Details are still scant, but…

“I mean, he had a lot of ammunition in that house, and certainly … all of us were strapped, you know, with ammunition, and we were calling for additional ammunition,” Kraus said. “Like I said, we tried to give him every opportunity to come out.”

    …I’ll go way out on a limb and suggest that this could’ve been handled better.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    -161 year ago

    People should be allowed to occupy and damage any property they’ve set foot on once, not matter how expensive

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      191 year ago

      People should have a home if the action here were to provide another housing option, then this wouldn’t have happened. Also seems the person likely had a traumatic reason for being evicted and needed help.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        71 year ago

        I agree. But I probably wouldn’t phrase that as “they could stop evicting people”.

        Even if well implemented social housing existed, one should still be able to evict people from expensive property they aren’t willing or able to pay for.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        41 year ago

        Indeed. If you want anything better than the cheapest apartments to exist, you have to be able to evict people who can’t afford more than the cheapest apartments.

        • @Famko
          link
          41 year ago

          But people these days can’t even afford the cheapest apartments, so what’s the point of having “better” apartments for the minority?

          • @Maalus
            link
            31 year ago

            So instead let the people move into those apartments for free, damage them and then let them shoot at police trying to evict them?

            Would you be willing to part with your life savings to give them to me just because I left a comment to your thread? If not, why are you expecting other people to part with the houses they built with their life savings for some random bloke?

          • @SCB
            link
            21 year ago

            By definition, people can afford the cheapest apartments, because that’s how those apartments get rented at that price point.

            • mathemachristian[he]
              link
              fedilink
              21 year ago

              Do you not see the problem here?? Your definition only includes those able to rent. As soon as the price of the cheapest apartment rises anyone under that cutoff becomes invisible to you.

              • @SCB
                link
                11 year ago

                Yes that is what happens when you have too little supply.

        • mathemachristian[he]
          link
          fedilink
          01 year ago

          Fuck the children of poor people, idiots should’ve been working to supplement the families income if they didn’t want to be crammed into a room with their siblings. Lazy ass kids…

          • @SCB
            link
            31 year ago

            crammed into a room with their siblings

            I love how you say this like it’s a crime against humanity lol

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        So I can just take all your stuff and you’re fine with it because fuck private property?

        There are huge problems in the current system but just letting the person with the most guns do whatever they want is not a good solution

          • @SCB
            link
            01 year ago

            You’re literally advocating for stealing from one person to provide for another here so the question is apt.

        • mathemachristian[he]
          link
          fedilink
          01 year ago

          If it prevents someone from being homeless without risking someone else (or me) being homeless then yes. Private property should not be of a higher concern than someone having shelter.

          • @Cryophilia
            link
            11 year ago

            You could be helping hundreds of people in poor countries survive, but you’re not. You should be selling your property and donating the proceeds to UNICEF or similar.

            • mathemachristian[he]
              link
              fedilink
              11 year ago

              Do you not understand the difference between taking from someone that’s hoarding a resource required by society and taking everything someone owns?

              • @Cryophilia
                link
                11 year ago

                You have more than you need, though, and someone else needs it more than you do. You don’t have to give up everything you own, just everything in excess of your need.

                • mathemachristian[he]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  1
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  This is bad faith trolling. Youre conflating the private property corporations and the wealthy hoard, depriving people of vital resources for their own profit, with my personal property of a few spoiled apples that I wasn’t able to eat.

                  Me pinching pennies so I can donate even more is not going to make a lasting impact whereas disowning those willfully depriving others will.

                  • @Cryophilia
                    link
                    01 year ago

                    You said

                    Private property should not be of a higher concern than someone having shelter.

                    Your private property could be used to help house someone much more in need than yourself.

      • @devil_d0c
        link
        21 year ago

        Some people should be allowed to fail.

          • @devil_d0c
            link
            11 year ago

            Sure, I could conceive of a scenario where someone who couldn’t afford rent should be allowed to fail. Are you unable to?

    • ikiru
      link
      fedilink
      3
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Dude, shut the fuck up.

      I hope you get to be in this dude’s situation one day and you have to take your homelessness with a please and thank you, sir, may I have another.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        121 year ago

        He occupied a house, not an apartment. He got evicted because he wouldn’t settle for less than a whole house.

        I may be in this dude’s situation one day. And you know what I’m gonna do? Move to a cheaper apartment.

        • @dragonflyteaparty
          link
          -21 year ago

          Where do you have that information? There was nothing about the reason for the eviction in this article or the one it linked to.

          • @SCB
            link
            5
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Here is a pic of the residence. Idk if rented or not but it is not small

            And here is the real reason for the conflict

            Sources said Hardison believed he was a sovereign citizen, meaning he thought he was exempt from the law.

            Channel 11 News photographer discovered a video of Hardison during a prior interaction with police in 2019. In the video, you can see a Moorish flag, which is flown by Moorish sovereign citizens.

            Hardison had a criminal history dating back to at least 2000.

            Source is the link to yet another article found within the linked article mentioned in OPs linked article. They post his address I snapped the Street View pic from that.