Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

idealista.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

651–660 of 930 posts

Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

#651

Post by petsfed »

DowsingSpoon wrote: post #597

In some states in the US, you can just shoot home invaders. That is, the use of deadly force is appropriate for protecting one’s self and family from a home invasion, and there is no additional duty to retreat from your own home. It’s a shame that the people of Spain live with such little freedom that these bandits are able to basically force people out of their own house.

"I so feared for my life that I drove to my primary home, retrieved my firearms, returned to my second home, where I then shot the home invaders through the window". Sure.

There is no state in the union where you can shoot people who are simply existing in your otherwise-unoccupied home, because "sleeping in a house you don't have permission to" is not an offense that requires any kind of violent defense. Even in castle-doctrine/stand-your-ground states where you don't have a duty to retreat, you still don't have a blank check to assault. Squatters are not home invaders, literally forcing people out of their own homes at gun point or some such. Otherwise, all a would-be murderer would need to do is plausibly lure their victim to their home, at some point say "I need you to leave", then shoot.

There's a million good arguments around American gun culture vs. European gun culture, but this is emphatically not one of them.

Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

#652

Post by TacticalCoder »

rudnevr wrote: post #264

I live in Spain and own property in Spain. There's clearly a gap between imaginary noble okupas addressing housing crisis via occupation of unused bank property and reality of weed smoking anarchists and their collaborating deoccupying mafia harassing mostly not-so-rich middle class, who can't afford the security measures the rich can. It's not a small problem, there's like 12K cases per year last time I checked. Eve…

> ... and reality of weed smoking anarchists

Mother of our kid owned a house in Spain. Two houses next to her house was an "okupa" but...

They were gypsies. They broke in and two first thing they did:

    - change the locks
    - put pitbulls (with a 's') in the garden
They were not nice people.

Took six months but they eventually got kicked out.

Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

#653

Post by kerkeslager »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #622
kerkeslager wrote: post #616

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait so lack of legal security reduced supply... by what mechanism? How do you think this works?

Why would you build new housing when someone can waltz in and change the locks and youre shit out of luck?

That logic also applies to demand. Why would you buy a house if someone can waltz in and...

It's very much not in evidence that this is affecting supply more than demand.

Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

#654

Post by Vegenoid »

TotalCrackpot wrote: post #606
Vegenoid wrote: post #574

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now you have a group (or multiple groups) of people that will use violence to prevent people from doing the things that they feel are wrong. Probably they'll decide on what those things that are worth using violence to prevent are, and probably they'll write them down so that everyone is on the same page. If they don't do that, then they are using violence for arbitrary and undefined reasons, which most people don't…

The most important difference is everyone could create such a group without main authority monopolizing violence. Some would try to recreate current authoritarian relations, while others would oppose them.

It's a nice thought, many small bands of people each doing their own thing. But I don't see why people think it would turn out differently than it has turned out before, which is some groups becoming large and powerful enough that they push out, destroy, or absorb other groups, until they become large and powerful enough that they're just called government.

Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

#655

Post by ImJamal »

southerntofu wrote: post #211
pnut wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get it. You have keys to the place. There's no written contract, no money changing hands. Show up with some muscle, chuck the losers out on the street and change the locks. What are they going to do, take you to court?

From a legal standpoint, assaulting people is illegal. Assaulting them in their residence (trespassing) could be even more illegal. They definitely could take you to court. From a moral standpoint, do you realize you're advocating for the mafia here? That's exactly what private mafia companies have been doing for years. Rightful owners enjoying their property are already well protected by the law and the police (too…

It is not their residence. They broke in and just moved in.

Kicking out people who are trespassing is how you have a safe and lawful society. Allowing private citizens to do whatever they feel like to innocent people is mafia like behavior.

Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

#656

Post by TacticalCoder »

redeeman wrote: post #501
Aurornis wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's clearly a gap between imaginary noble okupas addressing housing crisis via occupation of unused bank property and reality of weed smoking anarchists and their collaborating deoccupying mafia harassing mostly not-so-rich middle class, who can't afford the security measures the rich can. I had a friend who bought a house that needed a lot of work. Before he could get started on the remodel, someone broke in t…

Im amazed your friend didnt come up with a swift solution, and what would the squatters do? call police and say they were squatting? show their rental agreement?? wouldnt have happened to me

Yeah. Reminds me of a funny one in France where a stolen car had a tracker and it's location, behind a garage door, was known. But the police was saying: "Nothing can be done".

