All I know is about where I live. There is not "accepting", you either buy or rent a place in one. Same as buying or renting a place in the UK. Again this is trying to put an elitist spin on something where it doesn't exist. To repeat. All of the communities in this suburb are gated.
But you don't need your sexual proclivities checked before buying property in the UK.
I would have no idea, but then I am not selecting them am I. I really think you are deliberately missing the point. If children are playing in a dedicated play area that is within their gated community then they are safer than if they were playing in an area where anyone could prey on them. How difficult a concept can be for this to understand.
The people who live in the community (whether it be a tower block, or a set of houses) would be the only ones with access to the interior of the unbanization.
I cannot grasp why you are turning this into elitist argument, when it is so not that.
Most child abuse is done by family members not by strangers.
Most child abuse is done by family members not by strangers.
I am not arguing that. What I did say is (in my opinion) a children's play area within a gated community is a safer environment for them to play in than not. I respect your view to disagree with this.
Birdcage, I am sorry but I really don't think you are understanding this topic, and you are trying to create an argument where none exists.
No I'm not Ricardodaforce. I understand the topic perfectly well. My question was quite a simple one. Who would decide who is undesirable. How is that creating an argument?
Sorry, I'm sure it's me being thick, but how can you tell that children are at less risk of being preyed on, unless you carry out some sort of check on the sexuality of everybody who is allowed access?
No I'm not Ricardodaforce. My question was quite a simple one. Who would decide who is undesirable. How is that creating an argument?
What you are failing to grasp is that all I am saying is that the only people with access to the community are the people that live there. As in my previous post I think this provides a safer play environment for children. I respect your view to disagree.
No I'm not Ricardodaforce. I understand the topic perfectly well. My question was quite a simple one. Who would decide who is undesirable. How is that creating an argument?
The owner of the house usually decides who can rent the house from them, just as they do in the UK.
What you are failing to grasp is that all I am saying is that the only people with access to the community are the people that live there. As in my previous post I think this provides a safer play environment for children. I respect your view to disagree.
I repeat, I am not failing to grasp anything, however much you try to pretend I am.
It's no use keep repeating yourself either. I'm still waiting for an answer to a very simple but important question.
The owner of the house usually decides who can rent the house from them, just as they do in the UK.
But we're talking about a whole community here. Not just one person renting a house out. And do landlords do sex deviant checks on every possible tenant nowadays?
Sorry, I'm sure it's me being thick, but how can you tell that children are at less risk of being preyed on, unless you carry out some sort of check on the sexuality of everybody who is allowed access?
You're not being thick at all. It is a VERY difficult concept to grasp.
One the one hand, you have a community only accessible to the people that live there. Or you have a community that everyone has access to. Now I believe (and again I respect the fact that you disagree) that a community that would be open to people that prey on children would be more dangerous to those children.
I repeat, I am not failing to grasp anything, however much you try to pretend I am.
It's no use keep repeating yourself either. I'm still waiting for an answer to a very simple but important question.
Who decides who is undesirable?
I have no idea what you mean. If you are asking who decides who lives there then it would be down to the individual vendor or landlord. Same as in the UK.
But we're talking about a whole community here. Not just one person renting a house out. And do landlords do sex deviant checks on every possible tenant nowadays?
Ah and there is the problem. You think there is some kind of Community Panel that vetos people? No, it would exactly as it does in your street. There are no commities, no vetting groups. The flats in the community are all individually owned. Each owner decides who to sell or rent to.
But we're talking about a whole community here. Not just one person renting a house out.
They're ubanisations, each house within the urbanisation is owned by someone different. I don't think its a question of people being desirable or undesirable.. what is desirable to one person might not be to another..
My landlady let to me because she had character references, proof I could pay the rent etc.. No different to letting a house out in the Uk.
The fact I have a dog, made me an undesirable tennant to other landlords.
They're ubanisations, each house within the urbanisation is owned by someone different. I don't think its a question of people being desirable or undesirable.. what is desirable to one person might not be to another..
My landlady let to me because she had character references, proof I could pay the rent etc.. No different to letting a house out in the Uk.
The fact I have a dog, made me an undesirable tennant to other landlords.
I thought this thread was about gated communities? And those gate communites not wanting any undesirable in. So far those undesirables have been wattled down to sexual deviants.
I merely wanted to know who decided who was a sexual deviant and how they went about proving the same.
By the way, you mean urbanisation don't you?
Urbanization can be defined as the rapid and massive growth of, and migration to, large cities
Ah and there is the problem. You think there is some kind of Community Panel that vetos people? No, it would exactly as it does in your street. There are no commities, no vetting groups. The flats in the community are all individually owned. Each owner decides who to sell or rent to.
So what you are in favour of is very different to what the OP is suggesting. And not much different to apartment buildings we have now with communal areas only accessible to residents.
I thought this thread was about gated communities? And those gate communites not wanting any undesirable in. So far those undesirables have been wattled down to sexual deviants.
