# *Guns/Crack: The Commander - your opinion please?



## hatboy (Jan 24, 2002)

*Guns/Crack: The Commander - your opinion please?*

Hi Brian - Can you tell me what Lambeth Police are doing about the destruction being wrought on the local community, especially in Brixton, by the use and dealing of crack and by gun-culture? I'd like to hear what you envisage for the future for the safety of the citizens of Brixton?

(PS *PLEASE* can other posters resist the temptatation to post on this thread until Mr Paddick has responded and a debate can then ensue).


----------



## hatboy (Jan 27, 2002)

Bump - thanks for NOT posting on here yet people. Where's The Commander got too? Briiiaaan!


----------



## Brian (Jan 28, 2002)

Sorry for the delay - have had some serious personal issues to deal with.

What to do about crack and smack, especially in Brixton?  My take - "don't damage my community".  Translates into top priority = don't openly deal on the streets - it frightens people and raises their fear of crime - street deal and I'm after you.  That means arrest, charge, court, long prison sentence (I hope).  

Chaotic drug users - those so addicted to crack or smack that they cannot hold down a job, don't have enough money to feed the habit without robbing, breaking into people's homes or cars = damaging my community.  These people are victims though.  Victims of 'the system' that got them into the state they are in - victims of the drug dealers who encouraged them into taking the stuff maybe.  We need more money for treatment, outreach work, support, so these people can come off the stuff and start living again.  OK, if they rob and steal they'll get arested too, but hopefully they will get help too (we have drug workers at the police station, for example).

Not much time now, but I wil develop my ideas as we go along.  Bottom line - screw the dealers, help the addicts.

Light blue touch-paper and retire!


----------



## mach v (Jan 28, 2002)

Sounds like a good plan, how do you see it coming into action? How can Brixtonites (like us) help?


----------



## pk (Jan 28, 2002)

Yes, I want to screw some dealers please!!


----------



## sonicdancer (Jan 28, 2002)

Commander maybe a zero tolerance attitude as adopted in New York by Geuliano may do the trick but this would need to be adopted elsewhere also otherwise the problems just get pushed somewhere else (as mentioned in previous threads) Cleaning up the dealers from the (numerous) favoured little drug dealing spots on the streets of Brixton WOULD alleviate residents concerns/fears but it would also eradicate the street life inherant.

I personally think that operation trident is failing, whatever you are doing it is not working, the guns situation is getting worse not better, a couple of deals up from the pavement outside Brixton Train Station people are getting shot, every week and as we can see in Tulse Hill recently innocent people are the victims...

The police need to work more closely with Government secret organistions who are experts in surveillance/covert operations so that the people who bring the drugs into Brixton 3/4 deals up from the street are apprehended, there aint gonna be many street dealers intimidating innocent people if you are cutting off the supply higher up.

START WINNING OPERATION TRIDENT - YOU ARE LOSING AND HENCE IT IS WORSE ON THE STREET


more money/police/ideas please


----------



## moon (Jan 28, 2002)

'The Commander', Panda etc, maybe you could start with the drug dealers on Atlantic Rd, they always congregate outside a certain mens clothes shop and sell to some of Brixtons most high profile drug victims.

If this is truly  Brian P with whom we are communicating  (although I very much doubt it) then maybe he can explain why the police have failed to do anything about this particular (Atlantic Rd) drug haven for years. Surely just driving past a few times would do the trick, or do you consider it a police no-go area?

And also could you explain what you mean about this 'don't openly deal on the streets' does this mean that you are happy for dealing to continue in crack houses, because it's less intimidating to the general public.

I am also a bit concerned about this statment 'but I will develop my ideas as we go along' does that mean you have no idea at the moment??? 

Sounds like you're a fake to me!!!


----------



## TinyCrendon (Jan 28, 2002)

I agree w/Jo, not convinced by commander.


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 28, 2002)

> If this is truly Brian P with whom we are communicating (although I very much doubt it)


Get with the programme happyhappy etc. It is Brian Paddick-I received e-mail confirmation this morning. The Editor has also checked out the Bona fides.
And for god's sake lets stick with the bloke-he's the best news we've had in ages,and his nascent dialogue with U75 is a _very_promising augury for the future


----------



## moon (Jan 28, 2002)

Only time will tell, I guess.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 28, 2002)

While I'm about 90% convinced now that it is him, because of various previously sceptical U75 peeps being won over by direct email contact from him, I have to say that I can't remember Mike putting anything up to confirm it


----------



## drfranni (Jan 28, 2002)

I hope that your personal "issues" are in the process of improving Mr C.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 28, 2002)

We need to get over whether this is definitely Mr Paddick or not. I beleive it is. I know people who've met you and speak well of you Brian, and, as I seldom do anything especially illegal and don't care if you know my identity I'm wondering whether you'd consent to me popping by the cop-shop and saying a brief (I know your busy) hello.

Aside from that, just wanted to say that I disagree with the Guilliani zero-tolerance approach because in the process of making an area safer it also oppresses street- and alternative culture. Since Brixton is the best Britain can do for a "downtown" New York type of lively street- 
scene, it would be more than a shame to kill it off. And may not even be possible anyway.

Another thing: I think it's great that you say you don't have set ideas on how to tackle the crime problems in Brixton. That shows you are flexible. Often the most enlightened people are the one's who can say "I don't know". But of course you'll need to evolve an effective strategy.

Interested to hear more. And pleased that you not demonising anybody. There's always a bigger picture isn't there?


----------



## Derek (Jan 28, 2002)

Using undercover cops would be a good idea as the dealers just move when uniformed patrols come along. There has been a great success in driving away dealers in the West End around Soho where a couple of years ago there was very open dealing in the streets. But the problem seems as bad as ever in south London. In the West End large billboards were used similar to those yellow witness appeal boards with anouncements about drug dealer arrests with slogans such drug dealer recently arrested and sentenced to three years imprisonment to scare away dealers.


----------



## sonicdancer (Jan 28, 2002)

HB I have weighed up the zero-tolerance approach on one hand and the loss of street culture on the other, and dont really think you can have your cake and eat it...The only way that a stop is going to be put to muggings/burglaries/shootings/assaults/close friends and family dying (bad side effects of drugs) and keep the hustle and bustle of street life (which I like no; love..) then the way to go is relax cannabis so that street activity exists (this is happening) and at the same time target the bigger Brixton dealers shifting kilos of cocaine down the food chain.  Operation Trident SHOULD be doing this.  I dont know any skunk smokers carrying pieces or hasseling people at Brixton tube...I mentioned it would kill the street culture inherant and was just really thinking aloud, but am troubled on alternative solutions.


----------



## Brian (Jan 28, 2002)

Wow!  If anyone wants personal confirmation call the station and ask for an appointment.  Say you are from Urban 75 and I will make sure one of you gets to see me (8649 2002).  The real debate should happen here though, not one-to-one in my office.

Zero tolerance - sounds like 'police state' to me.  In NY they had thousands of extra police, massive investment in improving the environment, special drugs courts - investment across the board not just hard policing.  Lambeth - I don't have the cops and the Local Authority don't have the cash to improve things that much - the spirit is willing on their side but ...

So why don't we just sweep away the dealers?  We have mounted every kind of police operation in Coldharbour Lane.  We have had under-cover cops, uniform cops working off what the CCTV shows, everything.  We have arrested about 50 street dealers in the past 12 months and within hours of arresting one, another takes their place.  As long as there is the demand, as long as there are poor, desparate and gullible people willing to put their necks on the line for the bigger dealers further up the food chain, there will be street dealers.

Number one priority is the street dealers because they peddle death AND frighten the public.  The bigger dealers are much harder to find and arrest and they have bigger dealers and so on until you get to the importers.  All law enforcement agencies need to do their bit to stop this.  My job with my people is to tackle the street dealers and (if we're lucky) the next ones up.  After that its out of our league (but we can pass on the info.)  The street delaers are like weeds - you cut them down and they keep growing back.  You need to deprive them of their 'sunshine'.  So we need to look at taking out the punters and getting them into treatment.  

Anyone who deals to chaotic drug addicts are in my firing line.  It's a contentious area but these are my priority targets.  OK, I have said in the past that club dealers who supply 'recreational users' who do not resort to crime to by the stuff are at the bottom of my priority list but how many people do we know who started with a weekend habit and ended-up with a terminal habit?

We are working now with the Secret Services on this (I think) but this is beyond my remit.  We also need to fight poverty and do more education in places like Jamaica where poor people are duped into carrying cocaine condoms in their stomachs.  You won't get any of these millionaire vermin drug barons swallowing this stuff.  Maybe a squirt of weed-killer on the right poppies would help?

These people are not easily frightened.  A couple of police drive-pasts does not do it for them.  We do patrol the centre and I have some of the bravest, fearless, unarmed cops who care enough to tackle gun-carrying drug dealers, who get attacked by the dealers and their cronies when they do, and still go back for more.  These are boys and girls in uniform who put their lives on the line for us and they get deal grief for it.

We need to decide those issues where the peeps and the police have no argument - lets get the drug dealers, for example.  We need to stand together in Coldharbour Lane, night after night, and put these people out of business.  It's been done before to get rid of prostitutes but these are heavier.  If the community and the police stand together we will win.  It is when we fight each other that the bad guys win.  Sure there are going to be things where you are going to disagree with the police.  Lets decide what we can work together on.

I have asked the police union reps. (Police Federation) to come up with a list of things the cops think should not be tolerated in Lambeth and those things that we should be more relaxed about (we cannot enforce every single law all of the time).  I have put cannabis (small amounts for personal use) in the second column.  What would you put in each column?  I have told the unions I will ask you what your big beefs are and then compare the two lists to see where we can agree on priorities.

I care passionately about people.  I love Lambeth, Brixton in particular.  I want people to have as much freedom as possible provided they don't damage my community.  These drug dealers are ruining it for us.  What can we do together?


----------



## hatboy (Jan 28, 2002)

Impressive. I'll get back to you, as I'm sure others will, with a list of "I'm OK withs" and "I'm not OK withs".  Shit - what a responsibility.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 29, 2002)

Excellent post, Commander. Lingering doubts on who you are finally extinguished .. I'll be interested to read others' responses, particularly from those who live locally.

[ 29 January 2002: Message edited by: William of Walworth ]


----------



## drfranni (Jan 29, 2002)

As HB says - "Shit- what a responsibility" 

Personally and professionally I struggle with the tensions between the need for my profession (medicine) to provide an excellent service with limited resources and to be accountable - whilst at the same time recruiting and retaining staff who are increasingly demoralised. In addition, you are surrounded by statutary duties and reulations.

There is no easy way around this - the police need to be accountable for their actions and I have some understanding of how difficult it must be to motivate officers who are faced with personal danger and vitriolic criticism in the same day. 

I have been the direct "victim" (hate that word) of  crime 5 times in the past year and it struck me very forcibly that the thing which impressed me most was the attitude of the officers involved. I knew that there was not a snowball's chance in a nuclear reactor that they would "solve the crime" and I did not want them to waste their time trying. But a rapid, pleasant, helpful response was an enormous comfort to me. The most upsetting interaction was a black officer telling my son (who had just been mugged for the third time) that there was nothing the police could do because "Local school are 90% black kids and they are the ones doing the mugging" My son was upset because 1) He has been raised right 2) He has been a victim of Equal Opportunity mugging and had previously seen no relationship between race and his attacks.

I'm not impressed by people who say "I don't want the police to be "nice" I want them to catch criminals" Every person who has been assaulted, insulted, abused or ignored by a police officer becomes alienated and this attitude may remain lifelong with serious implications.

If I had to chose my priorities in Lambeth I would say "Make the streets safe(r)" In order to do that, our whole community must be recruited - the "zero tolerance" must come from everyone, without that the police have no chance at all. I think astonishing progress has been made by the police towards the "hearts and minds" of our community but much needs to be done and it must be a continuing process. If Lambeth people saw police as our champions and protectors - if police cars were cheered and police officers supported in everyday interactions - much crime would vanish. It doesn't happen because (amongst other things)people are mistrustful, have memories and don't believe in the potential gains. There are VERY good reasons why people feel this way but progress towards a safer community will be very slow unless these issues are solved.

In the meantime - good luck Mr C!

[ 29 January 2002: Message edited by: drfranni ]


----------



## mach v (Jan 29, 2002)

HHJW:  





> If this is truly Brian P with whom we are communicating



Ah, but I doubt that you are double "Happy"  or from Wonderland on Button Moon, I have yet to see any evidence that you are called Jo either! In fact none of you really exist, you're all rampant AI programs let loose on the web: you're wintermute!


----------



## TinyCrendon (Jan 29, 2002)

.


----------



## han (Jan 29, 2002)

Adam P:


> Until you remove the financial profit its game over...dead punters, dead police, dead dealers, dead traffickers...



Quite. It's the ILLEGALITY of drugs that causes all the problems. I think all drugs should be decriminalised (not LEGALISED, which is slightly different). People will always take them. But if crack/smack are taken out of the hands of criminals, and addicts are dealt with by pharmacists/doctors etc. like they are in Holland, they will have far less chance of fucking up their own and other peoples' lives. It's the ILLEGALITY of drugs such as as crack and smack that have this enormous, far-reaching ripple effect of creating crime such as theft, robbery, knife/crime etc.
I'm not suggesting that we should be able to buy 'good quality' smack/crack in Tesco's alongside tobacco/drink, but we should take the whole situation away from the underground and disempower the evil bastards who peddle this stuff.


----------



## Derek (Jan 29, 2002)

I think that only cannabis can realistically be legalised as it is relatively harmless. Most cannabis users don't resort to crime to feed their habit and cannabis is not a dangerous drug. You can't legalise crack or heroin though that is insane. The drug problem is bad enough as it is with those drugs already and the problem is not just caused by the dealers and traffickers, these are deadly highly addictive drugs that cause their users to commit vast amounts of crime in order to feed their habits! Legalising these drugs would allow the drug situation to spiral out of control completely. Organised crime would not simply leave the drugs trade if it was legalised either they have billions in profits at stake.


----------



## moon (Jan 29, 2002)

Thanks for that Commander, it seems that you do have a clear agenda on this issue and your heart is also in the right place. I look forward to hearing how some of your ideas develop and are translated into positive action on the streets.

Jo


----------



## TinyCrendon (Jan 29, 2002)

.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 29, 2002)

I am inclined to agree with steelgate here, to an extent anyway  

I take Adam's point about what we're up against internationally. But as I and one or two others said in the Crack thread on the drugs board, I would like to hear an argument SPECIFIC TO CRACK that would persuade me that decriminalising it will reduce the social harm and surrounding crime, both far in excess now than that relating to any other (illegal) drug. I would need to be convinced they wouldn't continue or get worse.

Anyway, in the real world, it's not going to happen .. crack will be the very last one to get decriminalised.

So the scenario of increased tolerance (at least de facto) of cannabis but continued attempts to target the crack trade will I imagine be the main focus for this debate.

Plus other issues such as those Happy Jo raised ... how to reduce past alienation between the Police and the locals.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 29, 2002)

> When you give smack to people via a doctor they dont contuinue burgling/prostituting themselves because they dont need to, as has been seen with many experiments. Same with rocks...



Same with rocks as with heroin??? No expert me but the craving is so much more frequent and intense and psychotic and outwardly directed , often in dangerous ways???

I'm not convinced.. the evidence would be interesting.

I do agree with medically prescribed heroin for addicts but I also find it hard to cross that Rubicon of following the same policy with crack. Even people with liberal attitudes towards drugs, and more to the point Police and policy makers, would need more convincing I suspect.

Sorry .. this is a broader debate and really one for the drugs board, where it's already been raised, because as I said crack is NOT going to be decriminalised in the forseeable, so the Commander and us will be debating a scenario closer to the status quo.


----------



## nick (Jan 29, 2002)

Personally I would like to see a larger split between weed and harder drugs - not an original stance I know.
Therefore the purveyors of weed need to be separated from the sellers of other stuff.

Here is my initial thought:
1) Increased patrols & hassle of dealers in the "hot spots" of Coldharbour lane, Atlantic & Railton & the BR station - to drive them out.
2) an (obviously off the record) tacit agreement with the dealers that they can sell their smack and crack in a place that is slightly more cut off from the centre of town (St Mathews peace garden? / a part of Clapham common?). This would create space between them and the general population and would mean the users etc would move with them. (I have seen the way that the street walkers in Brixton tend to move to be close to their dealers). It would also avoid the problem that if you take one dealer out, another springs up to take his place and there would be less chance of passers by being hit by random gunfire. 
3) Let small time weed dealing continue from those low profile retail outlets that I am sure the Commander is fully aware of. this gets the "casual" smoker away from dealers in other stuff.

I am sure that the above is riddled with problems (think what would happen to house prices in Clapham if there was large scale dealing on the common LOL    ). but is there any sense at all in what I say?


----------



## bang (Jan 29, 2002)

william, when someone burgles you,leaves you paranoid in your own home who cares if it's for heroin or for for crack
 
i see what you're saying about violence but both are still causing crime, i can't see how you can see an argument for heroin on prescription but not crack - surely violence is in fact worse than the loss of property and that's ignoring the psychological damage burglary can do
(sorry to hijack this thread somewhat, maybe take it to the crack scumbag drug thread instead)


----------



## drfranni (Jan 29, 2002)

I agree that being burgled is very upsetting but:
1) I have no doubt I was burgled "casually" because I live so close to crack dealing - we are probably regarded as their cash machines
2) I would be content to live with the risk of burglary if I thought I could walk home from Brixton Centre Ville after an evening out without fear and that my children could come home from school or go to the corner shop without being attacked.

At the weekend, I sent my son to buy some cheese - he didn't return after 10 minutes, I RAN to the shop - no sign of him - I started to drive around, in a blind panic - only to discover that he had seen some dodgy looking peeps and had walked to another shop, about a mile away, to avoid them.

This is a sad way to live


----------



## TinyCrendon (Jan 29, 2002)

.


----------



## Brian (Jan 29, 2002)

This is where I am in danger of getting into real hot water!  As a police officer I have to say that legalisation/decriminalisation is a matter for politicians not police officers.  Not being cynical but politicians always have this dilemma: do the right thing but if it's not popular and you lose votes, you lose power and then you cannot do anything.  Do the popular thing, win votes and keep power and you could end up doing the wrong thing because there are more votes in it.  Does that mean politicians make decisions on the basis of how many votes it will win/lose them or on the basis that it is clearly the right thing to do (or only when the two coincide)?  Change in the law on anything except cannabis - no chance.  Is it right to decriminalise, strictly control, licence, ...  maybe some things.

There has been no treatment for cociane/crack addiction until now but I got an e-mail today about a tablet dervied from cocaine that has been developed that might provide a safer alternative to crack.  If this is the case, then maybe strictly controlled treatment with heroin and this new stuff might be something worth doing.  Whatever we think, I think the whole thing about decriminalisation fails the 'number of votes' test and is likely to fo some years yet!  Got to keep pushing on those boundaries!


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 29, 2002)

I'll let others respond to the Commander, but I agree with bang .. part of this debate should be shifted back to the drugs forum.


----------



## mach v (Jan 29, 2002)

I'm pro total decriminalisation, as I feel that it would be the only effective way for controlling drug supply and demand, and therefore allowing access to the users. especially if supply is given at below street prices, but I also understand that any political party that tried to push this through in one stage wouldn't last the next election and the law would be repealled immediately.

I am also sure that total decriminalisation would lead to "the wrong message" being passed down to the general public who, as a rule, want to get off their tits as much as possible without fear of social stigma. 

An education package needs to be in place that accurately informs people about the "highs" and "lows" of drug use (both legal and illegal) and deals with the perils of addiction. Once this is in place for a few years, then can we move towards total decriminalisation.

Didn't Blunkett make statements about Heroin becoming available through GPs again? And when does Cannabis become a Class C drug?


----------



## drfranni (Jan 29, 2002)

Edited because should be in drug forum -if anywhere, which I doubt

[ 29 January 2002: Message edited by: drfranni ]


----------



## TinyCrendon (Jan 29, 2002)

.


----------



## drfranni (Jan 29, 2002)

You want a police force that MAKES the laws??? You want a police force that is 100% in favour of all current laws and all government policies???????

I think there is a name for places like that ...lemme think..... oh yes, fascist/communist/name-an-ist dictatorships

Long live an independant, namby pamby, liberal police force


----------



## johnwisehammer (Jan 29, 2002)

Although I agree with a lot of what Adam and other posters have said, I'm tempted to think that perhaps we're not exploiting The Commandant's presence here in the best way by making generally-applicable statements, even if they're true. Maybe we ought to tighten in on very focussed Lambeth issues? But on the other hand, isn't this what it's all about?


----------



## corporate whore (Jan 29, 2002)

I'm in with JohnW here - The Commander may wield a lot of power, but the legalisation of hard drugs on a grand scale is not one of them - can we keep this discussion on the drugs board and talk about local issues?

The idea for a 'designated dealing zone' is pretty good, like Hamburg's street of whores..

More later


----------



## TinyCrendon (Jan 29, 2002)

.


----------



## drfranni (Jan 29, 2002)

"Why be so irresonsible to become a police officer undertaking laws over which you have no control ?" That was the quote which make me think - wrongly it would seem - that you felt that police officers should have control over the law 

I'm sorry that you consider me patronising - and have no idea why you want to make this a "personal" issue "Hope you dont touch any of that addictive junk you deal (see methadone)..." is pretty offensive by any standard

[ 29 January 2002: Message edited by: drfranni ]


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 29, 2002)

Adam that was REALLY offensive ...  

I agree with JWH ... let's stick to local issues ... the rest can and should go to the drugs forum.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 29, 2002)

Since I started this, and like several here, I live in the middle of Brixton, I'd like to put my foot down abit on this thread.

This is about Lambeth, and specifically Brixton.

Please can we keep to the subject of drug and gun crime and the local area. If you want to talk more generally please start another thread on the drugs board. 

This is an all to rare opportunity for Brixton people to talk directly to a high-ranking Police Officer - the Chief Commander for Lambeth. 

Adam P (and others), I hope you can respect this by taking general anger and suspicion of the Police to another thread.

I am not naive about the Police, but we will be wasting the Commander's presence here if we go on the attack. And as he has said, much of this argument is about politics, not local policing.

So let's keep focused on this. Thankyou.

Commander, it hasn't come up yet much. But how are you getting on with getting more ethnic minority officers at Brixton? And how are you getting on with removing racist officers, educating those inexperienced with dealing with the panoply of people they'll meet in Brixton and generally building trust across the local community? There are still incidents of racist policing in Brixton. I don't even think they are that rare sadly. (Accepting that there are some very decent Police too).

I am aware of the initiative whereby you've got volunteer local black men coming in to the Police station and "telling it like it is". (A couple of friends are doing this) How's that going?

The council seem to be neglecting provision for youth/teenagers in the area. (For instance the neglect of Dexter Square). This contributes to youngsters going off the rails and becoming criminals IMO (of course there are other factors). What can the Police do with Lambeth Council to encourage the council to provide youth facilities?

By the way, which gay clubs do you go to? (Oh OK, you needn't answer that one).  



[ 29 January 2002: Message edited by: hatboy ]


----------



## drfranni (Jan 29, 2002)

Hatboy - doesn't it all seem like a vicious circle? Even if Lambeth provided some services my children would like to use, they would be too frightened to walk there, so the services are underused, so the council doesn't support them OR they are used only by people who have the time to drive the children there and stay with them (ie not single working parents) Most of the street crime near me seems to be perpetrated (?spelling) by children  and so many of us keep our children "safe" by confining them to a room, a telly and computer games. If our streets were full of strong, confident children, these nasty little thugs wouldn't have a chance - and the crack dealers might think twice too.


----------



## han (Jan 29, 2002)

lol!    (erk! I meant 'lol' at Hatboy)

Yes, its the groups of kids roaming the streets that are the scary ones. Plus the dealers. Though it's those who carry knives and guns who are the worst. What in God's name can be done about gun possession? No-one can argue with a gun. That recent incident where two men in a scuffle fired a shot and the bullet went into a passing woman's stomach is an example. It could've been any of us walking down Tulse Hill at 8.30pm that Sunday. My housemates were popping in and out of the shop exactly where it happened. People just don't feel safe anymore.

[ 29 January 2002: Message edited by: han ]


----------



## wildwildlifer (Jan 29, 2002)

I quote the Commander " we have arrested 50 street dealers in the last 12mths". So don't expect us to be overwhelmed at less than 1 street dealer a week being hauled in throughout Lambeth. With such a low arrest rate no wonder there are a flood of volunteers to take their place. Its only by upping the arrest rate that the flow of new dealer recruits will be staunched.

By the way I accept the case for legalisation of all drugs as the only long-term answer. The human need to get off one's face now and then is as old as mankind and prohibition never worked.Everyone should be given drug credit cards so habits can be monitored and intervened in a non-criminalistic setting.

Spraying weedkiller over 3rd World countries as Monsanto/Novartis/Bush are doing in Colombia on a huge scale kills zillions of hard-pressed wildlife whilst not addressing the basic problem of demand. Just wait till the butterflies get organised!


----------



## johnwisehammer (Jan 29, 2002)

Commander - these are questions which are pressing for some boroughs at the moment but they may be non-issues in the case of Lambeth.

- how many (if any) of your officers are being diverted to "anti-terrorism" duties outside Lambeth?

- how is recruitment and retention of female officers (at all ranks) doing?

Thanks.


----------



## Voley (Jan 29, 2002)

&lt;deleted: didn't realise the thread had two pages&gt;  

[ 29 January 2002: Message edited by: Naked Vole Primpa ]


----------



## Johnny Canuck (Jan 29, 2002)

Commander, I'm not a 'local', but my city, Vancouver, B.C., has a similar problem with street dealing of crack.

An area of our city resembles a combat zone, with Central American teenagers dealing to a population you describe as 'chaotic drug users'.

The dealers deal openly; there is no mistaking what they are up to.

To date, the local police have conducted two 'sweeps', wherein they arrest 50 - 100 people on drugs and immigration charges.

Like London, they are back on the streets in awhile, or someone new takes their place.

Still, I can't help but feel that if the police made routine busts, on a daily or weekly basis, the hassle would cause the dealers to move on. It appears that the 'sweeps' occur more for media and political points, as opposed to real enforcement.

It's true that busting the dealers won't stop them, so long as there is a demand.

However, shouldn't the effort be made?

The police routinely stop speeding drivers, even though there is no hope of eradicating that aspect of human behaviour. But the enforcement helps to keep it within bounds.

Wouldn't routine enforcement against street dealers have the same effect?

I note that one of the suburban cities, New Westminster, had a serious problem with dealers operating at the subway stations.

The police there began stopping and arresting these dealers on sight; they soon moved on. Yes, they moved to a different area within the larger metropolitan area, but that is one where the police enforcement isn't so certain.

Would these tactics not work for you in your jurisdiction?


----------



## ICB (Jan 29, 2002)

Wow, coming as a simple westcountry boi this thread is something of a turnip for the books, wish we had intelligent and articulate coppers in Brissol  

AP - can't you get off your soap box and be practical for a moment?  

Short of totally re-ordering the state would you rather have somone with the views and intentions The Commander has expressed or some 'zero tolerance' (the self-evident idiocy of that phrase is hilarious) fuckwit in charge?

To get clichéd for a moment, this level of interaction _is_ the revolution, the net's an enabler of all that great stuff you want to see, don't start pissing all over people trying something new before you've given them a chance.

Good luck to you all, I just hope you can sort some of this mess out cos it's getting pretty fucked up everywhere.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jan 29, 2002)

> I have asked the police union reps. (Police Federation) to come up with a list of things the cops think should not be tolerated in Lambeth and those things that we should be more relaxed about (we cannot enforce every single law all of the time). I have put cannabis (small amounts for personal use) in the second column. *What would you put in each column?* I have told the unions I will ask you what your big beefs are and then compare the two lists to see where we can agree on priorities.



I think this is an excellent question. Maybe we could start a whole new thread on it?

(Incidentally, I mailed a link to this thread to my stepmother, who's spoken to Brian Paddick in the past. She says The Commander definitely sounds like him... but she was surprised that the press hadn't gotten hold of it and caused a fuss.)


----------



## hatboy (Jan 29, 2002)

when you appear again, hope you can address my points Commander?


----------



## twisted nerve (Jan 29, 2002)

> Why be so irresonsible to become a police officer undertaking laws over which you have no control ?



There is a strong argument for keeping the separation of powers within our legal system. The last thing we need is e.g. politicians deciding on sentencing, etc. Didn't Michael Howard try,  and (rightly) fail to do this? 


web page


----------



## hatboy (Jan 29, 2002)

Sorry, but there is another thread for ancilliary topics.     Thanks.


----------



## twisted nerve (Jan 29, 2002)

That's the problem with Usenet, though.

&lt;edited to add: I forgot this isn't Usenet, lol.&gt;

[ 30 January 2002: Message edited by: twisted nerve ]


----------



## bang (Jan 30, 2002)

did anyone see trading races last night?
showed the white guy painted black walking down coldharbour lane, you could have played spot the dealer it was so blatant even on television...


----------



## Aitch (Jan 30, 2002)

Hatboy I can sort of answer a bit of your question.  A certain Fubu wearer  you know has been going regularly to meetings in Peckham that the police have organised, basically they invite local ethnic people to come along and talk openly and blatently about any issues concerning race etc. that they have with the Police, lunch and £15 thrown in.  I think this sort of initiative is to be appauded its just a shame that it wasn't advertised  better as Mr Fubu was quite often the only one there!

He is in fact at Hendon today taking part in racial training to new recruits from all around the country some of whom have never really had to deal with any one from other cultures,  but who could well be placed in a London borough. 

It seems quite a small but positive step to helping eradicate racism from the force


----------



## nicnic (Jan 30, 2002)

Hi

My 2cents on how to clean up drug crime in Brixton and I hope the Commander is listening.

Increase the holding Cells at Gatwick Airport..

Customs are allowing large numbers of suspected “Swallower’s” through due to not having enough resource to hold them for the eventual movement. My understanding is that there are only 3-7 holding cells at Gatwick.

Traffickers are aware of this limit and are filling flights with “Swallower’s” in the certainty that some will
get through.


Nic


----------



## TinyCrendon (Jan 30, 2002)

[ I'll take back the methadone insult. (Its sick that docs hand it out tho) But not the patronising bit. If you dont want a reaction argue on the points I make not the ones I dont make. ]

The drug trade is NOT fuelled by small time no-marks flying in from JA with half a ki in their stomachs. This is street nothingness. An irrelevancy.

The real players bring in tonnage. Tonnes of gear. They are, in the main, organised criminals of the blue chip variety, governments and senior business people (see the arrest for example of the Pakistani shipping magnate with 12 tonnes of weed and smack on his barge in Copenhagen in 1999)

You can go on nicking the poor and weak for ever and you will NEVER stop drugs. 

The drug trade is the third biggest on the planet and it ENDS UP IN BANKS. Not under someones bed in cash. It is a neccesity for the econmies of many countries.

This sort of naivety about the drug trade, the reason it is criminalised in the first place, and who benefits from the trade (mainly banks) is just plain out of date.

Drugs are polictical. They are the worlds second cuirrency behind the dollar with TRILLIONS of $$$ activity all over the word.

Its the biggest trade in Mexico outstripping the next three combined, it is 55% of Bolivia's GDP, in 1984 the UN estimated that drug money was BANKED at the rate of $2m AN HOUR, one of the biggest UK city banks is a drug bank, one of the biggest banks in the Americas is a drug bank run by a man who is the biggest drug profiteer in the world (and who met with Fox and Clinton after Fox became pres of mexico).
Why, for example, did Mike Grasso, head of the bank of New York fly into FARC land in order to meet Raul Reyes. So FARC - the peeps whop have legalised coca in Colombia -would bank with them. They refused.

Or one can fritter around at the edges going "ooh arent poor crack users scum. Lets make weed a class C."

You legalise everything or you give up.


----------



## TopCat2 (Jan 30, 2002)

> The drug trade is NOT fuelled by small time no-marks flying in from JA with half a ki in their stomachs. This is street nothingness. An irrelevancy.


 Well Is it down Brixton way, stuffing represents a big source of coke to the "Jamaican" dealers...

I doubt they would go to the bother to bring in coke in this way if they had access to people with tons available. They probably don't have this access as the reputation for random irational violence precedes them.


----------



## TinyCrendon (Jan 30, 2002)

OK, stuufing/mules account for some drugs, of course. But they are not the big carriers. If you want to stop drugs in JA you go to politicans and the armed services who are the biggest drug runners. Instead efforts are focussed on the "street level" dealer, most often poor fucked up dudes (and yes they may well be wankers too) who are effectively chancing it.
See how many of those type of importers end up jail. Plenty. See how many of the proper players/profiteers end up in jail. Very rare.

Im sure you all know these sites/journalists but check the work of Gary Webb, Cele Castillo, Al Giordiano (www.narconews.com) for the reality of the trade.

I guess thats why i get worked up by peeps like The Kommondant who are so `in the way` its untrue...otherwise the combination of drug-war advocates, politicans and police are going to mean so many more dead, jailed, fucked up and bereaved individuals...


----------



## nicnic (Jan 30, 2002)

As far as I know the main (not some)transfer of Cocaine from JA to Brixton is via mules. Given the choice of 1000 mules, a tenth of which are not going to get through and one large shipment with the chance of loosing everything, I know the method I would choose?

I standby my comments that improvements in the holding facilities will cut down on the amount of Cocaine to Crack in Brixton. This will not stop the drug trade but will stem the current loop-whole and once realised hopefully stop the extortion/jailing of recruited Jamaicans as mules.


----------



## bang (Jan 30, 2002)

nic - i hear what you're saying about more holding cells - but do you think that's a permanent solution?
No one has offered a possible solution to this problem apart from legalisation yet

[ 30 January 2002: Message edited by: bang ]


----------



## johnwisehammer (Jan 30, 2002)

No offence (and to bring the topic off-topic even more) but that holding cells thing sounds suspiciously like something that gets leaked by the POA and PolConfed just before wage negotiations come up. (Fact: HMCE officers get paid extra to watch people shit in airports).


----------



## nicnic (Jan 30, 2002)

Bang
Not a permanent solution, but the Custom and Excise staff have been requesting more holding cells for this specific problem for a long period of time. I would go far as saying that the high number of known mules getting through is what’s escalating Brixton crack/violence  problem. More holding cells will not stop Brixton’s problems, but from what I’m hearing it’s a massive loop hole which has been too long in addressing. 

Agree with your point made about legalisation but I feel the polictical impact is just to sensible for all the worlds goverments to realise at once. Remember listening to old Douglas rambling on about this in the film 'Traffic'

nic


----------



## Johnny Canuck (Jan 30, 2002)

Adam, you talk sense.

Does anyone have any dollar figures for the size of the coke business in London per year?  My guess is, it's in the billions.

How many mules must you stuff to bring in a billion dollars' worth of coke?

No doubt it happens, but to get that kind of tonnage, you must send it through in ship containers, etc, just like they do here.

There's too much money to be made from drugs, to risk any of it being flushed down the toilet.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 30, 2002)

For fuck's sake start some other threads! Thanks so much for respecting my wishes to stay on topic guys!!      

I respectfully request that people who don't live in or know Brixton could leave this alone abit. PLEASE.


----------



## slowdog (Jan 31, 2002)

As I used to live in Brixton and I still often socialise there, on behalf of Hatboy, I shall bring the thread back to local issues.

People in Brixton street deal because they live in poverty and dealing is an effective way of making a living, and as they are otherwise criminalised at a very early age they have little to lose anyway.

People get addicted to smack and crack because it is one of very few escapes from otherwise stinking, miserable lives.

Peasants in South America and Asia produce narcotics because in a harsh international marketplace, it is the only effective way of using their land to support their families.  (Oh dear, I seem to have moved out of Brixton).

Meanwhile, it doesn't take rocket science to work out that the drug trade in Brixton or elsewhere is not driven by Jamaican single mothers opting for the pre-flight dinner service, but by big business and banks, and by implication politicians and the worlds security and police forces that support them.  (Oh no, I've moved even further out of Brixton.  But wait, I shall return there)

Brixton is not an island.  The same forces that fuck up the lives of people in Brixton, are the same forces that squeeze the breath out of the world's peasants.  Brixton doesn't have a crime problem, it has a socio-economic problem, just like the rest of the world.

Commander Paddick - you are obviously well meaning, and believe your role as a policeman restricts your attention to Lambeth.  Indeed, gentrification ie. cleaning up the streets, may make some residents lives more bearable, improve your statistics, promotion perhaps, but it will just move the problem elsewhere.  Your role as a human being, however, compels you to see the bigger picture.  Many people who read and post on these boards are politically active both in local, Brixton issues, and in wider international issues.  In truth they are essentially
different versions of the same thing.  If you really want to make a difference then can I suggest that as a human being, you join the side of the weak and meak.  And that as a policeman, you stop kicking the shit out of us on demos, and stop supporting the rich, the powerful, and the power structure, that ulimately brings misery onto the streets of Brixton.


----------



## pk (Jan 31, 2002)

And make sure you pull an honest pint at the weekend whilst your wife is out horseriding!!



(Long story)


----------



## TinyCrendon (Jan 31, 2002)

Nice one slowdog.

Hatboy - I dont think it went off topic quite as much as you feared. Surely (and in a political sense too) this is a good example of `thinking locally acting globally`. Or at least `thinking locally and globally`dont you...er...think.

When one gets an (alleged) opportunity to `talk` face to face with someone who says he is the Kommondant, its an opportunity however fleeting to put down the view that international drug policy DIRECTLY affects brixton, lambeth and of course every area of the UK. Dont you think so ?

Thomas A - A couple of years ago there was some debate in the media about the size of the UK drug market and its contribution to GDP/GNP. (Although it was a pretty flippant media debate like we get in the UK). I honestly didnt see any truly reliable figures though peolpe settled on a figure of around £8-10bn p/a as my memory serves me. 
One of the strongest arguments for decriminalisation is the economic argument. If, under present circumstances, the Uk somehow eliminated all illegal drugs it would therefore cost the economy something in that region, £8-10bn per year. Which would be an economic disaster for the UK. Now imagine you are in Bolivia and its 55% of GDP. It is UNREMOVABLE BY ANYONE. 
To simplify it somewhat the `War On Drugs` is that right wing people want control of the drug trade. (Colombia. Afghanistan, Burma, The Americas in general) Control it, profit from it and criminalise the population at the same time. Perfect. And that is what happens.


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 31, 2002)

I'm OK with: Cannabis, Ecstasy
NOT OK with: Heroin, Crack, Ketamine.
Cocaine, it strikes me, is problematical. On the basis that many cocaine users are precisely those casual Weekend users who do not constitute a threat to public safety or good order (this seems to me to be the fault-line between "OK with" and "not OK with" ) - Crack users and dealers 
_are_ very much a menace, and VERY bad news for Brixton's long-suffering, public. Squaring  _this_ circle will help greatly.


----------



## TinyCrendon (Jan 31, 2002)

Red Jezza - so you want to keep the coke/heroin situation the same then. you think its working like this ? has locking up millions (worldwide) kept the drugs off your streets?

What do you think should be done to change the situ for the better ?


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 31, 2002)

Check PMs Adam, please


----------



## hatboy (Jan 31, 2002)

Enjoyed your post Slowdog.

Where the hell is The Commander? Do you think he's been advised not too continue this. It wouldn't surprise me.

Slowdog - what happened to you? You don't answer my PM's and despite saying how much you liked Brixton, you seem to have left shortly after moving here. What happened? Haven't seen you anywhere.


----------



## TinyCrendon (Jan 31, 2002)

`The Commander` doesnt have any answers, wont contemplate thinking for himself, blames other people (politicians/the public) for not wanting change but at the same time adheres strictly to what they tell him to do and refuses to debate ("ooh i'm in hot water"). Just in a very nice liberal way. 

Thats what liberals do, its why OB appoint them so its all sounds good and the same shit continues. Just Blairite policing. If the Commander were able to think for himself he wouldnt adhere to the gang structure he is in. Dont be suckered by him (assuming he is who he says he is which im afraid i still doubt - but we'll try and debate him as if he is).


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 31, 2002)

1) Adam - The Commander   _is_ who he says he is. I have the proof in my inbox.
2) I take your points as regards fence-sitting "liberal" offricialdom (at least you know where you are with a 100% pure bastard in uniform!) - but he's gone further than any copper (or politician-in-government) I can think of in bringing something approaching a hint of realism and common sense to the absurdity/nightmare of drugs legislation/policing. No, it's notmuch. but it's something, and more than I've seen before, or elsewhere (to repeat myself)....
3





> you think its working like this ? has locking up millions (worldwide) kept the drugs off your streets?


No it isn't working-but legalisation, certainly of Heroin, possibly of coke, may well be even more disastrous. I don't see how you can legalise consumption, without legalising purchase, and therefore sale, and therefore supply, and therefore distribution, and therefore importation. And who would you grant such licence to? Big Business? (M & S-branded heroin - now with free needle! no thanks). The State? Even on a non-profit basis, no government and no state could be trusted with such a power-especially not on a monopoly basis.
The Medical Profession? what starts in the hands of compassionate, ethical physicians would end up in those of NHS Bureaucrats - another nightmare scenario 
Mr Corner Shop? within 6 weeks not one of them could afford their newly-stratospheric insurance premiums!
So No, Adam, It's not working. But yes, for now keep it this way as the least awful alternative, whilst trying whatever can be done to shift the emphasis to healthcare, cure, prevention etc.
Very, very imperfect approach,I know - just can't see any other as that much better.


----------



## slowdog (Feb 1, 2002)

Red Jezza - your argument appears to be thus.  Don't legalise heroin because it would be disastrous and worse than the present situation.  So how exactly would it (could it) be worse?  
Is it just because, as you imply, that we can't work out how it would be traded?  That seems to me a poor argument.  Some people might even call that a tautology ie. not an argument at all.  Adam, on the other hand, has made a very good argument.  If you disagree with him, then you have to challenge the assumptions and reasoning in his argument, and not just make a counter-statement, sit back, and say there thats settled.  Some people might call that reactionary.


----------



## TinyCrendon (Feb 1, 2002)

Red Jezza - Cheers for the reply. Cant say I agree w/you though. I think keeping things the same is simply a recipie for an American-type situation very soon. Lots of people in jail, lots of crack on the streets, lots of death. But I'm sorry to say I think that is EXACTLY what powerful people want. Maybe not in the forefront of their minds but in the notion that if someone is a drug addict and/or difficult to deal with or a street dealer then prison is the traditional option.

It seems pretty perverse that `treatment` and so on starts mainly AFTER addiction and sometimes, though not often, in jail. A bit late then. 

The methods of distribution are indeed the crux of the matter. Ive been on the radio with far better informed dudes than myself from Release (and other lot whose name Ive rudely forgot) and they taught me a lot.

Firstly each drug has to be taken individually.

You wouldnt lump treatment for alcohol and tobacco into one basket for example, no alcohol patches etc etc.

So you work on the best method of treatment/prevention/distribution method per drug. Heroin would come through doctors (see various succesful cases of prescribed smack, notably in Glasgow) for example. Even though popular opinion says people cant survive and have lives whilst using heroin it aint true, it has to be measured (doseage), it has to be given free to stop them burgling/prostituting etc.

Marijuana laws - well, that argument is done IMO.

Ecstasy - testing, education. Or go on letting millions of kids take amateur chemicals every weekend. Distribution, well, I would bite the bullet here and have special regulated shops (a la alcohol in Sweden), others say str8 government outlets (fantasy IMO) others say through doctors. I think in these cases its about amount per week/month etc. So it would be impossible to buy 50,000 Es over the counter for example.

Cocaine - in many ways crack (through doctors a la smack) is easier than powder cocaine. The `recreational` majority who dont develop serious problems using powder are difficult to fathom in terms of distrib. The stuff was legal and available from Chemists remember up to the 1940s (check that date it may have been later), my Grandad for example was a big fan of the tonics that had smack and cocaine in (no wonder). Of course he despised all drug users. I would venture the E shop option above but it is a hard one (see note at bottom of page).

To me though the hardest drug to work with is one hardly mentioned at all: LSD. So unpredictable in its effects yet so strong. Unaddictive (yes we all know `casualties` but it aint the same) yet heavily hallucinogenic. Coulod people go and buy 50 tabs, what if they took em all, is it pesonal responsibility? Its more that most drugs have a SIMILAR effect on DIFFERENT peeps, wheras LSD has  DIFFERENT effects on the SAME peeps from one tab 2 another (within reason etc etc).

But look RJ etc Im a journo not a drug distrib expert, I suggest you take it further and look at experts (such as Realease) who can take the distribution argument a little further and offer you some more ideas to inject...er...chew on....

ciao


To all/The Kommondant: check these sites for the realities of the drug `war`, off the top of my head:

http://www.aci.net/kalliste/os99001.pdf - if you want to see about certain banks etc...
www.copvcia.com
www.narconews.com
http://www.guerrillanews.com/crack/links.html


----------



## nelly (Feb 2, 2002)

Red Jezza - Prohibition isn't working here in Brixton or elsewhere. People are only just starting to have a real debate about what we should replace it with. And no we don't want transnationals peddling dope IMO.

Some of the key thinking within the UK is now happening in connection with something called the Angel Declaration - see the following site:

http://www.angeldeclaration.com/declaration.htm

Some of the solutions are obvious and probably not so controversial (e.g. weed - probably treat it much like alcohol - availability thru off licenses and homegrown) but for other substances notably heroin/crack there is more need for debate. Given that people use crack in Brixton and will continue to do so regardless of Brian's best efforts what would we replace the existing gun-infested system with? What could a post-prohibition system of crack availability look like in Brixton? Could we propose something that would be better than what we've got?

I know this is general drugs debate territory but also believe some of the key thinking has to come bottom up from places where people live with this stuff. Think global...

BTW much respect to Brian for being here.


----------



## Andria (Feb 2, 2002)

Dear Nelly

Thank you for your message
I was one of the Author's of the Angel Declaration!

It was initiated by an ex-lawyer businessman, who gathered a group of full-on reformers together, and that was the result. It was very tough for me as an ex-addict, widowed by AIDS to not push for a bigger section on Harm Reduction - treatment, AIDS prevetnion etc, but I think my peers managed to convince me that the section on it was big enough..

Are you involved in any of the growing reform initiatives? If you aren't but want to be, please let me know. I can sure find you a man who will(!) - if u catch my drift!

Great to know you are out there 

Till next time


Andria


----------



## Andria (Feb 2, 2002)

Dear Nelly,

I see you were up at 8.32 am working - well you must be commited; you should definitely join one of our industrious gangs of reformers, if at all possible.

You say something in response to Red Jezza about not wanting IMO 'peddling drugs.' Mmh, first of all, I'm not convinced they are not already involved with it (but have no proof so better shut up) 

But much more importantly, it is very likely that when the drug laws do change the economic beneficiaries will be the multi-nationals and so on. It is inevitable. Yes, this is hard to accept, for ALL socialist reformers.

However, we could - if motivated - make that less a home-goal for them by beginning now to plan small-cooperatives of medical marijuana folk and so on. This is already happening, though some police are wasting our precious taxes arresting these guys, I suspect that this whole thing will continue to progress. Indeed, many feel that it might be just a case of capitulation of the state, as it's too difficult for them to drop their pride and say this law is daft!

Personally, I'm open. I've seen extraordinary acts of goodness, humility, and pragmatic compassion (as well as inane and unspeakable cruelty) so I really cannot predict

I only know we need to keep on keeping on, and anger must be only a part of the energy that fules us: when we speak to people who clearly do not know any better, we have to reach into their minds and hearts and understand their fears and what their resistance to these changes is about.

Drugs-demonisation/brain-washing has been happening for eons, and is deeply ingrained in ALL of our psyches. It's a long road but...

I can feel a song coming on

One more thing about Brixton: does this sound very naive??Should a few of us 'streety activists' go down and give the influx - if that is at all true - of NEW crack dealers - a polite chat about not f-ing it up for the rest of us; "if it works in Brixton, it could be done throughout the country, and so on."??

DO ANSWER THIS ONE. I ain't doing it on my own anyway

And Alan J - don't be so fliming cheeky!!  Tee-hee ('c u' on other list Tues..)AND where's Brian Paddick gone?

Love and solidarity

andria (efthimiou-mordaunt)
Users Voice Ed


----------



## Brian (Feb 2, 2002)

I know this won't inspire you with confidence but I left my password at work and not knowing quite what I was doing accidentally changed my post name to 'Brian' from 'The Commander'.  Still, I feel more comfortable with this.  Those who want to check it out can go back to old posts to see The Commander had changed to 'Brian'.

Now guys, you might find this hard to believe but I am really busy and do not have as much time as I would like to be with you all.  It would be great to meet up, face to face, socially and have a real discussion but I am not sure that is allowed 

Adam, I was so irresponsible as to join the police when I was 18.  Have your views matured and developed since you were 18?  When mine did and I became increasingly concerned about the police and what we were about I though to myself I have 2 choices.  Either influence the team from the field of play, become captain some day maybe, or stand on the sidelines and shout.  What would be more effective?  So I am on the team, playing and influencing.  I think you and Ken Livingstone have got something though.  I think, with the right safeguards against political control, the local police commander should be held to account for policing his/her areas and recruited/sacked on the basis of doing a good job.  I am held to account (should be, it has been a bit of a mess lately) first Tuesday of every month at Lambeth Town Hall, Room 8 at 6pm.  Be there or be square.  (Not March though I'm on holiday!)

