Climate activists targeting SUV tyres is criminal damage, police say

33 comments
  1. How thick does a person have to be to think that deflating the tires of a GP is possibly going to give credence to their group.

  2. A mate of a mate is apparently doing this around his area with a lentil in the valve cap.

    He said that in the Telegraph recently a reader wrote in to say they were worried about buying an SUV now, and should they be? The writer said that in fairness yes they should as these actions were increasing. And does the reader really need an SUV, or do they just want one unnecessarily.

    No idea if this is accurate. But that’s the justification he is using. He believes his actions are working.

  3. For those who seem to think that things like deflating car tyres or gluing yourself to paintings is not criminal damage because the damage done isn’t technically permanent:

    >Damage is not defined by the CDA 1971. It should be widely interpreted to include not only permanent or temporary physical harm, but also __permanent or temporary impairment of value or usefulness__ – Morphitis v. Salmon [1990] Crim.L.R. 48.

    >Any alteration to the physical nature of the property concerned may amount to damage within the meaning of the section. The courts have construed the term liberally and included damage that is not permanent such as smearing mud on the walls of a police cell. __Where the interference amounts to an impairment of the value or usefulness of the property to the owner, then the necessary damage is established__ – R v Whiteley [1991] 93 Crim. App. R. 25.

    https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/criminal-damage

    Emphasis mine. Damage doesn’t have to be permanent for it to be criminal damage. Deflating a car tyre = temporary impairment of usefulness = criminal damage. The police are correct here.

  4. Duuuurrrrr, when will these fools realise, these tactics get more people offside than onside. They need to find another way, stop targeting normal civilians and target the ones actually causing the issues. But they won`t, they don`t have the balls. Easier to just target innocent people. Odd tactics that 100% fail, every time. Grow up, target the right people and do something actually worthwhile that will actually cause them to change and sort the issues out!!

  5. I bloody hate SUV’s and those stupid american trucks, they are unnecessary, wasteful and obnoxiously big (can’t see past them when behind, take up road space).

    If you drive one and you don’t actually live up a mountain or something you’re a bellend in my book, and you should be ashamed.

    This however, is a step too far. You don’t touch other people’s cars for fucks sake.

    Also, as obnoxious as they are, by doing this you are just increasing the carbon being burned seeing as the RAC or AA will have to come out with a compressor in a lot of these cases.

  6. Well yes, obviously damaging someone else’s property is almost always Criminal Damage.

    Point was always that these activists feel that it’s justified – which is obviously a whole different question.

    Ironically though, if they honestly believed it wasn’t Criminal Damage, then *it wasn’t.* Same if they honestly believe it’s necessary to avoid a crime (That’s how those people who threw a statute into Bristol dock got away with it).

    The Criminal Damage Act is a strangely written one – loads of get outs for honest, if incorrect, beliefs.

  7. Yes, it is. But it’s going to get worse as people become more extreme and passionate about Climate Change. Climate Terrorism was always going to happen, and to be honest I think it’s a necessary part of society. The suffragettes caused serious damage as well.

  8. if you damage tyres, the driver has to then get more = more fuel/bad for environment e.g. rubber/electric/air etc than just leaving what they have in working order

  9. Meanwhile they will walk past my V8 saloon since they have no idea what cars are actually fuel guzzlers and go for the low hanging fruit.

  10. If it’s criminal damage to tamper with an antisocial SUV’s tyre, what is it called when people chose unnecessary large vehicles that damage the environment and the roads, cause more fatalities, and inflict detrimental social impacts due to consuming so much space? To me one seems far worse than the other.

  11. While there could be a few select cases of people absolutely needing SUVs, let’s not pretend that’s close to a majority. People could selflessly choose more ecofriendly cars and have it not change their daily lives, but they won’t. They just won’t.

    The climate crisis is much more real and imminent than people would like to believe. And regardless of whether its oil barons or ordinary people, there are many that just don’t care. Many that would never change their own actions for the benefit of others.

    You might not like people deflating tyres, but they’re fighting for all of our futures. People who make selfish choices might get their toes stepped on, but it’s a small price to pay for the hope of saving the planet for future generations.

  12. I mean I have an SUV because on top of my NHS job I run a sound equipment rental company, and the alternatives a pickup truck or a white van 🤷‍♂️

  13. I love the environment and most of the life on it but just wtf are these terrorists upto?

    Do they seriously think this kind of shit will have any positive fucking impact for climate change.

  14. Yeah, look, I’ve worked long hard hours for several decades. I’ll drive what I want because I want to drive it. It’s not your business. It’s not your concern.

    And no, I don’t yet have a 4×4 yet but I’m definitely picking one up soon due to all the damn potholes.

  15. I don’t see why they would deflate tyres, if u wanna be a real menace just put citric acid into people’s petrol tanks coz thats more fun

  16. No cure for stupidity. Climate change isn’t a problem that can be solved by attacking the general public. For every tyre deflated, a rich businessman is taking a flight from London to Paris for a lunchtime meeting.

    The perpetrator here is probably wearing clothes made by the cheap fashion model that claims its sustainable but in reality is paying hush money in 3rd world countries.

    The system needs to change from the top. Not bottom up

Leave a Reply