I merely wanted to know who decided who was a sexual deviant and how they went about proving the same.
It is about gated communities. I live in one. Some people decided to treat this is some kind of elitist argument, which certainly isn't the case here. I said I thought the benefits were security and safety to children. That's all.
It is about gated communities. I live in one. Some people decided to treat this is some kind of elitist argument, which certainly isn't the case here. I said I thought the benefits were security and safety to children. That's all.
And I agree entirely with the concept that safety to children is paramount. My question, that still remains unanswered, is who decides who is sexually deviant when members wish to become a member of your gated community.
So what you are in favour of is very different to what the OP is suggesting. And not much different to apartment buildings now with communal areas only accessible to residents.
Precisely, your description "apartment buildings now with communal areas only accessible to residents" is EXACTLY what I am referring to. That is the type of gated community we have here. I distance myself totally from the remarks made by the OP. I posted in this thread, because I have an opinion because I live in a gated community.
And I agree entirely with the concept that safety to children is paramount. My question, that still remains unanswered, is who decides who is sexually deviant when members wish to become a member of your gated community.
The answer is the exactly the same as if a sexual deviant wanted to buy or rent a house in your road.
It is about gated communities. I live in one. Some people decided to treat this is some kind of elitist argument, which certainly isn't the case here. I said I thought the benefits were security and safety to children. That's all.
Your reasons aren't elitist.. but the thread started by the OP is very elitist. So I think it is fair that we debate the original OP too..
Though I notice that she has not being back and returned to her thread.... :rolleyes:
You might not in favour for elitist reasons.. but the thread started by the OP is very elitist. So I think it is fair that we debate the original OP too..
Though I notice that she has not being back and returned to her thread.... :rolleyes:
It certainly is worth debating. Just don't tar me with her brush!
Comments
Birdcage, I am sorry but I really don't think you are understanding this topic, and you are trying to create an argument where none exists.
But you don't need your sexual proclivities checked before buying property in the UK.
Do you here?
I am not arguing that. What I did say is (in my opinion) a children's play area within a gated community is a safer environment for them to play in than not. I respect your view to disagree with this.
No I'm not Ricardodaforce. I understand the topic perfectly well. My question was quite a simple one. Who would decide who is undesirable. How is that creating an argument?
Sorry, I'm sure it's me being thick, but how can you tell that children are at less risk of being preyed on, unless you carry out some sort of check on the sexuality of everybody who is allowed access?
What you are failing to grasp is that all I am saying is that the only people with access to the community are the people that live there. As in my previous post I think this provides a safer play environment for children. I respect your view to disagree.
The owner of the house usually decides who can rent the house from them, just as they do in the UK.
I repeat, I am not failing to grasp anything, however much you try to pretend I am.
It's no use keep repeating yourself either. I'm still waiting for an answer to a very simple but important question.
Who decides who is undesirable?
EVERYONE ELSE!
But we're talking about a whole community here. Not just one person renting a house out. And do landlords do sex deviant checks on every possible tenant nowadays?
You're not being thick at all. It is a VERY difficult concept to grasp.
One the one hand, you have a community only accessible to the people that live there. Or you have a community that everyone has access to. Now I believe (and again I respect the fact that you disagree) that a community that would be open to people that prey on children would be more dangerous to those children.
I have no idea what you mean. If you are asking who decides who lives there then it would be down to the individual vendor or landlord. Same as in the UK.
Ah and there is the problem. You think there is some kind of Community Panel that vetos people? No, it would exactly as it does in your street. There are no commities, no vetting groups. The flats in the community are all individually owned. Each owner decides who to sell or rent to.
They're ubanisations, each house within the urbanisation is owned by someone different. I don't think its a question of people being desirable or undesirable.. what is desirable to one person might not be to another..
My landlady let to me because she had character references, proof I could pay the rent etc.. No different to letting a house out in the Uk.
The fact I have a dog, made me an undesirable tennant to other landlords.
I thought this thread was about gated communities? And those gate communites not wanting any undesirable in. So far those undesirables have been wattled down to sexual deviants.
I merely wanted to know who decided who was a sexual deviant and how they went about proving the same.
By the way, you mean urbanisation don't you?
Urbanization can be defined as the rapid and massive growth of, and migration to, large cities
It is about gated communities. I live in one. Some people decided to treat this is some kind of elitist argument, which certainly isn't the case here. I said I thought the benefits were security and safety to children. That's all.
And I agree entirely with the concept that safety to children is paramount. My question, that still remains unanswered, is who decides who is sexually deviant when members wish to become a member of your gated community.
Precisely, your description "apartment buildings now with communal areas only accessible to residents" is EXACTLY what I am referring to. That is the type of gated community we have here. I distance myself totally from the remarks made by the OP. I posted in this thread, because I have an opinion because I live in a gated community.
The answer is the exactly the same as if a sexual deviant wanted to buy or rent a house in your road.
Though I notice that she has not being back and returned to her thread.... :rolleyes:
It certainly is worth debating. Just don't tar me with her brush!