Hatboy - ethnic minority recruiting is better than it was.  Peeps are recruited centrally and then sent out to all parts of London.  I get no choice as to who I get and it would be against the law to send black recruits to specific areas - discrimination on the grounds of race.  There is nothing that makes my blood boil more than racist police officers.  I cannot comment on a couple of high profile cases that are still going through the discipline process but we PROSECUTE racist and violent criminals who wear police uniforms.  Racist policing is rare in Lambeth (unfortunately not exstinct).  Someone has already found out which gay club I go to and is trying to cause SERIOUS shit for me.  It's nice to be popular!!

Johnw - we were suffering in Lambeth having to send large numbers of officers to Central London but it has calmed down now.  We have very high numbers of female recruits.

Johnny - regular hits on the dealers are not easy.  They are getting really aggressive with us at the moment and making death threats against the officers in the front line.  

Longtoe - we need to do more about officers' attitudes towards black people, all people who are seen as 'different' from the officers.  Allowing them to mix with 'different' people in non-conflict situations is a good move.  Giving a mixed team of police officers and BEM people a task to do together is one of the best ways.  Let me take these ideas away and have a play with them.
Things are fundamentally different from when I joined 25 years ago but there is always room for improvement.  Select one of my offficers at random and you've got a very good chance that s/he won't be racist.

Slowdog - you are right.  Most people caught up with drugs are victims of the big dealers.  The punters, the street dealers, the mules - they are all exploited.  The main reason is poverty - the feeling there is no 'legitimate' way of earning a living so you may as well deal crack.  Wrong, misguided and destructive but that's what we've done to these people.

nicnic - this is about criminals full stop.  This is not a race issue.  This is about poor people being exploited who happen to live on the importation line.  Locking up everyone coming in from Jamaica is not the answer.

Drfranni - more youth provision is not really for your kids.  It is for the muggers and those at risk of getting into mugging.  If they have something better to do, then it will be safer for your kids and the rest of us.

Brian aka 'The Commander'


----------



## johnwisehammer (Feb 2, 2002)

Thanks for making a concerted effort to reply to lots of peeps.


----------



## hatboy (Feb 2, 2002)

Yes, it is appreciated Brian. Good post.  I think you have a lot of support locally.  I've never really looked up to a member of the Police force before, but you do have my respect.


----------



## hatboy (Feb 2, 2002)

Andria - I really don't think having a polite chat with crack dealers and telling them to move along now and not fuck it up for the rest of us would work.   At the very least you would be told to fuck off, possibly beaten up and if you were persistent enough you could probably get yourself shot.


----------



## gate (Feb 3, 2002)

I don't know why Cannabis is still ilegal, as this is far from a dangerous drug, it is a wolrd away from harmful drugs like cocaine and heroin. Cannabis users don't fund their habit by crime and cannabis is anything like as addictive as those drugs either. It also wastes police time and the time of the courts in prosecuting cannabis users, when that time could be spent fighting dangerous dealing in dangerous drugs. In America most of the people in prison from Americas war on drugs are harmless cannabis users! This is a complete utter waste of time and resources!


----------



## Brian (Feb 3, 2002)

This is a very difficult issue for Brixton.  The market stall holders, the shop owners and the overhelming majority of the people of Brixton support my officers attempts to rid the streets of the drug dealers.  Someone gave information that a dealer was operating but when officers moved in, the same person was in the crowd making out he was hostile to what the police were doing.  When the show was over, he went up to the officers and apologised that he had to join in or the dealers would get him.  It is blatant intimidation of ordinary people.  Yes it is dangerous to stand up to these people but unless we can think of ways where we can all stand together, so they are out-numbered and realise that everyone is against them, we are not going to get them shifted.

There has to be a priority list of what the police deal with.  That is not to say that you can blow cannabis smoke in an officer's face and expect him/her to ignore you.  They won't!  

We have analysed the results of pilot in Lambeth not to arrest people for small amounts of cannabis for personal use.  Results should be out w/c 11 February.  I cannot say what the results are but...  .

The Home Secretary saw the report on Friday and is taking it into account in deciding whether to reclassify cannabis from Class B to Class C... BUT BE WARNED!  Whilst there would be no automatic power of arrest if it goes to Class C, you could still be reported and still get (a maximum of) 2 years imprisonment.  If you refuse your name & address you could still get nicked for it.  We are a long way from legalisation/decriminalisation.


----------



## nelly (Feb 3, 2002)

Brian

It is evident that heroin could be shifted partly or wholly into the medical domain as an alternative to the current system by which it is available.  For prohibitionists and reformers alike solutions to problematic crack use and all that goes with it present the hardest challenge.  

In your experience of policing crack use in Brixton do you have a sense of any way in which its availability could be regulated that might improve on the current situation? (I'm talking radical thought experiments here - not feasible policies for next week). As a public health specialist I don't get to see much of the enforcement end of things and would genuinely welcome your thoughts. 

Just say if this question is too sensitive to answer here. I appreciate that it might be. If so that's OK. I am not interested in the Met's view here but your personal opinion and the development of models that might be long term goals within the drug reform movement.  

BTW I am new on the Urban75 site and finding my way around. Hopefully my profile and details are visible. I can also be contacted privately (by you or anyone else) at work on: 

n.hunt@ukc.ac.uk


----------



## TinyCrendon (Feb 4, 2002)

.


----------



## Brian (Feb 4, 2002)

Adam - I have to be careful.  As people have said before, expressing my views here could end-up in the Press or on my bosses desks!  

The trouble with legalising drugs is it will inevitably result in more people trying them.  I am sure many people are put off because they are illegal.   A certain percentage of the population have what I call addictive personalities i.e. they cannot have just one drink but become alcoholics, cannot just use drugs at weekends but drugs take over their lives.  There would inevitably be more addicts.

The benefits of legalising drugs are that you could regulate them (over 18s for example), ensure they are pure, clean needles, and so on.  The long-term health effects e.g. heart problems from cocaine, would remain but many of the bad side-effects e.g. HIV would reduce.  You would also take much of the profit out of it so maybe people would not shoot each other over drug deals.  You would still get some people stealing to buy drugs even if they were 'officially' available.

Someone came to see me on Friday and said that a new batch of drug dealers had taken over parts of Brixton pushing the established dealers out.  The displaced dealers had to earn a living so they have switched to street robbery.  I don't know if it's true but there is always the chance that legalising drugs would just push criminals into some other activity as harmful if not more harmful to the community.

What do I really think?  We need to help those people who, if they knew they were going to get addicted, would never have started, to get off the stuff.  We need to take the criminality out of it by legalisation and strict control.  We need to educate people as to the effects drugs will have on them short term/long term and allow those old enough to know better to make their own decisions about what they do to their bodies.

Nelly, as I have said before, apparently they have developed a cocaine-based tablet that might help with crack/cocaine addiction.  I understand that physical crack addiction can be overcome more easily than physical heroin addiction (rather than psychological addiction which is worse in crack).


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Feb 4, 2002)

Brian, the idea of dealers making death threats against police officers is foreign and offensive to Canadians.

As you know, our police carry guns. And as it is anywhere, the range of opinion about the  police varies, but most people recognize that they do a hard job, on our behalf.

People who try to kill police officers here are met with equal force by the police, with the backing of the public.

If your criminals are becoming aggressive to that extent, perhaps the time has come to arm the average cop on the street.


----------



## editor (Feb 4, 2002)

Johnny - please keep any debate on this subject relevant to Brixton and its unique social circumstances.


----------



## nelly (Feb 5, 2002)

Brian

It wasn't the treatment issues I was asking about. I am familiar with what local services do, such as the excellent Stockwell Project which is a beacon service as far as working with crack users (we don't always realise how lucky we are to have such a humane, progressive service on our doorstep), And I follow the wider treatment literature myself (and am personally pessimistic about any treatment that will be a magic bullet). The drug field heralds these periodically but I've been in this business a while and they rarely fulfil their promise. What I am interested in is the detail of how we might do what you refer to in your reply:

"The benefits of legalising drugs are that you could regulate them"

I absolutely agree with this principle. However desirable it may be in theory, policing crack out of existence is a chimaera. Pandora's box is open and we can't put it back in. And I am sure we could improve on the way crack is currently available and reduce the harm to crack users and the much larger majority of non-crack users in Brixton. But it is the practice I struggle with. Optimally, what would a regulated crack market in Brixton look like - in detail?   

I am assuming a starting point of the removal of the international legislation that limits policy options at present. Would we choose medically supervised availability from a clinic in Colharbour Lane? Over the counter availability? I think not! Licensed control à la alcohol - perhaps through specialist drug services where rapid access to treatment/counselling/rehab could be provided and warnings be provided credibly to adventurers who under-estimate the allure of this drug?


----------



## TinyCrendon (Feb 5, 2002)

.


----------



## Andria (Feb 5, 2002)

* To Brian - if people knew they were going to get addicted*

Dear Brian

I was on this tag a few days ago, and I know you're busy, but when you can I would be delighted to hear a response to this. 

The concept that individuals - 12 yr olds who live in city slums all over the world, for example, - would/could know (their vulnerability to chemical dependency) and not take that first shot, snort or smoke is so naive to me.

I am only one person, but I'm almost certain that my experience is not singular. I was 17 when I had my first opiate, and I danced in the nude! I knew something radical had happened to me. A few months later, a boyfriend shot me up with heroin to apologise for hurting me over something. Then I knew straight away that I was an addict, not because I was physiologically hooked immediatelly of course, but simply something VERY deep down inside said; "Home at last; safe at last.." 

The drugs field is beginning to understand that some children are more vulnerable than others but are not in a great deal of agreement about prevention measures.

DARE, in the U.S  has been a dire waste of public money, and more young Americans are experimenting - at least. Perhaps the fact that a uniformed cop comes into a classroom and talks about illegal drugs is not a good idea???!!! 

Over here, the Education/Prevention programs are not that much better. More recently, following some of us screaming out for mentoring services -  that is a young person who is clearly beginning to go off the rails get's an adult, often but NOT always who's been to hell and back - and can spend quality time with that child and give them some compassionate and sensible attention and life-training, (whatever you call it.)

I'm sure you are aware that some ex-cons and ex-addicts love that kind of work.

Many of my peers - recovering addicts - certainly those in early recovery are completely anti-legalisation of any drugs as they are terrified of a world where they would have to 'just say no' everytime they walk out onto the streets, and because some of them believe that the incentive to not use would be gone. I've debated that with many of them till we've all gone nearly blue (familiar experience for many of us!!) and it's essentially pointless.

BUT MUCH WORSE is the way that the media preys on this group
a) Using us to demonise drugs, b) dealers (user dealers are generally alright) c) sex-workers and of course ultimately ourselves. This is quite evil to me cos everytime an unknowing person opens their gutter press paper and reads all the misinformation and lies, their FEARS are intensified, and the reform struggle is set back another few years. 

I happen to believe that it is only a matter of time till politicians wake up en-masse and begin to listen to the scholars, preachers, politicians, cops, addicts and ex ones too, 'normal' users(!) and their families who are beginning to write protocols about how it would look when everything is legalised. Why? Because we have an aging population who require lots of health service money to care for them, and setting billions of drug enforcement and military money free COULD be used to care for the sick, instead of incarcerating the vulnerable. 

Also, several billions will be reaped by Pharmaceuticals, and I happen to know for a fact that a leading drug policy reformer has been approached by the leaders of the capitalist world(s) - multi-nationals - to speak of related issues.

But, I want to comment about Brixton. I have spent a fair amount of time in New York, a bit doing illegal needle-exchange, a lot interviewing often-dying street addicts, giving peer support when and if I can. One of the things that struck me about our community - generally is that we acquiesce to oppression quite easily. 

ON The other hand, I will never forget a meeting I had with skinny black woman I met on the Lower east side. She was quite stoned and I am very passionate about these issues. I  remember that when I started to talk about the fact that DRUG ADDICTS HAVE RIGHTS THAT ARE BEING DENIED THEM ALL THE TIME AND WE NEED TO START FIGHTING BACK, not only for OUR lives but our loved ones, her head suddenly shot up and she started talking like she hadn't for years.

Amongst addict users, there are good and bad, as everywhere - whether thay are still active users or not. Some of the good ones are doing this kind of work ALL OVER THE WORLD

I would like to know if anything like this is going on in Brixton. And if it isn't and you were interested Brian, would/could you support it in some way?


----------



## boomclick (Feb 6, 2002)

fascinating points in this thread, and respect to Brian for taking time out to respond to people's questions 'on the street' (well this little electronic street)

there is one comment that concerned me - the claim that it's getting difficult to hit dealers because they're becoming aggressive and issuing death threats.  (i've paraphrased, but not misrepresented)

surely this cannot be right?  does this not send out a message that you can get away with crime as long as you threaten the police enough? 

i would have thought that threatening police officers with violence and death would be enough to warrant arrests and shipping police officers from all over the country (to avoid localised retaliation) to carry out mass arrests of dealers.

i don't want to see police officers shot, but if threats stop them doing their job, p'raps they should be in a different job?


----------



## Brian (Feb 6, 2002)

Andria

I read your post in awe - you have my respect.  I am a real amateur here trying to fumble my way through this stuff.  I am not someone who has any real first-hand experience like you.  This is what this is all about - express, explore, inform - I have no fixed ideas on this stuff.

You're right, if we are getting 12 year olds exposed to this stuff then I do not expect them to be able to make the right 'informed choices' around drugs.  That would be naive.  If we could regulate to make it very difficult for people to even try this stuff out before they had to wisdom to make those decisions, would that work?  I'm not sure.

I think uniform cops in schools should restrict themselves to what they know - what the criminal consequences are.  They (well most of them) have never experienced drugs themselves, they are not medically qualified, so why should the kids listen to what they have to say about how evil drugs are.  'You can get x years for possessing y drug', full stop.  The people that need to talk about the long-term medical problems are medical people and the people who need to talk to kids about how drugs can screw your life up are recovering addicts.

We are doing some mentoring, or should I say the local Youth Offender Team (local authority) and voluntary sector are doing mentoring with 'at risk'  and 'offender' young people but not around drugs I don't think.  But it is really powerful if you get the right people involved (like you?)   

As I said before being illegal puts many people off.  I am not sure it puts addicts off - the urge is too strong (but what do I know).  You list a whole batch of victims who are demonised by the media.  I am glad you make a distinction between user-dealers (i.e. just enough to feed their habit) and non-user dealers (who just exploit the victims and don't care if anyone dies).  I would only go as far as 'the lesser of two evils' as far as these types of dealer are concerned.

There is only one place for chaotic drug users (addicts) and that's rehab.  Treatment, may be treatment in prison, but treatment, help, support, ... That is the way out, the only way out I think.

Adam - if we want a real, gloves-off debate, suggesting this is going to end up in some newspaper article is not a good way to get it.  Of course the beauty of the internet is that no-one can prove who you are.  First newspaper article based on these boards and I'm out of here.

I have to be pragmatic.  I deal in the real world, the art of the possible.  You make some very heavy and disturbing points and I am glad that you do.  Give me some time to think about what you say.

Nelly - I'm not ignoring you.  No time at the moment.  I'll get back to you.


----------



## christonabike (Feb 6, 2002)

I, also, would like to know why officers are not arresting dealers in Brixton because of threats.

It sort of goes against the grain.


----------



## Brian (Feb 6, 2002)

boomclick - Sorry - wrong message going out here!  The more my brave and fearless officers are threatened, the more determined they are to get stuck in!  We do not retreat in the face of such threats.  we do not routinely arm our officers either.  I mean there are armed officers that Brixton officers can call on and they respnd very quickly but we do not routinely arm police officers and no Lambeth officers are armed (not with guns anyway - they have batons and CS spray).

Adam - the art of the possible - I do not give two hoots about my promotion prospects but I do care about keeping my job here in Brixton.  One step too far and I might be counting paper clips in Personnel Department!  I am seriously reviewing the whole way we are tackling drug dealing in Brixton.  'Do nothing' is not an option and whilst I, with help from you guys I hope, think about what would work better (bearing in mind I cannot change the law), I have to do something and I have to be seen to do something.  If I thought there was a serious risk that my officers would be killed I would withdraw them and replace them with armed officers.  I do not want that sort of escalation and it is not necessary at the moment (difficult call).

Nelly - sorry it was you I should have reassured earlier - I do not know what a regulated crack market would look like.  Something like your last paragraph appeals but I am no expert.


----------



## TinyCrendon (Feb 6, 2002)

Brian - Im not `suggesting` anything but the internet is public dude. If you want to debate then debate but you cant then make conditions afterwards. Personally I'm not interested in publishing this i dont think theres anything v interesting there at all. But you are my equal, not my superior (even though you have lot more power than I do), you can't make conditions about coming here. You debate with ordinary bods or you dont. You might note i use my full name etc etc...

But look, maybe you'd make a really good legalisation advocate. What is so good about your job when you will be enforcing laws you dont agre with, in a violent and nasty trade when people you might know and like/love may die (armed officers or not).

I guess we've run out of stuff to say here. But I honestly can't understand your personal make up. Knowingly doing things that you don't agree with is not in my make up, knowingly doing things that MAKE THE SITUATION worse and kill and dehumanise people is even further from the mark (i guess we dont agree on the last point but i cant tell from what youve written, seems you will go ahead doing what you're told to).

Why stay in an organisation that is (on this subject) doing very bad things you dont appear to like ?

Please check a few of these sites Brian: you will find that you are up against powers you have no control over, who would trash you - a man who appears to have played by the rules set by the powerful - just to import more coke, you're just like us in some ways replaceable, so don't let it happen to you, do what your principles dictate. u only live 1ce innit ! 

I can put you in touch with former US cops Mike Ruppert (FBI) and Cele Castillo (DEA Spec Ops), they would make an interesting chat. Would you like that?

respect 
adz

www.narconews.com
www.copvcia.com
www.thedrugwar.com


----------



## boomclick (Feb 6, 2002)

cheers for the reply brian,

further to your information that established dealers have had to turn to street robbery because of new dealers...

...anecdotal evidence of what's been happening in brixton recently would bear this out.  there seems to be *a lot* of street robbery around brixton at the moment.   several friends of mine have been mugged in the last month or two, a couple have been assaulted and these boards have had notices of muggings, especially at the cashpoints in brixton and in josephine avenue.

of course, these attacks could as (if not more) easily be attributed to dealer's desperate clients,  but there does seem to be a worrying trend.

is there an apparent increase in street robbery at 'your end' of the issue (ie increased reports/arrests) ?

brixton has been through ups and downs over the last 20 years, but mid to late 90s saw an increase in the 'perceived' safeness of the streets.  it would be a tragedy for this trend to reverse...


----------



## hatboy (Feb 6, 2002)

Adam Porter - You ask Brian:

 "Why stay in an organisation that is (on this subject) doing very bad things you dont appear to like ?"

I'm sure Brian can answer that himself. I would like to offer my defense however. Which is that the way you change institutions like the Police, or one way, is from the inside.  Which I imagine is what Brian is attempting to do by doing what he can within his remit and what he believes is good for the area.  The situation may not be perfect, but I certainly haven't ever come into contact with a cop who seems to care to this extent and seems to take an honest practical approach to the subject.  Mr Paddick has stuck his neck out to come here.  I started this thread and although I've left it to others to do most of arguing I have followed it with great interest.  This is about what happens on my doorstep! I have learned alot about the local Police and  about Commander Paddick the man.   

Implying that he should get out of the Police if he doesn't like everything they do isn't helpful atall.  As someone who lives in the area I'm more interested in a practical exchange of views than any philosophical or intellectual  muscle-flexing.  I would appreciate some respect in this and I know  Mike (editor) who also lives in the middle of Brixton feels similar.


----------



## wildwildlifer (Feb 7, 2002)

Could I second, or rather third, that emotion, hatboy.
By the way, Brian , it was not your technological incompetence that caused 
your 'identity' to change. Several of us had our nom de plums changed , inadvertently
(?), as a result of the Ed's improvements to the boards.
he who once was and maybe again, Johnny Butterfly


----------



## TinyCrendon (Feb 7, 2002)

.


----------



## hatboy (Feb 7, 2002)

OK Adam, I never said I was opposing your view.  I'm not anti-legalisation. I don't know the answers - mainly listening here.  I just want people who don't live here to keep the topic local/practical please.   After all, it's people who live in Brixton who are on the blunt end of this. For the record I don't call anyone "scum" either.

As for naming a Police force that's changed from inside.  Well in small ways, the Met -  as people like Brian demonstrate. He is in it and he is (or if you want to be cynical, appears to be) different.

Brian can't get drugs legalised, but in his position he can contribute an opinion to the debate that may be heard.  He can also make a difference to Police/community relations here, street safety and crime levels.

Sorry to seem patronising Adam, I know you're a clever guy. BUT you don't LIVE HERE.


----------



## TinyCrendon (Feb 7, 2002)

.


----------



## hatboy (Feb 7, 2002)

These things do affect other areas of London I know - yeah.  I like you better now you're more chatty and less like a College Lecturer.


----------



## TinyCrendon (Feb 7, 2002)

point taken


----------



## Brian (Feb 7, 2002)

Adam - I have great respect for you and what you say.  I cannot stand around waiting for others to come to their senses whilst peoples' lives are destroyed through drugs.  I have to work in the real world the way it is now.  I have expressed my personal views on live TV in front of a Home Affairs Committee.  I am not affraid to stand up and be counted.  I am doing what I think is right in the current circumstances even if I think I would do something different if the law was different.  What I need the answer to is this:  With Brixton as it is and the law as it is what is the best way for me to use the resources and the power that I have?  This is not a cop out and I have engaged in the philosophical/hypothetical debate here and in Parliament  BUT WHAT DO I DO IN MY CURRENT POSITION NOW?  HELP ME!!  

hatboy, I think I love you!


----------



## boomclick (Feb 7, 2002)

what can you do with current law and current resources?

it's a tough question because two of the biggest problems are lack of resources and hopeless laws, but how about:

sweeping through atlantic road/coldharbour lane a couple of times a day and arresting a dealer each time?  co-ordination between those watching the cctv footage and those on the street should make it (relatively) easy enough, no?  it's not practical to try to arrest all the dealers, but picking one or two a day would eventually have some sort of effect, surely?  two months into the campaign there'd be 100 less dealers on the street.  

perhaps the dealers would be less easily replaced if they've got a 1 in 20 chance of getting nicked *every day*.

if this is successful, step it up, double the number of sweeps.

how about having police actually on the streets around brixton centre *all the time*?  are there insufficient resources for, say, 2 teams of 2 police officers to patrol brixton centre?  

i can't remember the last time i saw police patrolling in brixton (as opposed to standing outside the tube with sniffer dogs or zooming about in vans and cars)

to be honest, i think brixton would be a less intimidating place if the drug dealing was simply less flagrant. 

also more CCTV.

finally (and this shouldn't be too difficult but potentially outside your remit) how about lighting jospehine avenue properly?


----------



## nick (Feb 7, 2002)

Could the Brian / Hatboy romance overtake the Drew / Tribal Princess lovefest?  Vote now  

But seriously, is there any way to move what (appears to me) to be the main concentration of crack/smack dealing to a less central part of the borough? 
I have very little knowledge of the way that this scene seems to work but it seems to me that the robbery / prostitution / needles / guns etc etc are always very close to where the actual dealing takes place. Let the dealers know that there will be zero tolerance of crack/smack dealing in the centre of town but that there will be a slightly more lenient view taken if it occurs in a less populous part of the borough away from schools, houses and passers by (no idea where this place would be - are there any empty industral estates around?).

Is there any way that you can get your cops to "persuade" the dealers that any crack/smack dealing in the centre will be stamped on hard, but that if they are "only" dealing other drugs on a relatively small scale the attitude will be a little more laissez faire.

Have the cops that you polled come up with any useful suggestions yet?


----------



## nick (Feb 7, 2002)

Just seen boomclick's post and agree completely with him (he/she expresses himself much better than I do).

Lighting Josephine Avenue is a must (perhaps getting the trees trimmed back a bit as well might help). For what it is worth (very little I know)  I moved house recently and despite seeing many great places in Leander / Josephine / Helix etc decided not to go there because of the street crime there


----------



## boomclick (Feb 7, 2002)

i've just thought of another idea...

this is off thetop of my head, so apologies if it's not properly  thought through.  it might even exist already, but i don't think so.

there is a dedicated drugs team at brixton police station, yes?  there are also plain police constables, who are the one's who patrol the streets (possibly?).

why not combine the two - 'bobbys on the beat' dedicated exclusively to class A drug crime?  with the right publicity, and attitude on the street, i think this would go down a storm with people on the streets of brixton who are traditionally anti-police.

see those coppers over there?  - there not going to arrest mr market stall trader for smoking a spliff, but they will walk up & down coldharbour lane, and politely ask groups of big men  in leather jackets (who've been ID's over CCTV as dealers) to move along, or they'll be arrested the next time round.

the point wouldn't be to *stop* the dealers, we all know that's next to impossible - but it would inconvenince them - their clients wouldn't know where to find them from day to day, fix to fix and they'd have to make other arrangements - safe houses (like the old crack shop on railton road), alternative places, whatever.  the message has to go out loud and clear that the heart of brixton, with it's shops, schools and local life - is *not* a suitable crack or heroin dealing place.

i suppose the key to all the suggestions i've made today is to make life difficult for the dealers.  what angers a lot of people i know is that the dealers act like they can do what they like, as openly as they like - and no-one's going to do anything about it.  which, to be fair, seems to be the case at the moment.

what really puzzles me are all the portuguese heroin addicts around brixton.  back home they'd get sunshine, could register as addicts and get prescription heroin and addiction treatment.  why the f*ck get pranged on the platform of brixton station instead?

oh - one final point - brixton needs more resources allocated to the police.  this should be obvious and would be easy to get if a few of the people in charge of deciding were brought down to brixton and asked to walk unaccompanied down atlantic road, coldharbour lane etc.

brian - you've got to try to get the bean counters to actually *see* what's going on...


----------



## hatboy (Feb 7, 2002)

Well!! What can I say.   Thanks Brian - just trying to be fair. Seen you on telly though and your not my type - anyway I only go out with dealers.    

Moving on, aside from what others have said (sticking all the dealers on a deserted industrial estate is a hilarious and unworkable idea Nick) I think the simple presence of more foot patrols around the centre of Brixton more of the time would make some difference, especially after dark. I was in Coldharbour at about 1am yesterday and the street was deserted. Then I see two or three Police by the Granada car hire.

I do want to emphasize however,  that I personally do not want to see any oppression of Brixton's street culture, nor any hassling of people just shooting the breeze (if that's the right expression). I like all that.  Nor do I personally mind dealers as such. What I object to are dealers/users who rob, intimidate and use violence. I hope we all clear on that otherwise we'll end up sounding like "disgusted of Tunbridge Wells".

So, not "swamp", just a presence.


----------



## editor (Feb 7, 2002)

I'm still baffled why the dealers are allowed to ply their trade with complete impunity all along Coldharbour Lane, one of Brixton's major thoroughfares.

Walk along the stretch from the Dogstar to the Prince of Wales and you'll have no trouble finding someone to accompany you on your journey, hussling you with requests to buy 'drugs' off them.

While this doesn't particularly bother me (I've lived here far too long to get upset by idiots trying to sell duff drugs) many people find their presence on the street *very*  intimidatory indeed - to the point where some girls I know are too scared to walk down the street. Why should women have to put up with this kind of intimidation?

Seeing as the various bars, restraurants and clubs on that stretch of Coldharbour Lane must generate substantial income for Brixton, surely it makes sense to post some police there - and put up some decent lighting?


----------



## J-Bob (Feb 7, 2002)

I'm in agreement with what Mike, Hatboy and others have suggested as practical and workable solutions (I know a few people who will not go down Coldharbour for the reasons Mike outlined); however, what happens if and when these actions are implemented ? Will the problem just merely move down the road to Camberwell or other locations ? 

I say this, as to my mind, a great deal of the increase in open dealing/drug taking in Brixton has been in response to squeezes on places such as King's Cross, and even more centralised locations such as around Centre Point.

Surely it just becomes a circular argument unless we take into account some of the wider issues that Adam brought up ?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Feb 7, 2002)

Andria: the most profound, most concrete,  most seductive, and most frightening description of addiction I have come across - 

"Home at last, safe at last."

I hope you are safe.


----------



## hatboy (Feb 8, 2002)

God, yeah Johnny, I thought that too. "Home at last, safe at last" -  frightening and profound.


----------



## unclekellan (Feb 8, 2002)

been hearing a lot bout this thread - and respect due Mr Commander.

some points i would like to raise, if thats ok 

decriminalisation/legalisation is a nest of thorns. so are the division between hard/soft drugs and dealers/users. 
is cannabis ok and not ecstacy; is ketamine ok and not ampethamine. what about users who deal to support their havbit rather than burgarling
if a users sells to other chaotic-users are they a treated as a chaotic user or a dealer.

how much co-operation is there between brixton police and other boroughs. if brixton managed to eradicate or reduce the drug/crime related problem - would it simply be exporting the problem to another borough, in the same way westminster exported the sex industry to camden

how much support does brixton police have from the CPS re its policies regarding difference between users and dealers

which prisons do most users prosecuted in brixton get sent and what are the drug rehab schemes / ex-prisoner support schemes like at those prisons

how many, if any, drug rehab programmes are there in brixton area and how many are working with the police over targaetting dealers rather than chaotic users.


------

comment rather than questions

seems to me that one of the major problems in dealing with street crime, whether it is drug or violence is the problem of prosecution. one could swamp an area with officers but if one cannot get evidence and/or witnesses then the offenders walk. 
all the wrining of hands and complaining about the prescence of drug dealers wont make a jot of difference if people wont come forward to testify

while i am cautiously in agreement with decriminalisation - one has to recognise that that wont in itself solve crime resulting out of addiction. one only has to look at alcohol related crime to see that.

one of the ways that the public may feel more empowered and involved and confident in getting actively involved in this issue, and therefore may (*may*) lead more people to feel mre confident about witnessing is if more police were prepared to get up and talk about stuff to local residents.

meanwhile, adam, it has to be said - if The Man comes to you and ask yur opinion when he has no requirement to do so, then insulting him and attacking him is not going to get your point listened to - he is more likely to retreat back behind his desk and nothing changes.


----------



## unclekellan (Feb 8, 2002)

here's another takle on upping the police prescence in central brixton

lets say you follow the suggestions by some other posters and putting plain clothed and uniformed police on the street and sniffer dogs and increase the patrol cars - what happens when the black community and the gay community start to say they are feeling intimidated and/or harrassed by such a massive increase in police prescence.

i' m not saying its the wrong approach, just that put into context of other isssues and it can be seen in totally different way.


----------



## johnwisehammer (Feb 8, 2002)

Strangely, I think you'll find it's not only black and gay people that don't like the idea of a neighbourhood where every third person on the street is a copper and where passive sniffer dogs roam.


----------



## TinyCrendon (Feb 8, 2002)

You are all lovely as far as i can tell. When I argue about political issues i tend not to take many prisoners - hence the college lecturing. But I find thats the best way...Im kinda used to arguing against rightys all the time so you have to win arguments no ?

Brian asked `with the powers that i've got what can i do` and once again mentioned the `real world`. Well obviously the word `do` is operative here. You can always `do` something (street lighting like mike says on that bit of coldharbour lane and in general around that end of CHL/market/dogstar/ritzy bit etc etc isnt good).

But, respectfully and compassionately to all, if you take the word `do` to mean anything long term or concrete on the subject of drug misue and its surrounding problems then the answer to Brians question has to be...`nothing`. He can do nothing. And Im not laughing when i say this, it doesnt make me go AHA! SEE! It makes me want to leave the country...


----------



## sonicdancer (Feb 8, 2002)

I agree with you Adam, firstly on the fact that it is a political issue and secondly that there is not much Brian can do he is caught in the middle really, there is over whelming support for legalisation of cannabis in some parts of the country but in middle england this suggestion is reacted to very badly.  

The vote winners come from this surburbia land and I doubt very much if Blair will do anything before the next election if at all, even with the best efforts of Blunkett dropping hints and breaking new ground (lowering the classification)  (introducing a trial more acceptance of smaller ammounts in Lambeth), 

I walked down the lane last night  and there seemed to be MORE than ever dealers between KFC and the pub, all muttering Marijuana, Ganja, Skunk, Sensi etc etc, it then dawned on me that the sweeping approach might backfire BADLY there are so many dealers there now more than ever I think this tactic may well be futile, and too dangerous (which figures with Brian's almost desperate plea's for ideas, as this has im sure been tried) and also (made me dismiss the suggestion of zero tolerance).......... but they where advertising the smoke NOT crack, pills, base.  although I have no doubt whatsoever the shelves are stacked with these also.  

The point I am trying to make Brian and what other's too have debated  is that if Cannabis was legalised and distribution is controlled, there is no reason for dealers to be standing in the streets when there is controlled outlets.  SO what you could do and believe you have been doing already so carry on is attempting to lobby influencial governement and high ranking police figures into this idea of legalisation, therefore giving no ligitimate reason for dealers to be there (so they must be holding class A's).

Taking it back to Brixton Guns Crack.  I would suggest that you start making suggestion's reference making an area within Brixton (ONLY) which encompasses all the patches of the dealers a "Cannabis can be legally bought" zone.

The dealers choose to deal on the streets, probably as a last resort but I bet they actually like the past-time, in the Brixton Jamaican circles I bet the status is probably quite high, the pressure and dangers inherhant mean they are more likely to arm themselves, inturn they are more likely to shoot someone, especially anyone who gets in the way (your officers brian)

This is going to be a long drawn out affair for police and mainly and more importantly Government to wake up to trialing radicale ideas in an effort to reduce gun crime on our streets


----------



## drfranni (Feb 8, 2002)

I AM a wet liberal and cannot help being deeply immersed in "the personal is political" but I am totally signed up to the idea that WE can do something

I hate the fear that street crime brings, I hate that my children are fearful of going to the cornershop (however my son browses the music shops on CHL with impunity - says he feels safe there!)

Two nights ago, I got off the bus as usual, as LJ. This is not a very "safe looking" area. A man was shouting at his GF -seemed very out of control and violence seemed imminent. Many people, including the large group of people how are usually in front of the supermarket and the barbers, stopped and looked. There seemed no doubt that any of us (myself included) was ready to intervene. The bloke stopped, looked, and calmed down - a bit. We made the street a safer place for a few seconds

If it had been a dealer, I suspect that we would all have had second thoughts, I'm a big ol' girl but doubt I could argue with a bullet. Fear makes the streets less safe and I have no idea how to overcome this but I am also sure that there will never be "enough" police on the streets to achieve this - we are also part of the solution - if a solution exists


----------



## slowdog (Feb 8, 2002)

This is indeed the most amazing thread.

It is hard to keep this thread to practical solutions in Brixton because the problem is neither local nor simple.

In fact, the situation in Brixton is not unique or, dare I say it, particularly bad.  There are ghettos in this city that are suffering much worse from guns and crack.  But they go unnoticed because they have no trendy bars, no flash websites, and no liberal professionals living there who are able and willing to do something about it.  Their pain never makes the pages of the Evening Standard, let alone the national press and television (or even Year Zero).

I too believe the personal is political, and for that reason I question whether the police have the answers.  Some individuals within the police service may have the best of intentions and their opinion is valuable.  But the police, as an institution, is not answerable to the people they police, but ultimately to their political masters, and we all know who pull their strings.  While this remains the case, change to the police service from within, and change to the most deprived neighbourhoods of London are at best cosmetic, and at worst a pipe dream.


----------



## Andria (Feb 8, 2002)

Dear Slowdog and Adam too

You make vital statements about the role of the police, and whom they are ultimately answerable too. But hey, he is here with us on line and while Adam continues to get him to read those sites, and I pressure him to try and strategise, we ALL need to think about the issue, cos it is ALL our problems

Like AIDS was never a gay men's disease, drugs are here now and everywhere. If each one of us did one thing per day, things cumulatively change dramatically. 

I'm going to assume that if you are on this thread you care like I do about the drug problem, whether it is Brixton or not, and this mentoring stuff can be done by almost anybody with a heart and mind - ALL of us. AND it costs 1 hour a week

That's just one of many ideas; it's not about trying to presuade kids not to use, but it is about telling them the whole truth, and then giving them a little bit of guidance that will go a tiny way to get them to make the healthiest choices for themselves and those they love and love them.

Bye for now; thanx for keeping me in touch with reality guys. I have just so lost faith in govt; they keep getting bought over. What can i say?

andria/Users Voice editor


----------



## hatboy (Feb 8, 2002)

I've probably said this, but I am very concerned not to demonise/dehumanise anybody.   Dealer doesn't necessarily  equal gun-man, especially when we're talking about little bits of weed. (Or little bits of nothing, when we're talking the selling pretend drugs to tourists in Coldharbour Lane).   Likewise we should be careful about advocating Police "sweeps" or "swamp".   I know Brian Paddick was a PC during and before the 1981 riots when "Operation Swamp" was a heavy-handed police action that contributed to the  unrest.  (Correct me if I'm wrong there Brian. I wasn't a regular visitor to Brixton till 85 and didn't move here till 88 but I think that was Operation Swamp).


----------



## TopCat (Feb 8, 2002)

Yeah it was swamp alright, I was in the ice rink in streatham when it all kicked off and they put out a tannoy telling everyone there were no buses to brixton because of anti police rioting. the rink emptied in about ten mins as all the braver/more reckless than me peeps went for a mooch about... 

Interesting that Brian was a pc then, he must have been about 12!


----------



## unclekellan (Feb 8, 2002)

i'm not saying that people should put up with the atmospherte in/around brixton right now - tho i dont think, in some ways, it is as new as it might feel

i have only been attcked in london 3 times in 13 years; one was drandom drunken stuff in central london - the other two were bottle attacks in brixton in the late 80's and again in the mid 90's.

but i also worry that for many people the answer seems just to stick lots of police on the streets, increase cctv surveillance and push the problem somewhere else.

which is why i was asking about how much work is being done by the police to work with drug rehab agencies, prisoner support agencies, halfway houses and other bodies.

if users especially chronic/addicted users of drugs/alcohol dont have the necessary support systems in place to help them get off and stay off the substances, then they will keep creating a demand and that demand will be satisfied by dealers
and since one cannot support a habit on social security, crime is inevitable

the problem is not simply one of the supply but also of demand.

unfortunately, if it is expensive to mount high-police-prescence and visibility, it is far more expenisve to set up and run rehab /support systems at the level required


----------



## Brian (Feb 8, 2002)

head honcho - I was going to get mad but then I realised that what you think is the impression others must be getting as well.  We have arrested at least 50 dealers in CHL in the past 12 months.  I have a brave and fearless team (i.e. one team) of officers who are down there hounding the dealers whenever they are on duty (about 8 hours a day, 5 days a week).  With that level of enforcement, I am not surprised people think we are doing nothing!  I'm looking at having 5 teams.  It will take some doing - I've only got a limited supply of officers and I am not talking about next week.

unclekellan - testing questions.  What priority order do we put we our drug fiends in?  Let's apply the 'don't damage my community test'.  Top of the list are the street dealers in crack and smack -they screw-up people's lives and they frighten the public.  Next come chaotic users who steal and rob to buy the stuff - OK they need help and treatment but they also need to stop damaging others to pay for the stuff.  User-dealers - are they selling to chaotic users?  They are also high on the hit list if that is what they are doing.  I want people to stop damaging other people.  Is arresting any of them doing any good?  Gotta do something?  No 'do nothing' option, not for me anyway. 

There is some joined-up stuff between Lambeth and other Boroughs.  We are at the moment at the 'what works' stage.  If it works in Lambeth we can try it elsewhere but displacement is an issue.  CPS are OK with this - no problems there and I think prisons universally have treatment and aftercare for all prisoners who get over a certain length of sentence.  Don't know how many rehab schemes in Brixton but we do work together pretty well.

I do read everyone's contribution and I do take it all in but some posts I do not have anything to say about.  Do give me a break from the 'puppet of my political masters' bit and the 'changes are only cosmetic' business.  Everything is relative I know but compared with the changes I have seen (not seen come to think about it) in my 25 years of policing (how old did you think I was anyway?) these changes can be measured in light years (ahhh!  Kylie!!)  Uh,hum, sorry about that   And most people in the police think I am a beyond-redemption, 'let's get the guys in white coats to take him away', rebel.  

I was a actually a Sergeant in Brixton when Swamp happened and we are not going there again!

unclekellan there is money for rehab and that is part of the answer (except no effective rehab for crack addicts yet).  What do we do on the supply side?


----------



## Andria (Feb 8, 2002)

*Supply Side*

Regulate and Control. Regulate and Control. Tax it and pay for improved health-care, education and transport 4 all.

I know you've heard it before, and it will take for ever to implement, but from where I am standing with a head full of sometimes-overwhelmingly painful memories, what I'd want for those I love (if they got in trouble with Ds) is

a) Clean drugs sold by a pharmacist who can give advice when necessary

b) Clean & easily available needles.

c)  Truthful education - if we did that on drugs, we would have to change the drug laws immediately..

d) All the money that would be saved from punishing and imprisoning and insurance etc could be used to sort out the health service and the transport system and the fact that we have an aging population who need a lot of health-care.

It seems so simple to me (from a 'child's' eye-view) - in theory at least - I just don't get why everything GOOD takes so long... 

And when I do get it, it reminds me so deeply of why I became a heroin addict: the world is an unjust, unequal, often cruel, mostly-testosterone (but I'm sure us girls hormones don't help sometimes)driven-mess.

Anyway Brian, if you are still on line, did u get my liyttle private E? 

I think it would be good if we could interview you for the Users Voice: I try to give folk hope with that. It goes out to many service users (drug services) and of course AIDS ones too and their carers. I'm totally respectful of people's wishes re editing - indeed they essentially do it for themselves.

Lost of wonderful, famous and infamous people have been in there; have i sold it to you yet?

andria


----------



## Andria (Feb 9, 2002)

*Andria cheers up!*

Brian et al!

And I guess that last note was very down eh? (End of a knackering day.) SORRY.

Here are some improvements on it.

In the immediate re prescribing: doctors must use their freedom to prescribe injectable opiates to entrenched addicts who will not/cannot come off. AND actually there are things that can be done for Cocaine and/or Crack addicts but there simply are not enough infrastructures to respond to the need that is out there AND I think (if some workers were honest) there is a lot of fear about working with this group. Once upon a time, being a drugs worker was frustrating and heartbreaking, now it's both of them and sometimes terrifying.

Next step re prescribing: before we get to chemist/druggist selling amps over the counter, we must consider regulating the administration of prescribing through medics. One of the problems we have in this country is that our docs are reticent to prescribe injectables they say because more injecting inevitably leads to more blood borne infections (which may be true.) However, if the doc doesn't prescribe, and the patient goes back to the street, they may have the double-whammy of another infection PLUS poisoned and/or cut drugs. So which is best in the long run?

Perhaps the doctors cannot carry all this on their conscience. AND at the end of the day, they are obligated to work with patients they can see are motivated to staying with their scripts, or coming off - it's a numbers game. So in the end, the most vulnerable will always go  to the wall: die young, go to prison for years or develop life-threatening diseases. It is a form of social darwinism that goes further than the addict community of course..

But I've been asking a question about community-organising in Brixton, and nobody is answering. Am I asking the wrong people? Is it a stupid question or what? Somebody just let me know and I will stop harangueing this list on this subject.

Models of community-empowerment exist; we need to get our hands in and start using them. That is the only way the morale and hope of a community rises, and things can start to change.

Re having arrested many crack dealers down there: how quickly do they replace each other Brian? That must be SO f frustrating. I will never forget the last long street-use I did. It was 1991-3 in Kings Cross. There was an Italian user dealer I would score from regularly. He was put on remand for 4 months, and then back out on the street, where he returned to exactly the same spot to begin dealing again!! (maybe prison had slowed his brain down or HIV was eating it up, but you get my point...)

I analogise that picking up 28 dealers in a week (or whatever it was) must be like an active addict having a great binge-week with smack and coc, and feeling great. Then, when they return to the beat and see the replacements so thick and fast, the come-down must demoralise terribly.

What to do when nobody is winning much....be wild, creative
"boldness has genius" and all that.

Brian, if you could tell me of any community initiatives that you know of, I could stop harrassing you and see if there is anyway I can help.

Look forward to your reply.

Andria


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Feb 10, 2002)

Even without being the most sterling of Canada's citizens, I have always had a respect for the police.

I call them 'garbagemen with guns'.

Not because of the objects of their 'business', but because, like dustmen, they are people who we ask to take on the distasteful jobs of our society.

No one likes their neighborhood unsightly, no one likes to see the mental patient screaming on the corner, the passed out junkie pissing himself, the teen with the crowbar prying off a basement window.

No one likes to deal with our violent or unstable citizens.

So we pay this group of people to do it for us, to get their hands dirty when we can't or won't.

When we see to many junkies on a streetcorner, we tend to get mad at the police.

But Slowdog has a point. Maybe the cops don't answer to their 'political masters', but they must operate within the framework of law and policy set down by elected officials, bureacrats, and boards.

There was a time in this city when a pimp or dealer could get taken into an alley and beaten up by the cops.

Illegal, but the 'powers' countenanced it , the public turned a blind eye, and there were few if any pimps or dealers on the street.

Today's atmosphere, and public, are different.

The cops could quite easily control the street drug problem, but it might be at a cost that you aren't prepared to pay.

Brian et al have discretion within an envelope. If you want the envelope changed in any way, you must go and take on 'city hall'.

Adria, do you believe that the legalization of crack/coke would be a good idea?

Sure, it would be clean, but at say 1/10 the price, one could continue to increase the dose to get over the habituation effect, until finally reaching the point of stroke or heart failure.

It ain't junk, no one is nodding off before they can od.


----------



## Brian (Feb 10, 2002)

Andria - I wll call you Monday


----------



## sonicdancer (Feb 10, 2002)

Jonnie the old bill are not armed as you know, this is probably one of the main reason's why yardie (jamacain) gangsters have targeted London as soft spot, the other being the cocaine culture in London (demand is there) and the Home Counties, the other being the leniant sentences and no death penalty in Britain.

I dont think arming the police would be a viable solution though, just escalate the problem, also we DO have a problem in London and Brixton and the whole country for that matter with heavy handed police, there are plenty of cases in this country caught on CCTV, and see other threads on this board for proof of this (unofficial policing tactics).  But if that was encouraged in Brixton it would explode.....


----------



## unclekellan (Feb 10, 2002)

[andria (hello, not seen yu since the old act up days)]

one of the issues about drug use, particularly opiates, is when the law changed in 60s and changed the way in which registered addicts could a) get their treatmnts and b) were treated.

maybe whats needed is some kind of forum work in brixton between police, gps, drug rehab pojects, users, probation service and concerned locals. 
the police on there own are only touching part of the problem and can never on their own provide a solution
---

seems to me a number of assumptions are being made by The Commandr about a) drug rehab progs in brixton b) drug rehabd/afterprison support for users in/from brixton - 
stuff has got to be joined up between the police and after-prison services, between police and drug rehab, between sentencing policies - maybe more probation in exchange for drug rehab attendance - 
yu can arrest all the people yu like - but if they come back out of prison and there is no local support network and there has been no decent support for rehab inside - then they will re-offend - its the nature of addiction.

hell, i was a speed and alcohol addict - i know - without detox unit - i'd be dead

---

re hierarchies of targetting.

the "do they damage my community test" works if applied to straight forward dealers - the big money men exploiting the rest. but user-dealers - too often these are just as chaotic as your regular joe's. and treating them the same as your bastard dealers misses the point. 
if yu got to spend time buying stuff, holding it in your house and selling it to others without using it all up yourself -whilst being an addict - yu got to be pretty desperate - burgularly/prostitution/mugging is lot less hassle. 

when brian talks about those who hurt the community, we got to be clear that teenagers on crack are part of the community too - 

is this debate about what we do about "them" as people who hurt our community or a problem about "us" as a community which contains people who are drug users

ultimately its got to come down to aftercare and support systems. the police might take people off the street for a while - but if the demand for the stuff is still there - then it will be supplied. 

and can people here explain which is their priority:

crack/heroin dealers on street corners 
guns
burgularies and muggings 
kids into heroin/crack


----------



## TinyCrendon (Feb 11, 2002)

Brian - that was a very depressing and in some places unintelligible reply- you have seen/not seen progress measured in light years.

I have to say that last reply takes me back to my original posts. That isnt Brian Paddick that was nonsense...

If it is then we are all in big trouble.

Also, please stop about this `Yardie` bollocks, the drug trade in London and the UK is run - in the vast main - by white guys. IN the main the Yardie gangs are white-supplied. You think these little street fools can match peeps like the Adams or McGuires etc etc. 
The `Yadies` in the south of london don't bring in all the coke and the most of them aren't `Yardies`they are local kids. I also think the term is racist, why are there no terms for other gangsters, why do the majority white gangsters have no name. Instead people make feature films about them...

Anyway I think this thread has reached a very sad conclusion. There is nothing we can do. The police won't help us they will only enforce laws they know are wrong and kill people, and the drug trade is controlled by major economic concerns who wont leagalise it for fear of losing its profits. We might as well give up and become dealers...you know, work from the inside like we were told above. Sheesh...


----------



## Vinchenzo (Feb 11, 2002)

Hatboy - cheers for this thread - after being a longtime sometime lurker i finally got down to registerin cause of it (blagsta's party anecdotes & photos didn't hurt either) - so yeah nice one.

Adam - in contrast to what you think i don't reckon the thread has reached a sad conclusion - it's more society that's in a sorry state - although i agree with the majority of what you say illegality/profit/poverty are the major factors etc, your misinterpretations of the Kommandant - which sometimes appear willful (but then he is just a liberal tryin to get us all on side no?)  tend to blur the issue somewhat. 

