London/UK violence

[Andrew Robinson]

On 14 August 2011 19:36, K9 Kai Niggemann <kai at kainiggemann.com> wrote:
> Scary stuff in the UK: Cameron wants the army in to protect public buildings. rioters should be evicted
> from public housing. Rioters' families should be evicted from public housing as well.

Actually, there is nearly always a 'good behaviour' clause that you
have to sign to get public housing, so eviction for not keeping
control of your kids has always been an option. My house is partially
public housing (We own 45%, a housing association owns 55%), and we
could (theoretically) be evicted if we leave our bins out on the wrong
day, or fail to grow the same types of plants that were in the garden
when we moved in, but in reality it's only invoked to get rid of
'problem' families who are involved in crime, or let their kids pull
down trees, smash car windows etc. This doesn't mean the council gets
out of it's responsibility to house people, it just means the family
goes to the back of the queue, and gets a worse property.

> BlackBerry messenger will be switched off by the police (on what prerequesite?)

...and Twitter, and Facebook, and possibly the SMS network - no
details of how this would work (barring the obvious 'it wouldn't'), so
I expect it will be dropped as unworkable, huge free speech and
restraint of trade implications will get in the way (see Pirate Party
press releases) if they did try to do it.

> Also: bystanders said the police in riot gear was standing by instead of stopping the looters.
> Was this to prepare the UK for conversion into a full fledged police state?

Actually, it's a symptom of a pre-existing row between govt and
police. Govt cut police budgets massively. On the  first night of the
riots, police claim they were outnumbered, and couldn't risk stopping
looters. A cynic might suggest this was a ploy to get the cuts
reversed.

- Andy_R