Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

V340 - Trespass Offences Bill Watch

  • View Poll Results: Should this bill be passed into law?
    As many are of the opinion, Aye
    29.73%
    On the contrary, No
    51.35%
    Abstain
    18.92%

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    B340 - Trespass Offences Bill (Second Reading), TSR UKIP

    Trespass Offences Bill


    A Bill to make new provision about trespass to land and inhabited dwelling, its prevention and possible punishments.

    BE IT ENACTED by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—

    1 Definitions
    For the purposes of this Act—
    (a) trespass to land involves unjustifiable interference with land and the space which is in the immediate and exclusive possession of another;
    (b) trespass to inhabited dwelling involves unjustifiable interference with inhabited dwelling and the space which is in the immediate and exclusive possession of another;
    (b) the expression "land" includes ground covered with water and only defines an area enclosed by a clearly visible upright structure used to mark its boundaries;
    (c) possession of land or inhabited dwelling means the right to eject or exclude others from it;
    (d) occupant is a person who holds land or inhabited dwelling in actual possession;
    (e) inhabited dwelling is mainly a house, flat, vessel, aircraft, or other place of primary residence.

    2 Trespass to land
    (1) A Person commits an offence if he intentionally enters or is on any land as a trespasser and refuses to leave the land on occupant's request.
    (2) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable—
    (a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or both;
    (b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years.

    3 Trespass to inhabited dwelling
    (1) A Person commits an offense if he enters or is in any inhabited dwelling as a trespasser.
    (2) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable—
    (a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or both;
    (b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 years.

    4 Short title, commencement and extent
    (1) This Act may be cited as the Trespass Offences Act 2010.
    (2) This Act comes into force at the end of the period of two months beginning with the day on which it is passed.
    (3) This Act extends to the whole of the United Kingdom .


    Previous Discussions

    Second Reading

    First Reading
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I believe that the changes I have made are an improvement.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Would travellers be party to this bill?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jakemittle)
    Would travellers be party to this bill?
    How do you define travellers? Eru Iluvatar has asked me the same question in the end of the second reading to which I responded using a personal message. The reply was the following: "Travellers would be free to cross privately own land, but could be asked to leave, which would still mean that they are free to leave without changing the course hence continue in their trip."

    He then added that he in fact meant gypsies and such (generally nomads), to which I responded by the following: "Gypsies and other nomads live either on a private or public land – both options are usually illegal. A criminal offence under this bill would only be the first one and I think that it is perfectly all right. Imagine that you own a land and plan on building a factory there. One day you come to check the area and you see a gypsy family there. That means a lot of complications. With this bill, you kindly ask them to leave and if they refuse, the police will come and kindly escort them to a police station."
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    How do you define travellers? Eru Iluvatar has asked me the same question in the end of the second reading to which I responded using a personal message. The reply was the following: "Travellers would be free to cross privately own land, but could be asked to leave, which would still mean that they are free to leave without changing the course hence continue in their trip."

    He then added that he in fact meant gypsies and such (generally nomads), to which I responded by the following: "Gypsies and other nomads live either on a private or public land – both options are usually illegal. A criminal offence under this bill would only be the first one and I think that it is perfectly all right. Imagine that you own a land and plan on building a factory there. One day you come to check the area and you see a gypsy family there. That means a lot of complications. With this bill, you kindly ask them to leave and if they refuse, the police will come and kindly escort them to a police station."
    Gotcha!..
    okay thanks for clearing that up
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    With regards to the status quo, what, if anything, of importance has changed?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LawBore)
    With regards to the status quo, what, if anything, of importance has changed?
    It was mentioned in the second reading: http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...29&postcount=4
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I didn't debate it so I'll abstain.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    I didn't debate it so I'll abstain.
    All right. By the way, good luck to you in the Labour party, I have only just discovered that you are not a part of TSR UKIP any more (which is disappointing, but I am sure that you have your reasons). :facepalm2:
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    All right. By the way, good luck to you in the Labour party, I have only just discovered that you are not a part of TSR UKIP any more (which is disappointing, but I am sure that you have your reasons). :facepalm2:
    It's the only fair thing to do really, as - although I can read the threads - you've not been given chance to address personal concerns so abstaining is fine. =]

    Thanks mate, I apreciate it. Well, we all have our reasons for everything :p:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    The no's have it! The no's have it!
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: December 30, 2010
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
    Useful resources

    Articles:

    Debate and current affairs forum guidelines

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.