While knowin that what you an others say about the global perspective is correct an that everythings connected - i think you might just have tipped the scales too far in the global direction considerin that the thread was about issues in but not specific to brixton - featuring exchanges with the (maybe you say) local police commander. 

Are people reactionaries just cause they engage in such an exchange without launchin a full frontal assault??


----------



## bruise (Feb 11, 2002)

*hope*

Decriminalisation (if not legalisation) will not take place anywhere in the country unless the Brixton 'experiment' works. Therefore it's in all our interest that it does, so we should all try and further this debate and put forward as many concrete suggestions as possible, and give top cops (so what if liberal - do you really expect them to be revolutionary socialists, der!?) a chance to stick their heads above the parapet without getting them blown off.

Adam - Merely the fact that there is some place for this debate to take place is itself a massive sign of hope.

A shame no-one seems to take up Adria's suggestion, or maybe everybody thinks it's too dangerous/non-starter. 

The cops are a blunt instrument, and liable to get things totally wrong. I'm a bit more pessimistic about the level of 'race awareness' in the cops - you rely on recruiting babies from the white suburbs then 'dump' them in the canteen and 'alien streets', and they turn to racism as an easy answer to the massive problems they see around them and as an expression of the alienation they feel. I wouldn't trust them to tell the difference between 'street culture' and serious crack-nutters. And any white cops I come across seem to have a near pathological hatred of Black people and incapable of talking using neutral terms. Black cops seem to get it in the neck from everybody, and should be due more respect, imho.

There's got to be some way of the community itself taking more of a lead. There were some suggestions at one time in Lambeth of inviting Sinn Fein over to explain how community policing went down in areas that the RUC daren't go. However, how you prevent that turning into vigilateeism and gang-banging I don't know. (And their record on drug running is not good, I know)


----------



## TopCat (Feb 11, 2002)

Evidence for this?


> (And their record on drug running is not good, I know)



I am not doubting you just curious as to whether this is a daily Mail inspired urban myth...

Nice to have met you again on friday BTW.


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 11, 2002)

JWH knows a fair bit about that one. The IRA (as far as I can work out) don't mind talking with the UVF and similar when it comes to carving out trading territory in their respective areas!

Possibly not al that relevant to Brixton though?

Top post bruise!


----------



## bruise (Feb 11, 2002)

Hi TC and WoW

I was just coming back to edit that bit out, won't know because your posts wouldn't make sense.

All I meant was that some of their activities became very gangsterish, and their solutions for delinquency - ie knee capping kids for TADA, for example etc - verge on the extreme. And know, this is nothing to do with Daily Mail paranoia - read stuff by ex-members. Anyway, sorry, Hatboy and the rest please ignore the ref to Sinn Fein.

The point remains, though - what more can the community do, how can that be supported and activated.

Two points - the concensus is for school's type work you need a cop (to point out the criminal consequences), a medic (for genuine trustworthy evidence of physical effects, long term effects etc) and an ex-addict (for the effect it has on your own personal life). So. Like, why not get those teams of three up and running? Er, now. Please? Soon?

Also. A point no-one has touched upon, is a culture of machismo, shoulder-shrugging, giving gun-toting, woman/fag hating that's summed up in gansta rap, though isn't confined to it. I know that real hip-hop has moved on, and gansta in US is a suburban whiteboy game, but you wouldn't know it among the current Sec School generation over here. There's real problems developing, and there's too little attempt countering that on a credible culture-based level.

Lastly. There's one force - and this is a more serious point than it sounds - that should be tapped, and that's scary gran. I'm serious. A lot of kids of dealers age have been brought up by their gran. The last person they would be able to bring themselves to attack is someone of their gran's age. The ability of scary gran to humiliate their machismo bullshit on the street is massive. Scary Gran, particularly scary JA gran is someone I want to see put in power on the streets. Put them in uniform or not. I want to see them cussing the arse out of these wankers - it's a force that can easily be organised through the churches and stuff. Bring them on.


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 12, 2002)

> A point no-one has touched upon, is a culture of machismo, shoulder-shrugging, giving gun-toting, woman/fag hating that's summed up in gansta rap, though isn't confined to it. I know that real hip-hop has moved on, and gansta in US is a suburban whiteboy game, but you wouldn't know it among the current Sec School generation over here. There's real problems developing, and there's too little attempt countering that on a credible culture-based level.



There was quite a few mentions of this in the mobile phone theft thread on the main board, but not here. I'm tempted to endorse this point, but I'm held back by not knowing enough detail.

SCARY GRAN! What an excellent idea 

W of W


----------



## Gary Hayes (Feb 12, 2002)

*Targetting drugs*

Dear Brian,

Your consultation with Brixtonians is very welcome and I am very grateful for this opportunity to talk to you.

I commend the Lambeth cannabis formal warning pilot. It's strengths are in the fact that it takes the focus off a relatively harmless drug offence and redirects resources to provide better policing. 

My worry however is that the rationale for its expansion is biased towards more targetting of drug users, albeit different and often more harmful drugs. 

This in my opinion brings with it its own problems. A lot will be simple displacement problems. But more importantly such an approach merely targets the more excluded and vulnerable people (those using crack and heroin on a daily basis) of our area, exacerbating their and our problems.

While we have to target a lot of the drug dealers in Brixton, I sense a leaning towards singling this out as the 'Brixton illness'.

Despite the obvious temptations, using such a patholigical scapegoat is dangerous and masks many of the truths and real problems of Brixton. Such a practice often and currently does lead to disenfranchisement, resentment and escalating tensions - all of which are visible in Brixton.

I believe we have to rethink the role of police and I believe Lambeth is already starting the change.

Policing is the frontline in many respects. Much of the advice on this website is the need for more police on the streets. The most important question however is what will be their intervention when faced with the many problems poresented in Brixton - a lot of which are social and psychological as well as criminal. 

Police must acknowledge they have a large social role to play in society and MUST provide better police training and special policing where complex interventions are needed.

This might take the form of 'social police' who have the powers of arrest but also skills and resources to refer, counsel or educate people in need.

Much of the government's latest initiatives go some way to achieving this - such as arrest referral schemes and Drug Treatment and Testing Orders - but they do not go far enough in terms of social support and help.

Police roles MUST change. They must also face the fact they are the front line both in terms of intervention but also in terms of where most of the funding is going. Police possess unique powers that if used properly can create very useful lines into support and so encourage inclusion which will help the victim, the criminal's behaviour and society as a whole.

The change will also greatly improve the public's perception and relationship with the police.

Gary Hayes


----------



## dr256 (Feb 12, 2002)

Coldharbour Lane is really just the tip of the ice berg. There are about 20 dealers not 100 yards from where I'm sat at the bottom of Tulse Hill right now. I'm sure you all have your local hotspots. Ten years ago there was one or two dealers on friday and saturday night, now they are there 365 days a year. and even when it's pissing down with rain. I be a hypocrite if i didn't say over those years they have sometimes been useful, when the usual supplies of weed dry up. So last week, our street finally gets it very own shooting, over you guessed it, drug deals gone bad. There's a porche, a bmw 7 series, a jaguar xj6 and a rather tasty celica outside my house. All of which are owned by said entrepreneurs on my st corner. These dealers have been decribed as petty, but they're not, they're earning morn than most of you with a masters degree. so the answer is simple, legalise Street dealers and get them to start paying tax, at the 40% rate they'd all be on we have enough revenue to hire an entire extra police force...

Why not ask those who make so much from brixton, dog star and other bars, macdonalds, kfc to make an community contribution to pay for a cop in the street.


----------



## unclekellan (Feb 12, 2002)

> Why not ask those who make so much from brixton, dog star and other bars, macdonalds, kfc to make an community contribution to pay for a cop in the street.



oh yes. just what we need... not!

PFI police. 

i can see the accountability issues now - and of course the woman who gets raped slightyl too far down the street from the relevant corproate sponsors building and so "its not my job, mate"

i can remember in the early 80's when we used to joke about them privatising water supply - oh how we larfed.

were really laughing now, aren't we


----------



## hatboy (Feb 12, 2002)

This thread is neither "sad" nor "concluded".  Remember Adam - you're not taking this class.  

Good to see a couple of new names joining in above.  I like the idea of making the businesses that make money hand over fist in Brixton pay for afew more cops.

Some of their proprietors could stop consuming half the coke in the area too!


----------



## Vinchenzo (Feb 12, 2002)

Unclekellan   

PFI police - it's not so far fetched - now you mention it i'm sure i remember a tv news article sorry filler last year about a pilot scheme featurin a group of retailers who'd all chipped in to buy/finance their very own local bobby - who from there on in was gonna concentrate all his efforts on things like shoplifting & loiterin kids - if me memory serves me right it was up in sheffield at that big shoppin centre in the middle of the industrial no man's land?? 

Brian 

do you know anything about this one?? and while you're here without wishing to question your judgement regarding life decisions etc - you say that when you realised what the police were about you decided to 

"influence the team from the field of play" (02-02-2002 07:17 PM),

which I suppose is fair enough - but now looking back on that decision how influencial and effective do you feel you've been & more to the point can be in the future if as you also say 

"most people in the police think I am a beyond-redemption, 'let's get the guys in white coats to take him away', rebel" (08-02-2002 09:34 PM)

????

yours assuming that there's a serious underbelly to the quip?

vincent


----------



## corporate whore (Feb 13, 2002)

Yeah and the West End (Westminster?) police wanted to start charging the meat market bars in Leicester Square a surcharge to provide the additional policing needed when the beered-up hordes come flooding out at 11.20 - a worthy plan, given that the majority of crime commited at that time is the direct result of these bars serving and serving and serving and serving the sort of shit beer referred to in the 'Stella - curse of the drinking nation' thread elsewhere on these boards.

Not sure how Brixton businesses would react to being asked to help provide more coppers because of the ever-expanding drug dealing - hardly the fault of the DogStar that crack gets dealt on its doorstep, and it doesn't seem to stop people queueing outside on a weekend..

I still think there's sense in the suggestion the dealing should be concentrated in one place. Like the man said, Coldharbour Lane is the most obvious, but by no means the only, place it goes on. The bottom of Tulse Hill is a case in point, as is Railton Road (never sure what those guys are selling though - possibly just weed).

In Hamburg, the city made a deal with the hookers and pimps - we'll give you a street in which to do your thing - put a gate at the end so no-one can see in, only let in who you want to let in, police it yourself. Could this not work here, but with crack and smack? Let it be known that dealing will be tolerated in one place only, and anywhere else it will be dealt with with extreme prejudice. Containing it would mean it could be seen, quite clearly, who's buying, and therefore who needs to be stealing to fund the buying.


----------



## editor (Feb 13, 2002)

I'm all for concentrating the dealing on one place, but I suspect there won't be many people volunteering for it to be *their*  street, neither would many businesses relish having dealers outside their door.

<flippant mode>
Maybe they could have a mobile drug dealing van go around like a mobile library with a self enclosed shooting gallery, snorting pews, rolling tables and perhaps a fast bus to a safe little patch where the hot-headed, gun-toting, cowards can safely shoot the shit out of each other.
</flippant mode>

But on the subject of surcharges for extra policing, I can't see it really working. Where do you draw the line? The clubs, pubs, fast food sellers, hot dog stalls - or what about the late night bookstores, cafes etc? Anyhow, I thought that the council taxwas set up to cover these local charges, no?


----------



## corporate whore (Feb 13, 2002)

I see your point Mike but I don't see any of the businesses on Coldharbour or Tulse Hill actively trying to attract the dealers who operate outside their businesses at the moment. It's still happening though.

My premise is that there's an entire road (preferably a cul-de-sac, if that doesn't sound too Suburban75) dedicated to this - no-one living on it, no other business going on except dealing. This way the only people who come into contact with this shit are people who choose to do so - not someone who's just popped out to Costcutter for a two-pint of semi-skimmed and some rich tea.


----------



## pk (Feb 13, 2002)

I'd be up for confining the dealing to a park, or whatever, and dealing with those selling outside this "zone" with extreme measures.

I also think blood tests for violent criminals should be mandatory.

Anyone found with crack in the system gets a whole lot of slow release valium or something to make them too dozy to fight.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 13, 2002)

I think the whole concept of a acceptable zone to deal in is a non starter... No one will want this where they live and it would make it more dangerous for users to buy if it went ahead as it would by it's very nature be more isolated.

I still think we need to allow GP's to prescribe whatever they feel is appropriate when dealing with drug addicts.

The problem of crack remains though. Many users would smoke untill they were dead given an unlimited supply so the moral question remains:
Is it acceptable for us a a society to allow or worse facilitate people to drug themselves to an early grave? I don't think so and would disagree with legalisation of crack for this reason.

Moral dillemas make me want a beer and a spliff!


----------



## Alanj (Feb 14, 2002)

And the 'reactionaries are biting back . Disturbing to see the reports of the tongue lashing re 'Lambeth'Crime rates given out b to Lambeth Council and Brixton police .
It is easy to forget that the Police Force is not a unified body acting with 'one mind' . Rather it is a complex organisation composed of many different and sometimes competing 'interest groups' .To many coppers Brian is anathema , he represents every thing they detest /hate and they find him and his 'experiments' profoundly threatening .He is open about his sexuality , is University educated ( I think I am right on this Brian?)
and is a social 'liberal' who is developing models of policing by consent as opposed to 'repression' /coercion' .Elements in the Met are already mobilising against him at many levels .The same lobby and vested interest groups who were threatened by the Stephen Lawrence report are also actively engaged in challenging and undermining Brian .Expect press leaks , disinformation like the nonsense given about the Brixton experiment with Dope given by the Police Federation rep to the Home Affiares Select Committee on Drugs , and much ,much ,more ,these people fight very dirty indeed .To some exent this situation is mirrored throughout the UK and the tredgedy is that radical change may not happen despite the 'success' of experiments such as Brixton because reactionary forces such as the police fed simply will not allow them to happen . I off to read my Guardian now - as if you didn't guess .Alan J.


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 14, 2002)

I think Alanj is absolutely right, the first question I asked Brian was what he thought of Fred Broughton's "evidence" to the Home Affairs Select Committee, in which the "tolernace of cannabis increases crack dealing" line was pushed OUTRAGEOUSLY.

I do hope Brian and others in the Police who think like him will fight back on the publicity and put it about big time, with as much publicity as possible,  that the Brixton experiment should not be curtailed but spread Met-wide, which will, logically, release more Police to deal other crime.

For those on these boards who support full on legalisation of everything, the "separation model" of tolerance of soft drugs in order to reduce peeps exposure to hard drugs, might? be anaethema. The idea that the Police, once they don't have to bother with hassling petty weed tokers, can then be free to be more tough on bigger fish in the dealer world, might be *even more* uncomfortable.

BUT I'm arguing pragmatically (and I admit selfishly 

It's politically easier, especially for the Police,  to argue for a tolerant policy on cannabis if you separate discussion of it from that of other drugs, except in terms of how a more leniant policy on the first will lead to a more effective "crackdown" on the second. I don't happen to agree this will happen except to a limited extent, the discussion above goes into the whys and wherefores of that. But it's about protecting small gradual gains from being reversed innit.

And as Alanj says Brian has quite a few enemies inside the Police and to bring them into line on cannabis policy the most pragmatic and realistic arguments possible will be necessary.

I respect the thoughtfulness and insights with which most people on this thread including the Commander have been discussing crack dealers in Brixton and generally.
It's an excellent debate.

Stick around Brian!


----------



## Danny K (Feb 14, 2002)

*Legalise 'em all*

I've just stepped into this debate after being recommended to visit urban75 and I'm very impressed with it.

I run Transform (the campaign for effective drug policy) and we're campaigning to legalise all drugs in order to decrease the problems associated with use and misuse of drugs.  I won't go into detail as the info is all on our website.

It seems to me that this discussion can be broken into two:

1  How do we best deal with the situaltion in the long term and that, in my opinion is total legalisation?

2  What do we do in the meantime?

I have the greatest respect for Brian and what he has done in Brixton and what he has done in terms of putting his head on the block politically.  We need more coppers like him.

I am surprised at some of your reticence in calling for legalisation, given that Richard Brunstrom (Chief Constable of North Wales) has done so, as has Barry Shaw (Chief Constable of Cleveland).

There is, in my opinion, a strong reason to call for legal change, if as a copper, you think it is due.  

As to what we do in the menatime I am hoping to gather together those enlightened people like Brian from all over the country to plan some co-ordinated pilot initiatives to see what works where.

There is no 'one size fits all' answer and it is only through trial and error that we will discover where to go next.

It is very difficult to see where to go next in terms of what can be done under prohibition.  When use and misuse reach a certain point, you have so much chaos associated with the unregulated market, that it becomes nigh on impossible to make much progress.  

The Dutch and other countries are beginning to realise this and are looking to make changes to the international conventions in order to deal with the supply side.

It is only when we control the price and distribution of drugs that we can really influence things.


----------



## hatboy (Feb 14, 2002)

And how will pressure on the Met from David Blunkett today ("cut street crime or I'll bring in government managers") and Ken Livingston's seemingly more receptive attitude to NY Mayor Guilliani's "zero tolerance" effect all this????

Ken Livingston used to think that zero tolerance had potential to oppress both black people and gay people (in NY even dancing in a bar requires special permission now).  I also think this.

If we are going to see a greatly increased Police presence on the streets of Brixton, I hope to God the police have the confidence of all sectors of the local community. No one wants another 1981.


----------



## gate (Feb 14, 2002)

There has been a version of zero tolerance in the West end. Especially around Leciester Square and Soho. Over the past year there have been increased police patrols at weekends and a massive atempt to crack down on drug dealing in Soho with a joint police squad being formed to patrol both Covent Garden and Soho as previously dealers had been able to run into Covent Garden to avoid arrest. The area seems to be getting a bit safer as well. This was copied from New York where crime around the area around Times Square has been drastically reduced over the past eight years.


----------



## Brian (Feb 14, 2002)

Hey Guys.  This is really good stuff!  Another manic week - sorry for the long pause.

Bruise - we do need more race awareness training.  I keep thinking things are getting better re. police officer attitudes but we cannot afford to take our eyes off that particular ball.  I am going to put monitoring in place on all types of police activity to see what is happening and I am going to re-invigorate our diversity strategy.  Please don't blame cops for inappropriately stereotyping and then stereotype cops!  There are good and bad black cops and good and bad white cops (most are good and some are quite outstanding!)  I could not agree more about drugs education.  Cop + medic + recovering addict - the dream team.  I will get onto it.  Scary grans and scary mums - how do we get them into action?  There is real mileage in this.

Gary - there is a real dilemma here.  We need tough cops to arrest the dealers and the street robbers but we need 'social cops' to win over the community and to deal effectively with 'victims' of crime (chaotic drug users are victims of crime).  We need dual personality, dual purpose cops!

dr256 - the guy from the Dogstar was suggesting this to me today.  I think we need adequate funding centrally and 'free at the point of delivery'.  

Vincent - I think I have been influential and effective within a small and an increasingly larger arena - tomorrow the world!  I am doing what I can where I can and according to some of our customers I am chagning things and from their perspective for the better.  (Sorry - ego check required).  Things are getting very nasty for me at the moment (see later).

Alanj - you are right of course.  Whether it is homophobia, professional jealousy or touching peoples' raw nerves around drug abuse I don't know.  Still it could be worse, I could be being ignored .

Danny - welcome!  I know you are right of course (about legalisation) but we are having to work with the art of the possible.  No political party would win an election on a commitment to legalise all drugs and so it is not going to happen until public opinion changes first.  We need to work on the electorate not the politicians at this stage.  I do not think the Home Secretary is looking at reclassifying cannabis because there has just been a change of heart in the Cabinet.  He senses a change in public opinion.

WoW - I would love to fight back against the lies that are being trailed around about the cannabis pilot.  My bosses are not ready to go with it yet.  Patience is a virtue  .  I am going away for 3 weeks.  I will be mad if they publish the results while I am away.

hatboy - I think there should be zero tolerance - zero tolerance of those things the local community say there should be zero tolerance of and tolerance of those things the local people say we should go easy on.  I know, who are the local community?  Can a community have thoughts?  But you get the idea.  I can do most things given enough officers - and I mean sensitivity, caring, hard on the villains, easy on the innocent - whatever you guys want.  

Gotta run - boyfirend's home!  Please, please keep this going.  I will get back in 3 weeks but I really do need a break.  Take care you guys.

Brian


----------



## bruise (Feb 14, 2002)

> Scary grans and scary mums - how do we get them into action? There is real mileage in this.



Scary grans and scary aunts, was my thought. A bit of honesty and a bit of humility and some funding. Go round the churches and confess that the powers that be need help. I think there is a dynamic about the gender and the generational thing, partly because the problem is largely caused by young men, who are hopped up into a cycle of machismo and self pity and despair. They need help, but a man in uniform of their own age or older is just going to be perceived as a conflict situation.

My recruitment speech would be something like this:

"Ok. There's no-one who knows what's going on like grans and aunts. There's no-one else who has the same respect. They might not act like it, they might not show it, but deep down everybody respects their aunt and their gran. Now we've come here for help, because we're losing the fight against drugs and violence, and you know we are.

Now, nobody objects to a little grass or a little rum, but when it comes down to needles and guns and knives, you know it's gone too far. When it comes to little kids stealing their homes to get a fix you know they need help. And, sure they need medical help, but they also need persuasion, they need love, they need tough love, otherwise they never get to where they need to get to.

Also. Take my men - and they mostly are men, and they mostly don't know the area or the community - going up to some hopped up crack dealer on Railton Road. You know that's just going to lead to conflict, to macho bullshit, to someone getting hurt. And there's no way anyone's going to think that that cop has any concern for the crack head himself and the trouble he's in. 

Now, if instead that guy's gran, or someone who looks and sounds like that guy's gran is there everyday, showing care, showing concern, and showing toughness, it isn't going to be the same. Number one he can't bring himself to hurt someone who reminds him of his gran. Number two, no-body is going to buy shit off him with you around. You've messed up his pitch. You spend some time trying to get through to him. You tell him where he can get help. But whatever, you've messed up his pitch, you've saved a couple of kids. That's enough.

So we want your help. An evening a week. Payment by the shift. Patrols in two and threes. Some kind of uniform to identify you. Training in drugs awareness and in conflict resolution. Plus back-up from trained and capable cops. How about it?"

Is that such a stupid idea? I dunno. What do other urbanites think?


----------



## wastedbloke (Feb 15, 2002)

Personally I have to take this right back to a point Brian made at the beginning of this thread:

"As long as there is the demand ...... there will be street dealers."

He's right! 

My guess is that many of the people on U75 contribute to that demand but what we don't want to see is the seedy, violent, intimidatory practices that take place on the likes of Cold Harbour Lane.

I know some of the people contributing to this (mighty) thread and I know they also take drugs. You are therefore part of the "demand" Brian refers to. Don't deny it! Don't try and wash your hands/disassociate yourself from the nasty side of it. You are an inarguable part of the cycle.

I'm not about to offer any immediate solutions to Brixton's (etc, etc) drug problem. I don't think there is one. 

If there is a solution at all its about taking responsibility for one's own environment - on mass that will make a difference. 

Don't deal with wankers!!!

If your dealer is connected to a killing then ditch them - they are scum!!! Just don't fucking go there!!!

On a societal level we determine our own laws. Furthermore we determine our own codes of practice - we create our own environment - and while "we" people continue to deny our own role in the drugs market we continue to allow the rot to set in.

Walk down Cold Harbour Lane and look that prick (OK so he's a stooge - but he is at the customer service delivery end of the industry and therefore the interface) in the eye with disgust.

If the *demand stream* starts to have moral values then the suppliers will follow suit - they have to.

Its down to us.

wasted
        xxx


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 15, 2002)

*Respect to bruise and wastedbloke*

Good post wasted :



> If your dealer is connected to a killing then ditch them



Well, my man (not in Brixton, nor Walworth  will ONLY sell hash/weed, and not on the street, and only to people he knows.

This has been my situation for quite a while ...not saying he's not part of a chain, but it's a one product only supply chain and his Mr Medium just above won't touch other products because of the risk of violence. Separation model on the supply side 
But I think I'm in the minority of "consumers" overall, so, yes, wasted identifies a real problem.

EXCELLENT POST BRUISE!!  Anyone in Brixton think of any objections? Not sure I can, but I suppose it's worth wondering whether there  are some dealers so hard core, so far gone, with so little organic/family connection from the area (they might drive in from Harlesden or something?) that they are beyond Gran telling him to come right here and shut up for one second bwoy and listen!

BUT others who know Brixton better wil know better.


----------



## Voley (Feb 15, 2002)

*Coldharbour Lane isn't a No-Go area*

Just to back up what Brian was saying about Coldharbour Lane, I was down there having me lunch yesterday and the police were arresting a bloke (almost certainly) for dealing. Looked fairly major - took 4 coppers and a van to do it.

So, it does happen.


----------



## sonicdancer (Feb 15, 2002)

sorry to be an old cynic but sticking aunts and grans down Cold Harbour Lane is the most ludicrous thing I have heard so far, they would be shot.  I dont think you'll find any angry grans who would go down there its far to intimidating, some of these dealers are heavy heavy guys. Im sorry that suggestion doesnt hold any water at all for me.


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 15, 2002)

I admit I was wondering about that, but it wouldn't be your 
*only* strategy, just a back up one.

You could experiment with employing them in less high tension locations first ... I doubt you'd *ever* be able to send them down Colharbour at midnight Saturday!! 

But there other places and other times. Bruise?


----------



## Andria (Feb 15, 2002)

*Loving ourselves a bit better*

Dear all

I have just read a long thread from y'all about various things, and i have counted about 4 different people who call themselves scum or wasted or whatever.

Considering, you are the waker-uppers of society, I think your pseudonyms should be more positive about yourselves, yeh? Or have i lost the plot; i mean, are they sorta jokes?

Love andria


----------



## slowdog (Feb 15, 2002)

A point that I don't think has been raised yet, is that Brixton in general, and Coldharbour Lane in particular is a victim of its own success.  

A certain amount of ghetto tourism is at work.  Many people come from outside the area to socialise in Brixton.  I have a hunch that for many people, rather that being intimidated by the dealers, they are part of the entertainment.  The opportunity to see real life bad-assed black gangsters and the chance perhaps of a major police bust adds to the kudos of the area.  If this wasn't the case then I doubt bars like the Dogstar and the Living Room would be so successful and attract so many Claphamites and Chelsea people.

I find the suggestion that the propriotors of such venues pay for extra police hypocritical, when they actually feed off the relatively benign 'street entertainment'.  Like I have said elsewhere on this thread,  Brixton's problems are neither unique nor particularly bad.  I suspect the problem would be smaller, if Brixton's nightlife, both bar owners and clubbers, didn't take advantage of the situation.


----------



## Andria (Feb 15, 2002)

*Brixton 'entertainment'*

Dear Slowdog

It may be that there is some truth in what your saying, but it is probably equally true that people are just going to Brixton because it's diversity is huge and this also makes it an interesting olace 2 b.

The idea that being at gun point/knife point is kinda 'entertaining' is a little weird. I may have got you wrong there - I get things wrong a lot. But as one who has been held at both 'points' I need to add it is also terrifying and deeply demoralising. I would like to relate one of these stories but I feel uneasy about deepening a stereotype

Anyone decided about this medical marijuana benefit yet?

Andria


----------



## Alanj (Feb 15, 2002)

It is a point that seems to have escaped some people that there has been a thriving street drugs trade - confined to puff only -down Coldharbour Lane for many ,many, years , long before the first Brixton Riots. Indeed ,if I recall correctly the first riots followed a heavy handed 'crack down' by the police on the local drugs trade .And the reason given then was the 'escalation' in related 'street crime' .Remember the 'SPG' and the 'SUSS' laws ?
What seems to have changed is the product on sale , and the scale of the trade ? Would people feel the same if it was puff instead of crack and H on sale ?
Brixton has long had a population of minority and working class peoples who are marginalised ,crimminalised and disavantaged economicaly ,socially and educationally .The 'drugs trade' was nurtured by the Thatcherite regime of the 1980's whose credos was 'there is no such thing as society' . Thatcher and Co did more than anyone to expand and develop the drugs trade in the impoverished inner city areas of the UK. Some can recall bags of smack - kilo bags - doing the rounds which had seizure stamps on them just after the first riots . The UK Black communities had long been associated with 'ganja' use but heroin and Cocaine were very much a cultural taboo except within very small circles (the Jazz scene for example).The mass unemployment of the 80's , a deliberate policy of the UK Goverment of the time had a huge and disproportianate impact on areas like Brixton .Coupled with USA and UK third world politics -Afganistan War ,Columbia ,etc ,all financed by the drugs trade ,the conditions were ripe for a 'break though' for Heroin and Cocaine in
urban areas of the UK .Coincident with this was the emergence of USA 'rap' culture and style as a role model for UK Black and white youth .Hard drug use was set for an explosive expansion and inroads into communities where it had not even had a toehold before . Who remembers the 'Smack' epidemic in Southwark circa 83/84 .Followed by Liverpool ,Edinborough ,Glasgow ,Manchester ,then the rest of urban UK .No one should underestimate the attractions and economic imperitives ' fuelling the expansion in the drugs trade . For many it was the only feasable 'career option' - it led to wealth ,style and peer group respect . For marginalised youth with low expectations ,low esteem and little chance of 'advancement' this offered the chance of 'escape' and 'riches' .
A few hundred quid could start a major business .
As some posters have pointed out disproportianate attention is paid to 'Black Yardie' crime gangs- the Adams families and others dont merit a mention . The Yardies shift a relatively insignificant amount of drugs into the UK - yes their use of violence is marked - but in reality the big movers and shakers in the UK drugs scene are 'untouchable' and never get into the press they have the political , fiscal ,and social contacts to make them so .And they use violence - just discreetly -or less so in the case of the USA .The lack of anaylisis and press coverage , unless 10 years after the event is marked.Anyone who believes that the 'State'/ MI5/MI6 and Special Branch have not themselves been knee deep in the international drugs trade for many years is niave . Afganistan , Pakistan ,Burma ,etc are British spheres of 'influence'Anyone remember the case of the senior UK Army Intelligence Officer with extensive involvement in covert ops in Northern Ireland getting busted with 100's of kilos of dope pressed into the body work of his car ? Just at the time that Protestent Terror Groups were exchanging drugs for guns etc ?The Officer claimed he had no knowlege of the drugs pressed into the body work of his car !!A car he collected in Southern Spain !!!He must have been a piss poor 'intelligence op'!!! The officer involved got a year's soft time in a Scandinavian Jail , kept his mouth shut and retained his commmision ? Strange huh?The story was that the UK Gov ( or elements within it ) was washing money - xchanging it for drugs - xchanging drugs for guns in the Dam and then shipping the guns back to NI Prots . The UK govs involvement by this time being untraceable .
And we have the 'Stalker' Affair .A senior and respected UK 'liberal' Police Officer, acceptable to the 'Nationalist 'community, is asked to conduct an enquiry into alleged RUC 'Shoot to Kill'  covert ops - as he digs up the dirt and a lot of 'dirt' there is ,he 'unexpectedly 'resigns' ? A rumour - with much credence - circulated at this time is that Stalker had a very close family relative who was heroin dependent - exposure , disgrace ,imprisoment of the relative ,and other threats were brought to bear - Stalker resigns ? Wheels within wheels !Hey I am on a rant here and have wandered way off topic into a 'history lesson' .
Anyway I'll conclude by saying that Brian Paddock merits support but do not underestimate the the pressures that can be brought to bear on him ,the complexity of the situation he is dealing with , the history behind it ,and sheer 'Machiavellian' machinations of 'power' and 'reactionary' forces .There is no simple 'magic bullet' to cure the social ills that afflict Brixton AND other inner city , working class and marginalised communities , in the UK .
And 'heavy' policing will most certainly not be a solution to these problems . Part of the problem with Brixton /Lambeth is that the 'middle classes' have started to move into the area and are now 'mobilising' big time and its the 'middle class' who are active 'New' Labour Voters /constituents .And at the risk of offending , many members of this list fit the profile( myself included although as a  Degree holding ,opioid dependent benifit claimee maybe I dont!!) . Its no coincidence that similar attention in the media and the Met is being given to Stoke Newington - another area where the middle classes have moved in en-force . Now the politicaly active 'New Labour' voting middle class have moved into these areas - 'social conflict' ensues  The working classes have had to deal with these problems and the like for time 'imemorial' but thats another 'thread' .I am retiring to my bunker with my tin helmet on now .A 'devils advocate' ranting Alan J


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 15, 2002)

*Not the same in their effects on the streets*

Excelent post Alan, excellent, respect 

I will reread it properly Monday ...

But in answer to your question :



> Would people feel the same if it was puff instead of crack and H on sale ?



Frankly, no! (see my post above)


----------



## slowdog (Feb 15, 2002)

Dear Andria 

I too have been on the receiving end of this city's violence, and you are right, it is no laughing matter.

The point I was trying to make, and obviously failed, is that Coldharbour Lane, in my opinion is relatively harmless.  Another poster on this thread has described how her kids are harassed and bullied in other parts of Brixton, but tellingly says her son feels quite secure on Coldharbour Lane.  My experience of that street is that it is a circus, there are more clowns than gangsters there.  Con artists selling rocks of soap and lawn trimmings to gullible outsiders who are happy to get a glimpse of the ghetto without the risk of a journey into the really nasty areas of the city.  

I am sure there are some genuinely dangerous characters down there.  However, the only time I have been intimidated and threatened on that street was at the hands of the police during a blatantly racist stop and search while walking between pubs!


----------



## Andria (Feb 15, 2002)

Would people feel the same if it was puff instead of crack and H on sale ?Alan J


Well actually, no, I wouldn't feel the same.

I have never seen anybody 

a)die from an OD of grass, (the Norway 6 was a heap of bullshit. Check the research evidence,it really wasn't reliable AND y'know logicvally even if it was, if there have been no deaths for thousands of years and then an international movement to legalise the stuff emerges, I wonder who could be wasting time telling porkies like that one...)
b) share needles in the admin of it and 
c) then live/die with AIDS.

But I have all the above with crack, smack and charlie.

William of Walworth; I'd be really interested to know why you would feel the same. It is not quite true that a drug's a drug's a drug, and all that. The problems/disturbance on the streets does get more intense when the drug is H or C doesn't it, wheher its cops or dealers, or strung-out users or whatever.

The collateral damage of the drug-war in this scenario grows enormously.

Respect 

Andria


----------



## hatboy (Feb 15, 2002)

Terrific post Alan J. 

You're right about Coldharbour Lane Slowdog. It isn't where all the danger is, but as the current "frontline" can represent more in this discussion.  I personally know afew people whose dealing consists almost entirely of selling all manner of substances that are not drugs but are sold as,  to the naive.

Correct me if I've misunderstood Wiiliam, but why would you be equally against street weed dealers? The chaotic behavior, gun crime and violence is not associated with cannabis use or dealing IMO.   I remember Brixton and more particularly Railton Rd frontline when weed was the main trade and to me the atmosphere was far less theatening then. (Pedantic point - Atlantic runs up as far as Marcus Garvey Way, it's Railton from that point on).

The "supergran" idea is hilarious.  It's also patronising and abit racist IMO to think that grans and aunties have such a mythical status in black households that black crack dealers are going to take advice from their, let alone anyone elses granny! Ridiculous, but made me laugh thanks.  In a wider context I do get the gist tho about having respect for your elders.


----------



## Alanj (Feb 15, 2002)

Dear Andria ,
                      If you read my post carefully and with thought you will see that the question I ask is a lot more complex and loaded than it may appear at first sight . There are profound 'class' , racial ,political, economic ,historic ,cultural factors interplaying in this -at first sight- straight forward question .And yes there is a real issue of the Middle class 'embourgousification' of Brixton .Coldharbour lane ,and surrounding areas 'involved' here .
The same 'arguments' that are deployed to justify 'cracking down' on the current street trade in crack cocaine and h were deployed in the 70's /early 80's about the 'street trade' in puff .I do not deny the reality of the complex problems surrounding the street trade but I do reject the simplification of this complex set of problems and there history by those who should know better .
And as it happens i can remember scoring puf on the street in Brixton and Notting Hill being distinctly 'threatening' and 'intimidating' and associated with rip offs and violence at the time (70's-early 80's ) - the drugs may have change but to my recall the scene hasn't .Thats why I never ,ever ,scored on the 'street'- its strictly for those who don't know better. Interesting that the Opiate scene around the Dilly and the West End has never been associated with the same degree of violence - most of those involved 'know' each other . 
What I would dare to suggest Andria , is that there has been a significant 'middle clas' and 'educated' influx of population into the Brixton area who are able to mobilise and articulate their demands -and get them met - far more effectivley than has previously been the case .There was no 'touchy feely' policing when Brixton was considered an undesirable 'ghetto' .The same process is now going on in Southwark , as it did in Campden ,Hackney ,Bethnal green, Shepards Bush ,Islington ,Chiswick and so on . Unemployement rises , the affluent organised working class move out ,the squatters and students and housing co-ops move in , then in come the middle classes and lo and behold 'crime' becomes an issue. Can we see a pattern emerging here ? New York has followed a similar pathway !! And look where 'zero tolereance' was developed !!!With respect Alan J.


----------



## hatboy (Feb 15, 2002)

Mmm. I feel sure the weed scene was less threatening. If only because of the much more peaceful way weed effects people.


----------



## moon (Feb 15, 2002)

*Grannies on the beat!!!!*

My Nan hasn't got time to don a uniform and start patrolling the back streets of Brixton. She's far too worn out from years of scrubbing floors and backsides in the NHS.  Would any of you put your Nan on the streets as part of Britains drug control policy???

Commander - you said of the dealers:
'...the feeling that there is no legitimate way of earning a living.......but that's what we've done to these people' 
Yes that is the legacy that has been left to us by the slavery system, but it is not an excuse. Some of these dealers are just plain lazy and want to get rich quick without having to go through the hard graft.

Dealers follow the line of least resistance and when you partially decriminalised Cannabis in Brixton it was like putting up a sign saying 'Dealers come to Brixton, we want your products!'.
And as far as ignoring weekend recreational users is concerned, well who do you think caused the explosion in Brixton drug dealing in the first place?

To quote Slowdog 'Brixton is not an island' 

Boomclick - 'I can't remember the last time I saw police around Brixton centre' me neither, but I do remember a rather large, older West Indian policeman who used to patrol Brixton centre about 10 years ago. He would actually have members of the community coming up to him and shaking his hand. But 10 years ago Brixton was a much friendlier place.


----------



## Alanj (Feb 15, 2002)

Dear 'Jo' take a peep a my last two posts on page 7 .Alan J.


----------



## moon (Feb 15, 2002)

Yes , I've just re-read them, its a clear case of the first world meets the 3rd world IMO.


----------



## sonicdancer (Feb 16, 2002)

mmm excellent posts alanj, I am regurgatating what you have said in my head, and identify the patterns you have mentioned and its association with the frontline and crime in general in that area.


----------



## bruise (Feb 16, 2002)

This caused me to think b/c I hate the idea of disagreeing with Hatboy. And, actually I don't. 



> The "supergran" idea is hilarious. It's also patronising and abit racist IMO to think that grans and aunties have such a mythical status in black households that black crack dealers are going to take advice from their, let alone anyone elses granny! Ridiculous, but made me laugh thanks. In a wider context I do get the gist tho about having respect for your elders.



To take the patronising and a bit racist bit first:

It's a stereotype that gran is a power within many Black British households, and is functions closer to a mum to many. With a germ of truth.

It's a stereotype that Italians love their mums and their grans, almost to the point of worship. With a germ of truth.

It's a stereotype that w/c white communities like in Bermondsey or where ever are very protective towards their mums, and the nan is hugely important, often powerful figure. Again a germ of truth.

It's a stereotype that m/c kids love their mummies, but have a special place for their granny.

It's a stereotype that u/c kids often have difficult, cold relationships with their parents, but very warm ones with their grannies. Again a germ of truth.

It's a stereotype that Antyji and granny are often seen as very important in Asian families, and are given the right to meddle in all the kids' affairs. Again a germ of truth.

How many stereotypes does it take before you realise that each community has some version of the stereotype, which is based, partially on some truth. It might be particularly true of communities under attack and subject to pressure that they draw on such an important resource. However, I find it strange that there's such a similar stereotype about just about every community you can think of, but yet it's not acknowldged as simply a universal truth. Why not? 

I actually didn't have a particular community in mind when I was putting forward the suggestion.

You might be right and it is hilarious. Sonicdancer might have even more of a point with pointing out the potential dangers - I think he thinks most crack dealers are more 'far gone' than I would hope, but that could be naivety on my part.

BTW, I was just kite-flying, and don't mind in the slightest if people think it a ludicrous idea. I'm not entirely convinced myself. Just wish there was ways of tapping into more community action, less heavy-handed police action, and some way of reaching out to the low-level dealers themselves, who need help as much as anybody.

(Also, I regret the 'scary' earlier - shows lack of respect)


----------



## hatboy (Feb 16, 2002)

Perhaps I was abit harsh Bruise. It wasn't a personal attack on you. And like I say, I do get the gist. In a way it's a nice idea, but it is a fantasy.


----------



## Reddolly (Feb 16, 2002)

Aside from the seriously heavy drugs/dealing/ gun issues I feel Bruise has hit on a good point with this macho - don't give a shit image thing. There seems to be an increasing number of young teenage boys/girls with this attitude. My mate a couple of weeks ago got threatened at knife point for whatever he had on him. It's a ridiculous situation and these young people know they can get away with so much under current law.

I read about this new project scheme in Lambeth, where offending teenagers attended skill building projects by day and were on curfew by night, freeing up detention centres and costing less too. We need more of these kind of schemes. At present there isn't much to do for teenagers around here - unless money is involved.


----------



## hatboy (Feb 17, 2002)

I would agree with that. Obviously it's not the whole story, but the fact that facilities for teenagers and local youth have to fight for survival but there's always room for "luxuury apartments" is a scandal. I expect an expolsion, I really do. I can only judge from local because this is where I am and I am probably stuck now. But I am shocked by the shortsightedness of the powers that be.


----------



## freethepeeps (Feb 17, 2002)

from today's Observer


----------



## moon (Feb 17, 2002)

Jasper, writing in today's Observer, says: 'Young black men have found support amongst peers whose creed is "live rich, live fast and don't give a damn about society". People from all classes drive into our communities to buy their recreational drugs. They then go to their homes in the peaceful suburbs, leaving the black community to live with violent drug dealers prepared to kill at the drop of a hat.' 


That article rings true with me, and I have campaigned alongside Lee Jasper in the past.

The whole subject just makes me feel very very sad.


----------



## freethepeeps (Feb 17, 2002)

A lot of it rings true for me, too.

I worry about his conclusion though, working with the police is not enough, there needs to be a strategy to address some of the problems that he quotes eg high unemployment rates and high rates of incarceration on psychiatric wards.

I too am saddened by the situation.


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 18, 2002)

Andria asked :



> William of Walworth ; I'd be really interested to know why you would feel the same. It is not quite true that a drug's a drug's a drug, and all that. The problems/disturbance on the streets does get more intense when the drug is H or C doesn't it, wheher its cops or dealers, or strung-out users or whatever.



And Hatboy asked :



> Correct me if I've misunderstood Wiiliam, but why would you be equally against street weed dealers? The chaotic behavior, gun crime and violence is not associated with cannabis use or dealing IMO. I remember Brixton and more particularly Railton Rd frontline when weed was the main trade and to me the atmosphere was far less theatening then.



Oops! Misunderstanding! My response to Alan was that I would *NOT* feel the same about H and C dealing as about weed dealing, ie I have been/would  be *much* more laid back about the latter.

In other words I would agree with you both, Andria, and hatboy. Apols if that wasn't clear!


----------



## grubby local (Feb 18, 2002)

*from today's Big Issue mag*

One of Britain’s top policemen, who spearheaded the softly-softly approach to cannabis use, has broken more new ground – by opening his heart about drugs and politics on a subversive website.
Brian Paddick, the high-profile commander of the London Borough of Lambeth, has written 24 ‘posts’ since January under the name ‘Brian: The Commander’ – in a discussion with members of the website urban75.com, renowned for its coverage of direct-action protests, drugs and anarchism. 
On the bulletin boards where users register to post messages, Paddick, 43, who describes his interests as "police, gay issues, drugs", discussed a recent march by Movement for Justice in Brixton, asked for suggestions for Lambeth Police’s new slogan, and explained his cannabis scheme , whereby those found in possession of the drug were merely cautioned.  
In one debate, titled ‘Guns/ Crack: The Commander – your opinion please?’, Paddick said his "bottom line [is] screw the dealers, help the addicts". He expanded on his softly-softly approach to drug use: "We need to take the criminality out of it [drugs] by legislation and strict control. We need to keep pushing the boundaries."
Last week he told The Big Issue: "Clearly, we are not getting it right in terms of dealing with the problems of dealing in Class A drugs in Brixton. What the boards have enabled me to do is get a feel for what people think from their perspective versus what I know."
The commander became aware of the boards when a colleague informed him of racist and inflammatory posts by one of his own officers. He said no action had yet been taken in this case. 
Paddick, Britain’s highest-ranking openly gay police officer, emphasises that he is posting his personal, not official views. So far, his superior officers remain unaware of his activity.
"I thought people would tell me to go away," said Paddick. In fact, the ensuing debate on guns and crack in Brixton has set the bulletin boards alight on the popular site, which has 4,000 members and is visited a million times a month.
"There’s an understandable stereotype based on the history of minority groups and the police that police officers are right-wing, racist, sexist and homophobic and not interested in anyone else’s views. Things have radically changed but people’s views have not changed. By engaging in a personal way on the boards I can break down these stereotypes," he told The Big Issue.
Commander Paddick’s detractors will seize on some of his comments. "The concept of anarchism has always appealed to me," he said on one post. "Do not treat all police officers as lapdogs of a corrupt capitalist system. Dogs sometimes turn on their owners," he wrote on another.
He said the only thing he regrets writing is a throw-away line on pop music. "I think a comment I made about Kylie was a bit shallow! I have been described as politically naive. If this means I say what’s in my heart, I’m happy to be labelled as such. I’m either brave or stupid." 
Paddick now says he is looking to create internal bulletin boards for officers to speak to each other confidentially at the station.
Brixton-based urban75 editor Mike Slocombe said: "Brian is to be commended for having the bottle to do it. The biggest difference is that you actually feel like he’s listening. He replies to what you say."
"This is the first copper I’ve ever come across who has had the imagination and sheer common sense to open up a police/public channel of communication in this way," said one poster, ‘Red Jezza’. 
A Metropolitan Police spokeswoman said that there was no written policy on serving officers posting to bulletin boards and would leave it up to the individual. Posting inflammatory material would be investigated, she said. 
See: www.urban75.com.

--- ends ----

I've spoken to Commander Paddick and he assures me that despite earlier comments he made, he will be back posting on these boards when he gets back from holiday in three weeks time


----------



## hatboy (Feb 18, 2002)

That's great. Very positive. And Red Jazza even gets a name-check!  (Hatboy goes green).


----------



## TopCat (Feb 18, 2002)

Hatboy, just you wait 'till Brians boyfriend find out he said he loves you!!


----------



## TinyCrendon (Feb 19, 2002)

In the Independent today too...p4 ish i think. And dont look at me i had nothing to do with this publicity business. Nothing worth reporting in my view.

I think its turned out v depressing this thread. Very. I think Mr Paddick, though it was nice of him to reply and so on, is deeply disillusioning. A typical gatekeeper. Am I the only one ? Judging by the level of thought and allowed action theres gonna be a lot more dead people. 
But hey...it's coooooooooool maaaaaaaaaaaaan. Thats the way it is maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan...you cant do nuffing about it maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan...


----------



## corporate whore (Feb 19, 2002)

Adam you're way too jaded, maaaaaan - hope it's not contagious.

Oh & the Evening Fucking Standard has splashed big on this today...front page lead "Met Chief Finds Anarchism Attractive" ... for fucks sake..


----------



## gate (Feb 19, 2002)

They seem to be making a really big thing about this! When its nothing really, anyone can come here and express there opinions! At least its giving loads of publicity for this site!


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 19, 2002)

*Shocking exposure ... not ...*

Standard thingie here


----------



## TopCat (Feb 19, 2002)

I hope this attraction to Anarchism will not lead him down that well trodden path of:

Wearing black clothes 
Living off the dole
Eating lentils
Dogs on string
Listening to Conflict
Throwing rocks from the back
B.O
Quoting bakuinin whilst off ones head on ketamine...

Er..That's it...


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 19, 2002)

*Idle gits ...*

Independent version here

They're so lazy aren't they. these "journalists"? Just recycling the Big Issue story.


----------



## Alanj (Feb 19, 2002)

This thread and discussion and more to the point Brians contribution to it have just hit the National ITV News under the story line ' Top Cop Stirs Up More Controversy' !!!!!! It would be a terrible pity and shame if Brians very positive contributions to an excellent debate are used against him by those vested interests that deem him a threat . It is a pity that he is away at the moment and cant be here to defend himself against potential detractors/attack .Let those of us who have valued and welcomed his contribution keep an eye on things as they pan out .Alan J.


----------



## sonicdancer (Feb 19, 2002)

this is very sad news , not good news I think.


----------



## Calico. (Feb 19, 2002)

Who knows, maybe it will encourage more policemen to think about their profession more clearly. Remember, important debates like these are very rarley acknowleged in the mainstream press. 

Well I didn't think it would ever happen but I finally have respect for a policeman! Lets hope Brian is not just the exception that proves the rule, and there are more decent cops out there.


