human rights pi$$ boiler

[Atomic12C]

A police officer friend of mine recently told me about a motorhome theft that happened last week.

To cut a story short, traveler steals brand new motorhome, police give chase, traveler tries to kill police and other motorists by using motorhome as weapon, drives through hedge row and field and in to rear entrance of traveler camp.

The police who could not follow through the hedge row or field use the road and enter the front side of the traveler camp to be met with a road blockage of vehicles and travelers throwing stones and being aggressive.

After back-up arrived and the blockage was cleared the brand new motorhome is parked up with a clamp on it and with brand new occupants, which included a bloke, his 'significant other' and about 5 kids.

Asked to vacate the motorhome, officers were met with a load of silent smug looking smiles.

Police were prevented in removing the family from the motorhome due to their human rights.
Police also unable to charge the bloke as he apparently wasn't the driver.

[Atomic12C]

Mrr T said:

There do appear to be some material differences between the stories.

I think they are similar cases but not the same 'incident'.
The 'story' I have been told happened last week and involved a new motorhome and not a caravan.
(Couldn't see any typical PH evidence, in the form of a weblink, to support it though).

So its just a case of take it or leave it. (Sorry)

[Atomic12C]

wiggy001 said:

If you cannot take reasonable steps to ensure that your home is not stolen then you shouldn't be buying it!

WTF?

You are at fault purely because others wish to break/ignore the law?

Basically if somebody wants to steal something then it comes down to how much they want to do it. If that desire is strong then I would hazard a guess there is nearly feck all one can do to stop them.

So what is 'reasonable' when a theft can be described as a certainty to happen?