Old Rover Plant
- Thread starter Liam
- Start date
Currently reading:
Old Rover Plant
You want to get silly about it? The public are a victim since our taxes have to go towards paying for traffic police officers to try to stop you from doing it.
Anybody who likes asylums such watch session 9 
So you enter onto private land, without permission or consent but don't intend to steal anything?
That's a bit like saying you can enter someones house without their permission, but as long as you didn't intend to steal anything then that's alright???
That's a bit of a contradiction there Jug. How can you take a van full of wheels from private property (which legally belongs to someone) and then claim that's not stealing?
Sorry, I agree with Paul - there's no such thing as a victimless crime. Someone is losing out. The factory and its contents belong to Rover, the liquidators or the new buyers (Phoenix Group?)
Who legally own all that stuff now? Most probably the liquidators or the Phoenix group owns the premises and all its contents. And all companies are required to keep inventories and carry out stocktakes for accountability purposes. Everything left in the factory should have been accounted for, so yes, people WOULD know what's in the place to start with.
Taking what you're saying and applying it to different circumstances, you're suggesting that if a High Street shop goes into receivership, locks its doors but leaves all its stock inside, then you can quite happily break and enter and take some of the stock for yourself? Because it's a victimless crime and no-one's to know?
If you did that where you used to live in Dubai would you still be walking around with both hands attached to your arms if you got found out?
Theft is theft, and trespass is trespass.
i'll be a lookout for a 25% share of the 'winnings' lol
Oooh, I'll have a better look at that later.
Offenses
Trespass
Trespass means going onto land or entering a building without permission.
It is not a criminal offence, but a civil matter.
Therefore it is nothing to do with the police.
A person (e.g. a security guard) may use reasonable force to remove you,
but only if they are on the land or in the building at the time.
If you enter empty land or an empty building and lock them out it is their bad luck
and they will have to get an injunction (a civil court order).
However it may be a criminal offence to commit criminal damage getting onto land or into a building.
Aggravated trespass (section 68 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994)
This applies to land which is not a highway (e.g. private land),
but it must be in the open air (i.e. not under a porch and not indoors).
The cops must show that you are acting with the intention of
intimidating any person on the land or neighbouring land into
stopping their lawful activity or obstructing them so that they
cannot carry out their lawful activity.
Criminal damage (section 1 Criminal Damage Act 1971)
Without lawful excuse destroying or damaging property
belonging to another. This can even mean grass (but not wild plants!)
and chalking the pavement!
Theft (section 1 Theft Act 1968)
Dishonestly appropriating (i.e. assuming rights of ownership) of
property belonging to another with the intent of permanently
depriving the other person of it. The important thing is that all
elements of the offence must be proved, so that if you are not acting
dishonestly or if you intend to return the property
(e.g. after photocopying an important document) it is not theft.
Breach of the Peace (a common law power)
Breach of the peace has a specific meaning. It applies where harm is done, or threatened to be done or likely to be done to a person or in his presence to his property. The cops don’t usually know this. It does not mean just making noise etc. If the cops say there is a breach of the peace, try to find out who they think is being harmed, threatened, likely to be etc.
Trespass
Trespass means going onto land or entering a building without permission.
It is not a criminal offence, but a civil matter.
Therefore it is nothing to do with the police.
A person (e.g. a security guard) may use reasonable force to remove you,
but only if they are on the land or in the building at the time.
If you enter empty land or an empty building and lock them out it is their bad luck
and they will have to get an injunction (a civil court order).
However it may be a criminal offence to commit criminal damage getting onto land or into a building.
Aggravated trespass (section 68 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994)
This applies to land which is not a highway (e.g. private land),
but it must be in the open air (i.e. not under a porch and not indoors).
The cops must show that you are acting with the intention of
intimidating any person on the land or neighbouring land into
stopping their lawful activity or obstructing them so that they
cannot carry out their lawful activity.
Criminal damage (section 1 Criminal Damage Act 1971)
Without lawful excuse destroying or damaging property
belonging to another. This can even mean grass (but not wild plants!)
and chalking the pavement!
Theft (section 1 Theft Act 1968)
Dishonestly appropriating (i.e. assuming rights of ownership) of
property belonging to another with the intent of permanently
depriving the other person of it. The important thing is that all
elements of the offence must be proved, so that if you are not acting
dishonestly or if you intend to return the property
(e.g. after photocopying an important document) it is not theft.
Breach of the Peace (a common law power)
Breach of the peace has a specific meaning. It applies where harm is done, or threatened to be done or likely to be done to a person or in his presence to his property. The cops don’t usually know this. It does not mean just making noise etc. If the cops say there is a breach of the peace, try to find out who they think is being harmed, threatened, likely to be etc.
Last edited:
So you enter onto private land, without permission or consent but don't intend to steal anything?
That's a bit like saying you can enter someones house without their permission, but as long as you didn't intend to steal anything then that's alright???
That's a bit of a contradiction there Jug. How can you take a van full of wheels from private property (which legally belongs to someone) and then claim that's not stealing?
i never said it wasnt stealing, i said it wasnt aggravated trespass, but it is burglary. read my post
thats why its victimless, they wont be affected by it in any significant way, emotionally or financially. yes i accept there is a victim, but i don't think they would really give a toss.
good point, so i probably have about 3 months to shift the gear before a theft is reported. who knows maybe longer. i know mg tf production is set to start in the second half of 2007, so i better get a move on.
i'm not denying its illegal, but its hardly 'wrong' or immoral. no one really feels the loss so whats the big deal. its not like stealing an old ladies tv.
i would probably be without both hands, in a very nasty prison, getting bummed. either that or dead if the british embassy didnt pay up. but i wouldnt be daft enough to even consider something like this in a county with a working legal system. britain is a completely different story, its the land of opportunity. we even glorify people who do things like this in characters such as del boy. socially acceptible theft and fraud its a british institution. and with such low risk or consequence why the hell not?!
we dont need a lookout, no one is looking, thats the beauty of it. bring your own van and you can have whatever you put in it.