----------



## Streathamite (Feb 19, 2002)

*damn and blast....*

I smell real danger here...in one bound, Brian AND Mike AND U75 have become the national hate-figure for every hate-filled,reactionary dinosaur in Britain... and what I regard (despite Adam's somewhat negative appraisal) as an important and constructive debate gets turned into a meejah smear-storm.
Christ,Ihope-for Brixton's sake-that he keeps his job.


----------



## Fidel (Feb 19, 2002)

Well the lunch time bbc report was okay! I think Mike came across well and  got the points accross good and the commander didnt get slated..


----------



## zeedoodles (Feb 19, 2002)

Yeh good interview Mike and great to stress that this Brian chap actually LISTENS to some of us. Not many police,political people or even media people LISTEN. Brian is a top dude IMHO and we should support him if they try to smear or kick him out. 

A LISTENING POLICE MAN HOW REFERSHING 
(next thing there all be wanting party invites)


----------



## Streathamite (Feb 19, 2002)

> we should support him if they try to smear or kick him out.


Too damn right, Zee. And now-as the shit's gonna fall heavy over the next few days, we need to start thinking _how_ we can best do so. Suggestions/practical steps, anyone?


----------



## TinyCrendon (Feb 19, 2002)

*oh god...*

.


----------



## zeedoodles (Feb 19, 2002)

Re - reading Brian's posts again he talks so much sence, it is very hard to see how anyone could have a problem with him.


----------



## zeedoodles (Feb 19, 2002)

*ADAM*

Has he not already taken some steps by revising the police attitude to cannabis in the area ????????.

Waiting to be shot down in flames by those more astute in these matters than me


----------



## TinyCrendon (Feb 19, 2002)

.


----------



## Wireman (Feb 19, 2002)

This is my first post on Urban75. I joined because of this debate.

Everyone who supports Paddick should WRITE to the newspapers who are attempting to distort what he's on about.

The forces of reaction are circling, it is up to US to defend him.


----------



## zeedoodles (Feb 19, 2002)

*ADAM*

I am not half as literate (sp) as you and probably a lot less capable of writing and debating. I am more of a tree hugger than a politician. I just think the chap has taken some time to come here look at the site, listen to peoples views and answer questions that is more than most of his kind ever dream about.
So IMHO he deserves some respect.

I am not stupid and realise that the most likely nothing will change because of his posting here, but it has sparked debate on a London level in the news etc and that has to be good.


----------



## Havanna Cigars At Pleasing Prices (Feb 19, 2002)

*it's all a conspiracy gov'nor!*

Adam, 
your borderline-hysterical posts suggesting the hopelessness of dealing with these ruling 'elites' would seem to be more in keeping with the threads about the Lizards And Other Secret Rulers Of The World...are you an Icke-Lizard-Lover in disguise? C'mon come clean.


----------



## marko (Feb 19, 2002)

It's been said before but - Adam P: I think you've now stated your belief that Brian's presence here, or in the met, won't have a significant effect on anything. If this is what you believe, then why not leave the discussion alone. I think a lot of people have found it useful as an exchange of ideas about local policing issues in Brixton.

You can always start a new thread about the philosophy of policing, the possibility (or not) of change etc.


----------



## TinyCrendon (Feb 19, 2002)

.


----------



## hatboy (Feb 19, 2002)

TO ALL PEOPLE FROM THE MEDIA READING THIS: 

The story is not "Anarchy appeals to top cop".

The story is "Top cop is applauded by local people for engaging with them and listening to their ideas"

I am partially responsible for all this since I am the person who started this thread.  Like several others here I live in Brixton and know it well.  Brian Paddick's already proving himself an asset to the area. His experiment on relaxing the cannabis laws has been officially pronounced a success, street-crime is down (official figures today) and he is gaining the confidence of people (black and white) across the community.  REPORT THAT PLEASE.


----------



## Havanna Cigars At Pleasing Prices (Feb 19, 2002)

*I hold my hand..or rather thumb up*

it was cheap...although I would like to think Pleasing... but perhaps only for myself.
Adam - you put very valid points across, and I broadly agree with what you are saying about de-criminalisation. Your posts reek of pessimism though without the qualification of composure...but maybe you are just privy to information/experience that we can only guess at?


----------



## chairman_miaow (Feb 19, 2002)

*But what about black deaths?*

What has Super Cop done to bring to justice all the people that his colleagues have killed? Derek Bennet, Ricky Bishop etc etc etc? 

I don't see any justice for those people?


----------



## editor (Feb 19, 2002)

It's easy to knock Paddick's motives and reasons for posting here, but ultimately it doesn't matter.

All that really matters is that he has been *directly * responsible for stimulating one of the best and most engaging debates about drugs and community policing that I've read in a long time, and the subsequent huge publicity means that the issues are getting the attention they deserve.

Personally, I've grown to respect the man.

May I ask that others who wish to broaden the scope of this debate and challenge Paddick on topics such as police brutality and racism, please do so in another thread.

Adding more and more issues unrelated to the main drug theme will only result in an unworkable, unfocussed thread.


----------



## harry (Feb 19, 2002)

I've been following the debate for a few weeks now but not being a Brixtonite never felt the need to reply. But what has happened today could be really bad. In these times of spin and bullshit it's refreshing to see senior officials that aren't afraid to express what they feel and go out on a limb and my fear is that the Commander is going to be the subject of a witch-hunt in the reactionary press. That would be a tragedy!


----------



## Alanj (Feb 19, 2002)

I fully conncur with our dear Editors comments . Brian Paddik has shown more intelligence and commitment to open ,honest ,debate and discussion than many in power ever do . As a result of the quality of this debate the issues raised and this thread are now being discussed nationally , Mr Paddick isn't personaly responsible for all the ills committed by the Met , with more officers like him perhaps we would see far less policing by force and much more policing by consent . He has stuck his neck right out on the 'chopping block' by posting here and being so open with us , big RESPECT to him for that .As an advocate of the legalisation of all drugs , a supporter of harm minimisation , I am glad to see that he has engaged in debate in manner which is absent of any of the condescention and patronisation that we usualy get treated to by those in positions of 'power' .Indeed Mr Paddik represents a very real threat to entrenched vested interest groups in the Met and elsewhere . And a big WELL DONE to Hatboy for starting this thread and to our Dear Editor for all his hard work on the site and in the 'media' today .Go get yourself a drink Mike and put a big cheesy smile on


----------



## Bookere (Feb 19, 2002)

I think the timing of the press getting hold of this debate has been almost perfect. 

Mayor Giuiliani's less than helpful comments at the end of last week about cannabis use leading to violent crime (I mean, come on????) needed to be countered by some serious *informed * wide scale debate. 

I share peoples fears that this could turn into a press witch hunt for Mr Paddick. Having spoken to a number of people though I'm confident most people who read the comments of this thread will see the hugely important value that can be gained from someone in Brian's position accessing all a variety of mechanisms to interact and communicate regularly with community members.


----------



## chipshot (Feb 19, 2002)

Thanks for this,
Hatboy, Brian and Ed - top stuff


I hope the current press don't use the brixton debate here as a weapon against this sort of discussion, I think I can hear the sound of middle england begining to turn the page of todays daily mail ! "Bunch of lefty anarchist blah, blah, blah...."


There was discussion of, within Brixton there being places for people to buy Crack etc that wasn't street corners. That house or street being to all people almost seperate from the rest of the area. Would this not give the dealers a "seat of power"? An area of terrotory unchallanged to expand from ?
Does middle England consider Brixton to be this exact thing but in a larger scale ? Have the powers that be written off the area ?

Is the only answer here to attempt a pilot study of Medically backed Crack treatment. Take 50 current users. Try taking them out of the dealer loop. See if crime drops !

In short this debate is about solving a problem in Brixton, that is now open to everyone nation wide. Those new to the discussion -particulalrly from the press - try starting with articles with constructive ideas,  hopefully moving away from the "anarchist cop - sells papers ! line.... it's a shortcut to thinking !


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 19, 2002)

> Mayor Giuiliani's less than helpful comments at the end of last week about cannabis use leading to violent crime (I mean, come on????) needed to be countered by some serious *informed* wide scale debate.



Bookere, did Giuliani *really* say that?? Missed it if so!

Youn are right, informed discussion on these issues essential, and Brian's engagement here has been a part of that, whereas in contrast a visiting New Yorker's stupid (it seems) comments very much have *NOT*

Respect to the Commander, and also to Hatboy's post ..... 

* Listen to the locals, media! *


----------



## TinyCrendon (Feb 19, 2002)

.


----------



## editor (Feb 19, 2002)

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you, Adam.

Paddick is doing far more good fighting for change within the police force, even if it does involve him getting flack from others and pissing off the top brass.

If he leaves the force his influence would shrink accordingly and I for one am finding this direct line to a senior police commander useful and productive.


----------



## harry (Feb 19, 2002)

Yeah
I'd go along with that. The last thing anybody wants is for the old school old bill like those embodied by Glyn Smythe and the bully-boyFederation to take over again. We need more coppers like the Commander and who knows maybe in a few years time we'll all live in a better place?


----------



## mugwump (Feb 19, 2002)

*The War on Drugs*

Ah, reminds me of something that I heard on a Tool CD.

This is not a War on Drugs, this is a War on 
Personal Freedom.  Please bear that in mind at all times.

IMO the answer to the drug crime problem is simple:

Promote the use of ibogaine to remove people's dependancies on hard drugs.
Legalise all drugs, and make them available from chemists.
Promote the idea that drugs are not bad in themselves, it is people's misrespect of their power whence problems come.


----------



## RubyToogood (Feb 19, 2002)

If you're interested, Brian Paddick's "anarchism" comments are on this page of the Brixton Movement for Justice March thread. You'll see from the context that he is simply replying to the post about anarchism made by ginger (then known as ginger nuts  ).


----------



## TinyCrendon (Feb 19, 2002)

.


----------



## johnwisehammer (Feb 19, 2002)

"Does middle England consider Brixton to be this exact thing but in a larger scale?"

Ooh, absoutely, I agree with you there - it sounds a bit flippant but if one of those crack dealers started hanging around Cullens on the Kings Road instead of Costcutters on Coldharbour Lane (or whatever), you can bet he'd be whipped off the street _instantly_ and (I believe) that's absolutely to with the fact that Chelsea residents have more political, social and economic clout than Brixton ones. I've always thought that non-policed zones were a shit halfway-house for dumping social problems on the poor - but I wouldn't object too much if they had it in Belgravia as it's "such a good idea".

I'd also say that "tolerance zones" for otherwise illegal behaviour already exist in the UK so it's not some space-age wild idea at all - in Edinburgh, there's a "non-policed" area for prostitution in Leith and in Leeds or somewhere as I understand it. In Amsterdam, they've built sort of car parks with bus shelters each side of each space for privacy and of course we all know about the shooting up rooms (here ends the obligatory Dutch reference). But can anyone think of an industrial estate or spare space near Brixton which would be suitable? Wouldnae think so.


----------



## harry (Feb 19, 2002)

You never know Adam, we live in hope!


----------



## harry (Feb 19, 2002)

You never know Adam, with a few more Brian Paddicks around we could live in hope! Wherever that is.


----------



## Platinum (Feb 19, 2002)

This might not be a popular opinion, but Drug addicts and even the dealers who addmittedly peddle these 'commodities' are people. We will not ever begin to tackle these problems until we can come to terms with what drives such people. What makes persons value themselves so little that they are prepared to poison themselves, furthermore what makes a person value others so minimally that they are prepared to profit from their despair. In my late teens I lived in the Granby Triangle, and was around both the taking and distribution of illicit narcotics. It is the feeling of separation from the reality of our shared humanity that is the real problem. If people dare to have hopes for themselves and the people around them, however hopeless they may seem, then we can move on together. It doesn't help that we grew up in a time when people considered; 'there is no society...' an axiom.


----------



## hatboy (Feb 19, 2002)

Platinum - that opinion will be popular here (maybe not with Dailly Mail readers). If you look through this thread in detail you will see comments from myself encouraging people not to demonise or dehumanise people.


----------



## Platinum (Feb 19, 2002)

I agree hatboy, and accept that here my opinion will be more readily accepted. Its just in my experience that pushing people into a 'group' outside what is 'normal' society, whether that is that of a dealer or an addict only furthers the problem. Rather than talking of 'screwing dealers', we should ask why dealers are willing to 'screw' us. However alien their exploitation seems, most human Behaviour is common. Is a trader in the city, any different in the traits he exhibits. Yet they are not demonised by mainstream society( tho I'm sure persons  here might find fault).


----------



## Tourn (Feb 19, 2002)

*Adam >> In country X it is legal to punch old women in the face. Now Im sorry, Ive had a good listen, but the voters of middle X will never stop punching old women. <<*

Some things are intrinsically criminal. They are not hard to recognize, they are crimes against another. Laws that sanction the persecution of persons who have done nothing Intrinsically Criminal are not only not respectable, but the enforcement of them is of itself intrinsically criminal.

Prohibition will work great injury to the cause of temperance. It is a species of intemperance within itself, for it goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man’s appetite by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A Prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded. - Abraham Lincoln (1809–65), U.S. president. Speech, 18 Dec. 1840, to Illinois House of Representatives. 

*Adam>> Drug dealers/policemen and politicians are all the same gang. All on the same side. The top firm... <<*

Huh? 

To those who disagree with reform, consider the following: 
I guarantee you that all the gun-toting, murderous, ultraviolent, "drug-lord kingpins" who sell to and addict our children in order to generate huge, tax-free amounts of bribe money and profits to buy bigger and better homes, cars, lawyers, and weapons are on your side. They not only appreciate but also thrive and depend on your point of view for their very existence!


----------



## gate (Feb 19, 2002)

Tourn, are you suggesting that all drugs should be legalised then? I think that would bring chaos! The drug situation is bad enough as it is! I think that you can only safely legalise Cannabis and perhaps ecstacy.


----------



## unclekellan (Feb 19, 2002)

could someone tell me how this story was leaked to the media - and whether we think  that it is fine that posts onto this forum ended up spewed all over the press

perhaps the jaded jounalist who keeps using this thread to attack anyone with a flashing blue light could use some of his investigative powers and find out where the sources came for these stories.

after all, for all his (sometimes justified) cynicism of the police - he should remember that the media are not exactly top billing as friends of the workers or the anarcho-left activists

and people, whilst posting on any public forum is open to 're-interpretation' by outsiders - people should remember that for the moment at least - you can bet that journos and others will be paying a little more attention than usual to these boards in the hope of picking up some other tempting morsel to throw to the dogs of middle england


----------



## Tourn (Feb 19, 2002)

*>> Tourn, are you suggesting that all drugs should be legalised then? I think that would bring chaos! << *

Why? Are you going to use drugs if they suddenly become legal? 


*>> The drug situation is bad enough as it is! <<*

Attempting to keep addicting drugs away from those who are addicted is futile and dangerous. And not much can be said for law enforcement policies that foster criminal activity. Turning $3 worth of addicting drugs into $300 on the street does nothing but accomplish that.


----------



## johnwisehammer (Feb 19, 2002)

"could someone tell me how this story was leaked to the media - and whether we think that it is fine that posts onto this forum ended up spewed all over the press"

I don't know where you get the idea this was "leaked" to the media - it's a public forum, innit? It's the nature of the beast - it's the equivalent of speaking to a public meeting - if you don't want something widely known, stick to private forms of communication (possibly something that might have crossed Paddick's mind over the last 24 hours). You don't get to pick and choose who listens.

"perhaps the jaded jounalist who keeps using this thread to attack anyone with a flashing blue light could use some of his investigative powers and find out where the sources came for these stories. "

I think that's mean, snide and uncalled for and quite unlike you (not least because not anyone gets or takes a flashing blue light - a fact that's crucial to all this).


----------



## Tourn (Feb 19, 2002)

*>> "could someone tell me how this story was leaked to the media - and whether we think that it is fine that posts onto this forum ended up spewed all over the press" <<*

As has been stated, this is a public forum. And for what it is worth, I am here because of what I read in the media.


----------



## editor (Feb 19, 2002)

For the record, the journalist who (ahem) 'leaked' the story was a Big Issue writer who had the decency to ring both me and Brian Paddick up first before running the story.

Material posted here is in the public domain and considering the popularity of the site it should come as no surprise that journalists are among its readers.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Feb 19, 2002)

I have not been contributing to this thread not being a resident of the area, but am finding it very intresting as the issues apply to the contry as a whole.

Well done to the commander for posting here, it took a lot of balls.

Unfortunatly the first I heard of the program was of my Dad. Does the BBC keep any of its programs on the net that I could fing or does anyone know where I can find a transcript.

Cheers


----------



## Gilgongo (Feb 19, 2002)

> _Originally posted by sonicdancer _
> START WINNING OPERATION TRIDENT - YOU ARE LOSING AND HENCE IT IS WORSE ON THE STREET
> more money/police/ideas please



Hmm. That would translate into "more control please" I would think. One thing about control is that the more you have the more you need. More control is not the answer. 

Have a look at www.stopthedrugwar.org for some interesting angles on what is really going on in Brixton - it's a global problem, not a local one.

Just Say Know.


----------



## Gilgongo (Feb 19, 2002)

> _Originally posted by steelgate _
> *Tourn, are you suggesting that all drugs should be legalised then? *



Steelgate son,  this isn't a particularly radical idea. Since the late '80s, the Dutch have decriminalised various narcotics currently classified in the UK under Classes A, B and C. The Dutch parliament is required to ratify this legislation annually I understand, and each year  they have voted it back in because the policy of decriminalisation of what other countries refer to as "hard drugs" is popular and works.

I think the only worthwhile debate in the UK should be about _how_ such a policy could be introduced, not  _whether_ it should introduced.

Just Say Know - 40 years of the Drug War and what have we got for all the fighting?


----------



## Wireman (Feb 19, 2002)

It's p1 and p4/5 in Wednesday's Sun. Not good.  

Usual suspects quoted.

Time to fight back.


----------



## Gilgongo (Feb 19, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Derek _
> *You can't legalise crack or heroin though that is insane.  *



You really, really, need to understand that almost every word of your post is misinformed or just wrong. I'm not holding this against you - it's the majority view after all, but it just doesn't stand up to the empirical evidence of the last 40 years in this or almost any other country.

If we are to have a constructive debate about this then we need to start separating myths from facts much better than we are now. As it is, we can't even get off the ground at the moment with much of this.

For a summary of what I'm referring to, see www.stopthedrugwar.org 

Just Say Know.


----------



## wroglet (Feb 19, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Adam Porter _
> ]Legali[Bse/decriminalise crack and smack. Or give up and let the dealers run the show.
> 
> If we legalise any drug, do you imagine that the incumbent Chancellor will miss the opportunity to steal a huge amount of revenue? Of course not. International organised criminals will simply undercut the legal outlets and continue in much the same way as now.
> Hardly an ideal solution....


----------



## Rowland. (Feb 20, 2002)

A quick intro: I've appeared here after hearing about the Brian Paddick's comments on `the news' - I've spent a couple of hours reading this forum and the one about the Brixton Movement for Justice March, and I'll admit to being impressed by pretty much everything I've read here - rational, informed, and genuinely interested debate.  And I'm especially impressed by Brian Paddick - clearly a very brave man.  But to the point...

There's been a fair bit of discussion about what might happen if heroin and/or crack were legalized.  Derek's idea that it's insane to do either?  Or Adam's idea that, because of the tax that would be put on these drugs, that illegal dealers would undercut the legal supplies?

Once upon a time, back in the days before aspirin, laudanum (opium dissolved in alcohol) was the most popular pain killer in Britain - it used to be legal, and it used to be very widely used (I've heard it was great for getting the kids to sleep - scary, eh?).  It strikes me that anyone interested in legalizing heroin could do worse than to find out what it was like back then with laudanum.  I don't know the details myself (well, I've read Coleridge's `Xanadu' and bits of de Quincy's `Autobiography of an English Opium Eater' (it's a bit heavy going in a stodgy Victorian way), but they hardly give you an insight into what it was like for the bulk of the population), but it strikes me that a fully informed debate ought to take past experiences into account, and I've never met anyone in this kind of debate referring to the British experience with widespread and legal opiate use.  Remember: the stuff *used* to be legal, once upon a time, so why not again?  What can we learn from the past in this case?

As for the idea that, if all recreational drugs were legalized, illegal drug dealers would undercut the (excessively taxed) legal drug supply.  Well, the proof of the pudding is, as they say, in the eating.  The *BIG* problem with most illegally bought drugs - as I'm sure you all know - is the matter of purity.  When you buy street heroin, you *know* it's going to be cut with something or other, but what?  Drugs like LSD and Ecstasy - man-made drugs - are often synthesized badly and end up being full of nasty poison.

This isn't far off the situation during alcohol prohibition way back when in the USA.  When booze was illegal, the stuff was made illegally and sold illegally, but was often poisonous due to poor distillation and brewing.  As soon as the prohibition on alcohol was lifted, the bootleggers had to find other kinds of trade to make their money because people stopped buying their known poor quality products - experience shows that legalizing a previous illegal drug, at least this once, put all the drug dealers out of the drug business almost straight away.

It strikes me that something similar would happen to illegal drug dealers in the here&now if currently illegal recreational drugs were legalized.  There would, I think, be several mechanisms to ensure this: firstly, the demand for illegal drugs would drop off because a lot of people would be *very* glad to buy whatever they want legally - avoiding the risk of getting nicked (a sensible thing to do if you legalize recreational drugs would be to increase penalties for dealing drugs illegally, and also to introduce penalties for buying drugs illegally) and ensuring a guaranteed pure supply. Secondly, I can't help feeling that if all illegal recreational drugs were legalized, there would be a campaign mounted to ensure that the illegal dealers went out of business very quickly - it'd be the one time when increasing policing really would help: get rid of the current dealers, and who's going to replace them?  The risks would be high and the potential gains would be low.  And, well, illegal drug dealers are, when you get high up the chain, Not Nice People - wouldn't *you* like to see these vicious thugs out of business?  There'd be a lot of support for that sort of thing, I'd reckon - I can't help feeling that a lot of people would be helping the police directly by shopping illegal dealers in a way which is rare now.

And another thing has just occurred to me: it's perfectly practical to grow drug-producing plants in the UK.  Hemp is already widely grown indoors and it used to be widely grown in fields here, and opium poppies are just about viable (not that I can really see anyone bothering with them).  How much more home-grown would there be if it were legal?  That'd help keep the illegal suppliers' profits down, wouldn't it?

Yes, you can point to the illegal supply of tobacco in the UK - that works in part because the supply is high quality: you can buy dodgy Bensons off some bloke in the pub and they're exactly the same as you can buy in the corner shop, just cheaper.  This only happens because it's easy for people to buy fags abroad without paying duty on them and then import them cheaply at low risk of being caught.  The same applies to rip-off booze acquired the same way for the same reasons: people buy it because it's of known good quality.  How much booze is available that's *made* illegally?  Not a huge amount, and anyone who's ever tried any will know why: it's usually bloody awful stuff.  The economics of the situation are that illegal non-distilled drinks just aren't worth trying to sell - the risks are too high for the likely gain, especially when you consider that anyone can brew their own beer or make their own wine using a kit from Boots.  So the only worthwhile sort of illegal drink to sell is a distilled drink - and distilling is very carefully controlled in part because it's easy to get it wrong and make something that'll send people blind.  And so hardly any is sold in the UK and hardly anyone drinks it.

Just some thoughts.


----------



## Kameron (Feb 20, 2002)

*On the other hand*

Like you Rowland, I came here by the same route I read the same thread and I came to the opposite view.

If you making it all legal (everything legal), and sell it through chemists then you put the dealers, importer and men with guns out of business.  That is what we all want isn't it.  However it leaves us with a problem of what to do with the users.  Well if they will buy from you (ie the govt.) then you can make a condition of the sale that they tell you who they are and authenticate that in some way. Then you have got a lot more control than he underground arrangement we have now.

Your case example is of drugs from the era of Oscar Wilde, in our own the Amsterdam model shows that usage falls, and not only does it fall but with proper regulation you know who the users of the hard drugs are. You can track their behaviour and instantly they become I lot more controllable and much of the danger to us and ironically them is removed.  Apart from anything else a significant drop in the price will drive down the amount of street crime and house hold burglaries making my life in Brixton better and that it what we all want.

This crime (the use of hard drugs) harms many people who make no choice to have anything to do with drugs. The users have the right to harm them selves if they want, and I think it is government policies that makes the users desire to harm themselves harm me as well.


----------



## wastedbloke (Feb 20, 2002)

I was going to send Brian a PM but decided to put it in the public domain instead - obviously this influenced my wording. It’s lengthy but heartfelt:

Brian

I’m sorry to note the negative publicity being bestowed on you and your decision to contribute to these boards. You made a decision to “go public” about your job and, it seems, quite deliberately contributed as your professional self instead of as an anonymous (as most of us are) poster. I feel quite sure this was a calculated decision. It strikes me that all you were trying, in fact succeeding, to do was involve yourself in healthy debate with the people of Brixton. 

I appreciate that Urban75 users are not wholly representative of  the Brixton community but what you have done is engage in lively debate with many people who would otherwise think of the police as  removed from their lives. People who have strong and, at times, radical beliefs about the law and the way in which it is interpreted. People who generally view the police as a threat instead of as providers of security - that is not to say that we break the law on a regular basis (through using drugs or any other activity) we simply know, from looking around us, that crime is rife on our streets and that current policing strategies aren’t working. It doesn’t take a genuis to appreciate that the best way to understand what’s happening is to engage with the people affected. To discuss with them how they feel. 

Thankfully you seem to know this. I just hope those around you  
are as level-headed when it comes to seeing through the current fog of media misrepresentation. Mind you - if they can't even discern the truth when presented with biased “facts” then they probably shouldn’t be in the police force!

Keep the faith

wasted

<edited to say - "Fuck - sometimes I sound like a pompous git!!!">


----------



## Tourn (Feb 20, 2002)

*Global >> Unfortunatly the first I heard of the program was of my Dad. Does the BBC keep any of its programs on the net that I could fing or does anyone know where I can find a transcript. << *

I first read about the Commander on the BBC news this morning, my time. I just checked, there is now nothing about him on the BBC news page. It is now 7 PM here.

These things have away of coming back. 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/default.stm


----------



## Wireman (Feb 20, 2002)

All BBC stuff here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/news/190202/paddick_190202.shtml


----------



## Clapham Omnibus (Feb 20, 2002)

I agree with the Commander and I think he is brave to air HIS PERSONAL opinion. Obviousley he cares for the people of Brixton. Not writing it off as some kind of South London O.K. Coral.
Brixton has not declaired UDI and it is not an island.
Good to hear what the highers up in the Met think


----------



## agricola (Feb 20, 2002)

sorry for being cynical but i give commander paddick six months at most before he gets sidelined or booted......look what they did to ali dizaei after he started writing for the guardian


----------



## Aussie88 (Feb 20, 2002)

*Another cop' s perspective*

I read about the outspoken Commander  on another police web page. I am an Australian police officer, relatively junior. I stress that I enter this debate with no disrepect directed towards the Commander.

I am a conservative. Pure and simple. HOWEVER as such a passionately believe in unfettered freedom of speech. As such, although I do not agree with all the Commander says, I nevertheless support his right to say it - yes, even as a serving police officer. 

"The problem" as I see it is we cops are not the ones who should be deciding upon drug policy. That, it seems to me, is clearly the province of the Parliament. We are not elected - they are.  Rightly or wrongly, we cops do their bidding. They are elected to make laws. We are not. It seems simple enough at first blush. HOWEVER their remains the vexed issue of police discretion. That is, we police use our discretion (lawfully) not to enforce all laws all the time. To not have such lawful discretion ("the original discretion of the Constable" I think is the ancient terminology) would, as I think they Commander would tend to agree, lead to either "zero tolerance" or a "police state". Anyone who wants to do away with the measured use of discretion does not understand policing and has never had the misfortune to be a cop.

So there really IS a kind of eternal conflict - lawmakers vs the original discretion of the Constable. My view : the lawmakers are elected - my use of discretion should be limited to relatively trivial offences. Is personal possession a trivial offence? Let the lawmakers decide. Not the cops.


----------



## Eddie E (Feb 20, 2002)

*ethics of policing*

'Editor' properly wants any legalisation debate not to overthrow Brixton topics , so I'll be brief.
Adam - there's no more difference between a policeman holding a personal view on a topic differing from the legislation than you having something private in your life and being a journalist! - go eat an apple!
Last few posts - Brian may well outlast the next few months, my views on legalisation were well known for years before I was promoted and returned to the Drug Squad to lead operations.
You want a 'police ethics debate'? - open  a thread elsewhere, that subject is wider than Brixton.
Love to Brixton
Regards,  Eddie


----------



## TinyCrendon (Feb 20, 2002)

.


----------



## Tourn (Feb 20, 2002)

*Adam >>Come on everyone, especially all you newbies, read the posts if you are going to make comments like this... Tourn - Im the one who wants all drugs legalised/decriminalised. Not the other way around. Sorry if my (bad) analogy confused you. << *

You have it wrong!!! I am the one but I don not understand what comment you do not like. 

While I did not understand your post (at all), I used it as a vehicle to get some of my ideas across. Especially, the intrinsic nature of real crime.

We can not rightly call ourselves a free people and incarcerate others solely for what they put into their OWN bodies. 

Well, I am off to work now. Bye


----------



## Bookere (Feb 20, 2002)

William (WOW)

Giuliani's exact words were as follows:

"Marijuana caused a lot of the violence we had, I would encourage the police to arrest as many of them [drug users] as possible." 

SOURCE 

It's an utterly rediculous notion to anyone who has had the *pleasure* of smoking a joint. 

For those of you who look at Brixton in support or against this argument, see Hatboy's insightful comments about the changes in Brixton over the last 15 years. 

Violence in Brixton is far more prevelant now due to the influx of Crack dealers. The so called "Frontline" was a far less dangerous place when people were only selling quantities of weed.


----------



## Trotboy (Feb 20, 2002)

*Interesting issues*

Firstly let me congratulate Brian for having the balls to do this. It does go to prove what we all know, but rarely see; that Police Officers are human beings.

I have seen Brian perform at Lambeth Police Consultative Committee meetings, and again, he's very good. HOWEVER the problem is that, as Brian evidently realises, the Police are at the end of the day agents of the State. In order to change things conclusively we first have to change the State itself.

Tinkering with drugs laws will only provide small-scale and short term solutions. Indeed, 'zero tolerance' methods will only have the same result in the end. New York may have dealt with street crime for the time being, but the contradictions within US society that create such hopelessness and despair remain.

Firstly, to Brian I'd say keep up the fight, we will support you in every way possible to change the attitude of the Police. However, I don't think your stand will be tolerated for long, particularly in the period we are moving into. Also remember that others have done similar good work in the past, but it can be undone just as fast. In Devon & Cornwall in the late 1970's and early 1980's, John Alderson was a massively progressive chief constable, who made great strides in introducing 'community policing' and transforming the Police force. Almost all of the progress he made has since been undone.

Secondly, to people in Brixton, I'd say don't expect too much. Brian is one man within a system. His presence does not stop racism within the force, cannot change overnight the 'canteen culture', and as we have seen already, does not stop such events as the shooting of Derek Bennett, the heavy handed policing of the following demonstration, or the death of Ricky Bishop. Certainly Brian can make a small difference, and we should support him in that, but we will still have to defend the community from the Police as well.

Thirdly, on the specific issue of Drugs, there are massive social problems caused by drugs, obviously. We are all aware of the issues, but decriminalisation solely in the Brixton area is not a long term solution, only decriminalisation NATIONALLY can start to solve some of the problems. Local decriminalisation leads MORE white middle class drug takers to visit 'the Ghetto' to score drugs off the dealers, for one thing. 

Brian says the Council want to work with him to fight the social problems around drugs. But I see very little evidence of this. New Labour's agenda seems to be one of gentrifying Lambeth and pushing the problem somewhere else. Selling off Council Housing, bringing in big business at the expense of the community, cutting public services, all these point to Lambeth wanting anything but to deal with the issues.

The Socialist Party makes the following demands; which would help the situation, but the Council and the Government will never implement unless we fight for them:

* Community control of Policing through democratically elected committees of residents, tenants and trades unions.

* Effective Trades Unionisation of the Police Force, with democratically accountable command structures.

* Increases in funding to recruit new Police Officers and improve training of Police, with recruitment emphasis on local community.

* Affordable publicly owned housing for all, with massive injection of cash into existing Housing stock and the buiding of new council housing.

* High quality comprehensive education available free locally to all

* Legalisation of drugs under a free prescription programme for addicts, with facilities provided for addicts, and properly funded programmes to re-integrate addicts into society.

* production of all drugs, pharmaceuticals, alchohol, tobacco and cigarettes to be nationalised under democratic control of the workforce.

* Massive programme of funding into the Prison service, with emphasis on rehabilitation of offenders.

These are just a few things that would help to change the face of Brixton, and to reduce criminality and drug dependency throughout society.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 20, 2002)

> The Socialist Party makes the following demands; which would help the situation, but the Council and the Government will never implement unless we fight for them:



How do you propose to fight for your demands??

I am all ears...


----------



## adi baby (Feb 20, 2002)

*Good Cop/Bad Cop*

Hi people

Brand new to urban thx to the Standard and The Sun. Love the level of debate especially our man Brian - wot balls!  And Im not talking big salty chocolate balls!

My main point where did all the NY baddy business go - elsewhere or have they just lockked everybody up cause they certainly aint solved the underclass situation - and secondly how many baddyboos in Brixton are property owners - none!? 

Lets face facts youre either in or your out!

 a mate of mine bought a flat in Oct and he's already 'earnt' £20,000 without having to do jack - and if youre out like most kids in brixton are, you are just gonna go out and get it one way or another - full stop.

Crime wave - you aint seen nothing yet!

yours in sadness eeking a living in UK Plc


----------



## Bookere (Feb 20, 2002)

Welcome to the Boards Adi and what a very good point to start with. 

Have a look around the boards and you will find a lot of support for this anticapitalist stance.


----------



## edgarlesty (Feb 20, 2002)

*NYPD effects...*

Adi,

I did some work in NY in 2000 on urban governance and attended an NYPD working group at 6am one morning through which the zero tolerance policy was implemented. The same system which is consistentlyt vaunted here as a possible solution.

It was through these team meetings of officers that "hotspots" of crime were indentified and subsequently officers concentrated in that area to deter other "criminal" acts.

The point you make is an interesting one r.e. the underclass and economic inequality as Giuliani and zero tolerance did "well" in clearing street crime from Manhattan Island (for London read Chelsea/Knightsbridge etc) and shifting it out to the Bronx/Jersey areas.

However, many of the people I spoke to In NY, including prison reformers, homeless workers in Harlem seemed to think that the supposed "success" of zero tolerance in reducing crime levels was actually more likley attributable to the general economic upturn in the NY and US economy rather than heavy-handed policing tactics.

capitalism thus taming (to some limited extent) the beast of inequity and frustration it had itself unleashed.


----------



## adi baby (Feb 20, 2002)

thx for the welcome bookere and thx for reply ed - just to say hey isnt it great this site and what a rush getting replies - everyone should try it!  

My first reaction is Oh Gosh Am I an anticapitalist just because the causes of crime seem so totally obvious to me?

The second reaction is gulp these people are all pretty damn sharp so i better watch my step but hey i am here to participate so bring it on! 

re ed's comments on NY zero tolerance - yes it all sounds like pieces of the puzzle but i like the summing up ' zero tolerance = zero understanding'.  no ghettos in the UK - it just will not work cause of our geography ( 2 small ) and our cultural history ( the blitz, all people). 

power 2 the people!


----------



## Bookere (Feb 20, 2002)

Its an interesting reaction to think "Oh gosh, I'm an anti-capitalist"

To be honest I don't consider myself an anti-capitalist. I see a huge number of faults in capitalism, but I can't deny I benefit from it as well. The simple answer is I don't know what  the alternative is.


----------



## adi baby (Feb 20, 2002)

maybe ive always kind of thought that socialist capitalism is good vs market dominated capitalism which is bad.  a point brian made about police discretion seems apt that everything can be used or abused even capitalism!


----------



## hipipol (Feb 20, 2002)

*storm in a plastic cop issue tea cup*

All this frenzy about a cop who thinks about shit, then rejects and returns to upholding law an order- not the kind of geeze I want round my hopuse fer tea, I can assure you of that!!!!!!
 Fuck, him an his main squeese are on hols, lucky git, good timing eh?
 Still least he thought about  it a bit, before ordering the back stairs re-greased!!!!!!!!


----------



## Trotboy (Feb 20, 2002)

TopCat,

We fight for these demands and others consistantly, in Lambeth and well beyond. Tonight we will be at a meeting of Tenants on the Ethelred Estate about Lambeth Council's 'UDP' - their masterplan for gentrification, we will be there with other Tenants who are fighting against the 'New Deal' on the Clapham Park Estate.

Tomorrow night we have our regular weekly meeting at 320 Brixton Road, 7.30pm, the main speaker is a comrade from our sister Party in Israel, who will be speaking about the situation there. We will also be discussing further how we take the ongoing fight to the Council.

Saturday morning you can find us on our weekly stall outside KFC, opposite the Town Hall, where we will be petitioning, leafletting and selling our weekly newspaper; the Socialist.

We are no strangers to fighting against cuts in Lambeth. Before we became the Socialist Party in 1996, we were known as 'Militant' and had three surcharged councillors in the 1980's when the Council fought against Thatcher's cuts. Our councillors were later expelled from the Labour Party for their stand.

If you want more information feel free to e-mail me, or pop along and see us on our stall, or to our weekly meeting.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 20, 2002)

I would rather stick needles in my legs than attend one of your paper sales. An attitude that I am sure you find is quite common amongst local people. As for Ted grant, well please don't hold him up to be a champion of the working class as I remember the things he actualy did whilst in power...


----------



## Tourn (Feb 20, 2002)

*Giuliani's exact words were as follows: "Marijuana caused a lot of the violence we had, I would encourage the police to arrest as many of them [drug users] as possible." *

Giuliani is a charming nazi. He was absolutely wonderful in the wake of the Sept 11 terrorist attack in NY City but his police department has been repeatedly sanctioned for brutality and corruption. 

The much ballyhooed drop in crime in NY City happened throughout the United States. Crime rates here are at a 30 -35 year low 

During Giuliani’s tenure, the Mullen Commission found, after a two year investigation into police coruption > New York City's "finest" had a "litany of manufactured tales" for nearly any occasion… They commit perjury in front of grand juries and at trials as casually as they'd tell a fairy tale to their toddler. 

In 1996 Amnesty International, after an 18 month investigation , found: "the information gathered suggests that police bruta-lity and unjustifiable force...is a widespread problem, with a pattern of similar abuses occurring over many years."

All of this was ignored. Then we had the specter of Abner Louima, a Haitian immigrant, being openly  tortured in a NY City police station and an attempted cover-up. Followed soon after by a completely innocent , unarmed, immigrant being shot 41 times by undercover police while he was standing in the vestibule of his home.

I could go on and on here but one more example. Last year the NY City police department arrested 59 thousand individuals on marijuana charges. An undercover officer, attempting to by marijuana, shot and killed a completely innocent individual he accosted on the street in an attempt to buy drugs. 

The officer would not take NO for an answer and an argument developed ending in a death.


----------



## Duncan (Feb 20, 2002)

*Brian (The Commander)*

I served as a detective at Notting Hill police station under several senior pseudo-detectives (the Met. seemed to have a knack of sending senior dross to B.H. [Notting Hill], both uniform and CID), including "Brian-the-Iron", now known to one and all as Commander Brian Paddick. In fact, DCI (sic) Paddick as he was then known, authorised me to visit Jamaica in order to track down the financial assets of an arrested Jamaican drug dealer.

I find it hard to believe (though perhaps I shouldn't) that someone of Commander Paddick's experience a) is unaware whether the British Secret Service is now involved in the drug war and b) can mention cocaine and poppies in the same paragraph: _".....where poor people are duped into carrying cocaine condoms in their stomachs. You won't get any of these millionaire vermin drug barons swallowing this stuff. Maybe a squirt of weed-killer on the right poppies would help?"_

If *Brian (The Commander)* is in fact Commander Brian Paddick of the Metropolitan Police service, well, the residents of Lambeth should be questioning the Mets. wisdom of sending a bafoon to oversee the policing of their part of London.


----------



## adi baby (Feb 20, 2002)

class A point dunc!


----------



## popslut (Feb 20, 2002)

*Ghetto fabulous...*

These days I'm awoken at 6:30 am every morning by next-door's chickens - better that than being awoken at 3:30 am every morning by next-doors crack habit. 

But...

When I moved to Brixton in 1995 I was kind of aware what I was moving to - a crowded inner city neighbourhood, entirely encased in concrete, apart from the dog-shit strewn oasis that is Brockwell Park. I lived in a flat just on the corner of Effra Road and Brixton Water Lane between a crack house and a knocking shop and was paying £750 a month for the priviledge. I knew better than to fit a stereo in my car, as I knew it would be ripped off in days, as happened to several of the people that visited me. I knew better than to leave my place unattended [or apparently unattended] for more than a day/night as the block I lived in was plagued by break-ins. 
Later on I moved to a dismal flat in Tulse House [at the top of Tulse Hill] which received no natural daylight as a result of abysmal planning, and which came with a delightful collection of refuse, used condoms, overflowing skips and burned out cars [i SWEAR i'm not exaggerating here] through which i had to walk to get to my poorly lit stairwell. I would be awoken every night by the shouts and screams of my neighbours beating the shit out of each other, and by the constant blaring of Police car sirens whizzing past my window every 5 minutes.
During this time I was smoking about an ounce of dry skunk a week.
In 1999 I was diagnosed with depression - aggravated by chronic cannabis psychosis. Surprise surprise. 
My solution was to get the hell out and move to Somerset - where I currently rent a delightful detached 2 bedroom house for less than half the amount i'd be expected to pay for a miserable studio flat in a shitty part of London. The air is clean, light and noise pollution are virtually non-existent and I chat with my neighbours in the street. And guess what - I've had a stereo in my car for 2 years. I rarely bother to lock the doors. I haven't had the urge to spend all day every day smashed off my face on skunk since I left London.
Sorry to sound like a smug bastard - its not my intention.

The point I'm trying to make is this;

If you choose to live in a sewer, don't be surprised when it turns out to smell of shit.

 

Furthermore;

* Its no surprise that people tend to lean on drugs when you consider the extreme discomfort that city-dwellers on low incomes are expected to live with on a daily basis. 
* Where there is a demand, there will always be people ready to supply, regardless of policing methods, laws or media polemic.

Attempting to chase the dealers out of Brixton smacks of NIMBYism - they're going to set up shop somewhere! It'd be like trying to nail jelly to the ceiling. Likewise the "tolerance Zone" idea. "johnwisehammer" summed it up rather nicely thus;

_I've always thought that non-policed zones were a shit halfway-house for dumping social problems on the poor - but I wouldn't object too much if they had it in Belgravia as it's "such a good idea". _ 

The Police are empowered only to try to tackle the symptoms of the problem, rather than the underlying problems themselves. 
All the time 1% of the world's population control 99% of the wealth etc etc...
All the time The Sun and The Daily Mail are the loudest voices in the country etc etc...

Lastly, I hear often about weed is the harmless and benign intoxicant. I beg to differ. Whilst I believe that the "War on some drugs" is a total farce, and that what I put in my body is my business, I meet a lot of people younger than myself who are convinced that they can smoke kilos of "harmless" weed with impunity, forever. Not so. I don't mean to preach - but cannabis psychosis is fucking scary and not something I'd wish on my worst enemy.


----------



## hatboy (Feb 20, 2002)

Can't stop now, but just a quick response to a couple of points above.

Duncan - does it matter if Brian Paddick gets a technical point about drug origin/manufacture wrong while making a jokey remark about it if his motives are good/heart is in the right place?
I'm not necessarily Mr Paddick's greatest fan, but I'm impressed with his honesty and I'd like him to stick around so Brixton can see how the situation developes. The very fact that so many other Police don't like him is a big feather in his cap to me.

Popslut - I'm sorry your experience of Brixton was so negative. It doesn't sound like your housing situation was very good and that's important to a persons well-being. But, come-on! If you think Brixton is a sewer then you can't have got to know it very well. I always feel that, despite it's problems there is much more good than bad around here. I personally have never lived in a more friendly, neighbourly place.  You may well be someone who simply prefers the different (not better or worse) style of life a rural location offers. But don't write Brixton off because of that. It isn't a sewer, despite the complete mis-representation in the Sun today.


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 20, 2002)

> Lastly, I hear often about weed is the harmless and benign intoxicant. I beg to differ. Whilst I believe that the "War on some drugs" is a total farce, and that what I put in my body is my business, I meet a lot of people younger than myself who are convinced that they can smoke kilos of "harmless" weed with impunity, forever. Not so. I don't mean to preach - but cannabis psychosis is fucking scary and not something I'd wish on my worst enemy.



No-one's really pretending it's harmless though popslut. The point was its *relative* harmlessness compared to other drugs, in terms of the effects of dealing and trading on people in Brixton. And it was a question of prioritising in terms of Police policy given the very flawed drug laws as they now stand.


----------



## Duncan (Feb 20, 2002)

*Brian (The Commander)*

Hatboy: Does it matter????!!!

This idiot, if it is Cmdr Paddick, is a senior officer in the Met. Police dictating - one way or another - how the residents (you) of Brixton shall conduct them/yourselves. Of course it matters. If this guy can not distinguish between the coco plant and a poppy plant, how can you take his comments seriously? I'd go one further, how can you take the Met. seriously promoting such a guy and giving him such command?! I've known Brian-the-Iron since he was a PC living in Islington. I hope I'm wrong, and it's someone masquerading as Paddick, but if I'm wrong - God help society. Thank Christ I live out of the MPD.

When I fly, I expect the airline pilot to know the difference between a runway and a motorway. Likewise, the residents of Lambeth should expect, and demand, someone with an iota of intelligence.


----------



## popslut (Feb 20, 2002)

hatboy

Didn't mean to give the impression that my entire experience of Brixton was totally negative - it wasn't. I had many blissful breakfasts in the Phoenix Cafe on CHL and I had no qualms in walking thru the town at ungodly hours alone or with friends - I never encountered a moments aggro in all the time I was there. 
Went out, got wasted, had lots of laffs and felt thoroughly metropolitan
Before Brixton I lived in Hackney and before that, on Shacklewell Lane in Dalston - both areas favoured by the press/TV as "centres of iniquity and crime" but both, in fact, friendly and good fun places to be. 
My thrust was more to do with the discomfort of living in crowded concrete planning nightmares plagued by noise, air and light pollution, and with little or no influence over your surroundings. 
Where I live now, crack and heroin addiction and their associated social fallout are virtually invisible. Sartorial faux pas, however, are endemic. Who would be brave enough to walk into Bar Humbug attired in bushy sideburns, tweeds and folded-over wellies?

Also, I didn't mean to describe Brixton as a sewer - you'll have to forgive my somewhat juvenile metaphor. 

Maybe what I should have said was this;

"If yu choose to live in a crowded inner city neighbourhood, entirely encased in concrete, don't be surprised if the people around you, who find themselves at the bottom of the social and economic pile, behave in ways which reflect the discomfort of their situation."

Not as concise, admittedly, but less open to misinterpretation.  

William of Walworth

Dunno about you, but I've met and talked with many people all convinced of the "relative harmlessness" [isn't that an oxymoron?]of smoking weed - some even asserting that smoking spliffs serves to "clean out your lungs"!! I was one of them for 15 years, until it came up and bit me on the arse. 
I do know that people dependent upon drugs will take any opportunity to rationalise and justify their addiction and present their particular tipple as a harmless panacea. Like I say - each to her/his own, but forgive me for feeling the urge to warn anyone who cares about the nasty effects of overdoing it.




I believe that no amount of progressive Policing and legislative reform is going to make the slightest bit of difference to the "crack/guns/gangs of moody yoots on street corners" problems of inner-city life. Pathetic as it may seem, I think MTV has more influence upon all this than any number of Community Initiatives. When Val Doonican becomes cool again, tha kidz will all be out drinking Guinness, smoking St Bruno and mugging each other for their rocking chairs.

Lastly;

Will everyone [not necessarily just the contributors to this forum] please stop propping up that most offensive of euphemisms - "ethnic" when what they actually mean is "non-white".

"Ethnic [adj.] Of or relating to a sizable group of people sharing a common and distinctive racial, national, religious, linguistic, or cultural heritage."

Thats all of us. Isn't it?

Or;

"Ethnic [adj.] Heathen"

Yuk!

Even worse is the qualification "ethnic minority". Is it just me or does this suggest a kind of insidious cultural superiority?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Feb 20, 2002)

Cannabis psychosis?!


----------



## popslut (Feb 20, 2002)

*Brian (The Commander)*



> _Originally posted by Duncan _
> *Hatboy: Does it matter????!!!
> 
> "Of course it matters. If this guy can not distinguish between the coco plant and a poppy plant, how can you take his comments seriously?"
> ...


----------



## hatboy (Feb 20, 2002)

Thanks for that much more reasonable take on Brixton Popslut. Yes, ideally it would be good if Mr paddick knew all about how every street drug was made, but I still think it's not hugely important. He's dealing with the other end of the supply chain. After all most of us know what a destructive force alcohol can be but if you asked me how absinthe (or most drinks to be honest) was made I wouldn't have a clue.  And I don't need to know to know how pissed it can get a person and how that affects your behavior and people around you.

By the way I accept your argument about  "cannabis psychosis". Everybody knows how paranoid smoking strong weed can make some people and I know that if you have a tendency to say,  schitzophrenia (sp?) it can be exaccebated by weed.  But probably only if you smoke all the time, or too much for you.  I think alcohol should remain legal, but that's not saying everyone should be pissed all day.


