I announced a consultation on plans to speed up the process for evicting persistent ‘neighbours from hell’ from their homes when all other efforts to curb their behaviour have failed. But I want to go further. Social housing is a precious resource, and hard-working taxpayers will rightly wonder why anyone involved in trashing and looting should benefit from this. But as things currently stand, whilst thuggish behaviour against neighbours or in the immediate vicinity of their home provides a ground for evicting a tenant, looting or other criminal activity by tenants further from their homes can’t usually be taken into account.

This cannot be right. People who commit anti-social behaviour should feel the consequences regardless of whether their actions are taken within the immediate vicinity of their home or further a field. That’s why I want to add a question to my recently-started consultation, on whether criminality and anti-social behaviour that tenants or members of their family commit outside the immediate neighbourhood should provide a ground for seeking eviction.

This Government has a clear message to the rioters: your one night of madness could have disastrous consequences for the rest of your lives, and for your entire family. The police and courts are working hard to ensure that perpetrators feel the full force of the law. I will back those councils who want to back this with action of their own against those tenants who have torn up their own communities and, through those actions, potentially their own social housing tenancy agreements.