Last edited:
i never said it wasnt stealing, i said it wasnt aggravated trespass, but it is burglary. read my post
I did, I was going by this section of your posting quoted word for word:
On whatever scale, you are still taking property that doesn't belong to you and making a profit out of it. That is theft whichever way you look at it.
Where exactly do you draw the line? Is it ok to steal a single Mars Bar from Tescos because they would hardly likely to know it's gone? And of course it's 'wrong' and 'immoral'. IT'S THEFT for goodness sake. Isn't the decline of standards in the UK bad enough without others taking the view that because the 'victim' doesn't feel the loss then it's ok to steal? Besides, how do you know that the 'victim' doesn't give a toss?
Isn't it a shame that with declining standards and morals in the UK, instead of people trying to bring them back up everyone else takes the "I'm alright Jack" attitude and lowers themselves down to the level of tealeaves?
We complain of the Chav Scum doing this and demand that something should be done about it, yet some condone and encourage the very attitude that we criticise. A sad state of affairs indeed
jug said:
that means if i take a van full of wheels it is burglary, i have stolen the wheels. i never denied that. did you actually read it "but thats me with my van full of wheels" i did not say "but that is not me".
i think the 'but' word caused confusion, it was a continution from the previous comment, so as a complete phrase it should read, that is not me with my van full of wheels (aggravated trespass), but that is me with my van full of wheels (burglary). meaning i would not be commiting aggravated trespass, but it would be burglary. i can see where the confusion came from
as i said already, i know its theft, i accept that.
Where exactly do you draw the line? Is it ok to steal a single Mars Bar from Tescos because they would hardly likely to know it's gone? And of course it's 'wrong' and 'immoral'. IT'S THEFT for goodness sake. Isn't the decline of standards in the UK bad enough without others taking the view that because the 'victim' doesn't feel the loss then it's ok to steal? Besides, how do you know that the 'victim' doesn't give a toss?
Isn't it a shame that with declining standards and morals in the UK, instead of people trying to bring them back up everyone else takes the "I'm alright Jack" attitude and lowers themselves down to the level of tealeaves?
We complain of the Chav Scum doing this and demand that something should be done about it, yet some condone and encourage the very attitude that we criticise. A sad state of affairs indeed
fair enough. i agree. its tempting to take advantage of the uk system's weaknesses, but if i did i would be no better than the scum who i frequently complain about. and that would be pure hypocrisy.
you do realise this has been a theoretic discussion, i'm not serioulsy suggesting that i will, or even would, go and steal from a MGRover factory. the fantasy is nice, but in reality it is wrong.
(anyone who's in, PM me
)
Last edited:
Back on topic for a sec.
Any of the northampton lot know if the old avon building near town is vacant or not? I feel a trip out this evening is in order
Any of the northampton lot know if the old avon building near town is vacant or not? I feel a trip out this evening is in order
Back on topic for a sec.
Any of the northampton lot know if the old avon building near town is vacant or not? I feel a trip out this evening is in order
there's no victimless crime, private property is private property. trespasser
thats right, I'm going to steal some lipstick...and other female cosmetics
think I heard that they shut up shop and moved the work to poland. it just seems odd as the building still has avon on it lit up at night...
think I heard that they shut up shop and moved the work to poland. it just seems odd as the building still has avon on it lit up at night...
Anybody who likes asylums such watch session 9
hmmm sounds interesting, havent watched a good film for ages!
Oooh, I'll have a better look at that later.
I also found a site that shows all the old lunatic asylums listed by county... leics has quite a few
they all look basically the same.
Session 9 is set here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danvers_State_Hospital
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danvers_State_Hospital
that means if i take a van full of wheels it is burglary, i have stolen the wheels. i never denied that. did you actually read it "but thats me with my van full of wheels" i did not say "but that is not me".
i think the 'but' word caused confusion, it was a continution from the previous comment, so as a complete phrase it should read, that is not me with my van full of wheels (aggravated trespass), but that is me with my van full of wheels (burglary). meaning i would not be commiting aggravated trespass, but it would be burglary. i can see where the confusion came from
My mistake
Yes, I got mixed up with the 'that is not me' statement preceeding the 'but that is me' statement following the burglary statement.However, you DID contradict yourself (found this bit in your quote):
If you don't agree with burglary, how can you justify nicking a few wheels?!!! Burglary/ theft is the taking or property that legally belongs to another party, whether they are victimless or not.
Quite!
I am aware of the theoretical nature of the discussion, but it's the mere suggestion that it's ok to enter private premises and take property that I find saddening. We need to promote better morals and standards in the UK, not justify the idea that it's ok to partake in burglary as long as it is a victimless offence.
if your gonne do it this link is worth a read......
along with all these.....
http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=47
p.s. fiatforum UE adventure lol :slayer:
along with all these.....
http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=47
p.s. fiatforum UE adventure lol :slayer:
yes i know. i'm bad. i just got excited when i thought about all that great stuff sitting there with no one to love it.
i would love to go and have a look around. i love factories.
session 9, good film. first time i watched it, thought it was crap. but i put that down to not really paying attention to the film, drinking and chatting instead.
watched it properly, and like it.
watched it properly, and like it.