----------



## Clapham Omnibus (Feb 20, 2002)

*Plants Vs Guns*

Duncan
What does it matter if Brian Paddick don't know the difference between a coco plant and a poppy plant!
I bet he cannot tell the difference between a Browning 9mm and a Colt 45 auto either.
Except the last two will most definatly kill you.


----------



## the_voice_999 (Feb 20, 2002)

popslut is dead right.
but if you think you can get rid off the gun/crack/smack cultcher by getting rid off the dealers and users you all may be nieve.
like an illness you have to start at the begining.
there was not a prob. until the govenment made smack ileagle in 1967. from that point on the use has gone up over 1000 times.
if the users got smack from the doctors it would be pure and the health risk would be very low. dealers would not be able to make money so would be out of bisiness. users would not have to comit crime to bye drugs.
makes you think the law might be wrong


----------



## popslut (Feb 20, 2002)

*mistaken identity...*

hatboy

It was "Duncan the Divvy" who made the point about coco [sic] plants and poppy plants.

I was merely quoting him.


----------



## Rowland. (Feb 20, 2002)

Hmm.  Interesting stuff.

Adam: apologies for misattributing words to you.  This Web interface makes it pretty easy to cock up like that (I'm more used to Usenet, where it's a lot easier to keep track of things); I'll take more care in future.

But...  You're right when you say that not all drugs can be lumped together - provided that means *for all purposes of consideration*; I think there are some commonalities in some cases, though, but obviously caffeine is hardly comparable to crack and you'd look very strangely at anyone who suggested that, wouldn't you?  I was trying to consider the likely consequences of legalizing more recreational drugs and looking at what might be learnt from past experience  If one were thinking of legalizing any given recreational drug, you'd have to think carefully about exactly how to do it, simply because of the different problems attached to the different drugs (there aren't *any* drugs - used medically, recreationally or, whatever which have *no* problems.  Did you know that oxygen is considered a dangerous drug in certain situations by the medical profession?).

Some thoughts: *given current society* (by which I do mean specifically the sort of societies we have in our inner cities; while I've never lived in *inner* London, I did once live in Hulme - central Manchester - before it was demolished and rebuilt; that was an experience. I'm essentially a suburbanite: I like cities, but I also like peace and quiet at home), I wouldn't be happy with completely open access to powerful, addictive, and potentially very dangerous drugs like heroin and cocaine (in any form) - but what to do?  Alcohol is a powerful, addictive, and potentially very dangerous drug: are the sort of controls on that drug adequate for something like heroin?  I wouldn't presume to have much of an opinion myself, beyond noting that alcohol (ab)use (being very widespread) causes more social problems than heroin (ab)use as far as I'm aware.  Cannabis might not be addictive, but does it make sense to have *that* drug no more hard to acquire than fags are nowadays? - the potential psychological effects of cigarette smoking aren't in the same league as those of cannabis, are they?

All tricky stuff (and I'm aware that there's a huge list of common recreational drugs which I've ignored), which is why I'm interested in what happened in the past: why make a blind leap into the dark based on purely here&now predictive guess-work when we *might* be able to apply lessons from the past? - just to make the guesses more reliable.  I can't see that much can be learnt from the `distant' past to inform decision making on something like crack cocaine, but as for drugs which have been around for a while?  Why not?  btw, (regarding someone else's comment) I was thinking of Oscar Wilde's time for sure, but before that too.

One of the points I was trying to make about legal/illegal drugs is that if you have a legal supply of a drug, the illegal supply tends to dwindle: that's one reason why hardly anyone distills potcheen.

Aussie88: one thing about the experimental relaxed attitude towards cannabis in Lambeth is that it was approved in advance by the politicians, who are studying the results with a view to learning from them and informing future policy.  This is *not* a case of the police deciding what to do on their own - if it were, I suspect that the predictions about Brian Paddick not lasting long in his job might be right.

Our current home secretary (more or less the bloke in charge of this sort of stuff) is unusual in that he doesn't appear to have been turned into a fascist bully-boy on contact with the home office, which is what normally seems to happen (or am I missing something?)

Duncan: you've had harsh words for Brian Paddick because he mis-attributed the source of cocaine.  Fair enough - you might have a point there.  But you've done the same thing - so are you the sort of idiot you're calling him?

There is a big difference between intelligence and knowledge.  Brian Paddick is clearly very intelligent with a lot of knowledge in *some* areas.  But where does it say in the rule book that policemen have to know everything about everything?

The way I see Brian Paddick is this: he's a copper.  He's supposed to have expertise in policing and to me, it looks like he has that expertise.  He's stated that policemen aren't the people to advise people on drugs and whatnot, because (in short) they're not experts in the field: leave it to the experts - that's a very sensible point of view, isn't it?  And sure enough, we have some evidence that Brian's not an expert in recreational drugs.  That's fine: he's clearly a very intelligent chap who's here to *learn*, and he will learn.  If he makes a minor technical slip like that, by all means correct him.  Does it matter from the point of view of his ability as a policeman that he once stated (flippantly) that poppies are the source of cocaine?  I don't see that it does: from the point of view of policing in Brixton, it just doesn't matter, does it?  What matters in this context is understanding the effect that different sorts of drug sales and drug use have on individuals and the community: this seems to be what Brian Paddick is concentrating on, and what he appears to have some expertise in.

If Brian thought, as that maniac in New York appears to think, that cannabis was a cause of violent crime, *yes* we'd be right to ridicule him - but he's more on the ball than that, isn't he?  He can see and has learnt what the various different drugs really do (I expect he has some mistaken ideas, as do we all) and has learnt about the social and personal consequences.  Good on him: he wants to learn, and he is learning.

Let's face it: once upon a time, *all* of use knew nothing at all - when we were born.  Since then, we've all be learning.  Some of us have learnt about different things to other people.  Why criticise someone just because they have learnt different things to you?  I've got a physics degree: should I ridicule you because you don't even know what vector calculus *is*?  Of course not - in fact, I'm used to people pointing ridicule at me because I do (and, erm, have forgotten almost everything about how to use it...  It was a few years back.)

If he'd been expressing ill-informed opinions about policing, or about Lambeth, or about any other area in which he is *supposed* to be an expert, then you might have had cause to call him a buffoon.  But he's not done that, you've got no cause based on what you have presented (which seems to be nothing more than a personal dislike of the man - and anyone with half a brain can figure out that an openly gay officer in the Met is going to have a lot of *that* to deal with - the fact that Brian *is* apparently dealing with it successfully - look at his rank - ought to indicate that he's a *very* bright boy in some ways at least), and...  How can I put it?  If you're going to accuse someone of being unintelligent and a buffoon, you really should spell buffoon properly.

If you've got intelligent, informed remarks to make in the debate,that's fine by me (who cares about that, though?).  I don't see that personal abuse is any help at all.

Johnny Canuck: cannabis psychosis?  Well, the term is a new one on me.  Cannabis is certainly a very powerful psychoactive drug, and you can't expect to hit your mind with lots of anything like that for long periods and not have *some* strange things happen.

Now I think about it, I have met a few people who have described initial experiences with cannabis in terms which now make me apply the word `psychotic' to the state they ended up in briefly.  Whatever the technical details of it, I don't think there's any doubt that some people do end up seriously screwed up by the stuff.

As for the idea (from someone else) that smoking spliffs can clear out your lungs: it's daft, but not *completely* out to lunch.  Once upon a time, a single cigarette in the morning used to be recommended for asthmatics: fag smoke contains chemicals which do open up the tubes in your lungs (bronchiodilators if you want the fancy name), and it was thought that the coughing which the fag induced helped clear out the muck - which is probably did to an extent, but at what overall cost?  Doctors now take the line that any asthmatic who smokes is getting it badly wrong.

popslut: I'm entirely with you on `ethnic'.  Worse to my mind is people who refer to `ethnic minorities and other minority groups such as women' (yes, I've really met that one).

If you mean non-white, say so.  If what you really want to do is refer to disadvantaged sections of society, do so.  Don't be sloppy about it.

But...  While I'm with you entirely on ethnic and I do think that `ethnic minority' does tend to have that `cultural superiority' angle to it - is it *that* bad a thing to think that we live in a reasonably superior culture?  For all the problems of these septic isles, they're pretty civilised: I think that means we've got a pretty good culture, and why *not* be honest and admit that means it's a superior one?  No, I don't say that this culture is the One True Perfect Culture or that we can't benefit from outside influences (I happen to hold the view that British culture is as good as it is *because* of all the outside influences, immigration, and suchlike) or that other cultures might not be better in some ways: just that here&now, we've got a pretty decent place to live in, all things considered.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Feb 21, 2002)

I asked about cannabis psychosis because, having been aware of the issues surrounding cannabis culture for at least a couple of decades, I hadn't heard of it before.

Cocaine psychosis, yes. Psychotic states are usually associated with the stimulant type drugs, and often have a sleep deprivation component.

Because the mechanism of operation for cannabis is different from that, it was somewhat surprising to hear of a new psychosis associated with it.


----------



## popslut (Feb 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Rowland. _
> *Hmm.  Interesting stuff.
> 
> 
> But...  While I'm with you entirely on ethnic and I do think that `ethnic minority' does tend to have that `cultural superiority' angle to it - is it *that* bad a thing to think that we live in a reasonably superior culture?  For all the problems of these septic isles, they're pretty civilised: I think that means we've got a pretty good culture, and why *not* be honest and admit that means it's a superior one?  No, I don't say that this culture is the One True Perfect Culture or that we can't benefit from outside influences (I happen to hold the view that British culture is as good as it is *because* of all the outside influences, immigration, and suchlike) or that other cultures might not be better in some ways: just that here&now, we've got a pretty decent place to live in, all things considered. *



Jesus H Christ on a bike!!  

I can only suggest you go away and ruminate upon the concept of "cultural superiority" and its repercussions with regard to recent World history.

A. I think you may have misinterpreted my meaning with regard to the whiff of cultural superiority inherent in the phrase "ethnic minority" - think about it.

B. Are you seriously labouring under the misapprehension that you are somehow part of a 'superior culture'?!?! Why not pop overseas and do some work educating Johnny Foriegner in the error of his savage ways? I'm sure they'll thank you for it.

"(I happen to hold the view that British culture is as good as it is *because* of all the outside influences, immigration, and suchlike)"

Yes - they all have natural rhythm don't they. Marvellous colourful culture. And aren't the children sweet?

Gah!!


----------



## popslut (Feb 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Johnny Canuck2 _
> *I asked about cannabis psychosis because, having been aware of the issues surrounding cannabis culture for at least a couple of decades, I hadn't heard of it before.
> 
> Cocaine psychosis, yes. Psychotic states are usually associated with the stimulant type drugs, and often have a sleep deprivation component.
> ...



We learn something new every day don't we..?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Feb 21, 2002)

I have read something about Cannabis Psychosis in a book by Dr Dorothy Rowe. If I remember rightly, she puts forward the idea that it was invented by White Male Psychiatrists as a way of locking up West Indian men that they couldn't label with anything else. According to Dr Rowe it is very difficult to get diagnosed with this unless you are Male and West Indian and that it doesn't really exist.  If I find the correct passage I'll transcribe it and post it here.


----------



## popslut (Feb 21, 2002)

Mrs Magpie;

Far be it from me to question the wisdom of the esteemed Dr Rowe [who?] - I speak only of my own personal experience. 

If you'd like me to go into more detail regarding my experience of cannabis-related psychosis I'd be happy to - although I think that maybe a little off topic. Feel free to PM me.

For what its worth, I would love to be able to smoke weed again - unfortunately 2 hits on a spliff and i'm staring into the abyss for 5 hours, sweating and panicking and terrified that I'm going to end up trapped behing that sheet of frosted glass again. 

I wouldn't discourage anyone from enjoying a spliff - a more enjoyable pastime I would be hard pressed to imagine. I can think of nothing which enhances food, company, sex, music, or just staring out of the window more than a nicely rolled spliff of good weed, and were my kids to come home and say "Dad - I've decided that booze is fucking horrible  - could you get me some grass?" I'd be more than happy to oblige.

What I would counsel against, however, is doing what I did and smoking an ounce of skunk a week for 15 years. 

Like i said before - i'm not trying to preach. It would be a bit selfish of me to discover a pitfall like this and not tell anyone though wouldn't it?

The ppl that are interested will go "Hmm - food for thought." 

The ppl that aren't will go "**click** - next post."

Thass all.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Feb 21, 2002)

Dr Dorothy Rowe is an internationally acclaimed Australian Psychologist who works in the UK.  She has written about a dozen books that go into edition after edition. She is hugely sceptical about Drug Companies and Psychiatrists. She believes that caring about and listening to works better and most labelled mental illnesses are actually extreme distress that are caused by real events or circumstances. I am not agreeing or disagreeing with her, or in any way trying to diminish your experience, it is just I have only come across this term in something she wrote, until I read your postings, that I just posted it in a general info sort of way. She has thousands of web pages devoted to her if you want to find out more about her.


----------



## Tourn (Feb 21, 2002)

*Rowland>> I was trying to consider the likely consequences of legalizing more recreational drugs and looking at what might be learnt from past experience << *

It’s not the UK but for what it is worth, 19th century America has been labeled a Dope Fiend’s Paradise. Once you know about it, you realize how stupid our present policies are. For the most part, based on myths and half truths.

In the U.S. there have been a dozen or so drug policy studies (Government & Private). Several of them have histories of drug use and are very informative. You can find them on line at the drug library 

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/index.HTM

The Consumers Union Report on Licit and Illicit Drugs, by Edward M. Brecher and the Editors of Consumer Reports Magazine at 

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/cu/cumenu.htm

is very easy to read and just packed full of information.


----------



## Clapham Omnibus (Feb 21, 2002)

*Free Drugs For Users*

The_voice_999

Nice idea giving Free drugs via doctors to users.
But!
Who Pays for this?
Can you imagin the Health Secretary standing up in The House and saying that NHS resources are being used for this.
Sorry old lady waiting in the hospital corridor.
Sorry Mr hip replacement man
Political suicide


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 21, 2002)

One last thing on cannabis psychosis, I just want to agree with hatboy really, who summed it up admirably.



> By the way I accept your argument about "cannabis psychosis". Everybody knows how paranoid smoking strong weed can make some people and I know that if you have a tendency to say, schitzophrenia (sp?) it can be exaccebated by weed. But probably only if you smoke all the time, or too much for you. I think alcohol should remain legal, but that's not saying everyone should be pissed all day.



"Only if you smoke *all the time"* being the key phrase.


----------



## Streathamite (Feb 21, 2002)

> This idiot, if it is Cmdr Paddick, is a senior officer in the Met. Police dictating - one way or another - how the residents (you) of Brixton shall conduct them/yourselves. Of course it matters. If this guy can not distinguish between the coco plant and a poppy plant, how can you take his comments seriously? I'd go one further, how can you take the Met. seriously promoting such a guy and giving him such command?! I've known Brian-the-Iron since he was a PC living in Islington. I hope I'm wrong, and it's someone masquerading as Paddick, but if I'm wrong - God help society. Thank Christ I live out of the MPD.


Sorry, Son, you're wrong, and seriously ahtofawder;
1) I don't think Brian is an idiot. I am wary of him, as indeed I am wary of all OB (they belong in jackboots), but his comments on this thread seem to me to betoken an unusual level of intelligence, reasonableness and - astonishingly for senior OB - understanding of the issues facing SW2/9. And I say this as a veteran OB-hater.  
2) Poppy/Coca - slip of tongue, hmm?
3) The best reason to take him seriously is that he has made a radical and positive difference to police/community relations on his patch. Alack, I no loger live in SW2 (I work in Harrow,and I'm a lousy traveller)-but most of my mates and my social life is still down there, and I think he has brought something vaguely approaching sense to the situation. AND hard drug busts are well up (and my views tend to chime with the venerable PK on this one)
4) Brian-the-Iron. My, have we got a nasty, bigoted little homophobe in our midst, mayhap? or why else would you raise the issue of his sexuality?
5) For the umpteenth thousand fucking time, YES IT'S PADDICK. THE WHOLE FUCKING COUNTRY IS AWARE OF THIS BY NOW. I'm guessing blind here, but I would surmise that your meejah tastes err towards the redtop end of the spectrum. So read the fucking front page,dummy. Or, if you want, I will forward to you the confirmatory email I have in my personal MS-Outlook file.
6) I'd rather have Padick than the tossers we have round our way. Now they really ARE assholes.
GRRRRRRRRRRRRR


----------



## Streathamite (Feb 21, 2002)

WoW; Quite, and absolutely!
You and I have smoked enough in our time (both of us being ageing hippies) to replant the Scottish Highlands, but we'd have to go a HELL of a long way further to get to that state!


----------



## Kameron (Feb 21, 2002)

*Free Drugs For Users*



> _Originally posted by Clapham Omnibus _
> *Nice idea giving Free drugs via doctors to users.
> But!
> Who Pays for this?
> Can you imagin the Health Secretary standing up in The House and saying that NHS resources are being used for this.*



Well, I personally don't believe that anything should be entirely free on the NHS for those that can afford to pay and I believe there should be serious incentives to encourage people and companies into private medicine. But that's by the by.

These drugs are today sold at a huge profit with amounts of mark up in price that most businesses can only dream of. The drugs are dirt cheep to produce and free from any patents! This means that the can be sold at a far smaller mark up by pharmacies  who will make a great deal of money from the deal, some of which can be siphoned off by the govt. of the day to pay for the problems created by drugs.

So i admit there are going to be problems, people who can't you recreational drugs responsibility, who are going to harm themselves.  However I believe that both the numbers and severity of the problem will decrease exponentially following a dramatic fall in price, a removal of the criminal element from the deal, and a gentle softly softly, if you will, approach to the regulation of all pharmaceuticals.

Try and read this as two separate bits and don't judge my views about drugs on the basis of my views about the health service or vice versa. Dam I really shouldn't mix my radical ideas.


----------



## Trotboy (Feb 21, 2002)

*TopCat*

TopCat,

I think you're getting a little confused, Ted Knight was the surcharged leader of Lambeth Council, and was not a supporter of Militant. Ted Grant was formerly involved with Militant, but left in 1991 to form another group: Socialist Appeal, which still remains in the Labour Party. Our councillors didn't agree with everything Ted Knight did, by a long chalk, but he didn't engage in the kind of swingeing cuts in services we've seen since.

No-one's saying you should 'attend one of our paper sales' I said feel free to stop by the stall and say hello if you want to know more. Which I suspect you don't.....


----------



## corporate whore (Feb 21, 2002)

Popslut's description of her time in Brixton depressed me - I'm in agreement with hatboy on the area and its good points outweighing its bad points, but I can see how someone could feel disenfranchised and disillusioned, and having the Motherfucker Family living next door can't help any.

If you're still here, popslut, I hope you're enjoying Somerset. It's where I'm from and it's a great place to live BUT 'hard' drugs (smack, crack) are just as much of a problem in those small, peaceful towns as they are in London SW9 it's just the dealing isn't as blatant. Which brings us back to Brixton, eh?

For what it's worth, I feel it would be a fucking shame if Paddick were to be shuffled off somewhere else within the Met because of what's been going on here. He's taking positive, sensible steps in Brixton and you just know he'd be replaced by someone who thinks the sun shines out of John Stalker's arse.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 21, 2002)

A little confused? Well if you mean I find it hard/ can't be bothered to keep up with the splitting tendancies of the trot groups in the uk then your right. tad Grant was a shit though, for what he did and the discrepanceys with what he said he would do....


----------



## Trotboy (Feb 21, 2002)

*Still confused*

TopCat,

You're still confused. Ted KNIGHT was the leader of Lambeth Council. Ted Grant never had any position on any Council and therefore was never in a position to promise anything or deliver anything. 

I say once again, Ted Knight never had anything to do with Militant. So please don't tar us with the same brush due to your own confusion.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 21, 2002)

TrotBoy... It appears you are confused..

You said:


> Ted Grant was formerly involved with Militant,



Then you said:





> I say once again, Ted Knight never had anything to do with Militant



How do you reconcile these two posts?

Further:





> Ted KNIGHT was the leader of Lambeth Council. Ted Grant never had any position on any Council and therefore was never in a position to promise anything or deliver anything



He was leader, did make promises and then shat on the people of Lambeth...

Clear your head, take a nice deep breath and try some logic ok?


----------



## the_voice_999 (Feb 21, 2002)

*Re: Free Drugs For Users*



> _Originally posted by Kameron _
> *
> 
> Well, I personally don't believe that anything should be entirely free on the NHS for those that can afford to pay and I believe there should be serious incentives to encourage people and companies into private medicine. But that's by the by.
> ...


----------



## the_voice_999 (Feb 21, 2002)

90 % of of the kind of the crime in your area is down to drugs, who pays for this. It is all of us through our taxs and insurance.
the real cost of street drug at source is much lower than the street price.
A 1/16 of pot costs between £5-£7.50 on the street the drug barrons pay at souce £3 a Kilo. this is almost the same with harder drugs.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 21, 2002)

*My arse!*



> the drug barrons pay at souce £3 a Kilo.



Oh yeah?


----------



## Trotboy (Feb 21, 2002)

*TopCat, I'll try once more*

TopCat,

I'll try once more, and let's see if you can understand English, OK?

TWO DIFFERENT PEOPLE:

Ted GRANT

Leading theoretician of Militant, left in 1991 to form a new group: Socialist Appeal, because he and a few people around him argued that we should stay in the Labour Party (Although most of us had been expelled) Ted GRANT has never held any elected public office.

Ted KNIGHT

Labour left-winger, who was the leader of Lambeth Council until being expelled from office and surcharged in 1985. NEVER a supporter of Militant, but an associate of Ken Livingstone; the two of them lauched 'Labour Herald' a newspaper in 1981.

Has this now cleared up your confusion?


----------



## TopCat (Feb 21, 2002)

Yes my most humble apologies for confusing the two teds.....


----------



## Chuff (Feb 21, 2002)

> Nice idea giving Free drugs via doctors to users.
> But!
> Who Pays for this?



 As already said, We are already paying for this, Thousands of pounds detaining dope smokers every DAY, Insurance premiums etc etc.

Heroin costs what 17p a gram to produce Say every addict gets a gram a day, take off the cost of the crime commited by SOME addicts, evens out, prehaps your even in prophit.

Plus counciling, therapy treatment becomes less stigmatised, easier to administer, People are able to work and hold down jobs while on prescription..

Who looses out? Oh mobile phone companies don't sell as many phones to replace stolen ones. Police budgets are cut as crime is less of an issue,  What percentage of crime is drug related again? and some very nasty criminals some in political office are forced to look elsewhere for cash.

The healthservice benifits, from the reduction of uneducated drug use, Hep, h i v, and many other drug related excasabated illnesses decline.

Prostitution dramatically reduced.

And on and on and on

Opps some powers of random search, seisure of information, and general criminalisation of sections of the population become unnecissary...I knew there was some reason why it didn't happen years ago


----------



## the_voice_999 (Feb 21, 2002)

*My arse!*



> _Originally posted by TopCat _
> *
> 
> Oh yeah? *


----------



## the_voice_999 (Feb 21, 2002)

*My arse!*



> _Originally posted by TopCat _
> *
> 
> Oh yeah? *




£3 a kilo is an approx figer given by govenment agentcies.
In moroco 5 years ago this was the price you would pay in sterling. you have got to remember the countries where the drugs are produced are third world. wages for one week are the minimum houly wage in this country. think again if you think this is bull.


----------



## johnwisehammer (Feb 21, 2002)

Who pays for heroin/addictive drugs on the NHS in an addict treatment model?

Well, we all do, obviously - but it's a damn sight cheaper than the present system. I don't know whether you heard about it or not but a few days of a go a study was released saying that a tiny number of drug addicts were responsible for a hugely disproportionate amount of the costs of the criminal justice and health systems already - a figure of £11,000 per drug abuser was produced. I don't want to get too attached to that figure (I'm not an expert and I haven't read the report itself) but if even half of that money was spent on treatment and administration of drugs (heroin costs piss all to synthesise, so we're really talking about health professionals' labour costs) that stopped junkies/crackheads niucking stuff, we (in our taxpayer hat) would be saving money anyway.

Secondly, there's a lot of evidence/studies around which show that a quid spent on drug treatment with users up front is worth five quid spent on cleaning up the mess caused by drug addiction down the line. It's cheaper. (Can't give any references, sorry, jusrt off the top of my head).

Finally, even if the above didn't work, it would be worth it just to get the smack and crack dealers off London streets, wouldn't it? When you think about it, it's fucking outrageous that anyone should feel unsafe walking down busy and well-lit streets in London because of dealers and addicts - decent people are being put under effective curfew.

I agree with you that it would require a politician of integrity, honesty and vision to push for it - I'm not sure whether we've got any of those at the moment. 

(NB apologies if your initial point wasn't "it wouldn't work" but was "all politicians are too cowardly to do it" - in which case, ignore all of the above - I'm agreed).


----------



## TopCat (Feb 21, 2002)

I have been to morroco and the price per K was at least £200 and that is twenty years ago...name your source...


----------



## the_voice_999 (Feb 21, 2002)

*Re: My arse!*

If you bye dpoe in the turist resort then you are paying the going street rate. the barrons don't bye of the street they own the fields it is produced in.


----------



## the_voice_999 (Feb 21, 2002)

sorry cliffchuff i sent my reply to you mail. if you could send it to this page. i can't be arsed to write it againg. still lerning how to use this site.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 21, 2002)

Do these Barons also own Baron John the modern mans clothes shops?


----------



## the_voice_999 (Feb 21, 2002)

*do they own baron john*

they prob. do. drug barons own a lot of food and gambling outlets to clean up thier money so why not.


----------



## newbie (Feb 21, 2002)

Finally got here- why do I always break webboard registrations?  Radio 4 sent me, so firstly I apologise for helping flood your discussion, _but_ I've lived in Brixton since the 70s,  at this house for 15 years, and no-one has ever asked my opinion, so I guess barging in is required

Popslut got one side of Brixton, generally I've had the other- the shit has happened to others, that's why I'm a very respectable person these days. Hey Brian, your ploy worked, in the way that I gave up booze when I turned 18, I've (virtually) stopped smoking dope since you liberalised it around here.

The arguments in this thread are very real, very Brixton.  I'm writing this to say that as respectable, responsible tax paying parent I'll be outraged if Brian is witchhunted away because he's prepared to talk.  I've spent 25 years watching 'them' treat the people of this area as a disease to be controlled, so somone who'll engage in debate with anyone and everyone is to be welcomed.  

While I've been reading this a fox has been wandering around.  A very poorly fox with a lame leg, no fur on it's haunches and a completely bald tail.  Not a pretty sight.  A bit like the girls at the end of the road.  They've been around for a year or two, since the cameras pushed them, and their dealers, away into the sidestreets .  Brian, what are your policies doing to protect them, to make their lives safer, maybe even to rescue them from the evil scum that run them?  I've seen them being hassled, bounced elsewhere, occasionally lifted, which to me looks like policing the symptoms not the cause.


----------



## Chuff (Feb 21, 2002)

*999's Pm*

the_voice_999
Junior Member



Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 8 
 re: cost to us 
90% by gove. figures. it doesn't cost £1000 a day more like £1'000'000 a day. 
17p a gram is less than a packet of crisps. 
If a user wants to buy £ 10. worth they would have to steal £50 worth of our property to make this money or mug yours or my grandmother or may not servive the attack. 
also good side to giving the drugs is that there would be no pushers standind out side the school gates to push these drugs onto our children, which means the amount of users would not go up. after all there is no point in selling it cheep to get you hooked if your not going to bye from them in future. 
the proof? i hear you ask. who would go out of there way to comit crime when you can get it for nothing. especailly a user. 


 Um, Thats sort ofwhat I was saying, Sorry if the irony missed you  Jwh....Sad but true, theres too much dirty money preventing legalisation, though you'd think the big chemical companies would be at leasta bit interested in distribution.


----------



## Danny K (Feb 21, 2002)

*Drug legalisation - the reality*

Of course pharma companies want to make money from legalised drugs.  They're itching for legalisation and may well be putting money into campaigns anonymously.

George Soros is the biggest single well known financer of decriminalisation and when someone like him gets behind a project its destiny is sure.

Legalisation isn't a 'what if' scenario, it's all a question of when.  Global prohibition will not be in place in twenty years time and the other question is what do we do in the mean time?  And it is mean...

In my opinion we work with allies in the process including the wonderful Brian Paddick and others of his ilk.

The way I see things we will see the opening of coffeeshops over the next year or so and increasing prescribing of heroin to dependent users. I agree with those who question why some should get their drugs free on the NHS.  It's not an easy one though.  I think that each case should be treated on its merits.

Ultimately we need to break out of the medical model of addiction and find other ways of viewing tolerance, withdrawal and dependency.  It'd be interesting to see if you could get into residential rehab for tobacco addiction for instance...If anyone wants to give it a go I'd be happy to advise them.  It'd really put the cat amongst the pigeons.

Next, as is happening in Switzerland and Holland, politicians are turning their attention to legalisation (control and regulation of the supply side).  Switzerland may well completely legalise dope next year.

What I'd like to see is people putting some energy into campaigning for change to the drug laws in whatever ways they see fit.  The tide has turned and fortress prohibition has been shown to be very vulnerable to attack.

With some effort from activists we can hasten the end of one of the stupidest and most counterproductive pieces of legislation currently in existence by years.  

Legalisation would benefit the lives of millions of ordinary people from Brixton to Bogota and if anyone wants to get on the anti-prohibiton bus, there are a stack of links to various campaigns on our website. 

Great debate.  Keep it up.

Respect
Danny

Transform Director
www.transform-drugs.org.uk


----------



## the_voice_999 (Feb 21, 2002)

thanks Danny for your comments and support, I will visit web site and check it out. I'm glad you brought up the laws in Holland.
 Back in the late 70's they de-crime you use of dope.
This had an unexpected effect on the use of smack. In 1978 the average age of a smackhead was 26 years old, but only 4 years ago in 1998 the average age had gone up to the mid 40's.
the reason being it took dope out of the hands of the dealers so when the dopeheads went to buy, they no longer came into contact with the harder stuff, leading to less new users. so even if we only go half way and decrim dope it would be a start.
Bye the way if any one is woundering I'm not a dope head. I gave it up very easely, but unfortunatly I was left with a very nasty adiction to tobacco which I have not been able to kick, even after five years of trying.


----------



## Clapham Omnibus (Feb 21, 2002)

Kameron
the_Voice_999
CliffChuff

*Free Drugs to Users*

I read your comment along with others with interest. I like you believe in those that can pay should. Infact this capitalist had private medical insurance.

*However*

I would have thought the people in real trouble with crack and other class 'A' drugs havn't got two pennies to rub together.They probably have even less in the way of a true friend. Therego they will be on the NHS. I agree with you and as discussed in the forum. That Cocao and popies are grown in S.America, The East and other countries for a pittance.
Can you imagine Tony Blair going on a trade boosting trip to these countries? Somehow I very much doubrt it. With a lot of countries seeking to destroy the crops, I doubt the rest of the world would be happy bunnies either. HMG Plc would be the biggest drugs buyer as this would have to be taken onboard nationaly. Think what that would do to demand and supply never mind the price. With every junkie and his dog wanting to claim asylum in Brtain, I doubt if Kew Gardens would be happy or able to cope with demand.

Iam afraid Kameron an the_voice_999 a pipe dream.

Looking at the news it may be that Brian Paddick will have financial matters to deal with when he gets back. With the traffic cops in Lambeth shortly due to go back to base. The way the funding is going they may find their BMW's have been sold and they have to use mountain bikes. (They probably would get round London faster anyway.)Highly and expensivly trained specialist Traffic police doing beat duties. What will we have next. The Air Training Corps,Army Cadets, Girl Guids and Boy Scouts doing 'Juvenile'? I suppose the MPA would have a role for the Brownies and Cubs as well.
Possably the safest place would be in hospital if things get as bad as last nights TV film 'Marked for Death' thats where we all end up anyway. Only if we are lucky . (At least the Health Service is getting some money. Not to detract their increased funding. As they are up shit street as well.)
How can the old bill fight crime with one hand tied behind his back. Alright they are slowly increasing numbers. The police officers in London are not even half the 49,000 the cops in New York.
Thats why I admire Paddicks comments. I think his comments should not only be taken in the context of Brixton but similar areas thought the country.
Obviously there has to be a public/police partnership to fight crime. If in Brixton and other areas heads are stuck in the sand the problem does not go away. We hav't seen what the Eastern European criminals have in store for us yet. I bet its not nice.
Keep the faith Brian


----------



## Platinum (Feb 21, 2002)

*In reply to newbie*

I like your Fox analogy newbie, I saw many Foxes go down the trail of destruction. It is all well and us in our comfortable houses to pontificate about the rights and wrongs of drug law or policy. the problem is far deeper, and the solution has more to do with addressing deep ills in our community/society. This seems like a mammoth task, but each of us can make deep inroads everyday. A story was once told to me; ' A young child in a primary school was given a jigsaw of the world to complete. The teacher returned a little time later to see how the child had progressed to find the child had completed the puzzle in record time. "How did you manage to do that so quickly" asked the teacher. "Well" replied the child, "on the reverse was a picture of a man, I put the man together, and the world came together by itself.". If we can try to do one small thing a day to help each other, however small, like talking to that begger even tho' we can offer no money, then we can hope for a more cohesive society as a result. If people feel part of the collective then they are a part.


----------



## river (Feb 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by the_voice_999 _
> *
> [...]
> Bye the way if any one is woundering I'm not a dope head. I gave it up very easely, but unfortunatly I was left with a very nasty adiction to tobacco which I have not been able to kick, even after five years of trying. *


So its true, dope does lead on to something more serious 

_tobacco_

.


----------



## johnwisehammer (Feb 21, 2002)

"Highly and expensivly trained specialist Traffic police doing beat duties."

This is, incidentally, quite a common view within the police - the work that has the most contact with the public is the least desirable. I was a witness on an identity parade not long ago and the coppers there were telling me, "I'm so glad we got stuck with this job for a week - otherwise we'd be walking around town with high-visibility jackets!" - it was obvious this was about as important to them as cleaning the cell toilets. It's sad, really.


----------



## popslut (Feb 21, 2002)

*Bah!*

I can just see the red-tops and Tory "Grandees" queueing up to go purple with rage at the notion of "free drugs for welfare scroungers" whilst 85 year old Grandmother Mrs Ada Scrote waits 18 months for her hip operation.

Despite the fact that the current model of prohibition has been thoroughly discredited, and the existence of stacks of irrefutable evidence that the "war on *some*  drugs" is totally counter-productive, the Widdecomes and the Yellands and the Hastings' of the world don't seem too easily swayed by good sense and a desire to make places like Brixton and Hulme and Easterhouse a better place to live. 

And guess why...

Cos they don't bloody live there, thats why. Neither do 98% of the rest of the country. 

Down here where I live, drug-related crime and all the associated misery are virtually invisible. Thats not to say it doesn't go on, but not in anything like the kind of concentration and with anything like the visibility of the less well-off, densely populated areas of the country. My neighbours are entirely indifferent to the plight of a few thousand crack-heads and smack-heads and the tactics of the dealers and everything that goes with it - because they don't have to deal with it. 

If you're waiting for them to start caring - don't hold your breath. Stick 3p on a gallon of unleaded tho' and watch them turn out to man the barricades and wave the placards! 

These are people who can find no compassion for people who have fled their countries for fear of being murdered - don't assume for a minute that they are ever going to give a toss about Mary and Bill Skaghead - let alone countenance letting any of their sacred tax money go towards paying for their stash!!

 

Once you make the front bench of any of the political parties, you are probably able to buy a nice house somewhere agreeable in Surrey or Hertfordshire, and have a nice smart man in a Daimler pick you up for work in the morning. You can probably command a reasonable fee as a non-executive director of some company or other, and its probably quite comfortable. 


How many of them do you imagine are about to jeapoardise that by trying to sell Mrs and Mr RedTopReader the concept of "your taxes to pay for free drugs for layabouts"? 

I should bloody cocoa...

Newspapers only print what they think their target audience want to hear, and what their advertisers want to be associated with.

Politicians only tend to act upon what the newspapers and focus groups tell them is popular, or will make them popular.

The Police are empowered only to act upon laws created and ratified by politicians. 

Ulk!

I don't believe for a second that Anne Widdecome is motivated by a desire for social justice.
Nothing will convince me that Max Hastings is more interested in the plight of the marginalised inhabitants of some inner city borough than the opportunity to print another article about Liz Hurley. 

Liz shifts 'news'papers - junkies do not.

So - who [ apart from Brian Paddick] is going to stick their neck out?


----------



## the_voice_999 (Feb 21, 2002)

I think it'a about time for the highly respected Brien Paddock (for speaking his own mind not that of the less Respected Tony and sidekick/sleeping partner Alister) came back and told us his opinion on the debate so far.

I'm sure where ever he is on holiday he has been keeping an eye on the debate.


----------



## Trotboy (Feb 21, 2002)

*Popslut*

Popslut,

Sorry, but I find your last post a typical piece of Liberal, hand-wringing drivel.

Firstly, lets scotch the notion once and for all that the westcountry is full of straw-chewing reactionaries who are all racist bigots and hate anything and everything. We have a Socialist Party Branch in DORCHESTER for chrissakes! I myself am from Tiverton in Devon, originally.

It's true that the countryside has its own unique pressures, that its still largely in the grip of the green welly landowning brigade, who incidentally do NOT read red-tops! That's an ECONOMIC grip, in their enslavement of the agricultural working class and their ownership of the land. Consequently they tend to have a political monopoly as well.

There is just as much anger at the system in the countryside, and if you think the movement against price increases in fuel was reactionary, THINK AGAIN! It was our comrades manning pickets of refineries in Scotland, the North East, North West and Wales alongside the farmers and hauliers.

There are just as many reactionaries in Lambeth as there are in Devon, reactionaries are everywhere, they are just better hidden in the City, their circles are so far removed from ours. In the countryside, they rule the roost, and strut about. Here in the City they are content to exist within the confines of their class.

OPEN YOUR EYES, and try to live outside your cosy liberal middle class world a little, you might learn something!


----------



## Platinum (Feb 21, 2002)

*Hey Trotboy!!!*

Trotboy, leave middleclass liberals alone. I'm Liberal by choice, and middle class by default. My comfortable upbringing makes me symphatetic to those who may not have had the leg up I recieved, and its my Liberalism that has lead me to investigate other politics than my own. I own no means of production, and exploit no worker. (Other than the workers I exploit by partaking in Capital)


----------



## the_voice_999 (Feb 21, 2002)

*JWH*

There are a lot of us out here who do care, nearly 40% of us did not vote in the last Election because we now who ever we vote for don't give a toss about our views.
 Bye the way I come from a small town where we are seeing the same things starting to happen, maybe not on the same scale as the inner cities but the cities have had 30 years head start.
 But some of the larger town are catching up fast.

 I used to live in Bognor Regis (W.Sussex) a nice small holiday town or so it would seem. But drug related crime is growing faster than appathy for politics and they have also had several shootings over the last cupple of years. This may seem small to Brixton but when you take the 50'000 population into the frame compaired to Brixtons very large population (I don't know that figure) I think the smaller towns are not to far behind.

 Also as you say with the eastern block barrons coming in, the market is moving into the suberbs. I have never had to live in Brixton but I have friends who do, so I have always felt quite stong about this issue. I can't be the only one.

 So the more of us that talk, the more people will listen.

 Maybe Transform should start a politcal wing, we could all vote for them, better than wasting a vote.


----------



## popslut (Feb 21, 2002)

*Popslut*



> _Originally posted by Trotboy _
> *Popslut,
> 
> Sorry, but I find your last post a typical piece of Liberal, hand-wringing drivel.*



Sorry - I'll try to type slower so you can keep up.



> _Firstly, lets scotch the notion once and for all that the westcountry is full of straw-chewing reactionaries who are all racist bigots and hate anything and everything. _


_

Fantastic leap of reason there Trotboy, but I'm afraid you appear to have attached a slant to my post that wasn't there when it left my modem. My point had nothing to do with the West Country - it just happens to be where I live. I was more alluding to the vast majority of the inhabitants of the British Isles who live in cosy, well lit, comparitively affluent little towns where the problems of burgling crack-heads and drug barons seem a million miles away. Having lived in a quiet Surrey village for the first 18 yrs of my life, some of the less affluent areas of London [Dalston, Hackney, Brixton..] for the next 12 years and Somerset for the last 4, I reckon I have a fair basis for a comparison. The majority of the people of Godalming [in my experience] are less concerned with the plight of the inner cities than the people of Sandringham Road E8. Guess why...

Moreover, its the cosy suburban Mondeo Man who swings elections - follow me?




			We have a Socialist Party Branch in DORCHESTER for chrissakes! I myself am from Tiverton in Devon, originally.
		
Click to expand...


How foolish of me to doubt your credentials!!    





			There is just as much anger at the system in the countryside, and if you think the movement against price increases in fuel was reactionary, THINK AGAIN! It was our comrades manning pickets of refineries in Scotland, the North East, North West and Wales alongside the farmers and hauliers.
		
Click to expand...


I fucking bet it was. And did you notice how public opinion was firmly on the side of the fuel protests until Mondeo Man realised all the garages were shut and he couldn't get any unleaded for his lawnmower? Self-interest ruled the day Trotboy. Those noble farmers and hauliers are the same people who profited from shipping live calves around Europe in disgusting conditions. I bet your "comrades" were out in force then too. 




			There are just as many reactionaries in Lambeth as there are in Devon, reactionaries are everywhere, they are just better hidden in the City
		
Click to expand...


Not entirely sure how YOU define "reactionary" - not a word I tend to find a use for.




			their circles are so far removed from ours.
		
Click to expand...


Oh - how cosy. Which "circles" would these be? I would hazard a guess that you and me move in entirely different circles Trotboy.





			In the countryside, they rule the roost, and strut about. Here in the City they are content to exist within the confines of their class.
		
Click to expand...


"Oh there you go Dennis - bringing class into it again." Sorry - couldn't resist the Monty Python quote. 

"Class" only exists if you want it to Trotboy. Not keen on the concept myself - feels a little - umm... feudal. Not that I would attempt to deny you the freedom to belong to any class you see fit - whatever helps you to feel like you occupy the moral high-ground i suppose.




			OPEN YOUR EYES, and try to live outside your cosy liberal middle class world a little, you might learn something!
		
Click to expand...


I suppose you've earned the right to be patronising - you've probably had a hard day going round painting big 'A's on walls in white paint. "Smash the System"  

I'm sorry I don't share your text book sixth-form Socialist views Trotboy - wouldn't this all be so much easier if everyone adhered to the new orthodoxy of Left-wing slogans and Socialist posturing?

I'm afraid the lo-res spatial metaphors of "Left good/Right bad" mean very little to me - I tend to form my opinions as I go.

Describing me as a "Liberal" probably helps you to compartmentalise me and saves you the bother of actually working out what I'm trying to say - although by my interpretation of the word liberal - [note:small 'L'] i can only take it as a compliment. I've been called far worse._


----------



## sonicdancer (Feb 21, 2002)

Rowland any post here that any senior copper should read which backs Brian for posting here its probably yours. However you are by admission a surbanite and I doubt from your post get get exposed to the desperate chaotic drug users that feed the crack dealers in inner cities. Corporate whore however rightly pointed out there is smack addiction in all parts of the country., <so don’t get to comfortable> It wouldn’t be a free for all ,



> I wouldn't be happy with completely open access to powerful, addictive, and potentially very dangerous drugs like heroin and cocaine (in any form)




yeh scary thought isnt it ??!!  BUT prescribed hard drugs to registered addicts is what is the majority vote here.   It is only one method of attack as others have pointed out (adam) the global <poppies for rice> picture having to be the other issue addressed.




> But... While I'm with you entirely on ethnic and I do think that `ethnic minority' does tend to have that `cultural superiority' angle to it - is it *that* bad a thing to think that we live in a reasonably superior culture? For all the problems of these septic isles, they're pretty civilised: I think that means we've got a pretty good culture, and why *not* be honest and admit that means it's a superior one? No, I don't say that this culture is the One True Perfect Culture or that we can't benefit from outside influences (I happen to hold the view that British culture is as good as it is *because* of all the outside influences, immigration, and suchlike) or that other cultures might not be better in some ways: just that here&now, we've got a pretty decent place to live in, all things considered.



Agree our culture is better for the outside influences that we have allowed in our history but we don’t have anything to be superior about that is a tired argument – watch moronic English hooligans abroad who still hav’nt really understood for the ugly face value of this *  culture  *   And as popslut has pointed out just try selling that to johnny foreigner. Pretty decent place to live, I really think not, damn right dangerous and inhospitable yes.

Clapham_omnibus said




> Nice idea giving Free drugs via doctors to users. But! Who Pays for this? can you imagine home sec saying he want dosh for this ??





Actually I can imagine that – i have a belief that an arrangement between the rest of the world and the 3rd world countries who produce the drugs that benefits everyone and does not lead to one side capitalising over another could be the way ahead>> ??? Cliffchuff and others we are already paying, hadn’t realised that !! but it makes sense.

Futuristic visionary unworkable but then we are already paying so the leak is plugged??? , but an avenue to be explored none the less. Its easy to be sceptical about what will happen because we are conditioned by our history, which has led us to this world of fear that we live in – look forward -- think out of the box.

Danny K  20 years ??  yeh reckon so. Still my life time anyway  



> Can you imagine Tony Blair going on a trade boosting trip to these countries? Somehow I very much doubrt it. With a lot of countries seeking to destroy the crops, I doubt the rest of the world would be happy bunnies either. HMG Plc would be the biggest drugs buyer as this would have to be taken onboard nationaly. Think what that would do to demand and supply never mind the price. With every junkie and his dog wanting to claim asylum in Brtain, I doubt if Kew Gardens would be happy or able to cope with demand.



Governments would be the BIGGEST but also the only buyers on the planet the rest being prescibed / controlled.  I don’t see the smack head emigration to Britain a realisation or achieveable move whatsoever. Not if everything is in sync.

I admire Brian Paddick for this <it gives me hope for the future> and his open sexuality in a homophobic society and even more homophobic profession and hope he can cope with it all when he returns.

Popslut don’t hold your breath…it could be quite a while before he posts here again but post he will there is no doubt. 


edited because I quoted myself !!!


----------



## Clapham Omnibus (Feb 22, 2002)

*Honest Politician*

Johnwisehemmer.

Sadly to say you probably are right. I for one don't believe in such a fantastic mythical being as an honest politician. Just the same as I don't believe in the tooth fairy.
Perhaps we could get Popslut to have a word with the farmers and scientists in werzel land to grow a GM model.
If she got six or seven hundered of them and sent them to London we would't know what to do with them.I for one would think the beast was an alien. I suppose we could send them down Coldharbour Lane to meet the Russian Mafia when they arrive. Such freaks would stop the Russians in their tracks as they would think that they had landed on a different planet.
Seriously though I think Ken Livingstone should be given more power to sort London out. I think he has been cured of the dreaded Red Ken disease that was going about in the 1980's. For instance take total control of the Met and the Underground. Not that we would have flshing blue lights coming out of the tunnel ont the Victoria line. An integrated and coherent policy for London is what I want anyway. Then we could start to get somewhere. At the moment too much energy is expent on political pulling and pushing. No wonder Coppers like The Commander speaks out. When are we going to see people in the Health Service and Fire Brigade 'comming out'. I am sure they have views as well.


----------



## editor (Feb 22, 2002)

> think it's about time for the highly respected Brien Paddock came back and told us his opinion on the debate so far.


 Why on earth should he? He stated that he was going away on holiday weeks ago, and he's as much right to enjoy a work-free break as anyone else.


----------



## johnwisehammer (Feb 22, 2002)

"If you're waiting for them to start caring - don't hold your breath."

But of course, you have to pitch it to (mythical middle England's) self-interest - it's not "give me money so I can send junkies on aromatherapy courses and Caribbean cruises", it's "let me spend money on drugs doctors so I can halve government spending on crime and give you big fat tax cuts, with the added bonus that you won't trip over so many crackheads next time you go to the opera".

I don't know whether you've come across John Farrell's book _Things can only get better_ but one of the things he says in it is that Labour's criticisms of privatisation in the 1980s totally failed to grab the public's attention because they were too abstract - what they should have said (he writes) is simply say to everyone, "Privatisation is going to be bloody expensive, so if you vote for us, we'll save you enough money for a big telly and VCR". 

I agree that trying to convince the Daily Mail and its readership that drugs laws ought to be reformed because they're oppressive to black and poor people is hard - much easier would be to pitch it as "drugs laws should be reformed because they're costing us wodges of money in tax that we could be spending on nice cardigans".


----------



## popslut (Feb 22, 2002)

johnwisehammer;

Absolutely bang on mate.

"let me spend money on drugs doctors so I can halve government spending on crime and give you big fat tax cuts, with the added bonus that you won't trip over so many crackheads next time you go to the opera"


Totally effective, and given the added credibility of Trotboy and his SWP mates all shouting "Sellout!!", guaranteed to succeed.

"Privatisation is going to be bloody expensive, so if you vote for us, we'll save you enough money for a big telly and VCR". 

You know - when i read that, i actually found myself sitting thinking "Hmmm - big telly - VCR - nice..."


People - unite behind us - we shall prevail - we shall march on and conquer - and this shall be our slogan;

*"Drugs laws should be reformed because they're costing us wodges of money in tax that we could be spending on nice cardigans"*


----------



## johnwisehammer (Feb 22, 2002)

Sorry, I've got no clue as to whether you're being sarcastic or not there. Could you be a bit more obvious? I'm not being precious - just confused.


