If we want to do away with the godly rights of property owners and let people keep whatever they can take and defend, I am deeply in support of this plan, but I can't imagine it shakes out how the squatters like to think it would.
We'd just be taking the scenic route to roughly what we have, except I'm short a bunch of ammo.
> Yeah, it would be shocking to those who are used to the godly rights of the property owners on their property like in the US.
The story you’re replying to happened in the United States.
There was nothing noble about it. The squatters stole someone’s house and prevented them from occupying it. This wasn’t noble squatters versus evil landlords leaving houses empty. My friend literally bought a house for his family and someone squatted in it before he could move in.
Amazing that such a comment would come along and prove the point I was making: Some people can look an obvious injustice dead on, ignore the details, inject their own imagined narrative with victim and perpetrator reversed, and claim moral superiority for the perpetrator.
> The story you’re replying to happened in the United States.
I haven't seen any indicator of that at the time. Your comment does not mention anything in it about the US. Everyone is reading as if it happened in Spain. I don't even know whether occupying is possible in the US, bar a few specific states in certain conditions.
Regardless, it could have happened in Spain, and this is a topic related to Spain, my earlier comment still serves to make a statement in relation to the actual topic at hand.
