Don't know how to title this, appalling.

[RoyMac5]

Edit.

Edited November 15, 2021 by RoyMac5

[Gaspode]

3 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Yeah don't bother to read through the whole thread for other examples. He was so dangerous they had to take away all his possessions, right got where you're coming from.

 

When I said "their own safety", I meant his safety (which I'm certain you realised) - but just ignore the rest of my reply in order to score your petty points.

I keep telling myself to ignore your comments, but then you continue to post such ill-founded cobblers that it's hard to let it go - one day I'll stick you on ignore and be done with you....

[RoyMac5]

6 minutes ago, Gaspode said:

When I said "their own safety", I meant his safety (which I'm certain you realised) - but just ignore the rest of my reply in order to score your petty points.

I keep telling myself to ignore your comments, but then you continue to post such ill-founded cobblers that it's hard to let it go - one day I'll stick you on ignore and be done with you....

Just ignore my point like you ignore the fact that the Council can take away and destroy someone's personal possessions. You carry on with your point scoring. 

[Miggins]

21 hours ago, Gaspode said:

You're giving an awful lot of credence to the ramblings of one of the twatterati - any other sources to support the assertion that this happened? and how many times had this person been told to leave the roundabout? (or been removed and then returned?)

I'm pretty sure that camping/living on a roundabout in the middle of an A-road is illegal - and would additionally be considered to be a danger to the person involved and passing motorists.....

If the report is true then it sounds incredibly harsh, but if this person has repeatedly gone back to the same site after being removed, maybe it was done for their own safety in the hope that they would accept a place in a hostel or suchlike? Without substantially more information regarding the background to this situation, I'm afraid your anti-council rant is exactly that - a rant.....

Of course you are right, @Gaspode. Things are rarely clear cut and he may be unwilling to accept any help that may already have been offered or given. We only know one or two facts, but nevertheless it's good to see people leaping to the defence of a probably damaged and vulnerable fellow who has, on the face of it, been treated unkindly. They may have jumped the gun with their blame, indignation and concern but it shows care, compassion and that their heart is in the right place. 

Chris X

Edited November 16, 2021 by Miggins