----------



## popslut (Feb 22, 2002)

johnwisehammer;

No - really - yours was one of the more intelligent posts I've read during my time on this thread.

The last few years has really proved - its not what you do its how you present it that counts.

I'm searching for that John Farrell book as we speak.


----------



## popslut (Feb 22, 2002)

*Halcyon Daze*

johnwisehammer;

Oh, and re: London, Summer, '92

Fucking magic mate - moved into my first squat in Holloway Road with 2 weed dealers and a DJ - it was a magical year let me tell you!!


----------



## Wireman (Feb 22, 2002)

It's John O'Farrell. And it's the best critique of New Labour I've ever read.


----------



## Dean Becker (Feb 22, 2002)

*Hi from the Gulag State*

I live in Houston, Texas, the gulag city of the gulag state of the gulag country, the US.

I admire what the commander has done here and those posters to this forum who have joined in his call for major drug reform and restoration of dignity to so many peoples lives.

Certainly prohibition has never done anything but harm society and any improvement, let alone the extraordinarily logical and enlightened ideas shared by Brian seem as if a gift from above.

I created a series of chats and forums that run in the US. One is on the NY Times Drug Policy Forum http://www.nytimes.com and the other is at Drugsense http://www.drugsense.org/chat.  We feature online Q&A sessions with governors, Nobel prize winners, Judges, doctors and many others.   Reform is such a hard sell in the US.  Transcripts of each visit is stored on site for easy access.

I would like to join in your conversations here, and perhaps send a few more over from the US to discuss ways we can work together to bring about productive, appropriate changes to this insane, seemingly eternal war on drugs.

In the way we, (the US) helped destroy the Reich in WWII, today we need your help to tear the "moral high ground" from the grasp of the maniacal despots like Bush, Ashcroft, Barr and Souder.. and too many others.

The schedule is not too full at the moment, but you can see the next few guest appearances at:  www.cultural-baggage.com/schedule.htm

Too bad I did not find this place sooner.  Just yesterday, we had your MEP Chris Davies as a guest.

Please keep up the good work and of course when Brian gets back I will want to invite him to guest with us on Drugsense and the NYT.

Till later.


----------



## Rowland. (Feb 22, 2002)

Popslut: you've responded to my comments about cultural superiority in an unfortunate way.  I *did* do what you suggest: `ruminate upon the concept of "cultural superiority" and its repercussions with regard to recent World history.' - *before* I posted.  Would it help if I mentioned that my dad's best friend (now dead) did a runner to Britain from Hitler in 1936 and was then deported - an exiled German Jew, no less - to Australia as an enemy alien?  I've been thinking about this sort of thing for decades because it's very close to home.

You say:

A. I think you may have misinterpreted my meaning with regard to the whiff of cultural superiority inherent in the phrase "ethnic minority" - think about it.

Well, I did think about it before posting and, well, what *do* you mean?  If you think I've misunderstood, could you explain a bit?

But stop and think a minute.  If you look abroad at `Johnny Foreigner' as you suggest.  No, don't do that: look at the *cultures*.  I'm not talking about *people*, I'm talking about *cultures* - the social frameworks created by people which structure society and within which we live.  Look at the structures - such as they are - now in place in Zimbabwe.  Look at what Rwandan culture lead to in the very recent past.  Look at the filthy mess in the Balkans - driven by very sick cultures.

Do you seriously think that it's reasonable to say that (say) Serbian culture is as civilized as British culture?

You also say:

B. Are you seriously labouring under the misapprehension that you are somehow part of a 'superior culture'?!?! Why not pop overseas and do some work educating Johnny Foriegner in the error of his savage ways? I'm sure they'll thank you for it. 

It's not a misapprehension: British culture is clearly far superior to most others.  Look at what we've got here: a reasonably civilized country in which most people can sleep in their beds at night without fear of attack, arbitrary arrest, dispossession, and all the other things -cause by sick cultures - which are endemic in much of the rest of the world.  That is the *only* thing I mean.  Britain is uncommonly civilized for all its many faults which we could spend days listing.

(Yes, I'm aware that there are a lot of problems here and there in Britain, not least the uncounted poor sods without a bed at all)

Don't you think it'd be good if some aspects of British culture could be exported?  The absence of attempted genocide is one aspect of British culture I'd like to see in all the rest of the world - or do you think that's unacceptable cultural imperialism?  I don't - it's not something exclusively British, and it is something which all cultures would benefit from.

I don't mean that British food, music, literature, etc., is obvoiusly superior to all others (it's not - that's a lunatic assertion): just that, the way things are now, Britain is one of the most civilised countries on the planet.  Yes, there are more civilized countries and *YES* we've got big problems here - but compare Britain to the rest of the world.

As for your parting comment:

`"(I happen to hold the view that British culture is as good as it is *because* of all the outside influences, immigration, and suchlike)" 

Yes - they all have natural rhythm don't they. Marvellous colourful culture. And aren't the children sweet? 

Gah!!'

I'm 100% pure English (that is, born and bred in England - no, it's not something I'm proud of, it's just an accident of birth and upbringing).  None of my grandparents were English.  Think about that before you make remarks like that to *anyone* again.   *MY* recent ancestors are some of the outside influences I was talking about.

(I occasionally get worked up about things, and this is one such thing.  Why?  In part because I grew up with the evil of racism in the 1970s around me - skinheads at school openly going off `Paki bashing' and suchlike.  Black kids at *infants'* school coming in for shit because of the colour of their skin - that blew my mind when I was 5 years old.  All this dehumanising shit which I've been passionately opposed to since - partly because, as my dad's Jewish friend found out the hard way, if that sort of thing gets out of hand, you end up with industrial scale murder and precious little help from anyone.  And even when it's not that bad, it's still awful.  And whatever *you* might think of me, I've got it right.  Just one example: I used to be a teacher (no longer: I got mentally ill and haven't recovered yet).  I was surprised one day to have some of my Asian-origin students ask me if such-and-such a teacher was racist.  I was surprised and gratified - clearly, I had done my job properly.  No, I'm no campaigner: I'm just trying to do the right thing myself.  Rant over.)

We're living in a mongrel nation which has had immigrants pouring in from all over for time out of mind.  The way I look at it is this is good: the more outside influences, the better - that's *it*.  Influences to disturb the rut societies tend to get in if they don't have those outside influences.  `Natural rhythm?  Colourful culture?'  What?  I've no idea what you're referring to.

*I* was thinking of, well, ill-defined effects in part: when you've got lots of outside influences, you've got a broader base of ideas to draw on.  That broader idea base can help with *everything*.  And I do mean *everything*: farming, industry, commerce, social life (I suppose that's where `natural rhythm' comes in), art, the *lot*. 

We're all of us enriched by this sort of thing, aren't we?

How can this be anything but a cause for rejoicing?  And how can you possibly think there's anything bad about saying it's a Good Thing?  Or do you think that the fact that Britain really is multicultural is a Bad Thing? - of course you don't, but one might get that idea from your words.

I wasn't really thinking of anything specific, but we're all enriched by the multiculturalism of this country.  Do you dispute this idea?  If so, *why*?  Isn't it better to rejoice in multiculturalism than to be a `little Englander' wishing to `preserve the ``purity'' of English culture'?  Of course it is - you know that, don't you?  And that's what I'm trying to do.  Please don't mistake me for some patronising Colonel Blimp.

Rowland.


----------



## Clapham Omnibus (Feb 22, 2002)

*'Comming Out'*

*Comming out*

In using the term it was not a swipe at gays but a two edged term. Mr Paddick is well known within the force.
My terminology was referring to the fact that he spoke out about what is happening to policing in London. I think other members of the Emergency and Health Service's should equally speak out and be heard.
Perhaps they in the Big House in Whitehall might listen for once.


----------



## Rowland. (Feb 22, 2002)

Tourn: thanks for the links.

sonicdancer:

`Rowland any post here that any senior copper should read which backs Brian for posting here its probably yours.'

Thank you 

sonicdancer:
`However you are by admission a surbanite and I doubt from your post get get exposed to the desperate chaotic drug users that feed the crack dealers in inner cities.'

Not these days, I don't.  However, while I was brought up in Harrow and now live in a suburban part of Merseyside, I *have* lived in rough bits of Manchester.  Crack didn't seem to be much of an issue back then (late 80s-early 90s), but I've seen an armed car chase with real shooting, lived with a rock band in the flat above me, dogshit and piss in the stairwells, permanently broken lifts, had a mate mugged on his way home, and so on. No big deal, but I've lived it.

sonicdancer:
 `Corporate whore however rightly pointed out there is smack addiction in all parts of the country., <so don’t get to comfortable> It wouldn’t be a free for all , '

(I've only ever come across heroin addiction in suburban London myself)

I doubt that it would - but the question to my mind is this `How *exactly* would the supply of currently illegal recreational drugs be handled?' - I'm all in favour of legalizing some recreational drugs (all? I wouldn't suggest that unless I had detailed information about them all), but once you've done that, what do you do next?  It's easy to imagine a disasterous free-for-all, so what *exactly* are we going to do?  I don't have any answers, so I'm asking  questions.

sonicdancer:

`quote from Rowland:
``I wouldn't be happy with completely open access to powerful, addictive, and potentially very dangerous drugs like heroin and cocaine (in any form)''

yeh scary thought isnt it ??!! BUT prescribed hard drugs to registered addicts is what is the majority vote here. It is only one method of attack as others have pointed out (adam) the global <poppies for rice> picture having to be the other issue addressed.'

Sure - I think that's a good idea too, but when I said `completely open access', I was thinking about having the stuff on sale like Cadburys' Creme Eggs.  I'm wondering what controls would be appropriate on which drugs - I don't think I'd raise many hackles by suggesting that it'd make sense to have cannabis under fewer constraints than heroin, for example.

Just one thing: I'm a looney (well, not really: I suffer from clinical depression and anxiety) and I've been sent to see several different psychiatrists.  The one decent consultant shrink I've met was one of the few in the country happy to prescribe heroin to addicts.

sonicdancer:

` ``quote from Rowland:
But... While I'm with you entirely on ethnic and I do think that `ethnic minority' does tend to have that `cultural superiority' angle to it - is it *that* bad a thing to think that we live in a reasonably superior culture? For all the problems of these septic isles, they're pretty civilised:
[snip]''

Agree our culture is better for the outside influences that we have allowed in our history'

<wicked grin>  *Allowed*?  You think the Celts, Romans, Saxons, Angles, Jutes, Vikings, Normans, and so on turned up with invitations?

 sonicdancer:
 `but we don’t have anything to be superior about that is a tired argument – watch moronic English hooligans abroad who still hav’nt really understood for the ugly face value of this * culture *'

Oh, I know about the downsides of British culture, but - well, why not look at the bad bits *AND* the good bits?  And then compare here to elsewhere?  Do you recall, as I do, boarding houses with signs up saying `No blacks and Irish'?  They're gone - but go to Germany *now* and you can see exactly the same sort of thing if you look: signs up in similar places saying `No foreigners' which usually just means `No Turks'.  We've got racism in Britain all right, but it's a lot less bad than a lot of other places.  A lot worse than a few, mind; but I reckon better than average.

If you take any odious aspect of British culture, I can point to somewhere else in the world where there's something similar but much worse.  I think I recall hearing about some minor attacks on synagogues a year or so ago in England, and haven't there been a few fire bomb attacks on mosques?  Not good, but a damned sight better than the official Indian government action of completely destroying the main Sikh temple - the Golden Temple at Amritsar.

 `And as popslut has pointed out just try selling that to johnny foreigner.'

Well, I'll stick my neck out a bit: our culture *has* been sold to `Johnny Foreigner' who rather likes it in many cases - why else do people keep wanting to emigrate to these septic isles?  No, I don't think that our culture is the only one with any worth and I *like* the idea of different parts of the world being different (I certainly wouldn't want to see British culture everywhere - but even in the old days of empire, that was never the idea, was it?  The British Empire never did anything similar to what China has done to Tibet, did it?  Yes, the British Empire did modify the cultures it ran, but do you see anything wrong with making female circumcision illegal in the Sudan?  Or banning suttee and thugee in India?), but our culture does seem to have an attraction for lots of people and I don't subscribe to the ridiculous tabloid line that it's because `they're' coming over here to scrounge on the dole.

Umm...  Rather than bang on too much on this subject here, how about reading what Billy Bragg has to say on this sort of thing?  His view is similar to mine in some ways:

http://enjoyment.independent.co.uk/music/interviews/story.jsp?story=120023

 sonicdancer:
`Pretty decent place to live, I really think not, damn right dangerous and inhospitable yes.'

Hmm...  Okay, some examples.  This country is far safer to live in than Russia or China.  Unlike Russia, Britain's not in the grip of organized crime (nor do we have endemic anti-semitism) and does have something approximating a working economy, despite the best efforts of our government.  Unlike China, Britain operates under a rule of law - that's a *very* good thing in my book.

Britain is also a lot more hospitable to foreigners than, say, France: how are North Africans treated over there?  And look at how Turks are treated in Germany.  The legacy of slavery is still strong in the USA.  But which was the first major developed nation in the world to ban the slave trade and then slavery?  Britain, which abolished it from the entire British Empire - but it's back again in India.

Britain has no death penalty either - a big feather in our cap in my book.

We've got police who more-or-less stick to the rule of law most of the time (yes, we've all got tales we could tell), and that law really is mostly pretty okay - unlike, say, that in Turkey where those opposed to the government are regularly locked up and tortured (with British torture equipment - sickening, isn't it?).

Yes, there's room for improvement - but I still say that despite the recent upsurge in racial violence Britain's pretty decent.  For every member of the BNF, there's a thousand like you and me who just don't give a shit about the colour of someone's skin and speak out against bigotry.

Put it another way: would you rather live in Britain or Pakistan?  We've got the NHS, a welfare state, our country is stinking rich, we've got a not too distant approximation to democratic government rather than a military dictatorship, and don't have a big dangerous country with nukes apparently run by fascist bully-boys next door - and if you think Thatcher was bad, what about when India had a BJP-led government not so many years ago?  Anti-Muslim and anti-Sikh bigotry was open government policy then.  For sure these septic isles reek of all sorts of badness, but look at the rest of the world if you will.  For all the defects of this country, it compares very well to the rest of the world if you actually look at the details.

sonicdancer:

'Clapham_omnibus said 

''quote:
Nice idea giving Free drugs via doctors to users. But! Who Pays for this? can you imagine home sec saying he want dosh for this ??''

Actually I can imagine that – i have a belief that an arrangement between the rest of the world and the 3rd world countries who produce the drugs'

Last thing I heard, the largest producer of opium poppies for legitimate herion production was Tasmania.  I can't help feeling that legalizing heroin wouldn't change this much.

  sonicdancer:
`that benefits everyone and does not lead to one side capitalising over another could be the way ahead'

<insert cynicism>  In *this* world?  I can't see it.  The drug firms will get involved straight away, and they're hard-nosed capitalists interested in making as much money as possible.

Rowland.


----------



## the_voice_999 (Feb 22, 2002)

*lets stick together*

I'm new to this site and have been brought here by the tabloids we are all to fond af slaging of, which goes to show people may read the rubbish they print but we also have a mind of our own. We read, look at the other side of road and then deside which side we want to walk on. so the taboids can't be that bad if they are bringing thier readers to this site.

 We have to remember we all ultimately want the same gaols out of life,=a clean, friendly, loving, caring, safe society no matter what colour, nationalty or political veiws we have. I don't now who it was who once said "all politics has the same goals, just a different way of getting thier".

 The press pick up on our veiws, edit out the good bits and then slag us off.If we don't give them the bullets they can't shoot us, so when you slag off little ENGLANDERS you may be slagging me off. After all I love my English culture and heritage and want to preserve it the same as a lot of the nationalities who have come to our country over the years, we only have to look at Leicester city ( 30% non white ) where I live and work to see exsamples of this.

 Embracing other cultures doesn't mean you have to give up your own. If you walk down the Belgrave in Leics you wouldn't think you where in England at all, except it's cold at this time of year. So a 'little Englander' I may be but that is no differant to most other cultures in our beutifull country.

Also could we all remember this is not an XXX rated site and there are a lot of people passing through, some of them may be as young 10 years or even younger, they may now some of the language that some of us are using and follow our exsample. Plus the adults who visit after bad press will probably think the press our right and we don't want that do we.


----------



## the_voice_999 (Feb 22, 2002)

Hi Rowland
The drug firms will get involved straight away, and they're hard-nosed capitalists interested in making as much money as possible. 
____________________________________________________


I agree with this comment, but there is no copyright on smack and coke so the NHS will be able to bye from who ever they want so the cheepest sorce wil win the contract.


----------



## gate (Feb 22, 2002)

> you are by admission a surbanite and I doubt from your post get get exposed to the desperate chaotic drug users that feed the crack dealers in inner cities.


Drug use is everywhere now even in country towns! Also the crime rate in the suburbs is nearly as bad as in the inner cities didn't you hear about that brutal murder in Kingsbury one of the most respectable parts of London. In the newspaper article in the Evening Standard it said that around there groups of youths were always causing trouble and fighting and attacking people and that is in a decent area not a dprived inner city!


----------



## the_voice_999 (Feb 22, 2002)

Well put Steelgate.


Crime knows no boundery.


----------



## Streathamite (Feb 22, 2002)

> Class" only exists if you want it to Trotboy. Not keen on the concept myself - feels a little - umm... feudal. Not that I would attempt to deny you the freedom to belong to any class you see fit - whatever helps you to feel like you occupy the moral high-ground i suppose.


RIGHT. When you have quite finished parading your staggering political ignorance and economic illiteracy, please allow me to advise you of the following:
1) strangely enough,the concept of class does not actually need your permission to exist. It exists because there are a relatively small number of privileged individuals control/own 95% (approx) of the wealth and (NOT approx) 100% of the power in the UK, and the rest of us DON'T. 
2)It also exists because there are, and have been, generations of people who grew up with the certain knowledge that the only work they would do would be arduous, unstimulating, dirty manual work that offers them buggerall in the way of hope,opportunities, a future etc (I'm gambling here that you catch my general drift) - just the same job, more or less, till they could retire on a pittance of a pension.... only to find that, over the past 20 years, even that has been taken away from them (cheers, Margaret, John, Tony _et al_, leaving the with poverty, and their kids with bitterness and...drugs (mini-bump!)  
3) It also exists because, again strangely enough, if you grow up on a run-down council estate in innacity Liverpool (for example) where drugs (which is how class is relevant to this thread), crime, violence, poverty, social decay and despair have replaced jobs and hope, if you then suffer a sink school education (as you certainly will do in these circs), crap healthcare, crap public transport, crap infrastructure, crap social services, crap everyotherbloodything....then surprisingly enough, you are less likely to do well in life, and achieve what you want than if your name is (again, for the purposes of argument) Tarquin, you grew up in a handsome detached pile in Virginia Water, Daddy makes a very tidy pile speculating on 3rd world debt for Megabucks Investments plc, and you went to a superbly-resourced, Aspiration-driven public school-regardless of how intelligent, determined, hardworking or virtuous you are.
And whether you are "not keen" on the concept or not is pretty fucking irrelevant. 
Nor, actually, is it something which you have the "freedom" to choose to "belong" to-you just are. Christ, what do you think it is, you unspeakable moron - a 3-piece fucking suite??!!
And the relevance to drugs? simple. Where are the real heavy drugs problems. Not (again, for example) Radlett, Epsom, Harrogate etc....but Toxteth. And Moss Side. and Tottenham (I used to live 5 mins from the Broadwater Farm, and the place  _radiated_ evil). And th'Gorbals. And (wait for it)....Brixton, that heartbreaking place which, like Our Friend Currently Temporarily Down Under, I nevertheless love to bits.
Because in a place of poverty, despair and bitterness, drug consumption offers you an escape from misery for a few hours, and drug dealing can often seem like the only reliable, realistic way out for good.
Sorry everyone (especially Mike) for the inordinate length of this rant-but when I saw Popslut's astonishingly fuckwitted comment, I nearly had a coronary.


----------



## Streathamite (Feb 22, 2002)

> could we all remember this is not an XXX rated site and there are a lot of people passing through, some of them may be as young 10 years or even younger, they may now some of the language that some of us are using and follow our exsample. Plus the adults who visit after bad press will probably think the press our right and we don't want that do we.


Yes, thank you, Vicar. As far as I'm concerned, If Mike has a problem with what anyone's saying here, I'm sure he won't be slow in saying so. And if he don't, it's no other bugger's right to lecture me, least of bloody all on my fucking foul pissing language.
The whole point of this site - I'd have thought - is the latitude it allows for freedom of expression, and the fabulously healthy effect this has on the quality of debate + discourse!!


----------



## Chuff (Feb 22, 2002)

For fucks sake take the class and politics elsewhere.

This thread is tring to debate solutions to problems of drug dealing, specifically in brixton, not debate the great socalist v's class schism that dominates the reast of everybodys lives this dosen't have to turn into tirades about 'Middle england' and SPGB.


----------



## popslut (Feb 22, 2002)

Red Jezza;

My post to Trotboy was only ever going to get on your tits wasn't it ?



> * "RIGHT. When you have quite finished parading your staggering political ignorance and economic illiteracy" *



Ooops! I'm sure you mean "opinions which differ from mine" don't you?




> * "It exists because there are a relatively small number of privileged individuals control/own 95% (approx) of the wealth and (NOT approx) 100% of the power in the UK, and the rest of us DON'T." *



Speak for yourself mate! I wouldn't disagree about the disparity in wealth distribution, but if you want to describe your self as powerless, please don't lump me in with that. 

In my opinion, the concept of class 'exists' in part to validate a particularly narrow strand of political dogma, in much the same way as the concept of 'the Devil' exists to give Christians something to frighten their children with. 



> *  "Nor, actually, is it something which you have the "freedom" to choose to "belong" to-you just are." *


 

Free yourself comrade - you have nothing to lose but your chains!

Think about it - whether somebody describes me as 'xxx class' or 'yyy class' makes no difference to my life. Its purely a matter for them. 

Likewise, if it serves you to describe me as an "unspeakable moron" because my views differ from yours then that is entirely your business.



> *  "if your name is (again, for the purposes of argument) Tarquin, you grew up in a handsome detached pile in Virginia Water, Daddy makes a very tidy pile speculating on 3rd world debt for Megabucks Investments plc, and you went to a superbly-resourced, Aspiration-driven public school-regardless of how intelligent, determined, hardworking or virtuous you are." *


 

Isn't that just the kind of reactionary stereotype employed by the Daily Mail in order to arouse the indignity in its loyal readership and perpetuate the cycle of bullshit?

For 'Tarquin' read 'Swampy' - substitute the 'handsome detached pile in Virginia Water' for a 'squat in Essex Road' and liberally sprinkle with mentions of benefit claims and dogs on strings.

Hey presto - Instant Demon! Easy huh? Saves thinking it through.

If you want to debate this further please feel free to Pm me - we've wandered a bit off topic here and I've no wish to clog up this otherwise excellent thread with yards of rhetorical navel-gazing.


----------



## popslut (Feb 22, 2002)

*lets stick together*



> _Originally posted by the_voice_999 _
> *
> Also could we all remember this is not an XXX rated site and there are a lot of people passing through, some of them may be as young 10 years or even younger, they may now some of the language that some of us are using and follow our exsample. Plus the adults who visit after bad press will probably think the press our right and we don't want that do we. *



Bollocks. Fuck em.


----------



## Chuff (Feb 22, 2002)

10 year old or younger on this website with *OUR*  reputation, they are merely garnish for our smorgasboard of socialist satanism


----------



## hatboy (Feb 22, 2002)

Popslut, Trotboy and others:

Please can I ask that you start some new threads. You are taking this one completely off-topic.  You're both new here and it would be considerate. Thankyou.

PLEASE KEEP THIS THREAD ABOUT BRIXTON, DRUGGS, CRIME & COMMANDER PADDICK.


----------



## adi baby (Feb 22, 2002)

*Fresh Meat*

As a new boy myself, i can honestly say that i find the recent to-ing and fro-ing amusing as well as nostalgic and also not totally irrelevant as it does deal with the issues around drugs and innercity living which do seem to revolve around resource allocation issues which are political so in my opinion it hasnt strayed too far away and is in line with urban75's vibe.

swearing in the right place can give emphasis and humour and if there are kids out there checking this out then the next generation is shaping up nicely

i personally think popslut writes quite eloquently.  i think redjezza has got an ok attack in but its still an attack and i bet he's a student! just a feeling.

anyway just remember its all lies in the media everyday in every way but here we are people with nuggets if good stuff all over this site.

we will get there and people like paddick i think are helping push our thing in the right direction.

na na na naaa na!


----------



## popslut (Feb 22, 2002)

> _Originally posted by hatboy _
> *Popslut, Trotboy and others:
> 
> Please can I ask that you start some new threads. You are taking this one completely off-topic.  You're both new here and it would be considerate. Thankyou.
> ...



Hold on Hatboy - go back and read my previous posts!

I'm doing all I can to stay on topic here - not much i can do if Trotboy and Red Jezza want to start trading insults is there?
My last post to Red Jezza acknowledged that we were wandering off into hackneyed old toss and included an invitation to discuss stuff in private - dunno what more I can do...


----------



## the_voice_999 (Feb 22, 2002)

*poverty is not the cause*

Poverty is not the cause of smack/crack problems in our inner citys. There are smack heads from all classes, if it was poverty then when you have 80-90% unemployment on sink estates you would have 80-90% addicts. The problem is pushers and easy money and lack of control in our laws


Red Jezza, I think you missed my point, I was at a friends house this mornning who is on a different server to me which sensors out bad language. the last part of your reply would have read.


And if he don't, it's no other bugger's right to lecture me, least of XXXXXX all on my XXXXXXX foul XXXXXXX language.
Some of the replys on this thread did not make much sence.

And some parents would not let thier kids on site with bad language. Which means they can't have thier say in a subject that may affect them.

I'm not a vicar, I can exspress with out the need for xxxx


----------



## Streathamite (Feb 22, 2002)

Hatboy - I am so sorry. I stand by every word I said, but you're quite right, this is neither the time nor the place. However, if you look, I did make an attempt to keep to t'point by returning to the link between poverty and drugs. This has been an excellent thread - sorry I nearly totalled it. Really, as a 35 YEAR OLD OVER-PAID WHITE-COLLAR PROFESSIONAL (read, Adi) I should have known better.
bumpbumpbump


----------



## adi baby (Feb 22, 2002)

redjezza - u r old enough to remember black uhuru (the band)

great lyric - 'everybody want the same thing dont they dont they'

urban75 - its a regular f***ing love-in!!


----------



## adi baby (Feb 22, 2002)

anyway whether youre in brixton or brixham have a great weekend and dont get too wasted!!

love each other see you next week


----------



## Mikee (Feb 22, 2002)

*Respect where due*

Big up to Commander Paddick. Much respect for long overdue policy implementation and listening to the people. Still have a gripe though as you never answered my letter re Brixton Police's responsibility for the theft of my equipment from a crime scene in Brixton last year, where the police were rung by ourselves and received full cooperation as well as the offer of the keys to the premises, which they refused on the grounds that they didn't need them and would ring when forensics were done. Not only did the individual responsible not get apprehended ( for stabbing someone in the spine) but they left the premises without letting us know and consequently left everything unlocked with around  3 grands worth of music equipment on offer.......

Not to even get a reply was pretty damned rude and hence we find ourselves in the spotlight


----------



## Clapham Omnibus (Feb 22, 2002)

*Pissed off Police*

*Pissed Off Police*

I see on the news tonight that the Police Federation have got 90% backing against their pay award. What will Brixton be like if they were to work to rule? Or even worse go on strike?
This is a serious situation!
I don't think Blunkett gives much confidence to the public. If were going to be protected by coppers that have got a gripe I din't think there would be commitment. Will the junkies and dealers have a field day!
See my comment on cut backs
Does any one have a view?


----------



## A. Spies (Feb 22, 2002)

I saw an argument about class earlier on in this post and being young and inexperienced in these matters I have a few questions/whines.
I am a very average child.I live in a family that owns 2 cars, not big cars but still 2.My dad works as a contracter which means that sometimes we have a fair bit of money and sometimes we’re completely skint.I’ve watch my dad being worn down into depression by the pressures of soceity.He was born on a council estate but worked his arse off all his life and did in actual fact attend Oxfard.(where he had the piss taken out of him for his background).
 I go to a very average school and get very average grades in most subjects.
What I want to know now that I’ve given you the history of my life is what class I am…

Generally speaking the working class has always to me appeared to be defined as people living on council estates with shit jobs and no future. I’m doing ok in school just like pretty much everyone else I know and could have a bright future if I tried. I’ve always been intrested in Libertian Socialism but the fact is that I don’t think I’m working class enough to ever bother doing anything.This is mainly because the attitudes on bulletain boards like this always seem to be that you have to destitute with no hope for the future to want to change the way soceity runs. Maybe I’m wrong but the “your nothing but a middle class kiddywinkle who can go back to a comfortable job anytime you want, your just playing at being rebbelious” style of insult seems to get slung around a lot. What I dodn’t understand is how anyone can hope to build a popular struggle/peoples movement/whatever the fuck you want to call it. 
 If you have narrow class orientated vision where only people with a certain (low) income can be involved.  
 Maybe my area is totally unique but the vast majority of people I know are what you would define as “middle-class” they have hardworking parents who mainly work in tertiary jobs that have given them a fairly comfortable lifestyle.Not talking about huge hosues and BMW’s in the garden.But they do have a fairly comfortable lifestyle. How can anyone hope to build a popular movement if these people are considerd to have too much money to join in? to me the whole class war thing appears like a brick wall isolating Anarchism from most of the everyday population of britain.


----------



## John Wisehammer (Feb 22, 2002)

*erm, just a sec, old chap, I don't suppose you'd mind...*

A Spies - that's a very interesting question but it's a bit off-topic on this thread, which is about Brixton, policing and drugs. Perhaps it might be a good idea for you to cut and paste what you've written and start a new thread on (for example) the politics and protest board, where I'm sure you'll get an enthusiastic (and bonkers in patches) response.

I genuinely don't mean any offence here - it's just that obviously if too many subjects get dealt with on the same thread, we lose our train of thought and I'm likely to end up speaking about eggs and shoehorns!


----------



## Brian (Feb 23, 2002)

Respect, you guys.

Brian (Oz)


----------



## agricola (Feb 23, 2002)

red jezza:  i have never seen the problem of why places like toxteth expressed as well as in you post some way down this page....well done

a.spies:  it seems that being working class is where you are from in the pecking order of things

c.omnibus:  it will never come to that, but it is interesting how blunkett will respond (see the climbdown on overtime payments to the diplomatic protection group and almost everyone at nsy for example) 

the_voice:  if possible i also agree with you about how drugs are pushed

rowland:  again you are correct.  britain is the most enlightened society in the world BAR NONE


----------



## A. Spies (Feb 23, 2002)

*Old chap??!? *

None taken Wiseahammer.

*Post copied to Politics Forum*


----------



## MF/Midget Fighter (Feb 23, 2002)

Just thought I ought to post something on this thread. If it's going Archive, I'm coming with it!!!


----------



## editor (Feb 23, 2002)

Brian: glad to note you're still posting here.

As I'm sure you're aware, the press have had a field day talking about your contributions here, although the majority have come out in your favour (The Sun being a predictable exception).

I ended up doing a host of interviews where I found myself in the unique position of having to defend a high ranking police officer on live TV!

Enjoy your holiday as I fancy things may be rather lively for you on your return


----------



## Edd (Feb 23, 2002)

Just wanted to stop by and give prop's to The Commander for sticking his head above the parapet so to speak. Good work fella! 
Now for my 2 pennys worth -
As someone whos only been living down Brixton way for about a year, one of the things i was shocked about when i moved onto Coldharbour lane was that i have seen not one non-white Police officer since ive been here. As far as i can see policing a community is bloody dificult if those doing the policing do not refect in the slightest the make-up of the community. No wonder theres so much resentment. Until the communtity is genuinely on the Polices side its gonna be a damn difficult job to do much about the guns and crack as the police are so isolated. 
Good luck Brian, and get recruiting!


----------



## weekender (Feb 23, 2002)

*putting drugs money back into the community*

Firstly, i see this as a radical idea that isn't realistic.

The commander says of New Yorks' hard line against drugs that Brixton doesn't have the policing or the money to take the same hard line as New York.

It occured to me that customs must capture a vast amount of drugs each year, a percentage of which may still be 'pure' if tested. Aside from the cost to customs, these drugs have been aquired 'for free', as they are effectively confiscated, and are then destroyed(?). 

To keep addicts off the streets, would it not make sense to offer them these confiscated drugs at a price? If the price were lower than on the streets then it would persuade users to accept them from the police, where they also can be sure of purity and safety. The police then get the benefit of being able to measure the usage of drugs, associate and aquire the trust of known users and keep a tab on numbers, while bringing in community money and lowering street dealing.

I see that this breaks the law, effectively giving the police 'dealer' status, but it is only one step on from needle exchange clinics, where addicts can exchange old hypodermics for new.

Does this make sense?


----------



## hatboy (Feb 23, 2002)

Brian I hope you are enjoying your holiday.  Just to tell you that locally the media interest in your U75 comments has done you nothing but good. Everyone that I talk to out and about whose heard of you, even those very suspicious of the Police think you did good.  (Your ignorant colleagues were not so pleased). 

But it is only a start. We now need to see some definite action (after the talk) on Brixton's heavier problems (and some resolution of Police fuck-ups such as deaths in Polce custody).   Otherwise the friendly, integrated place that I for one love will be increasingly damaged I feel. Despite The Sun painting Brixton as a dangerous ghetto, anyone who knows it like long-term residents do knows what a beautiful place it is and what good people live here. Your comments made many national newspapers and national TV and radio. On both the radio and TV Question Time you had pretty much unanimous support.  My email saying that this wasn't about a top cop being into anarchy but about a top cop engaging with ordinary people was read out on BBC TV and radio.  The BBC London TV report is still accessible on the BBC London site I believe. (The Sun and The Daily mail were predictably shit and homophobic - the Shadow Lounge eh?)

I'll be interested to see what you do next?

By the way the South London Press picked up on you saying "Hatboy I think I love you". Ha ha. I'll have to let them know that I don't love you. But I do respect your candour and will be interested to see how your opinions translate further into effective, fair and responsive policing on the streets of Brixton. 

If they do????? Here's hoping.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Feb 23, 2002)

Weekender, money confiscated from drug barons in Lambeth is what pays for the independent drugs counsellors in Lambeth Police Stations, I have been told. I'm sure Brian Paddick could confirm or deny this, although I think it was an initiative started before his appointment


----------



## weekender (Feb 23, 2002)

*drug money*

Mrs Magpie I understand that the money confiscated from drug barons is re-invested already, but my point was based around the idea of re-selling the drugs confiscated, not the money.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Feb 23, 2002)

Weekender, I realise that, but it was more of a ' well they are making vague moves towards using drugs money'. Anyway, the police selling seized drugs isn't a new idea. I understand that some individual officers had been doing that for years!


----------



## Clapham Omnibus (Feb 23, 2002)

Weekender & Mrs Magpie

Bearing in mind hatboys comments about deaths. I think recycling seized drugs would be a dangerous path to go down.
What if someone OD'd on Customs seized drugs?
If there was a mistake in the analysis of the drugs and that caused a death?
Hard users would soon go back to dealers and the next of kin would kick up such a stink and sue the arse off whoever issued the drugs. I doubt that any Government Agency would take that on board. Never mind the GP's and the pharmacyst.
Plus you have to think of the security arrangements that the people who keep the drugs would have to put in place.
The best thing to do is get the dealers and cut off their supply. Then we can start clearing up the mess they have caused. A house is built on good foundations.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Feb 23, 2002)

Clapham Omnibus, I am not advocating that the police should be retailing seized drugs, that's Weekenders plan.


----------



## Rowland. (Feb 24, 2002)

I can't see Weekender's idea of selling seized drugs ever working.  The basic problem is one of purity: making properly pure drugs is a non-trivial job - *every* step of the way needs to be very carefully controlled.  You need to use manufacturing processes which are designed so that likely harmful impurities are `not there by design', for starters.  And in the case of something like heroin which is derived from plants, the plants themselves need to be grown in controlled circumstances to avoid (for example) harmful pesticide residue making it in to the final product.  And of course subsequent processing needs to be even more carefully controlled.

*IF* the manufacturing process is controlled like that, the likely contaminants are well known and therefore can be tested for.  Without control, who knows what might have got in to the end supply?  Yes, it's possible to test for levels of impurities - but having a drug with a low level of impurities is not the same as having a *safe* drug.  It all depends what the impurities are - a properly made drug can only have *those* impurities in it (well, more or less, with luck and a following wind and all that - but pharmaceutical firms are comfortingly paranoid about these things so we really don't have much to worry about), and *these* levels are known to be `safe'.  But if the contaminant is something else?  Well, working out exactly what all the contaminating chemicals are is very tricky, very time-consuming, and very expensive - so that wouldn't be known, and we'd just have to hope it was all okay.  Not good.

Even with all the careful control and testing they use, proper drug firms sometimes screw up: if you're interested in just how bad it can get, you might do a Web search on `trytophan' and find out about the nasty bacterial contamination left over from drug synthesis which once killed quite a few patients before the problem was identified and dealt with.

(Just a bit of trivia: the inside of proper pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities are the second cleanest places on Earth, with integrated circuit `fabs' (as they're called in the trade; I used to write on the subject professionally) being the only places which are cleaner - modern ICs are even more susceptible to contaminants that your insides - and maintaining that level of cleanliness is horribly expensive.  Do you think *any* illegal drugs are produced in proper clean rooms?  No, nor do I.)

In any case, drugs like heroin are pretty cheap.  The 1998 NHS guide price for 1 g of diamorphine hydrochloride (pure heroin, that is) in tablet form was £12.30 (100 10mg tabs) - you can find out current NHS guide prices by going to http://bnf.org.  Granted the price for powder designed for reconstitution and injection was somewhat higher: £20.68 for 500mg (the standards for injectable substances are much more stringent than the standards for stuff you swallow, hence the higher price).  But even so, it's not that pricey (when bought in bulk by the NHS, that is - but if the stuff were legalized, that's where it'd come from).

To my mind, the only sensible thing to do with illegally produced drugs like that is to destroy them.  The situation with drugs like cannabis where there's no chemical processing of the raw product is different - but much more different because, well, cannabis addicts needing a safe supply?  Earth calling Venus?  Obviously the state shouldn't be supplying cannabis to anyone for free unless there's a medical reason for it - which is why nabilone (a synthetic cannabinoid) has been part of the British National Formulary for some years now.  Yep, a most useful medical drug has finally made it back into medical use in this country after the best part of a century being illegal.

Agricola: I'm not personally convinced that Britain's got the most enlightened society in the world, but I do think we're up there in the top ten.  It's a bit tricky to judge, really - places like Denmark and Sweden are even more civilized than Britain, but they don't have the sort of society *we* have, so direct comparisons aren't all that helpful.  But we don't have Death Squads roaming the streets killing homeless kids as if they were rats as is the case in some parts of South America - for all its faults, Britain is certainly one of the nicer places in the world to live.

Rowland.


----------



## Eddie E (Feb 24, 2002)

*recycling*

Hi Weekender!
Good principle - but it was 'allegedly' done in the 1970's by the Mets Drug Squad and neither the public nor the courts thought it a good idea!!
In reality it is another point that shows how riduculous the current prohibition is.  The actual costs of 'health service' quality controlled H is so low that any re-cycling would be uneconomic, addicts may as well have the proper gear, from qualified personnel, at approved locations, with our best wishes for their future health and reduction in motive for crime.
Regards
Eddie E


----------



## Clapham Omnibus (Feb 24, 2002)

Sorry Mrs Magpie I thought you were advocating weekenders stance.
Rowland. You hit the nail on the head the very point I was trying to make. The impurities could never be taken out. Therfore impure drugs would kill someone.
Eddie
Isn't that what is happening already except instead of pure heroin the doctors are prescribing methadone.
Now I am not qualified to give a comment as to why methadone is used instead of pure heroin. perhaps it has something to do with weaning the addict off  the pure stuff. 
If a doctor is cruseing though this site perhaps they would like to comment.
I for one would be glad of your wisdom.


----------



## Edd (Feb 24, 2002)

Hmm, whilst whats been discussed here about the puritiy of drugs 'IF' they were legalized is interesting  but seems off the point a bit. This is not going to happen in the near future im afraid, (as much as we think it should!) and we're meant to be looking for current solutions to Brixtons problems......
For me Brixton is a prime example of how it is impossible to police an area without the acceptance, tolerance and ultimately co-operation of the local community. In Brixton any trust between the police & the community appears to have disappeared long ago and many of the problems of the area are the result. Brian appeatrs to be taking steps to rectify this, through his policys and his appearance on these boards but things need to go further and faster, and not just involve the police. 
For a start how about some local councillors appearing on the boards to put their points of view, Brian and the police can't solve Brixtons problems on their own.....


----------



## steve5312 (Feb 24, 2002)

I just posted this elsewhere, but I see this seems to have become the thread talking about Paddick now... so:

If Brian still reads this thread and wishes to contribute further, I'd be interested to see what he's got to say about the past week's events in the media. Personally I found it interesting and indicative of the nature of today's tabloid press that many of the papers concentrated solely on his sexuality and not the views he expressed. 

Perhaps Adam can help me understand that. Why do papers think the public really care if the guy was gay? It's entirely irrelevant, and about as uninteresting as today's News of the World front page "exclusive" about some Cold Feet actor cheating on his wife. Who cares???? 

It would've been nice if last week's events have made the Met sit up and realise that Brian's comments have received huge support from the general public, "anarchists" or otherwise. Sadly, due to the hype about his sexuality, it looks like he is instead going to be viewed as an embarassment rather than a free-thinker.


----------



## hatboy (Feb 24, 2002)

I am really sold on the Dutch way of doing things. Especially because it doesn't demonise anybody - be that addict, dealer or Police.  In Brixton it's not about a "clean-up" in my opinion. As someone said above, the way forward is to continue to build co-operation and trust between the Brixton community (especially black people because they have suffered the most brutality and racism from Police in the past) and the Police.

This is the article on the Dutch way from the Oserver.

http://www.observer.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,656121,00.html


----------



## Clapham Omnibus (Feb 24, 2002)

Ed is right
It's not upto the police to do it all. Yes lets here from some councilors and some community respectables on these boards.
Steve.
Yes what has being gay got to do with the price of fish. It's if you can get the job done that matters.
What's the best way forward? Make a decision. And once made stay on track with some kinda agenda so that everyone can pull in the same direction and at the same speed (excuse the pun)

On one of the other threads they are debating what would you say to an alian if you saw one?
I would really say "Can you sort Brixton out mate?" Then wave by by as he goes into warp drive.


----------



## Andria (Feb 24, 2002)

*Responding to "inverted snobbery" on this list*

Dear Spies

Ignore them; you are right. To build a popular movement EVERYBODY who can needs to be involved. You don't have to be poor or working class or middle-class, or intellectual or, or or

I'm going to assume that u are young enough to be my son! I've been involved with political and social struggle for almost 30 years: my experience is that everybody has a part. The only difference most of the time, is that some people get all, or most of the credit, while most of the troupers get little or none. BUT don't late that put you off.

You are welcome, and i think you are sorta upper working-class (if it matters at all.) You asked..

You are welcome


Andria
Editor/the Users Voice
*I saw an argument about class earlier on in this post and being young and inexperienced in these matters I have a few questions/whines.
I am a very average child.I live in a family that owns 2 cars, not big cars but still 2.My dad works as a contracter which means that sometimes we have a fair bit of money and sometimes we’re completely skint.I’ve watch my dad being worn down into depression by the pressures of soceity.He was born on a council estate but worked his arse off all his life and did in actual fact attend Oxfard.(where he had the piss taken out of him for his background).
 I go to a very average school and get very average grades in most subjects.
What I want to know now that I’ve given you the history of my life is what class I am…

Generally speaking the working class has always to me appeared to be defined as people living on council estates with shit jobs and no future. I’m doing ok in school just like pretty much everyone else I know and could have a bright future if I tried. I’ve always been intrested in Libertian Socialism but the fact is that I don’t think I’m working class enough to ever bother doing anything.This is mainly because the attitudes on bulletain boards like this always seem to be that you have to destitute with no hope for the future to want to change the way soceity runs. Maybe I’m wrong but the “your nothing but a middle class kiddywinkle who can go back to a comfortable job anytime you want, your just playing at being rebbelious” style of insult seems to get slung around a lot. What I dodn’t understand is how anyone can hope to build a popular struggle/peoples movement/whatever the fuck you want to call it. 
 If you have narrow class orientated vision where only people with a certain (low) income can be involved.  
 Maybe my area is totally unique but the vast majority of people I know are what you would define as “middle-class” they have hardworking parents who mainly work in tertiary jobs that have given them a fairly comfortable lifestyle.Not talking about huge hosues and BMW’s in the garden.But they do have a fairly comfortable lifestyle. How can anyone hope to build a popular movement if these people are considerd to have too much money to join in? to me the whole class war thing appears like a brick wall isolating Anarchism from most of the everyday population of britain. *[/QUOTE]


----------



## weekender (Feb 24, 2002)

*new article on guardian.co.uk about Brixton*

This article was published Sunday 24th Feb about the changing face of drugs in Brixton. Haven't read it yet though...

http://www.observer.co.uk/focus/story/0,6903,656125,00.html


----------



## Clapham Omnibus (Feb 24, 2002)

*Guardian Article*

Yeh Weekender I have read it. Not the other threads off it though.
It doesn't look to good on the face of it.
However the proof of the pudding will be the report.
Hopefully they will keep it quiet untill Brian comes back and can comment on it especially the freed up man hours and what they achieved.


----------



## popslut (Feb 24, 2002)

Quoted from todays Observer;




> *'What's the point of making war on part of your own country? Drugs are here and they're always going to be. This is a social problem, not a criminal one, and the whole of society has to tackle it - not leave it to the police on their own."*








> *"In Britain, successive politicians and police chiefs have vowed to defeat drugs, and in presenting their rhetoric have pumped up the enemy in the eyes of the public, exaggerating its strength and demonising addicts, using the media to create waves of what criminologists call 'crime panics'. The result has been an almost complete restriction on political room to manoeuvre."*




I couldn't agree more.


----------



## Andria (Feb 24, 2002)

*Responding to Clapham Omnibus re Opiate prescribing*

"Now I am not qualified to give a comment as to why methadone is used instead of pure heroin. perhaps it has something to do with weaning the addict off  the pure stuff. 
If a doctor is cruseing though this site perhaps they would like to comment. I for one would be glad of your wisdom"

Dear Clapham Omnibus (Are you a press man?)

You wanted an answer to the above question. I am not a doctor but I was a counsellor and I was also an injecting drug user of mainly opiates for well over a decade. I was also prescribed Methadone - oral and injectable for years.

Methadone was changed to in the late 60's and early 1970's as 
a) it there was some leakage of heroin from the private doctors onto the streets
b) It was deemed healthier if you didn't have to inject a drug (methadone can be injected but mostly it is prescribed for oral use.)
c) In the long-term, history has shown us with the advent of AIDS and Hep C, both of which kill the infected (slowly but they often do..) there was some sense in that
d) And as you rightly say, the hope is that people will be 'weaned off' heroin by being prescribed ever-reducing doses of methadone

Problems: 
a)Methadone is just as, if not MORE addictive than heroin
b) Most addicts, infact do not want methadone, they want heroin, otherwise they would all be buying street methadone right - der!!
c) Most of us would always have methadone in the fridge for days when we couldn't score heroin. Not wanting to go sick, we would always try to have a stash of methadone for those rainy days when it would be impossible to cop (american colloquialism for scoring..)
d) So much methadone has been prescribed in the last decade or so, the streets are apparently flooded with it, but most addicts wouldn't agree with that. Certainly it is NOT sold to non-addicts as they wouldn't be interested in buying it in the first place (or very rarely) - One of the many myths of the gutter press.
e) Concentrates of methadone - that is the 50mg amps can really wreck your veins, so if you have a high dose IM/IV script of methadone - it can get ropey. Friends of mine have the most awful skin-scars and vein damage: scary to look at
f) Detoxing from it can take longer than detox from heroin but this isn't the end of the world if you really want to come off; one way or the other, you will suffer some in detox.

I think that's it

Hope it was helpful

Andria E-Mordaunt B.Sc
Editor/the Users Voice


----------



## Mikee (Feb 24, 2002)

*Still no comment then Brian?*

I will back you up to the hilt on your apparoach to Brixton life. But Can you at least reply to your mail???????????

I'm £3000 down due to Brixton Polices negligence and no none even has the decency to return a letter


----------



## ChrisFilter (Feb 25, 2002)

isn't he away at the minute mikee?


----------



## Trotboy (Feb 25, 2002)

*Hatboy, Popslut, etc*

Hatboy, scan back and you'll see that my posts have been related to the thread, I posted a response to Popslut's reactionary comments about people who live in the British countryside. Who are, by-the-way, no less likely to face the problems of drugs, crime, and drug related crime. My brother is a Police Officer in Exeter, and deals with these problems daily.

Furthermore, these are ALL, WITHOUT EXCEPTION, problems related to Class and Politics. Comtemporary society is a creation of Political action, and Society is made up of different social classes. Unless, of course, like Popslut and Mrs Thatcher, you believe there is no such thing as class or society.