Turns out: the owner of the car had a friend who was a farmer. He came up with a tractor and ripped the garage door apart.

That was his definition of "nothing can be done".

If motherfuckers play dirty, play dirty with the motherfuckers.

Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

#657

Post by kerkeslager »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #495
TotalCrackpot wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For most of our history humans did not have to pay for a piece of land to put up some yurt or hut and live there. How is the current system not strong taking whatever they can? Private property is just a legitimized theft, because it leaves some people without access to land or natural resources that is required for survival. It's not true that without private property you get state slavery or a strongman situation,…

That is an ahistorical perspective. For most of human history, you could be killed for putting a yurt or hut in someone else's land. Even chimps will kill others for infringing on territory. There were breif periods where humans entered virgin land, but these people migrated because other land and resources were spoken for. >Private property is just a legitimized theft, because it leaves some people without access to…

[flagged]

Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

#658

Post by passwordle »

tiborsaas wrote: post #351

A friend of mine acquired an investment property in Spain and after a while okupas moved in, lock changed etc. A woman with two children. They were clearly helped with an organized team to get into that place. The sad resolution after lots of headache and thinking was to pay the invaders the 5000EUR they demanded to move out. There was some followup information about what happened after this. She was picked up by a c…

> There was some followup information about what happened after this. She was picked up by a car and taken to the next place to occupy.

I'm so sorry to hear that your friend eventually had to sell his vacation home. Fuck that poor woman and her two kids, if they're so poor they should live on the streets in the dirt where they belong !

Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

#659

Post by makeitdouble »

toss1 wrote: post #599
diggan wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's besides the point what I think is morally wrong or right. There is a legal difference between "occupying" someone's primary residence, and occupying other types of properties. The first isn't considered "occupying" here but rather "breaking and entering", and the local police are very quick at acting on those types of crimes, especially if the criminals are still inside the property.

No. It doesn't matter whether it is a primary residence, secondary residence, or an investment property. It is the property of someone else. Without permission, opening the door or window and going into it is breaking and entering. And do not try to argue that breaking, entering, and squatting somehow reduces the housing shortage — the effect is the exact opposite. With insecure property access and rights, people wil…

> people will be LESS likely to invest in fixing up unliveable places.

Someone's still paying for the house flipping. By definition the flipper makes a margin between what they paid, the repairs, and the price they get at the end.

So why should we encourage house flipping instead of having howners buy the damaged property and pay for a renovation company ? Housing wise the end result is the same, minus the flipping.

If your argument is that the buyer converted a 4 person house into a 20 doors appartment, that's a better proposition, but they're also in a much more protected position and won't be bogged down by squating laws.

Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

#660

Post by kerkeslager »

jjav wrote: post #638
kerkeslager wrote: post #615

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, not really. Theft is not the answer. Well HN's favored solution seems to be not caring that people are homeless until they start scaring rich people, at which point you lock them up in "mental health" institutions that are less about helping them and more about keeping them away from rich people. My solution is not letting people own homes they don't live in, but that's going to crash a lot of rich people's inv…

> I'd prefer they stole from the people actually causing the problem, the rich who buy up housing and make it unaffordable. If you actually want to protest the system this is what you should do. Go occupy the vacant summer homes of rich politicians and CEOs.

I think people angry about squatters are thinking that squatters are squatting for political reasons, because for people angry about squatters, this is a political issue.

For squatters, this isn't primarily a political issue, it's primarily a survival issue.

Squatting in the summer house of a CEO does solve your survival need for shelter, but it leaves a bunch of your other survival needs unmet because you're far away from, for example, grocery stores, and don't have the resources that the CEO has to have staff deliver and prepare your food. So I'd guess that's why squatters aren't targeting these properties.

The narrative that squatters are being disingenuous about their political beliefs because they squat the wrong homes is really just a tool to paint squatters as disingenuous political activists. The reality is that while squatters might hold political beliefs, few people would choose to squat if they had other housing options. It's not a secure housing situation. Most squatters are squatting out of necessity not political motivations.

Post reply on HN