As to allegations about the SWP and the SPGB, I am a member of neither of these organisations, neither of which have any real connection to the working class. I am a member of the Socialist Party, formerly a grouping around the 'Militant' newspaper within the Labour Party, until we were all thrown out.

As to sixth form socialism, I wouldn't know, I never made it to the sixth form at Tiverton Comprehensive.

I will gladly keep my posts within the subject area, if others do the same.


----------



## Trotboy (Feb 25, 2002)

*Guardian Leader*

We need more police officers like Paddick

Leader, The Guardian.

Thursday February 21, 2002


Commander Brian Paddick, the policeman in charge of a part of inner-city London, is one of the rarest figures of the modern day. Prepared to engage in frank and liberal conversation with the people he serves, Commander Paddick appears an offbeat and welcome voice in public life. But his latest outburst of honesty is unlikely to be well received by superiors in the Metropolitan police. It is not certain how much of the Met logs on to www.urban75.com, a Brixton-edited website favoured by anarchists and anti-capitalists, but many will be now pointing their browsers there. 

Here they will find "Brian: The Commander" offering himself for a chat on the site's bulletin boards. Some of it is philosophical musing, which surprisingly for a policeman has Commander Paddick attracted to anarchism and the ideal that "the innate goodness of the individual... is corrupted by society". Some of it is telling the world about the way it is. "I have some of the bravest, fearless, unarmed cops who care enough to tackle gun-carrying drug dealers... and still go back for more." Some of it is remarkably personal, given that Commander Paddick is the first openly gay commander in the Met. "Someone has found out which gay club I go to and is trying to cause some SERIOUS shit for me." 

All of it is compulsive reading. Perhaps other officers should face public cross-examination on the web. Rather than being cheered, there are calls for Commander Paddick to be sacked from the right-wing press, former officers and the Metropolitan Police Federation. But the attack from these canteen culturalists, motivated in part by a barely disguised loathing of a successful progressive policeman, should be shrugged off. Commander Paddick is an asset in a Met, where Londoners look and rarely see themselves. Brixton, where drugs and guns are all too visible, needs someone like Commander Paddick who is prepared to take the fight to the criminals. His forward-thinking has put him ahead of the curve. Before the Home Office planned to decriminalise dope, Commander Paddick experimented with cautions rather than arrests for people caught with small amounts of cannabis in south London so police could spend more time tackling the society-sapping menace of cocaine. A success, the scheme has saved 2,500 police hours, and arrests for harder drugs rose by 19%. As urban75 put it: Respect To The Commander.


----------



## Paul (Feb 25, 2002)

Cocaine abuse is a route cause of greedy, selfish, pretentious, self-righteous, pietistic egotism, "fuck wits" in other words, it rules the markets, economy, Governments and the world.  Very dangerous possibilities....

Drug adviser denies dealing in cocaine 

Kirsty Scott
Monday February 25, 2002
The Guardian 

An academic who advises the government on drugs last night strenuously denied newspaper allegations that he was a cocaine dealer. 

Neil Montgomery, who has given evidence to the House of Lords science and technology select committee on the use of the drug, was alleged to have supplied cocaine and cannabis to News of the World undercover reporters at an Edinburgh hotel. 

Mr Montgomery, 41, who is studying for a doctorate in cannabis and the law at Edinburgh University, has done research on cannabis and is a special scientific adviser to the Medicinal Cannabis Research Foundation, the only UK registered charity dedicated to studying the medicinal use of cannabis. He also acts as an adviser for GW Pharmaceuticals, the only drug research company licensed to grow cannabis in the UK. 

Mr Montgomery has testified as an expert witness in 180 prosecutions of people who use cannabis for therapeutic purposes and has advocated decriminalisation of the drug. 

The News of the World claimed Mr Montgomery and a friend met their reporters, who were posing as wealthy drug users, at the hotel. Mr Montgomery is alleged to have offered to supply cocaine at £50 a gram and produced cannabis which he said would cost £20 for an eighth of an ounce. In a separate encounter, the newspaper alleged he brought cannabis resin, marijuana and cocaine for the reporters.

Mr Montgomery said: "I'm disappointed that what could have been an exciting development in the provision of cannabis-based medicines in the Indian subcontinent turned out to be a rather unpleasant attempt at entrapment. 
"The article, which is peppered with falsehoods, is a pantomime. Everyone that knows me is aware of my views on our drug laws and how they should develop. They also know I am not a coke dealer."


----------



## TinyCrendon (Feb 25, 2002)

Steve 5312 - The press use his `gayness`simply to attack him. Its very simple. They think that other people will identify with the same type of hatred they have. Also any attempt at public dialogue must be halted at all costs...to them.

A Spies - Great post. Create your own ideas around anarchy, (if you want to that is) you dont have to think one way or t'other. You are exactly right about peeps who own BMWs are not immediately oppressors of the other peeps. Solid stuff pal.

Brian - Glad you didn't cyber-leg it. Although, as we determined earlier, I dont agree with you on drug policy and so on the attacks on you and especially those on your personal life were disgusting. Especially the Police Fed who you should metaphorically pepper spray when you get home. 
I hope you continue posting til the Tabs get bored of it. They'll find something else to get hysterical about soon enough.

Also can you bring me back some of those big skins they do in Oz. Its a joke its a joke...

adz


----------



## Danny K (Feb 25, 2002)

*Brian's hols*

Just a quick note to let you know that Brian is on holiday for another coupla weeks.

He's going to be taking some shit off his bosses on his return so if you support him, why not drop him a letter or card:
367 Brixton Road.
SW9 7DD

I just reckon the guy deserves some support for taking the stand that he has.  Not many queers in the police full stop and only one out in ACPO.

By the way, I'm an idiot, how the fuck do you get the smilies on a post?


----------



## Clapham Omnibus (Feb 25, 2002)

*Anarchist & Anti-capitalist*

*Anarchist & Anti-capitalist*

I take exception to the Guardians comment. I am neither an anarchist or an anti-capitalist. Obviously the Guardian have not logged on to other threads on this BB.
If the put their brain into gear before their mouth they might get their facts right.
It is clear that they are now entering the sensationalism of the tabloids. Which will reduce their credibility as a supposable 'serious newspaper'.
The bulletin board is open to anyone so long as they are not abnoxious.
I for one like the chats on the other threads but have a special interest in the way London is policed so here I am.
So stop putting everyone who posts on U75 in the same pigeon hole.


----------



## Clapham Omnibus (Feb 25, 2002)

*Methadone*

*Thanks Andria*

I am not a journalist, poltician or Police Officer. Just a concerned citizen.
I read your post with interest and I did not realise the affect methadone had. Obviously I will have to research the subject in detail.
Once again thanks for putting me straight.


----------



## adi baby (Feb 26, 2002)

*A cure for cancer?*

what is left to say??  this country is run by right wing business people who will grind us all into the ground eventually - they have taken all our public property and turned it into lucrative shareholdings - they have taken away our citizenship and turned us all into customers - pages and pages of jobs in the Evening Standard - pages and pages of properties and not one of the jobs will get you one of the properties - we are well and truly stuffed- people are going under en masse - crime is exploding and will keep exploding - they will try and keep it contained in area ( ghettos?) like Brixton - there is no cure for Brixton without treating the whole and its ridiculous to think there is - keep talking but get radical for all our sakes.


----------



## Platinum (Feb 26, 2002)

*A cure for cancer?*



> _Originally posted by adi baby _
> *keep talking but get radical for all our sakes. *



I agree with most of what you say, but I'n not sure people have to get radical. If they just became more 'Human', that would be a long way towards our collective dreams. While those who want change, and don't dismiss it as some form of Utopia', remain small in number, then radical thought/action remains the only way for change. However if all did a little, then the actions need to be less radical, and the once perceived 'radicals' will awake to find themselves within the mainstream, tho' admittedly on that day 'mainstream' would be nothing like today. While the majority remain in the 'matrix' nothing can change.


----------



## adi baby (Feb 26, 2002)

try being 'human' with no money, no job, no future, surrounded by an ever increasing pile of shit while the tv and shitrag Sun Mail etc flaunt the paradise existence of the few in your face. Try it!  Please try it and see how long it is before you do something desperate ie. fuck yourself and or someone else up, maybe then get to join the highest prison population in europe and then really get fucking nasty cause the human bit has been well and truly indefinitely postponed.  crime runs this country and there's no point deluding yourself - i hope you have a nice day anyway.


----------



## Platinum (Feb 26, 2002)

*You know me little!*

I posted my opinion, not my life story, which you seem able to perceive through cyber space. As it happens I have been homeless for a considerable portion of my adult life, having no food or money for some of that time, even living from the waste from 'shops'  routing through bins. Luckily no more, as a result of suffering mental illness due to both that situation and my addiction to drugs, as is required under the law, I was rehoused on my release from a Psychiatric unit having been held on section therein. I have been imprisoned many times, sometimes for my arrogance in the face of authority, sometimes for solely having descended into a hopeless delusional state. My situation today is brighter, much brighter. I am now married with children, and content if not happy. This has more to do with peoples humanity than them being radical. I do not make scathing comments about your opinion's legitimacy, as I do not know you. There is an axiom; 'Even a fool has a story to tell' . I do not quote this in an attempt to compare you with an idiot, rather to say that even a jester may run deeper than he appears.

A fool


----------



## adi baby (Feb 26, 2002)

platinum

you sound as if you have been through the mill - respect to you and your point - i guess like brian said its about belief in humanities inherent goodness ( even if most of the people with power seem to display little of it - i am livid at  the state of things but i am finding some reasons to be a little lighter here at urb75 - continue to be happy friend.

ggrrrrrr!!


----------



## Rowland. (Feb 26, 2002)

Why are heroin addicts prescribed methadone?  Well, I'm not a doctor at all but I have read up on drugs (mainly psychotropic drugs for treating mental illnesses, that being the sort of drug I take myself - prescribed, that is.  No-one in their right mind would take antidepressants or antipsychotics for fun, I can assure you - just look at the list of possible side effects...).  What I recall from the medical/drug books I've read - and this is just memory - is that the accepted medical theory is that it's easier to come off methadone than it is to come off heroin (but I can't recall why this is supposed to be the case).

I've not heard anyone outside medicine say that and I have no opinion myself one way or another.

Rowland.


----------



## Bookere (Feb 26, 2002)

Adi, 

Last time I looked there were an awful lot of people in this country who live in poverty that don't resort to crime. Far more than those who do. 

I see what you are saying, and I agree it doesn't help, but it's certainly not an excuse.


----------



## adi baby (Feb 26, 2002)

bookere

are you including drugs in that crime category?  are you including tax evasion? i think you'll find everybody in the bottom half is doing something illegal except for the very old who are a constant reminder of the fate in store for us ( chewed up and spat out) - 

 i read that we take more anti-depressants than any other european country - shame when you consider how it could be.


----------



## Clapham Omnibus (Feb 26, 2002)

Platinum

You seem to be sorted mate, long may it be.
Best wishes for a long and happy life


----------



## hatboy (Feb 26, 2002)

Wise words Platinum - from one fool to another


----------



## Platinum (Feb 26, 2002)

*Thank you*

I myself found this site throu' the media. I find it a comfort to find there are people who not only care, but wish to debate. A healthy thing always. Thx for kind words.


----------



## Mikee (Feb 26, 2002)

*True true*

But as the press never fancy giving him a break and I've tried my mbest to do just that. No w is the time for action, y'know keep the things current type affair........(Even though they've had a year to reply already...)


----------



## Clapham Omnibus (Feb 26, 2002)

*Mugged Tv Programme*

Did any one see on TV tonight the programme Mugged? It had some sequences about Brixton. Also it showed someone being driven round the Brixton area to spot his assailants.
Similar to Drews experience the other night.
I thought it was a good idea taking photos of 'known' people. That should warn them off of committing an offence even before they even thought of doing something.
Softly softly policing I think at its best.


----------



## popslut (Feb 26, 2002)

*Spirited outburst*

adi baby;

I just read your post;

"what is left to say?? this country is run by right wing business people who will grind us all into the ground eventually - they have taken all our public property and turned it into lucrative shareholdings - they have taken away our citizenship and turned us all into customers - pages and pages of jobs in the Evening Standard - pages and pages of properties and not one of the jobs will get you one of the properties " 

etc etc.

It certainly struck a chord with me. I can remember feeling the same way for the last few years that I lived in London. The conclusion I came to was this. 
If I'm LUCKY I'll spend another 35 years shuffling about on this mortal coil - buggered if i'm going to waste it waiting to to be granted the crumbs from the high table.

My solution [and I'm sure it wouldn't be for everyone...] was to up sticks and move out to just beyond the commuter belt where the price of accommodation drops to just below "scandalous" and there is space to breathe and think.
Its not everyone's idea of paradise I'm sure - unemployment is quite high in my area [luckily I'm self-employed and work from home] and the nightlife is not a patch on Brixton, but the good points are many. Not least the smell of cow shit on a warm summer evening. I never see a copper, weed is STILL £15 an eighth, food shopping is SIGNIFICANTLY cheaper, and it doesn't take me an hour to travel 3 miles.

Dunno why I'm telling you this - I think your words had a particular resonance for me. 

Don't let living in shit get on top of you - lifes too short, and you're not stuck with it. 
The problems of Inner-London living now appear very different with an insulating gap of 150 miles between me and them. 

My biggest headache these days is stopping the sheep barging my fence down and trampling my vegetable patch.

P.s. We're not "customers" - this implies a level of dignity that simply isn't there. 

We're actually "consumers". 

Organic devices which exist purely to "consume" the output of the industrial machine. We REALLY didn't need "Shake'n'Vac" or aerosol cheese or vaginal deoderant - until "they" invented them. 

Unless you're a politician that is - in which case we are "ordinary members of the public"


----------



## hatboy (Feb 26, 2002)

I still like it here. I'd be lonely in the countryside, and abit bored.  The inner city isn't all problems as we've discussed Popslut. I've no argument with you, but just wanted to know why you said ealier that since you've moved to Somerset you now "talk to my neighbours". Why didn't you talk to them in Brixton?  Takes someone to break the ice you know.  

This thread has gone right off topic again. Shall we all try (includes self) to get it back on track?


----------



## popslut (Feb 26, 2002)

Hatboy;

Hullo!  

Point taken - I do agree its not for everyone. 

It took me 3 years to come to the decision to get out of town and for the first month after I moved away I really did feel quite lonely. Whilst I lived in Brixton my flat became a sort of meeting point for my group of friends - owing to its location - and socially it was like a 4 year party. I look back very fondly upon that period in my life [not that you'd guess from some of my posts here!]

I suppose my situation was complicated by the fact that I earn my crust as a musician, and my flat in Effra Road was piled to the roof with studio gear that had taken me 15 years to collect. The fact that 2 flats down was a well-known crack house meant that I was afraid to leave my place unattended for any period of time, for obvious reasons (?), and lived in fear of coming home to find my door booted open. 

My place was only robbed once, and fortunately it happened 3 weeks after I'd moved my gear out to a more secure location.  

I 'only' lost my telly, hi-fi and loads of personal stuff which would only appear to have any kind of value to myself and somebody strung out and desperate to find £20 for a rock. 

I never really got to know my neighbours, probably because I didn't make the effort, but one stark contrast between London [not just brixton] and Somerset is that people actually DO say hello to strangers in bus queues down here [sounds like a cliche' but its true!] whilst yer Londoners tend to go about their business, keeping themselves to themselves and avoiding eye contact with strangers in the street. 

I suppose being out here suits me best because I find I have the mental and physical space to get my work done - basically cos theres bugger all else to do!  The group of extremely bored looking teenagers who gather in the car park of the village Cricket Club would probably testify to that! I reckon they'd have much more fun in Brixton...

In my 20's London was the perfect place to be. Now I'm middle aged [hehehe] I feel quite at home in a tiny one-horse town inhabited mainly by octogenarians and quadrupeds. 

"Morning Mrs Scrote - can I help you with those heavy shopping bags?"

I know I have a tendency to wander off topic a bit, but the more disparate views that are shared, the bigger the overall picture becomes. I don't believe Brixtons problems are created exclusively in Brixton. 

I've had my mind opened by the breadth of opinion expressed in this thread - I'm not normally drawn to web-forums - and I think its the pooling and comparing of viewpoints that will make the most difference. Everybody has something pertinent to contribute - even Trotboy [Christ - that stuck in my throat..  ].

Big up.


----------



## splan (Feb 27, 2002)

*Excellent Debate!*

I have been reading with interest!  There have been many excellent points on many issues, especially the drugs and violence ones.

I am not local, nor have I ever been to Brixton, so I will keep its short!

Well done to The Commander for having the proverbials to come here and talk openly and honestly!

Peace to all!


----------



## Dean Becker (Feb 27, 2002)

*Commander is due back when?*

I want to invite Commander Brian to join us on the New York Times Drug Policy Forum.

If my read of the prior posts are correct, he should be back around March 10 or 15?

If you want to see the words of US experts in medicine, law and other aspects of the "drug war" I suggest you visit 

http://www.nytimes.com

You have to register of course and here are some instructions on how to do so:

http://www.cultural-baggage.com/instruct.htm

We have had guests like the Goveror of New Mexico, Gary Johnson, Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman, Police Chiefs, Judges, Doctors and dozens more.  Their transcripts are kept on site via a transcript storage page.

Now, more than ever, the US needs the support of enlightened leaders of the UK and Europe.  Some of our most recent guests were Nol van Schaik who is helping the Cannabis Cafe in Stockton to remain open and Chris Davies your MEP who has so boldly stood for progress and the release of Colin Davies who still sits in Strangeways prison.

There's lots of paranoia and crabbiness in the US reform movement these days, what with Bush trying to declare us "terrorists".  We would welcome your presence and input at the times.

Dean Becker


----------



## Andria (Feb 27, 2002)

*Brian's return*

he will be back on March 11th

andria


----------



## adi baby (Feb 28, 2002)

popslut

just a thought - wonder how many black britons you see in your new west country life and how a black briton from brixton in similar circumstances to you would fare making the same type of city to west country transistion?


----------



## adi baby (Feb 28, 2002)

making the massive assumption that you are not a black briton.


----------



## Bookere (Feb 28, 2002)

Adi, 

From what I can tell Popslut is from exactly the same part of the world as I am. 

You're right, there are comparitively few black Britons in Somerset, but it's not to say there aren't any. 

It is only 150 miles to the west Country from Central London, people's attitudes are fairly similar to the rest of the country. 

I'm sure you'd get along fine, in fact I think you'd find people to be quite welcoming.


----------



## Trotboy (Feb 28, 2002)

*Careful there!*

I can only speak for Devon, since that's where I'm from, but I'd be careful about making statements like "in fact I think you'd find people to be quite welcoming." 

Things have certainly changed in the past 20 years, there is less overt racism in Devon, and a lot of the overt racism in the past was more through ignorance than hatred. Now when I go home I see many more black, asian and mixed race people than ever before. 

When I was growing up there was one black youth in the town, who was in and out of remand & prison because of having to literally fight for his right to live there (He was in a childrens home originally as well, so didn't have much chance). In the end he lost that fight, having a court order imposed against him and being imprisoned. There were a few asian families based mostly around restaurants.

Now there is a more cosmopolitan feel to the town in terms of race, with several black british residents, a few dozen asians and chinese as well. Also attitudes have changed, with more awareness about the issues of racism, and a younger generation growing up with no real problems around it. But there is still a hard core of racism, as there is in most places, and it only takes a minority of very unpleasant people to cause a big problem, so I'd be cautious about making such statements.

But I think it is true that you'd be far more likely to by and large be able to get on with your life without too many problems, and without encountering much overt racism, in fact some things, such as institutional racism in public services, the police, etc, you'd be less likely to encounter. But at the same time there is far less cultural diversity etc, less support structures to fall back on.

Steve Bush,
Lambeth Socialist Party.


----------



## adi baby (Feb 28, 2002)

bookere and trotboy

two replies which give a positive picture -  unless you wear a black skin i guess you can never really know the full reality  ( work, meeting people, housing etc) but, y'know, good, sounds like there may be more options open to all us inner citiers than we have been shown/explored.


----------



## dnm (Mar 2, 2002)

*Lambeth police failing in their duty*

The police have now decided to ban the use of sniffer dogs in everyday patrols because they "cause antagonism in the Afro Carribbean community", what ever next: the banning of handcuffs? the banning of the police altogether?

This stupid appeasement of a small minority of members of the black community (probably the ones who have a vested interest in ensuring low key policing so that they can continue to carry guns and sell drugs) will affect everyone living in that area. The police presence has already been described as inadequate, with policemen driving past gangs of drug dealers.

The public pay their taxes and deserve protection from the police. It's all to easy for ivory tower well off liberals like Commander Paddick to pander to small minorities in the black community to try and look nice and "politically correct" while the community suffers. He probably lives quite comfortably outside any high crime areas, the police pull-out and appeasement in Lambeth won't affect him.

Effective and robust policing benefits everyone who wants a safe place to live, where their kids aren't at risk of being sold Class A drugs or tempted into gangs, and where normal people can walk around without fear of being attacked.

The blame for this kind of thing lies squarely at the door of the politically correct liberals. They stopped the police stopping and searching suspicious individuals because of accusations of "racism", but if blacks commit 90% of street crime (whatever the reasons behind that) it's only fair that 90% (or around about) of the people the police search are black. And lets not forget, it's decent hard working blacks who suffer the most in places like Lambeth as a result of the police being prevented from catching these people with weapons or dealing crack. Not only are the PC luvvies content with emasculating the police stop and search powers which kept a lid on street crime for so many years, but they now prevent them even using sniffer dogs!

If an alien landed here and read about this, he'd quickly list us as an "illogical and backward life form on a path to extinction".

The public have a right to live in safety, and that means active policing (not just cruising around and driving past gangs, they should be taking them on, regardless of what the luvvies say the police are).


----------



## Platinum (Mar 2, 2002)

*Lambeth police failing in their duty*



> _Originally posted by dnm _
> *Effective and robust policing benefits everyone who wants a safe place to live, *




I'm sure that the majority of people in 30's Germany would concur with you. And who cares about a small minority anyway??? They are just moaning? If we are to take onboard you're opinion on these policing policies, can I suggest we change our Police uniforms. Maybe Black trimmed with silver with the odd skull and bones for good measure.


----------



## dnm (Mar 3, 2002)

Platinum - I think you misread. I meant a small minority of the black community that really should be ignored, not the entire black community (who are in fact the majority in Brixton)!

The politically correct liberals end-up harming anyone who wants to remain safe when they emasculate the police, that's the point I was making. They champion the cause of a small section of the black community (usually the ones who happen to be pushing drugs) as part of their overall strategy to use race as a weapon to destroy our institutions, the rising crime problem is a side-effect of this process.


----------



## Mikee (Mar 3, 2002)

*Knowledge*

Dnm - How much do you know about Brixton? How often do you walk down the crack-plagued streets and how deep within that scene have you been to know what you speak about?? The dogs have seldom ever been used against gangs of yardie crack dealers - but often against easier targets - students with a pill on them, who loose their employability, their studies, possibly their homes through a conviction, for example. Anti-liberal as you purport to be surely it is not beyond your understanding to be compassionate. The problem lies with the laws themselves and the medias inflammatory response to often tragic situations, such as the death this week of Rachel Whitear. The trite, copy-selling, sensationalist reporting of such profoundly tragic events prevents us as a society from looking at the realities of what we must do to deal with drug issues. People have always used and enjoyed drugs in various forms, it is not a possibility that we will ever achieve a drug free society. Maybe we shouldn't be trying to!!!!  Freedom of choice is everything . Back paddick cause we aint going to find anyone else who actually gives a shit, who can actuallly be bothered to listen....... Suss it out and now. Start being part of the solution and not part of the problem...!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Mikee (Mar 3, 2002)

*Heres hoping*

Hope it is Brian we've been reading. Hope he remembers my e-mail also. In the interim I agree totally that we should back Brian cause we definitely won't get someone who listens to Brixton the way he does,were he to go....

A forward thinking copper - whatever next.? The queen giving away champagne n opening up a few gardens for people to do gigs in? I mean, come on.......


----------



## Mikee (Mar 3, 2002)

*Hatboy*

How come its ok for you to post n no-one else???


----------



## hatboy (Mar 4, 2002)

Sorry Mikee - I don't understand the above. Just where did I say that? Or did you mean someone else and got mixed up?


----------



## sonicdancer (Mar 4, 2002)

As the thread starter I presume quite rightly HB feels a slight duty to try and keep it on topic and it has veered way off topic with all this talk of the west country......The people who live in Brixton who post on this board are concerned with Guns and Crack in there neighbourhood.

The Voice newspaper editor has written this week that he wants to encourage police stop and search policies.  As after the Stephen Lawrence case they have dramatically declined and so have the arrests and seizures of guns.

When the News TV reporter asked random black people in Brixton what they thought of this half said "Good idea if nothing to hide nothing to worry about" the other half slightly warily sited that "The source of guns needs to stopped rather than stop and searches increasing"...

difficult call dont like the term stop and search myself maybe need to label it differently


----------



## Paul (Mar 4, 2002)

The looming possibility of police officers taking strike action over money shows 
the world as it really is, greedy and fucked up. Society has broken down and
the police want more money to tackle the increasing stresses and strains this causes. 
This is no answer. 

Turn up, support the police, not for more money but to overthrow and break free 
from the chains of their incompetent masters, the forever "truth shy" British Government. 

Back a police state, led by Brian "the buddhist" Commander and his new breed of law. 
A law which starts with respect, trust, peace, care, understanding, faith, hope, 
and ends in happiness.   Who ever said we cannot have a happy ending. 

The US Government is trying to kill you, the UK Government is in bed licking ass 
with these assassins in an attempt to protect the all important American dream - capitalism. 
Capitalism and anti - capitalism are as equally important as each other in humanitys bid to evolve. 

America does not believe in evolution or rights of life, only money, fuck them before they fuck you. 

"The de facto role of the US armed forces will be to keep the world safe 
for our economy and open to our cultural assault. To those ends we will 
do a fair amount of killing".   Pentagon official Major Ralph Peters, 
responsible for "future warfare", 1997.
 


Officers staging House of Commons demo 


Thousands of frontline police officers from across England and Wales will stage a mass 
rally in Westminster over the Government's pay offer. The Police Federation protest on March 13 is 
designed to ensure "the voices of rank and file police officers are heard in the corridors of power". 

Rank and file officers last week voted by a 10-1 majority to reject the Home Secretary's offer. 
Officers will gather outside the Queen Elizabeth II conference centre, near the Houses of Parliament,
to protest at planned changes to their pay and working conditions. 

The package on offer includes an extra £400 a year on all pay scales and special allowances of 
between £500 and £5,000 for officers doing difficult or specialised work. However, it would also 
slash overtime rates and a number of allowances. They will also voice concern about Mr Blunkett's 
Police Reform Bill, which proposes a new breed of civilian warden with police-style powers to detain 
members of the public using force. 


Federation chairman Fred Broughton said: "By the very nature of their profession, police officers
are not allowed to strike or take industrial action, but this does not prevent them from registering
 their anger about their treatment at the hands of the Government. 

"Politically drip-fed smear stories, plans to worsen pay for a group of public servants who 
regularly put their lives on the line and proposals to give non-police personnel powers to stop, 
detain and use reasonable force against the public, have culminated in officers wanting to 
visibly display their frustration. 

"We are organising the lobby to focus minds on bringing about change." 
In England and Wales 84,205 voted against the pay offer and 8,059 voted for. 
There were similar results in separate ballots in Scotland and Northern Ireland.


----------



## Paul (Mar 4, 2002)

Evening standard 04/03/02

On-spot fines for cannabis

by Philip Nettleton

Scotland Yard is considering issuing on-the-spot fines for cannabis 
possession instead of the " softly softly" approach currently being 
used in Lambeth. 

Senior officers are examining an evaluation of the Brixton initiative but
may instead opt to press ahead with fixed penalty notices for anyone 
caught with the drug.  People caught in possession of cannabis in Brixton receive 
a verbal warning and have their drugs confiscated under a pilot scheme pioneered 
by Lambeth police chief Brian Paddick.  However, some high ranking officers favour 
imposing a fine so users don't openly flout the more relaxed attitudes to the drug.


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 4, 2002)

Dnm's post is based on a false premise : that the Brixton Police not to use dogs story has any grain of truth whatsoever in  it.

I'd be more inclined to be suspicious .. it has all the hallmarks of a story "planted" to discredit Brian Paddick.

The anti-liberal parts of the Police are notorious backdoor leakers, and have ready recipients for their drivellings in the Sun, and sometimes other papers too.


----------



## mistaken_plane (Mar 4, 2002)

okay thanks for reading this  sorry if ive missed anything like this already, ive tried to read the 18 pages in the last hour or so, but inevitably i skim-read a lot of the later pages.

these are from the first page or so, and its going back to the drugs debate. you might want this posted on the drugs board and ill be more than happy to shove it there, but seeing as im quoting from this board id like to put it here as well.



> _Originally posted by Brian _
> *Number one priority is the street dealers..."
> 
> The street delaers are like weeds - you cut them down and they keep growing back. You need to deprive them of their 'sunshine'. So we need to look at taking out the punters and getting them into treatment.*



that was from the same paragraph.



> _Originally posted by Nick _
> *Increased patrols & hassle of dealers in the "hot spots" of Coldharbour lane, Atlantic & Railton & the BR station - to drive them out.*





> _Originally posted by popslut _
> *Where there is a demand, there will always be people ready to supply, regardless of policing methods, laws or media polemic*



ok this is rather more simple to me. popslut was the only person i think in the 18 pages that actually mentioned that it doesnt matter what you do to supply, demand will always be there.

now this is a market, a market is where buyers and sellers meet. thats simple enough. now current policies are geared (and have been) towards supply. trying to stop supply. spending money to hit this abroad and the like.

nick said that he wanted more policing, and im sure a number of residents have the same view.

what i want to say is: does this work. this seems to have been the policy all along. get in and arrest. but as brian said, they just pop back up again. its glaringly obvious to me that this policy is flawed, has failed, and always will fail to stop the selling of drugs. its been given long enough and simply hasnt worked. so time for something new?

now markets are defined by buyers and sellers, or demand and supply. trying to hit supply doesnt work. but hitting demand will do. this is a post i put on another bulletin board a week or so ago in response to comments about this site and this issue:

"basically we were talking about demerit goods (goods which have a negative cost to society in an economic way. so tobacco is considered a demerit good, as it creates ill health which needs to be treated by the NHS which costs money etc.) and ways to block getting them into the country. quotas were mentioned but arent effective as they just push the price of the good (in this case drugs) up. drugs are a fairly inelastic good (meaning that demand doesnt change much with changes in price) so higher prices dont do the job.

instead an embargo was mentioned. an embargo stops trade altogether, which is the current policy on drugs. because they are illegal you cant legally bring them into the country to trade can you?! embargos are concerend solely with hitting supply, the idea being that if you cut out the supply the market will dissapear. the problem being that a market is a place where buyers and sellers meet. because there is an embargo the drugs market is a black market, but still a market, and despite the attempts to reduce supply, people still want the drugs. the embargo isnt stopping supply therefore drugs are still sold and consumed. this is because (as mentioned before) drugs are fairly demand inelastic (as you have addicts etc.) so trying to hit supply is a bad idea. the current idea is that if you reduce supply the problem will conveniently dissapear. infact if you reduce supply, you push up the price of the good. as the price is high people see that a profit is to be made, so more suppliers enter the market so youre actually increasing supply! the opposite of what youre trying to achieve. this is the current state of the drug market.

now a simple point was made earlier that drugs are demand inelastic. so no matter what you try and do to the supply there is always demand for the market. instead the best way to get rid of the market is to attack demand. figures show that there are far more registered heroin addicts today, than there were when herion was prescribed by doctors. so if the government were to treat addicts, and wean them off the drugs then the market would effectively cease to exist. there wouldnt be much if any demand for drugs, so you wouldnt be able to sell the would you? and this is what the government want to achieve!"

i know this is moving a tad away from the local perspective you guys want here, because i am talking about drugs as a nationwide thing, and not local. but im hoping you get the point im making, that more needs to be done tackling the people who buy the drugs, rather than lock everyone in sight up.

anyway, id be interested to know peoples views on this.

the other thing i wanted to say was a glaringly obvious contradiction:



> _Originally posted by Brian _
> *The trouble with legalising drugs is it will inevitably result in more people trying them. I am sure many people are put off because they are illegal.*



you are _sure_ of this. because id like to see some evidence backing up the statement. because from what you said there your views are based on opinions and what you think is going on, rather than hard fact. maybe im wrong and you do have fact, id just like to see it 

thanks!!

jamie.


----------



## adi baby (Mar 7, 2002)

its pretty obvious that the most irresponsible people in this country are the newspaper editors of rags like the Scum, (hate) Mail and News of the Screws etc.  They are in an incredibly powerful position day in day out year in year out in the minds ( and shaping of minds) of millions of people and they never discuss things, THE ALTERNATIVES, never ever bloody ever BECAUSE THEY DO NOT WANT CHANGE and as long as the corporate press do not want change then you aint gonna get popular support for it ( ie see attacks on Brian ) However if WE get together ( WE - ie those who actually DO care ) and put forward policies that actually deliver workable responses to the terrible problems of gang, drug, violence culture then people will look up from the paper they are reading and realise they are being lied and brainwashed and therein may lie the road to success for us.

waddaya think?  a national newspaper 'burn in'!


----------



## Brian (Mar 11, 2002)

Hi guys I'm back!!  Being a bit cautious to begin with.  I hope you understand.  I am still listening and taking it all in.  More soon I hope.

Brian


----------



## drfranni (Mar 11, 2002)

Welkommen, bienvenue, welcome.

Actually, despite the flak you are probably taking as we speak, I am jealous of anyone who has been on holiday.

On to more important matters....

Is there going to be a police rep at the meeting about the future of Loughborough Junction on 20th? It seems to me that our local future will depend on some pretty effective and appropriate community policing

Good luck (might be a good idea to stick a magasine down the back of your trousers - just a thought)


----------



## O-B-L (Mar 11, 2002)

Coldharbour Lane at any time of day, especially though at night is an awful place to walk or drive down. You can't make your way along it without feeling threatened. You will be offered heroin/crack/ecstacy etc. by an asortment of moody characters. I don't live in Brixton, but have friends who do and go to parties in the area from time to time. I dread the walk from the tube and up Coldharbour Lane. Christ knows how locals cope with it day after day.

As the commander says, taking out the street dealers does nothing to stop it, more just appear. He also says that they have used CCTV to moniter what's going on there. 

How about using that CCTV to bust those who have bought the drugs? Although I am strongly in favour of LEGALISING ALL DRUGS and know that drugs are not a criminal issue, but an issue for society as a whole and that busting a user will in no way make him or her stop using, if users feel that they can't buy gear in the area without getting busted then they will have to go elsewhere.

This is not to make it someone else's problem, as again the commander says, but should make users get their gear from a discrete, regular source. If they do that they'll also get better gear and not get ripped off so often.

Tricky one though.


----------



## calum (Mar 11, 2002)

hello there,
i take it you know all about the coverage you've received. fair play for speaking out though. how do you feel about it all? you got some serious mirepresentation while you were away.


----------



## Streathamite (Mar 11, 2002)

> Welkommen, bienvenue, welcome


Umm...not meaning to be to pernickety, but wasn't that in rather dubious taste (as I presume the good doctor F has also seen _Cabaret_)?


----------



## drfranni (Mar 11, 2002)

Sorry if it was, I'm afraid I'm far too philistine for subtle literary put downs - I was simply thinking resentfully about holidays, foreign lands and languages. Nope, never seen Caberet


----------



## Bookere (Mar 11, 2002)

> Coldharbour Lane at any time of day, especially though at night is an awful place to walk or drive down. You can't make your way along it without feeling threatened. You will be offered heroin/crack/ecstacy etc. by an asortment of moody characters. I don't live in Brixton, but have friends who do and go to parties in the area from time to time. I dread the walk from the tube and up Coldharbour Lane. Christ knows how locals cope with it day after day.



I'm afraid I have to disagree, 

I don't find it threatening at all and I am a local resident. Obviously there is a large amount of blatent drug dealing and a certain amount of other street crime but It doesn't frighten me. The part I'd imagine you are talking about is very well lit and always fairly busy. 

I actually enjoy walking along CHL on a nice day / evening, simply enjoying the vibrancy of the place and watching people enjoying themselves in the wide selection of bars and restaurants.

I suspect your fear of Brixton is linked to it's reputation. The first time I came to Brixton, I cam fully armed with a rediculous perception that everyone was likely to mug me or shoot me. Having lived in the area for some time now, I have come to realise that I have no more to fear in Brixton than any other busy London high street. 

I wouldn't advise walking around waving a mobile phone, but then I wouldn't advise that anywhere in London now. 

People describe Brixton in one breath as a ghetto where no one dares venture out at night, and in the next breath they tell you how good it is on a sat night.


PS Welcome back Brian.


----------



## drfranni (Mar 11, 2002)

Generally speaking (always dangerous) I agree with Bookere - I am never anxious at the "posh" end of CHL - ie the Brixton end. I am 100% more anxious down "my" end, which is, in fact, the middle - at Loughbrough Junction. It is less busy, fewer if any CCTVs, an evil recent history of gun related violence and I've been pushed and shoved and threatened "often" - that is to say half a dozen times

Edited because I was being a bit unsympathetic. I'm sorry if you felt threatened in CHL - I think this is bad publicity and a skewed persepctive. Don't worry about the "moody" types, they will never grow rich selling parsley to tourists and it makes them grumpy. Ignore them or give them a smile


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 11, 2002)

I broadly agree with Drfranni. 

I feel safer in the hurly-burly of the town Centre end than Loughborough Junction. Sometimes various types are very hassly and a bloody nuisance, and like most of the rest of the human race I have vulnerable days and invincible days. If the former then even low-level hassle can upset and unsettle me. If the latter then hassle me at your peril! The one time I saw something potentially life-threatening by the P5 bus stop in central Brixton (a drunken fight between two blokes involving weapons) the police were there in less than 3 minutes because of the CCTV. However, if I won a sudden huge amount of dosh I wouldn't move away from here, I'd just swap my grotty council flat for a house with garden. There are developments round here that really concern me, and that I would like to change, but I love Brixton.


----------



## boomclick (Mar 11, 2002)

just 2 things to say:

1.  totally agree with previous posts about CHL.  i get the train at Loughborough Junction, and I sometimes get nervous walking around those back streets.  I've been approached by beggars around there a few times, including one very bizarre old West Indian lady who had 'blacked up'.  you could see very pale skin on her hands and neck and a very thick, black paste applied to her face.  she opened her pitch with the words 'hello - i'm disturbed' and my heart went out to her so i gave her a fiver.  saw her pulling exactly the same pitch on someone else about 3 minuts laters.

The groups that hang out outside the green man and the cab office opposite can be much noiser & more aggressive than the 'brixton-enders'   

however -  i don't know if this is true, but i've always got the impression that the the dealers at the Loughborough Junction end are far more your traditional £10 bag o'green salesmen, as opposed to the larger, more serious, gun-toting Crack&Heroin dealers at the other end.  I did notice a prostitute working the corner of Loughborough Road and CHL at about 9am last week.  poor love...

I think Loughborough Junction feels more dangerous because there's less CCTV and far fewer people around...

Secondly, I'd like to welcome Brian back to this discussion.  I'm sure I speak for most people here when I say:
a) of course we understand that you might need to be careful with your posts, and

b) i hope your presence here doesn't cause your trouble professionally.  it should really be earning you plaudits and respect.  don't forget that!

l8rs
bc


----------



## grubby local (Mar 11, 2002)

*this in the big issue today*

jus to let y'all know .... big issue sent this in to John Stevens on Friday.

An open letter to John Stevens, Commissioner, Metropolitan Police.
We wish to register our support for Metropolitan Police commander Brian Paddick. We applaud his imaginative and innovative use of the internet to communicate openly and honestly with the community in the London borough of Lambeth, and are appalled at the distorted and homophobic way in which his views have been represented in some sections of the media.
Commander Paddick has employed a progressive response to the drugs crisis in the Lambeth area, focusing his resources on substances which cause serious social and health problems rather than wasting precious police time on processing minor cannabis arrests. 
Paddick should be cheered rather than censured. He is an asset not only to Lambeth and to the Met, but to the entire police force.
Matthew Collin, Editor, The Big Issue
Laura Lee Davies, Editor, Time Out
ken livingstone, mayor of London
Community-Police Consultative Group for Lambeth
The Reverend Canon Richard Truss, Dean of Lambeth
Valerie Shawcross, GLA member, Lambeth & Southwark
Tris Reid-Smith, Editor, The Pink Paper
vic motune, news editor, the voice
Polly Toynbee, journalist
Suzanne Moore, journalist
Deborah Orr, journalist
Ekow Eshun, journalist
Robert Elms, broadcaster
Mark Thomas, broadcaster
The Lifeline Project
Transform
release 
Paul Flynn MP
Brian Iddon MP
John Wadham, Director, Liberty
Shane Collins, Green Party Drugs Group
Paul Macey, Creative Collective

welcome back BP
grubby x


----------



## boomclick (Mar 11, 2002)

grubby,

that's brilliant  

well done  

r


----------



## treee (Mar 11, 2002)

unbelievable...
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/020311/80/ctn8l.html


----------



## Streathamite (Mar 11, 2002)

Following on from treee's useful link

about 90% of the media coverage of this whole little teacup-storm has basically boiled down to outrageous distortion and misrepresentation (with honourable exceptions - D Orr, R Graef, Guardian, Big Ish)
So why isn't Stevens having a pop at the press prostitutes - I thought good leadership/management was about supporting your subordinates, in the face of smears such as we've seen?


----------



## adi baby (Mar 11, 2002)

*Welcome back top cop dude*

Newsroom southeast at lunchtime today;

Presenter : "Will he keep his job?  Quite frankly I will be surprised if he does!"

The impartial and neutral BBC indeed!

Also as we are all now 'Anarchist leaning' according to the BBC on this 'Anarchist leaning' website, could we not recruit a few more bankers and  landowners to post to make us appear more 'normal and acceptable'  to those fun-lovin' folk at White City!

How about a show of support like getting everyone who respects and appreciates his input to sound their horn as they drive past brixton police station or something?


----------



## Calico. (Mar 11, 2002)

*Top Cop In Stop Pop Drop Shock!*

More here . http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/news/110302/paddick_110302.shtml


----------



## sonicdancer (Mar 11, 2002)

> How about a show of support like getting everyone who respects and appreciates his input to sound their horn as they drive past brixton police station or something?



I think that just might have an adverse effect but who know's, it is anarchist leaning but of course they seem to have blanket labelled the site, which of course is soooo short sighted.


----------



## mrgrieves (Mar 11, 2002)

*paddick should survive*

This is a really interesting forum.

Paddick may well be slightly screwed over today, the Daily Mail and the other tabloids  has been after him for two weeks, apparently he finds 'anarchy' attractive, not to mention the fact he's a homosexual degenerate.  Twenty years ago, he probably would have also been a Communist.

His approach in Lambeth is radical enough to be frightening, particularly if you are attempting to hold together a clearly discredited drug policy by conventional means.  The fact crime continues to increase in Lambeth may be held as evidence of incompetence on the part of Paddick, rather than the the fault of the Met and the government which it actually is.

Still, he has friends, and any charges levelled against him would be so clearly transparent that his removal could not be done with impunity.  The dodgiest thing he said, with respect to his bosses, was probably the 'Dogs sometimes turn on their owners' quip.  Still, they can't nail him for free speech.  If the establishment try and fight this issue, through Paddick, now, they will almost certainly lose and come out weaker for it.


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 11, 2002)

The obvious concern is that journalists will be crawling all over this site from time to time, looking for "controversy" in whatever Brian posts in the future.


----------



## Loughbrother (Mar 11, 2002)

too right there are radical policies - come along coldharbour lane and see the cctv filming the guys selling there warez, scary business when they do not fear the police, as soon as cannabis was dicriminalised the number of dealers rose dramatically. Police cant move in as they now that men will get shot...


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 11, 2002)

Ermm ..... where do I start? Lots of assumptions there Loughbrother. I'll let someone else address them, someone more local than me, but I do think that connecting cannabis decriminalisation (btw it hasn't been ... ) with the rise in violent crime is *very* open to question.


----------



## Modern Citizen (Mar 11, 2002)

I think the press are blowing this situation out of proportion, and making the situation worse for us Brixtoners. Far from exposing the problems, they are advertising the areas criminality. If you didn't already know where to buy crack, then you will now! 

I would like to say thanks to Brain Paddick for sticking his neck out and making a difference. 

I think we should stop asking what the police are going to do about Lambeth (I'm sure they ask themselves that question every day) we should instead be asking "what can we do to help the police"


Firstly, we can fight the witch hunt by boycotting the popular press. I think the Sun should be sold as a top shelf smutt publication, not unlike viz.

Secondly, we can support the police in their fight for better pay and conditions. (as well as teachers and nurses)

Thirdly, we can take our business else where. If you HAVE to take drugs don't buy them on our streets. Find a decent dealer and stick to them.They do exist and most of them deliver these days. I read it in the paper.

Lastly, don't live in fear. Crime is not new and its not restricted to Brixton.


----------



## Bookere (Mar 11, 2002)

Loughbrother, I share your concern at the dealers on CHL esp. at the junction of Loughborough road where I suspect you are taking your name from. Unfortunately you have not considered the wider implications of the new policies. 

A number of points, 

1. Cannabis has not been decriminalised anywhere in the UK as of yet. Mr Paddick has simply instructed his officers to confiscate cannabis off anyone caught in possession and not to arrest. 

2. Obviously there will be minor knock on effects when any change is made to policing methods or the law. The wider objective still remains the same. A huge number of people in this country smoke weed regularly. Considering it is still possible to be imprisoned for it, this is an absolutely ridiculously large percentage. It doesn't make sense to make criminals out of otherwise law-abiding citizens just for the sake of a few hypocritical laws that were put in place to prevent the workforce of this country reducing the productivity of the manufacturing industries. 

3. If we do decriminalise it across the country then these fearless youths who frighten you so much will not be able to make any money, selling weed and probably go away. 

4. "Oh yeah but they'll start selling something else" I hear you say. Well personally I think we can then start to tackle the real drug issues. By removing the recreational drug users from the scene we can concentrate on proper rehab for hard drug users and (With Brian's help) getting rid of the dealers.


----------



## hatboy (Mar 11, 2002)

Well, by the time I've looked at this today other people have pretty much said what I think already.  

Bookere's (and others) comments a couple of posts back about Coldharbour Lane not being as intimidating as it might first appear I totally support.  I love the busy Brixton streets day and night. I walk along the busy part of CHL every day and would  hate to see the street-culture and life of Brixton cleared-away. It's just the extremes of violence that most people want rid of here.  Unfortunately, the explosion of nightlife venues in this area and the consequent influx of visitors who plainly don't know the score and who waste their money getting ripped off in CHL have resulted in supply (of scams mostly) rising to meet demand.  

When people talk about dealers and dealing I think they should be more specific:  I mean we've got crack, smack, tourist rip-offs and weed/hash. In the days when it was mostly just weed (in Railton and Landor Roads) I don't think there was nearly so much ripping-off going on. There wasn't the constant flow of gullible new-comers there is now.  

Grubby Local - great letter, well done.

Welcome back Brian btw!


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 11, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Loughbrother _
> *too right there are radical policies - come along coldharbour lane and see the cctv filming the guys selling there warez, scary business when they do not fear the police, as soon as cannabis was dicriminalised the number of dealers rose dramatically. Police cant move in as they now that men will get shot... *



Do we actually inhabit the same area? There has been no dramatic rise that I've seen since the caution for cannabis policy......How long have you lived in Loughborough Junction? I have been here since April 1981. Perhaps you saw an increase after a cold snap ended or something.


----------



## drfranni (Mar 11, 2002)

Well, the Franni Family does a "highly scientific" survey every time we drive down CHL in the evening. Whilst this authoratative essay has yet to be published and we would accept some criticism of our methodology, we have seen no significant rise in dealers identifiable during a drive-by in the last two years


----------



## Paul (Mar 11, 2002)

Mrgrieves, "this is a really interesting forum", it would be "without" people like you.
Not only do you have the audacity to mention the brand name of that arsewipe 
newspaper, you almost try to sit on the fence whilst enlightening us with your 
fucked up opinion.  

The fact you even bring up homosexualty makes you a racist, your not alone on this, 
what the fuck does it have to do with you.  Mork  calling Orsan..........  
is this getting through - "if you have something against homosexuals, you are a racist". 
Unable to understand yourself, you find some kind of self-righteous, pietistic gratification 
in judging other people for what and who they are.  Its killing humanity, its time to stop, 
think for yourself.

Logical fact enlightening time - take 1 -  "the fact crime continues to increase in Lambeth may 
be held as evidence of incompetence on the part of Paddick", bollocks and more bollocks, 
the fact that crime continues to increase "anywhere", is all far to apt and relevant to the shitty 
fucked up state of global events.  What happens in Israel happens to you.

If you must stay please try not to be such a tit in future.

Regards Paul


----------



## Drive Like Jehu (Mar 11, 2002)

Uh, Paul, do you want to go back and read the post you're referring to again.

And then re-read yours?

Just a friendly hint like.


I dunno, twenty-two thousand people, all looking at this thread and thats the weightiest contribution I can come up with.

Bugger!


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 11, 2002)

Quote from drfranni

"Well, the Franni Family does a "highly scientific" survey every time we drive down CHL in the evening. Whilst this authoratative essay has yet to be published and we would accept some criticism of our methodology, we have seen no significant rise in dealers identifiable during a drive-by in the last two years"


More-or-less my method too Drfranni, you handle the vehicular obbos and I'll cover the pedestrian end....well OK I do get the bus or cabs sometimes....just covering all the bases!


----------



## editor (Mar 11, 2002)

Paul I think you've somewhat misjudged mrgrieves and managed to get almost every one of his points arse about tit.

Mind you, as an example of a drunken rant, it's second to none.


----------



## Paul (Mar 12, 2002)

Thankyou Head Honcho, "arse about tit"- Yin cannot live without Yang.

I dont drink - Regards


----------



## Paul (Mar 12, 2002)

Drive Like Jehu, if you read it again and still feel the same way, we 
can then debate its contents - till then.


----------



## Drive Like Jehu (Mar 12, 2002)

Paul - Check Your PM's


----------



## hatboy (Mar 12, 2002)

Paul, you have got the wrong end of the stick. Mr Grieves has quite a humourous way of saying the opposite of what a quick glance at his post might suggest from what I can see.

PS If you don't drink what are you on?


----------



## Paul (Mar 12, 2002)

Alright then,  I see clearly the context in which MrGrieves
states "not to mention the fact he's a homosexual degenerate. Twenty years ago, 
he probably would have also been a Communist".  These soundbites like 
"homosexual degenerate" produced by the same media which he is slanting only 
perpetuates the sorryful idea.   I should not have taken all the problems of the 
whole world out on MrGrieves, for this I am sorry, he was just there at the time.  
MrGrieves I still say you are part of the problem not the cure on this one.


"His approach in Lambeth is radical enough to be frightening, particularly if 
you are attempting to hold together a clearly discredited drug policy by conventional 
means. The fact crime continues to increase in Lambeth may be held as evidence of 
incompetence on the part of Paddick, rather than the the fault of the Met and the 
government which it actually is".   Well thats all very reassuring and nice but bollocks,
It is not the Mets fault that they are obliged to be guardians to the most corrupt, 
incompetent, lying, cheating and dying Government in the history of mankind.  
Shit sticks but this is no fault of the police service.


MrGrieves I have been a little hard on you, please forgive me.
Hope you get the Idea and have a really smashing day tomorrow.

Sorry for the trouble - Paul@MADlive.com


----------



## Drive Like Jehu (Mar 12, 2002)

Nice one.  No trouble.


----------



## popslut (Mar 12, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Paul _
> *Mrgrieves, "this is a really interesting forum", it would be "without" people like you.
> Not only do you have the audacity to mention the brand name of that arsewipe
> newspaper, you almost try to sit on the fence whilst enlightening us with your
> ...




-= Bwahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!  The Voice of Evo-Stik! =-


----------



## Paul (Mar 12, 2002)

Mrgrieves, "this is a really interesting forum", it would be "without" people like you. 
Not only do you have the audacity to mention the brand name of that arsewipe 
newspaper, you almost try to sit on the fence whilst enlightening us with your 
fucked up opinion. 

The fact you even bring up homosexualty makes you a racist, your not alone on this, 
what the fuck does it have to do with you. Mork calling Orsan.......... 
is this getting through - "if you have something against homosexuals, you are a racist". 
Unable to understand yourself, you find some kind of self-righteous, pietistic gratification 
in judging other people for what and who they are. Its killing humanity, its time to stop, 
think for yourself. 

Logical fact enlightening time - take 1 - "the fact crime continues to increase in Lambeth may 
be held as evidence of incompetence on the part of Paddick", bollocks and more bollocks, 
the fact that crime continues to increase "anywhere", is all far to apt and relevant to the shitty 
fucked up state of global events. What happens in Israel happens to you. 

If you must stay please try not to be such a tit in future. 

Regards Paul 
------------------------------------------------------------------------




- of= Bwahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!! The Voice of Cannabis if you must know...


----------



## hatboy (Mar 12, 2002)

It'll all seem different in the morning.

The last eight or so posts are a real waste of time.  

Oh and by the way, homophobia is not racism. It may have similarities, but it's not the same thing.


Insert stoned rant below Paul.


----------



## Paul (Mar 12, 2002)

Its Racism Hatboy- method in madness takes intelligence,
this might all be flying over the top of your hat, or the bottom of my arse.

Left in the balance...


----------



## In Vision (Mar 12, 2002)

*brian*

looks like brian got some better publicity today anyway... less homophobic...


----------



## hatboy (Mar 12, 2002)

Homosexuality isn't a race.  Homophobia is not racism.

Of course prejudice against race or sexuality is wrong, but they're not the same thing. Could someone gay and black tell him please.

We are so far off topic now.   My beautiful thread... RUINED


----------



## Paul (Mar 12, 2002)

Hatboy, settle pettle, your wonderful thread is not really off topic.
Racism, everything is about racism, community v community, how ones 
perception of what is acceptable differs from the next. 
I see it as racism no matter, thats my opinion, and like you sir, you are 
entitled to yours.

The drugs dont work.....


----------



## CkolonySC (Mar 12, 2002)

*Just wanted to add my support*

just wanted to say that I support the Commander all the way. I am a British citizen and have been living the Nashvile, TN USA for about 12 years. The US government's 'war on drugs' has been lost for years, but yet the Republican government fails to do anything about solving the real problem. 
Living in the city, the affects of street crime and drug addition are everywhere, but none so much as in the courts. People get arrested and convicted for petty drug crimes and lose there house, car, job, family... Then where do they end up? On the streets, commiting crime to support themselves. 
I admiire the position that Brian is taking on these issues and I wish that America could get a clue.


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 12, 2002)

Nice post Ckolony SC! 

Back on topic soon I hope ...


----------



## Paul (Mar 12, 2002)

More chance of Armageddon occuring than America ever getting a clue, 
there I go again, the end of the world Is an off topic subject 
too I suppose....


----------



## Modern Citizen (Mar 12, 2002)

*Think b4 you speak*

Please, can we keep this focused. This discussion is not about America, or the definition of racism. Petty distractions and bolshy displays of intellectual ego (as seen in the last few posts) do nothing but hinder the process. We humans can be so self obsessed, no wander we have so many problems in our society.
Real change must begin at home within your self. You must lead by example, not by force. Think before you speak.


----------



## adi baby (Mar 12, 2002)

American Prisons - now that is one great big giant scary subject - more inmates than kids in college - going down in the US is the equivalent of a death sentence so i have heard - if aids doesnt get you then the psychos with knives will - if youre not in a gang youre finished and like the man says you cannot get work if you make it thru - youve lost everything and so you go out and commit more crime - which you are now much much MUCH better at having survived a US State penitentiary.  The reason it is so horrific - stupid drug laws, ignorant drug laws, suicidal drug laws.

And yet the market for drugs, especially for 'fashionable' cocaine continues to explode, crime continues to explode, prison populations continue to explode, the streets continue to explode and soon no-one is safe and we are ruled by the corrupt and the criminal.  What a great fucking formula - God Bless America!

i met an american once whose only ambition in life, like all her friends,  was to live in a gated community that is a walled community where you need a security card to enter and large amounts of cash - the new american dream indeed - Viva la Brixton!


----------



## Paul (Mar 12, 2002)

I will suffer the accusation of using "bolshy displays of intellectual ego", if this is the assumption
you want to draw so be it, it is far from the truth however.  If I am honest with you this is all about 
provoking reactions for all the right reasons,  feel free to ignore me if it makes you feel any better 
I wont lose any sleep. 

"This discussion is not about America, or the definition of racism", I dispute this, it is 
all very relative to the fabric of global society breaking down.  Western democracy is a joke, 
International law and the criminal justice system is a joke, the US and UK Governments are a joke. 
Well I like a joke as much as the next man, but a joke is a joke and things are more than serious.
Serious enough to be permanently contemplating what my two year old boys future will be if 
humanity continues any further down the American capitalist dream road - down the toilet 
and into the void looks odds on. 

"We humans can be so self obsessed, no wonder we have so many problems in our society. 
Real change must begin at home within yourself. You must lead by example, not by force. 
Think before you speak",  this is the most intelligent quote i've ever seen posted on this site, 
hope I provoked you to say it.


No offence meant or intended to any of you, if anybody wants a further apology from me please let 
me know and i'll stand in the corner with a finger over my lips for an hour.

Free speech and peace for fucks sake, regards.


----------



## Modern Citizen (Mar 12, 2002)

*Doom Gloom guilt and blame (who needs them?)*

Thanks for your reply Paul.  Please don't stand in the corner with your fingers on your lips. 

All I want to express is the point that we cannot change the world on this site. 

However, we can bond as a Brixton community (pro sympathetic policing, anti guns and crack). In order to do so we need to communicate and act.

For example

Do you have friends that buy drugs off the street dealers? If so politely tell them to do it else where. Suggest they make alternative arrangements to find  a dealer in their own neighbour hood. 

If you see a ploice man, give him a nod and a smile.

Do something once a week for your community. (pick up litter, wash away some graffitti, give some time to a local charity etc etc)

In this way we can slowly change the mood of the area in a positive and un challenging fashion. 

We can't simply live in fear of when America finally explodes or we get shot by drug dealers...we may as well dread a meteor crashing to earth, nulear attack from the east, enormous tidal waves. All of these things have been imminent for years. 

Smile and encourage those around you. Doom and gloom helps no one.


----------



## Paul (Mar 12, 2002)

I appreciate we will never change the world on this web site (no disrespect intended), 
we will do that in the courtroom very soon.

I am the most positive and optimistic person I know, not a doom and gloom merchant at all, I smile 
a great deal and like to think I do my bit.  But if this means ignoring the strong possibility of mankinds 
pending extinction because being a "doom monger" is negative, well thats just not addressing reality.

Feel the fear and do it anyway.


----------



## adi baby (Mar 12, 2002)

If you want to smile at policemen and be civic  and believe that will brighten up the area - good luck - and well done - i support you but if people are reading this and thinking - God it really is fuct beyond help - they may take off and try their luck elsewhere and find some happiness before the whole shithouse comes down therefore some good coming out of some doomy gloomy


----------



## Bookere (Mar 12, 2002)

> Western democracy is a joke,
> International law and the criminal justice system is a joke, the US and UK Governments are a joke.



Which laws and governments on this planet would you prefer Paul. I agree in part, some of the laws and actions of the west are pretty bad, but to simply dismiss it all as a joke seems a bit extreme.


----------



## popslut (Mar 12, 2002)

*Coupla things...*

Just cos a post fails to meet your own narrow criteria of what is or isn't  "on topic" doesn't make it irrelevant. 



> * "We are so far off topic now. My beautiful thread... RUINED  "*




Who's beautiful thread? All credit to you for asking the original question Hatboy, but by choosing to hold this debate in public surely it becomes everybody's thread?
As has been pointed out several times, the problems of Brixton [such as they are - people have been likening Brixton to Satan's cauldron since before I can remember...] do not vanish as soon as yu pass west of Acre Lane. If its solutions to a problem you are seeking then I'd have thought you would welcome as many perspectives as possible. If its just a spot of parochial navel-gazing then...



> * "Do you have friends that buy drugs off the street dealers? If so politely tell them to do it else where. Suggest they make alternative arrangements to find a dealer in their own neighbour hood." *




Yeah, cos we all know how open to reason your average crack-head is. 

"Hey man - do me a favour and go score your rocks from....Hey - Come back!! - WHERE ARE YOU GOING WITH MY BLOODY VIDEO!!"

All the rock-heads i know are too busy stealing from their families to give a shit about what you think of their habits, and the man they score from couldn't give a monkeys either. He's too busy shifting his stuff until he gets enough money together to get the fuck out of the mess he's created. Yu can pick up as much litter as you want, clean up graffiti and smile at Policemen [!!] until the cows come home. There will still be crack-heads and crack-dealers. 
Its not about civic pride - its not about community spirit - its about crude commerce and the mechanics of neuro-transmitters. Crack makes you feel like Superman for a fleeting 30 seconds - to some thats worth 20 quid and having no friends.

Before there was crack there were no crack heads. Now there is crack we can't go back and uninvent it. There will always be people stupid enough to give it a try, and those that see the easy money to be made exploiting them. Prohibition is pure folly - its not a matter of "if" - its "where" and if it ain't your neighbourhood it'll be somebody elses.

Shoving dealers about from street to street is not going to solve anything. 

Treating addicts is sure to have limited success. 

Surely the only solution is to tackle the reasons why people get stuck into crack in the first place, and the reasons for that exist way outside Brixton.



> * "Man peering studiously into the gutter - his friend says 'What are you looking for?' and the man replies 'I lost my keys in the next street..' so his friend says 'So why are you looking for them here?' and the man says 'Cos the light is better...'"*


----------



## Modern Citizen (Mar 12, 2002)

Until drug addicts/crack heads out number everday people, I'd like to think we have a chance. 

Shit sticks pop slut, ditch your rock head friends and go clean up some graffiti. 

X


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 12, 2002)

Why are people posting stuff about the USA in the Brixton forum? I know Brixton has always been a world leader but................


----------



## popslut (Mar 12, 2002)

*Wooosh!!*



> _Originally posted by Modern Citizen _
> *Until drug addicts/crack heads out number everday people, I'd like to think we have a chance.
> 
> Shit sticks pop slut, ditch your rock head friends and go clean up some graffiti.
> ...



Hehe - style. 

You illustrate my point far more succinctly than I ever could...


----------



## Bookere (Mar 12, 2002)

> Surely the only solution is to tackle the reasons why people get stuck into crack in the first place, and the reasons for that exist way outside Brixton.



What do you think are the reasons that people get stuck into crack?


----------



## CkolonySC (Mar 12, 2002)

*Why talk about the US?*

The reason I brought up the US position is important. Domestic policy, espically in the UK, IS contingent on the internal policies of other countries (just look at the pressure put on the Dutch to change their drug policies.) Im not saying that Blair and Bush's great relationship on 9-11 is going to extend to drug policies (god forbid), but as I see it, the British position on drugs is far more progressive and constructive than the American, and I support this position. So why does this have anything to do with Brixton? Because in order to change public policy you need widespread, multilateral support. Support from as many people as possible. And in discussing the best ways to approach change and bettering a community, surely it can only help to have input and ideas from both inside and outside the community. It is in this respect that I offer my thoughts and opinions.


----------



## popslut (Mar 12, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Bookere _
> *
> 
> What do you think are the reasons that people get stuck into crack? *



How long have yu got?

I would draw a distinction between *dabbling* with crack and *getting stuck into it*. 

I'm sure people try crack for the first time for the same reasons they try E or speed or bunjee-jumping. Curiosity and the desire to experience something new. 

The first time I ever did coke my first thought was "Wow - this is fucking great - I'm gonna do this every day!!"

A minute and a half later that had changed to "Hmm - hope he chops out another line soon.." 

10 minutes after that it had become "Ewww fucking hell - so THIS is what they call a come-down..!"

I'm told [by people who do it] that the "up-down" sequence for crack is much the same but far more intense, and that it can take quite a bit of will-power not to go out and score again when you run out of rocks. 
The friend who explained that to me would appear to have the requisite will power, because as long as I've known him he's had a propensity to pop out every so often for a 20 quid rock, pipe it up, and then not touch the stuff for another 6 months. 
I reckon he's in quite a small minority and I think its possible for him to do this cos he has quite a lot going for him in his life and he knows that it'll all go down the bog if he's not careful. 

Somebody without quite so much going for them, maybe somebody who feels they have bugger all in life, or somebody with a childhood trauma to escape from, might decide [as i did] "Wow - I feel great - i'm gonna do that again..!!"  - and it doesn't take too many crack hits before you find yourself sucked into an addiction void. 

I think for many people who have received the shitty end of the stick [whether societally or otherwise] drugs can appear to be the only source of dependable relief from an otherwise abject existence, and for somebody who is already at a low-ebb the sudden profound high of a hit of crack must, i suspect, be an incredibly difficult temptation to resist. 

I'm not saying that everybody who is unhappy is going to become a junkie, or that everyone who is a junkie is so because they are hiding from something. We mustn't forget those dozy bastards who, despite all evidence to the contrary, assume they can dabble with highly addictive substances at the weekend and not get swallowed up. I've known a few of them too. 

There are many sets of circumstances by which we could all find ourselves at the bottom of the pile, whether thru poor education, racial discrimination, or simply as a result of the rate at which the gap between rich and poor seems to be widening. 
5 years existing on a Giro in a shitty council flat with bad plumbing and no apparent hope of escape would be a test for anyone I think, especially if yu'r forced to walk past the rows of BMW's, Mercs and leather upholstered SAABs currently parked up in the smarter 'gentrified' areas of Brixton and Camberwell etc on your way to sign on.


----------



## hatboy (Mar 12, 2002)

Great post above Popslut.  Btw - I think you took my post above "My beautiful thread - RUINED" abit too seriously.


----------



## Dean Becker (Mar 12, 2002)

*Taking Drug Reform Ideas International*

Brian,  I run a series of chats and forums in the US on the New York Times Drug Policy Forum and on Drugsense chats.  Instructioins on accessing these sites can be found at:

www.cultural-baggage.com/instruct.htm

I admire what the commander has done here and those posters to this forum who have joined in his call for major drug reform and restoration of dignity to so many peoples lives. 

Certainly prohibition has never done anything but harm society and any improvement, let alone the extraordinarily logical and enlightened ideas shared by Brian seem as if a gift from above. 

We feature online Q&A sessions with governors, Nobel prize winners, Judges, doctors and many others. Reform is such a hard sell in the US. Transcripts of each visit is stored on site for easy access. 

In the way we, (the US) helped destroy the Reich in WWII, today we need your help to tear the "moral high ground" from the grasp of the maniacal despots like Bush, Ashcroft, Barr and Souder.. and too many others to count. 

The schedule is not too full at the moment.  We do have a "Journalists on Prohibition" panel scheduled for March 26 which will feature Al Giordano of Narco News, Cynthia Cotts of the Village Voice, Barry Crimmins a reporter and humorist and Jeremy Bigwood who writes from South America about the drug war.

We've already had one guest from the UK, MEP Chris Davies was our guest last month.  Our only other international guest was Nol van Schaik of the Netherlands who also visted a month ago.

Brian, I will provide you with all necessary instructions and support if you would deem to join us in the near future.  Please write to me at fdb@ev1.net

Thank you,  Dean


----------



## paul boateng (Mar 12, 2002)

Im torn between legalisation and keeping it undercover. 

The bad boy side of me doesn't want to legal because I enjoy being devient. Why should the Police walk on by whilst I skin up. I want to stick 100 fingers up to them on that.

But the other probaly more realistic from the point of cutting crime. If you legalised drugs and I mean all of them. There would be no drug related crime. No traffiking, no dealing. Users would get better gear and better health service provision as with cigarette and alcohol users. This would enable them to control their habit. The police could also pipe or skin up along Atlantic Road and it wouldn't be no big shakes. 

It would take a whole section of people out of prison, which is not the best place for them.

The money from the taxes could be used to regenerate the economy and thus enabling more to be spent on such things like education, health and environment.

PB


----------



## enforcer (Mar 13, 2002)

*brixton ----guns ----crack etc*

what people fail to see is that the only person who looses out is the community..because police have there hands tied because senior police officers try to play the game of politics to what ever is new news.
If you want to live in a nice commuinty expect it to be policed ......if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear,,,,,,, we all want the same goal but at the end of the day the police will get the blame..because the community realy dont want to be policed!!!!!!
So let em get on with it and dont call 999 until all hell has boke loose!!!!!
Cheers


----------



## Brian (Mar 13, 2002)




----------



## ANGELA S. (Mar 13, 2002)

*BRIAN'S RETURN*

welcome back, Brian. Have been avidly observing recent events. Good luck, you've got balls.


----------



## adi baby (Mar 13, 2002)

Nice posting popslut - i thought it was really good the way you managed to provide a very human view of the 'drugs problem' as opposed to political, legal, etc.  Why do most people have such a lack of desire to understand people and just shrug their shoulders and say well off to prison with you then?  If youve nothing to hide then .. blah blah blah.  I mean its a crime without a victim, like the ludicrous notion of making suicide illegal ( which i believe it once was!!).  

More understanding which is why i dig urb75.  Nice one popslut - keep taking the cowshit.


----------



## Modern Citizen (Mar 13, 2002)

*Pop Slut*

Hi Pop Slut,

Your post on addiction was brillliantly articulate. I look forward to more.


x x


----------



## hatboy (Mar 13, 2002)

Enforcer - "nothing to fear" eh?  Except bad policing of course.


----------



## popslut (Mar 13, 2002)

*Blimey...*

Chief Constable of North Wales Richard Brunstrom on C4 news this evening stating that the current drug laws make no sense and pointing out the link between 'crime and prohibition' as distinct from 'crime and drug use'.



> *"A great many people in this country want to take drugs - what is the problem?"*




I reckon Brian Paddick has set a bit of a precedent here - another high-ranking copper takes the opportunity to express the controversial but blindingly obvious. 

I bet Anne Widdecome is stomping about with bulging eyes as we speak!!

Good-oh.


----------



## adi baby (Mar 14, 2002)

the enforcer talks about nothing to hide but hey we've all got something to hide if the powers that be decide that something you are or do is unacceptable - i mean blimey - brian would have been thrown into one of his own jails for being gay not so long ago in this country and many people in high places are terrified of people finding out they are gay because of how they will be regarded/treated and hey its not even illegal!

The argument that you would not object to increased police powers, even to police state levels, if youve nothing to hide needs to be thought about much more carefully than i think most people who use the quote have ever done - in 81 the riots in brixton were triggered by stop-and-search.  

and finally will all the seniormembers and longtime residents of brixton stop being so fucking precious about 'your' website, 'your' brixton, 'your' threads, 'your' opinions - lighten up, kick back and enjoy the ride.
meeoow!


----------



## Mr Retro (Mar 14, 2002)

Excellent post Adi baby. Although the post here are mainly intellegent and well thought out, the board can seem a bit cliquey at times.


----------



## asharp (Mar 14, 2002)

*extending the trail (first post! woohoo!)*

Hi all,

Firstly, like many peeps who come here I'd like to say thank you to Brian for speaking out here.  It's shown real balls and I personally have appreciated the debate here very much!  I just hope it can continue because (as the press interest has shown), it's very important.  This kind of dialog has to exist between the public and 'those in charge' for any progress to be made, and god knows there's plenty of room for change!!

I'm the type of chap who might come down to Brixton for a night out at the Dogstar and who might score a teenth for the journey home (note the word might!!  ). 

It seems from what many people are saying on this board that there has been a noticeable increase in street dealing of all drugs as a result of the new policy and it is not necessarily desirable (for various reasons).  To what extent do people think this would diminish if the pilot scheme were extended to other areas/adopted nation-wide?  Would it diminish at all?

My opinion is that the logical outcome of widespread adoption of the pilot would lead to a significant reduction in street dealing long term, particularly of weed/hash.  There must be a large-ish number of peeps coming from surrounding districts (and further a field) to score in Brixton and they'll be much more inclined to stay closer to home if they can (I don't know a stoner who WANTS to travel miles to score! ) .  This should lead to far fewer of the rip-off merchants and other such scammers; fewer drug tourists = fewer muppets to fleece/mug.

However, I'm not sure if the same would follow for the harder drugs that seem to be the greatest cause for concern.  Further measures need to be taken to tackle this issue - simply arresting participants has been shown not to work.  How do peeps think this should be tackled?  The suggestion of clinics/prescription of hard drugs to addicts certainly has it's merits IMHO but there must be other workable solutions that could run in tandem?


----------



## Dean Becker (Mar 15, 2002)

*Please don't forget the US!*

Brian and all,

I live in Houston, Texas, the gulag city of the world.

I am ecstatic at the news coming from the UK.  It appears you've done it.  The drug warriors over here are moralists and superstitious bastards.

I realize the victory is sweet and a burden has been lifted off your society so please do celebrate and carry on.

Should you get the chance, write some letters to our media, help us, because we have the great "terror" war thrust on the backs of drug users over here now.  I try to fight these "drug warriors" as best I can, but they have gone into overdrive with their lies now.  I think perhaps the clarity that is now become so vivid in England is desperately needed over here.

Not that you folks need it much, but here is a link to a booklet I just published today:

"Drug Truth - Abrahamson to Zeese"

You can read the PDF file at:

http://www.cultural-baggage.com/drugtruth.htm

The booklet contains quotes taken from the NY Times Drug Policy Forum and from the DrugSense chatroom.  The guests and panels have included a Nobel winner, a Governor, Judges, Police Chiefs, Doctors Attorneys and more.

The booklet will be given away at many of the Million Marijuana Marches this coming May 4th as well as at various political and social functions this year.  Here in the US, we are only about a century behind you guys.

BRIAN, it is still my hope that you can visit us on the Times and DrugSense some day soon, to enlighten our law enforcement officers to the progress that awaits.

Again, when the time is right, please remember the terrible situation in the US.  You guys are getting it down.  (I live in a back woods country with no regard for the Truth.)

Stay in touch dean@cultural-baggage.com


----------



## adi baby (Mar 15, 2002)

'CANNABIS IS SAFER THAN CIGARETTES AND ALCOHOL .. the governments top medical advisers declare' - (front pages of london standard (14/3) and metro (15/3))  it looks like the whole question of decriminalising small amounts of cannabis is about to become obsolete as the UK heads towards a similar policy on cannabis possession as currently on trial in Lambeth.  Brian, you must feel pretty vindicated ( and intelligently foresighted) - congratulations.


----------



## Clapham Omnibus (Mar 16, 2002)

*Wandsworth site*

hatboy. mike et all cost/efffect ? 
What about a  Wandsworth Forum.


----------



## Officer734 (Mar 17, 2002)

*Opinions...*

There's one thing that stands out here to me....

Just because any law enforcement officer is sworn to serve the laws of this country, and the crown, it doesn't necessarily mean we can't have an opinion.  Nor does it mean that our opinions match the official voice of our force politics.

I've been offered various substances, from steroids in the gym up.  But it doesn't mean that when I see 16 year olds smoking class A's I'm not going to do anything about it.  It's a requirement and comes as part of the profession.

So a pat on the back and a pint all around to Brian who's stated what possibly people don't want to hear.  I guess that some of the top brass ain't the as*hol*s I thought they were!

Oh, and of course, I'm married to someone that works at the end of the legal system in Brixton, so this is all very interesting.... and we're a gay couple, so a target for every institutionalised bioggotry there is. But that's another topic entirely. 

Long live free opinions and speech....


----------



## detective-boy (Mar 17, 2002)

*The Commander is not alone!*

Well, where to start!  I've just spent the entire afternoon checking this and related threads and have 13 pages of notes.  

Firstly, what a mind-blowingly interesting debate.  HatBoy - respect man for starting it all up.   I'll try and keep on topic.  Too many other brilliant contributions to mention.

Secondly, respect to Brian for having the bottle to do what he has.  I can't see anything too radical in what he has said myself but it seems to have been enough to launch a witchhunt.  Good luck - I fear you'll need it.

I have decided to post following the (all too predictable - well done AlanJ as far back as 14Feb) monstering of Brian by the Mail on Sunday and Sunday People today.  Boy, does he need your support now!  (Be interesting to see how many of the signatories to the Big Issue letter (see Grubbylocal 11Mar) stick around now)

Next, a declaration of interests.  I'm another copper, an experienced detective albeit not of such exalted rank as Brian.  I've worked Brixton fairly recently but don't at the moment.  I live in the leafy suburbs and originate from the countryside. And I'm a gay man.  Sorry I can't use my full identity - will explain if you're interested.

I can't answer for current Lambeth policing but I may be able to provide general information / explanation.  It looks like Brian may not be seek here for a while and I think it is important that the debate is maintained in some way.

I despair of an establishment which finds it so difficult to deal with conflicting opinion.  The police service encourages the public to be challenging (independent advisors, etc) but can't deal with challenging officers within it's own ranks.

Couple of things about crack and guns in Brixton.  Every tactic discussed has been tried and tried.  Many work short term but we just do not have to people / resources to mount operations everywhere they are needed simultaneously.  And that means displacement.  

Totally agree with Brians choices of priority - screw the dealers, help the addicts I think summed it up.  But that brings difficult questions.  If you still have users and there is no legal source you will still have dealers.  And if use is still illegal how can you provide help to addicts.  The question is definitely beyond local resolution - all you and Brian can possibly do is mitigate the symptoms and press for more fundamental change (but don't hold your breath!).

Several people have asked how local Brixton residents can help. As modern citizen says (11Mar) ask "what can we do to help the police".  Here are a few ideas:

1. Don't walk on by - don't put yourselves at risk but don't just ignore violence being used or threatened.  Start the old "hue and cry" - call us - gather a crowd (strength in numbers). (see Dr Franni story, 8Feb, "We made the street a safer place for a few seconds")

2. Stand up and be counted - give us your details as witnesses - be willing to tell what you saw - I know it's difficult and scary but we can't give the evidence you saw.

3. Provide information - preferably with a way of us contacting you to ask for more detail or whatever - it's really annoying getting something anonymous, knowing that the caller MUST know the other bit you need but having no way of getting back to them.  If not "Crimestoppers" 0800 555111 - it honestly is anonymous.  (Someone somewhere listed a load of car tyupes belonging to dealers - give us the registration numbers and background).

4. Get involved - as lay visitors, independent advisors, members of the community/police consultative group, by giving us your views here or elsewhere.  Talk to local officers - you'll find the vast majority are just doing their best but they know as little about you as you do about them as human beings).

5. Help educate youngsters - the breakdown of families, problems in education, etc. leave massive holes in the education of our youth - tell them how to make their opinions heard, become politically active, help break their resentment / perceived exclusion.

6. Support robust policing initiatives - action on suspicion inevitably means some innocent people will be inconvenienced but we're not psychic.  Ensure we do it nicely!

7. Cheer the police (metaphorically if not actually), encourage us to be your protectors (Dr Franni's idea - 29Jan).  Been to New York recently - their support for the NYPD and the Fire Dept is awesome (despite a record at least as bad as ours!).  Even saw an NYPD jockstrap on a mannequin in the window of a gay shop on 8th Avenue!  (By the way, thanks for the support for our "pay dispute" - neat trick Mr Blunkett, getting the anarchists to support the old bill!).

8.  Force the mainstream press and "opinion formers" (I hate that term!) to engage with a rational debate about drugs and legalisation, etc.  (Can't really add to the debate on this thread except to mention the impact of product liability if pharmaceutical companies got involved (touched on by Rowland, 20Feb - great post, mate) and the ability to keep drugs from kids more effectively if outlets were licensed).

9. Target other agencies (local authority, health, education, CPS, Courts, Law Society, etc.) where they have the power to make changes (It has been suggested that Brian get better street lighting, improve health care and education.  Beyond the Old Bill, people!  Help us put pressure (using the Crime and Disorder Act) on those who can make the changes.) 

10. Get together a local initiative like they did in Harlesden ("Young, gifted ... and dead" posters by the Not One More campaign).  They have a young rap group with a record with a positive message (malign influence of Gangsta rap raised by Bruise on 11Feb). (Hatboy for Chair - you'd be brilliant man!)

11. Be aware that many of your problems in Brixton come from outside the area ("ghetto tourists" - Slowdog 15Feb; visiting drug buyers/dealers - Lee Jasper, quoted by HappyHappy JoWonderland (great name!) 17Feb) - make it known they are not welcome.

12. Press for local authority / housing associations to provide low-cost housing in Lambeth.  The absence of police officers within your community is a huge part of the basic problem ("_ would have been better behaved if I knew the local cop and respected him" - Christian Evans 15Jan Movement for Justice March thread). 

13. Press for the acceptance of the principles of diversity (allowing people to do it *their* way whenever possible) rather than equal opportunity (allowing everyone an equal opportunity to join and do it *our* way) - See book "Managing the Mosaic - Diversity in Action" by the Institute of Personnel Development (IPD). 

Sorry to have gone on, but believe me I can bore you further on all the above if you want, have opinions on virtually everything else mentioned on the thread and find the whole debate envigorating.  And don't even think about getting me on to the subject of the media ...

Get back if anything I have said is of the slightest interest.

Cya.



PS. I think AdamPorter would prefer me to Brian as I am about to leave the police because I do not feel I can change it effectively from within (being unable to be politically active, etc).  But HAS HE DANCED OUTRAGEOUSLY WITH HIS CAT as promised on 28Jan (MfJ thread) if Brain turned out to be Brian!

PPS. Mikee - if you still haven't heard re- your £3000 claim you says down to our cock-up, write a letter asking for compensation to the local station or go and see a solicitor about lauching a negligence claim against us._


----------



## DaRKnERo (Mar 17, 2002)

*Keep the herb, dash the Crack!*

Brian said that he didnt want drugs to be dealt on his streets. I know what he means, but if there was a REAL outlet for drugs to be bought, there would be less trouble and less arrests. Basically, we should legalise cannabis. There is nothing wrong with the drug at all. It doesnt make you flip out and halucinate, therefore it as less of a side efect than beer! But, I dont agree that crack shouls be legalised! That is some serious s**t. Crack has very bad side effects, and they could be fatal. Cocaine causes alot of problems in our society, where-as cannabis only causes problems because of the law.


----------



## Anders199 (Mar 17, 2002)

Just came in to give some support to the Commander when some tabloid rag is trying to do him in again.
Keep up the sensible stuff, Commander, hopefully folk will see the rag for what it is and for what it's trying to do soon enough.

Anders


----------



## DaRKnERo (Mar 17, 2002)

*Been hearing some bad thing about Brian.*

Yo, The commander has been getting a lot of stick from the press. You lot hear about what they have been saying?

Just came to say hi, really. But still... it was this whole Brian the commander thing that showed me this place.

All my support.


----------



## hatboy (Mar 17, 2002)

Detective Boy - my mind is not very clear at the moment due to a very late night.  Your detailed and considered posting deserves a longer response.  You talk sense and I think it is a great pity that you are leaving the Police force. You seem to be exactly the sort man the Met needs.


----------



## Mikee (Mar 18, 2002)

*True, true*

Hatboy I couldn't agree more. It is indeed a shame that there aren't more officers on the force with the balls to speak the truth. However its even more of a shame that there's no-one in government capable of doing so. Anyways, I too am the victim of a late night so will shut up now - its probably for the best......

Evening all.......


----------



## Platinum (Mar 18, 2002)

*Witchunt*

Watched ITV news tonight. Seems that as soon as you come out into the open to express an opinion ( I guess that U75 is 'the open' given that it is public) people will reveal things about you that are either irrelavant or fictional. Not that my support means much in the face of media frenzy, but I have alot of respect for 'The Commander' and would like to say my thoughts are with him.


----------



## detective-boy (Mar 18, 2002)

*Thanks, Hatboy and Mikee*

Thanks for the comments.  Look forward to more detail later.  Strangely, you're not the first (inside and outside the Job) to say I'm the sort of officer the MPS needs (and I agree, but then I would, wouldn't I!) but, hey, you only get one life so best you enjoy it.


----------



## mrgrieves (Mar 18, 2002)

*the gutter press*

The sustained campaign against Paddick in the gutter press is really pretty disgraceful.   The Mail and the Screws especially, who will apparently use any means necessary to discredit Brian Paddick personally and professionally.

The reason for this is that middle england is desperate to silence a debate on drugs they know they can't win - they are holding onto diseased moral majority ideology which crimalised the drug problem 100 years and gave birth to corrosive crack 'n' smack inspired social decay we now enjoy in the 21st century.

This latest episode is so totally disgusting it deserves no special comment.

The whole 'gay' issue is by and large irrelevent.  But they are tailoring a story for a particular audience, where the fact that someone sleeps with men still has negative political currency.  Or in other words, Paddick is a fag.

Paddick - you've got a lot of support from intelligent people prepared to discuss the issues who admire the courage of your convictions in the face of this bullshit.


----------



## pixiebrown (Mar 18, 2002)

*Oh no*

Oh no... hope there's not any truth in this... BBC is saying that Brian is going to be "moved"... 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1878000/1878808.stm


----------



## Dean Becker (Mar 18, 2002)

*Demonize, vilify and destroy*

In the US, all that is necessary to incarcerate a person is the word of a Judas.

Last week in the NY Times, they carried a story about "snitches".

The crux of the story was that justice is bought and sold not by true detective work, but rather through a "smear campaign."  It seems that many "drug busts" were nothing more than the word of a snitch who says he bought drugs at a certain house.  Often, the snitch would hide some drugs on his person, visit a certain house without buying or even using drugs, then after leaving, they would produce for the cops the "evidence" that ruined the "sellers" life, taking away their future and their family.

They closed their story with this quote:  "All a District Attorney needs is $20 and a lying snitch to ruin the lives of a half dozen people."

100,000 pounds is something like 150,000 USD.  That's a lot of money to any snitch.

Best of luck to you Commander, my thoughts are with you.


----------



## hatboy (Mar 18, 2002)

I am absolutely gutted by todays news about Brian Paddick.  

1) The level of homophobia is disgusting. So extreme to me it is akin to racism. Some of these tabloids should be seriously held to account over this.  

2) What the f*** do these journalists (so-called) know about Brixton!  Brian Paddick is the best thing to happen to the police force here I can remember. It should be the people of Lambeth who decide whether he stays, not the Sun!!!!

Lee Jasper has said that he will mount a campaign to keep Paddick in his job if he is removed. I will definitely be getting in touch with Lee and supporting this.


----------



## adi baby (Mar 18, 2002)

Theyve dumped brian - The Met have shown their true colours and the rags have shown theirs - dont worry brian the people of brixton and progressives around the world support you - its a sad day for all of us when your sexuality has been used against you because you are trying to build better relationships with the community and better policies to target resources in the most effective manner.  It is a bloody disgrace and i hope everybody  is thinking about how to support Brian and get him reinstated.   C'mon Ken Livingstone, Editor's of The Big Issue/ The Voice/The Guardian -  actually DO something and support anti-prejudism and progressive policing.


----------



## Paul (Mar 18, 2002)

The Daily mail, the Sunday mail, the People, News of the world, the Sun, watch out. Boom boom time to shake your fucking room....


----------



## popslut (Mar 18, 2002)

*Support....*

Just wanted to add my voice to those who have posted in support of Brian Paddick, and to send a heartfelt "bollocks" to the red-top shitrags that work so hard to ruin the lives of millions.

Popslut.


----------



## adi baby (Mar 19, 2002)

Richard Littlejohn in the Sun today certainly showed that as far as he's concerned, gays are second class citizens and that he personally despises them.  This right wing creep like so many 'journalists' in todays rightwing press behave as if he's in the biggest gang in the playground and therefore  he's as safe as houses.  He picks on kids who are different in some way and loves the applause he gets from his 'gang' as he humiliates his next victim.  Can we think of any way to make him think again?


----------



## mrgrieves (Mar 19, 2002)

the met are gutless cowards, the right wing will now feel they got their man.

If anyone wants to organise a demo...


----------



## adi baby (Mar 19, 2002)

They are debating Brian on Radio 2 right now.


----------



## maclon (Mar 19, 2002)

*Good Luck Brian*

How sad that the gutter press and their cheque book journalism have nothing better to do than destroy careers and rob communities of leadership.

Good Luck Brian !!


----------



## fela fan (Mar 19, 2002)

Sorry, this is not a short one…

Truth and honesty are dangerous to men who have power. They live their lives outside those values. Along comes such a person, a policeman (a commander to boot), and of course he will be ‘got at’.

I feel forums such as urban75 are a sign that, through the internet, us people on the street can start making things happen, can begin to dent the abuse of power by the powerful, can perhaps return democracy somewhat to the people. The key though, is changing the British press.

In my humble opinion, as a 10 year outsider, the robustness of a democracy in a nation can be judged by the state of its press. Unfortunately, Britain’s democratic foundations were ruined all those years ago when Murdoch got hold of the Sun. No more information, no more knowledge, no more reporting. Ever since then the press have degenerated into bingo, sexual shenanigans, and hatred. Their currency is to humiliate and expose anyone who is: famous, has a ‘non-mainstream’ view, or is ‘anti-capitalist’. Those they ‘expose’ are human beings with feelings, but no, that doesn’t concern newspapers.

Abroad, the English press have become a story in their own right. We are often told what the Sun or Mail (never forget these are the two biggest sellers, with the Mail being particularly dangerous) are saying about so and so. Without the context of actually being in England and having to deal with the repercussions, it is often just a giggle, and you just shake your head in complete bafflement at why this stuff is being printed/selling. This of course is unfair on those at the receiving end. Unlike the politicians, who at least have to pander to us every four years, these papers (well, the proprietors and editors really) answer to no-one. Indeed, it used to be said that papers reported what politicos said, now politicos debate what ‘journalists’ and columnists rant on about. The power and influence of the press is out of control. It doesn’t help when the likes of Blair are in bed with Murdoch. The press are outrageous, are celebrity mad, are no longer acting as the check and balance a democracy requires, and practise hypocrisy on a grand scale. They actually make me sick as fuck when I think about them. 

As people have noted on this website, those who have some sort of power (eg Brian) and who then try to change the system from within, will always come up against the inertia of change practised by those with vested interests. It really is hard work, but I hope that through such excellent websites as urban75, like-minded people (they don’t have to agree, they just have to care) can slowly turn the tide. I only wish I could be back in London to actively participate in the defence of Brian. The best of luck to you all as well as Brian and those other coppers who are doing their best to drag the force into the 21st century. It’s great to read of such positivity as in this thread, and is a massive move forward. There can be revolution in reaction, but for change, there can only be evolution in action. It will take time, but the start has been made, no little thanks to Brian and all those debating on this forum. Don’t leave him in his hour of need.

I leave this post with the following comment: your biggest enemy to change and a better and less negative life in England is the popular press. And don’t think it’s just the tabloids, the Telegraph and Times are in the same boat – and they’re not rowing in our direction. I mean, in this day and age how on earth can the story of Brian being gay and being with a partner who smoked spliff have any credence or publicity. It is a real sad indictment of modern day Britain. It is pathetic. PATHETIC. 

We may have a problem with police, but ultimately they are under the orders of the politicians, who themselves are under the cosh of the press. Hence spin doctors. Go get the press – they are the REAL bastards.


----------



## Reform (Mar 19, 2002)

*Message of Support*

Brian,

Stick with it. Don't give up against those who are trying to take you down. This country needs more people like you are prepared to put themselves on the line to change things for the good of everyone.

The history of Britain is littered with examples of people like yourself battling the forces of conservatism. The one lesson to be learned. They always lose.


----------



## popslut (Mar 19, 2002)

> _Originally posted by adi baby _
> *Richard Littlejohn in the Sun today certainly showed that as far as he's concerned, gays are second class citizens and that he personally despises them.  ------  Can we think of any way to make him think again? *



Maybe somebody could find him and kick the fuck out of him? Oops - sorry - forgot myself there for a minute...!

Actually, to be honest mate, I don't think there is anyway to get through to the sweaty old bigot. Like his mentor Garry Bushell he probably makes a handsome living out of writing this shite. Lets just hope he dies a long and painful death - soon - and that I can be there to video it.

*"Go get the press – they are the REAL bastards."*

Well put 'fela fan' - I couldn't agree more. I too get that sicky feeling just thinking about them.


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 19, 2002)

Excellent post, fela fan, excellent. I agree with every word of it. The right wing press are the real spin doctors ... and as you say the real bastards 

Only confirmed by what adi baby is saying about what L*ttl*j*hn is apparantly saying  

Can anyone confirm details of that toerag's latest bile-filed rantings?


----------



## fela fan (Mar 19, 2002)

An idea to add to popslut's...

Surely the likes of Littlejohn drink in certain establishments. Can't he be found there, and bought a drink that can then be spiked, so that he can then be kidnapped, so that he can then be forced to change his ways, or else?? He could also have some drugs planted on him, the bill could then be called, and the Mirror can then do an expose on him. 

It's strange how such bastards have you reducing yourself to their level... I want the irony smilie here, but it ain't working for me...


----------



## adi baby (Mar 19, 2002)

A 'Dont buy The Scum /News of the Screws/Hate Mail ' campaign like the one after Hillsborough when The Scum said liverpool fans were looting the dead - never sold the same - we could get a nationwide campaign going - designs for stickers here at urb75?

hit them where it hurts.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 19, 2002)

The post-Hillsborough Sun boycott in Liverpool worked because a lot of people bought the Sun and switched from the Sun to the Mirror and made a noticeable dent in sales.......are there enough Mail on Sunday readers in Lambeth to make an impact? I'm not really sure of that.


----------



## Complex (Mar 19, 2002)

William: If you feel up to it, you can read the odious LittleTwat's latest homophobic, anti-Paddick ramblings here 

Complex.


----------



## detective-boy (Mar 20, 2002)

*Brilliant post, Fela fan*

The title says it all mate.


----------



## Mr Day (Mar 20, 2002)

*Brian P vs 'Little'john*

   

I tend to 'lurk' on this website as I don't feel I can comment on any of the Brixton topics. I live in a rural town, a million light years from the social problems of the inner cities and have had no experience of what it must be like to grow up in an environment where dealer's set up shop on street corners and where youngsters carry weapons etc etc. However, even sat here it doesn't take an idiot to work out that Brian Paddick's refreshing approach has paid dividends to the community he serves (ed) - I've just had the displeasure to cast my eyes over Richard Littlejohn's revolting tirade in The Sun newspaper and subsequently am not starting the day off in the best of moods. I want to know how this man can sit in his office typing out such offensive, inane bullsh*t and still have a job, yet Commander Paddick, who has made such a difference gets moved to a different position for daring to have, not only a personal life but also, shock, horror,  personal opinions!!!!!  This is so obviously a witchhunt and so wrong !!!! I suspect that a lot of people forget that behind the uniform of any officer, regardless of rank, there is a human being, just like the rest of us (Littlejohn excepted); maybe that's one of Brian's problems - he's seen as too human; but how hurtful must it be to find out that someone you cared for has gone crawling to the tabloids. This ex is as bad as Littljohn himself. Sorry, I'm very angry - this country seems to indulge in kicking good men and women when they're down - it's time that things changed. If there's any petitions going around or marches planned or whatever to support Brian then count me in. As I said at the beginning of my post I might live light years away from the world of Brixton and the like but I think I am long inthe tooth enough to know the difference between wrong and right, fairness and disgusting homophobic journalism. I haven't bought the Sun for years (Read the rubbish I mentioned above after following a link on here- thanks Complex ) and this has just underlined to me why I don't buy it. The Mail is even worse. Angry angry angry - I'm going to go and get some air. 
Nigel 

And Brian, I hope you're still reading the posts on here. You have mucho support and I hope you're bearing up.


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 20, 2002)

*Julius Streicher strikes again ...*

Sample of the odious scumbag's bile filled shite here :



> It’s come to this in a few short years. Not so long ago, the Old Bill used to stake out public toilets in an attempt to arrest and deter men using the place as single-sex knocking shops.
> 
> Pop into the gents’ today and you’re more likely to be accosted by a divisional commander on the pull.




 

Is this actionable?

Mrs M it's the Sun, not the Mail on Sunday, that the toerag drivels for ...


----------



## adi baby (Mar 20, 2002)

I agree William, I believe we have a law of slander.  Brian should go for Littlejohn especially on the following;

'Paddick flaunts it. He is proud to be known as Britain’s most senior gay cop.'

Can he prove this statement?

How about a thread dedicated to finding out more about this scumbag?  His dodgy dealings since he was 8.  His far-right affiliations?  His sexual preferences?  All and any examples of his bullying and dishonesty?  Fellow schoolchums, lapdancers, embittered ex-colleagues.  Everybody with an axe to grind against this fucker can post and we will regularly award 100,000 street cred points to the best contributions true or fictitious.  Lets take it to this bastard!


----------



## fela fan (Mar 20, 2002)

adi baby - a good workable idea, meanwhile we can all cause him just a tiny bit of aggro by sending him emails telling him what we think of him. If enough of us do this, at the least he will have to spend time sifting and sorting his emails. 

Having just taken a big breath and read his waffle, I note his email address is: richard.littlejohn@the-sun.co.uk

How about it boys and girls? I'm going to kick this off after this post.

Mr Day, look on the Lee Jasper and Keep Paddick Campaign thread on the Brixton forum for protests etc.


Meanwhile, can someone let me know how to start a thread? Thanx


----------



## Streathamite (Mar 20, 2002)

> How about a thread dedicated to finding out more about this scumbag?


Adi - bloody brilliant Idea
Fela-you click on the "Post new topic" button. 
Littlejohn has an Auto-response on his emails. You just get some bland message back when you mail him. I tried it 2 weeks ago.


----------



## fela fan (Mar 20, 2002)

Oh well.


----------



## autotelik (Mar 20, 2002)

This episode has been the icing on the cake for me of a shabby few months for this country ... still cheering to read so many positive posts and people doing their little bit to fight our sorry assed media.

This RL geezer also works for a public broadcaster paid for by our TV licence.

Ahh just look at his little chubby face ..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/fivelive/fivelive_pic_gallery.shtml

Perhaps we could ask the BBC why, in 2002,  they feel it is acceptable to employ such a person, when every other public body is dedicated to stamping out  all forms of discrimination and hate fuelled bigotry?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/fivelive/email_generalqueries.shtml


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 20, 2002)

*Julius Streicher strikes again ...*



> _Originally posted by William of Walworth _
> *Mrs M it's the Sun, not the Mail on Sunday, that the toerag drivels for ... *



Sorry, I can't remember which rag is which or who writes for which. I don't buy any of the gutter press on principle, I haven't done since one of them years ago, exposed someone, no-one famous, just a Joe Public, for some piddling 'sex scandal' and he committed suicide leaving a family behind. I vowed never to buy them again because they ruin peoples lives. I won't add to their profit.

Littlejohn got a sideswipey mention on the Radio this morning, (I think John Humphrys) when someone mentioned Littlejohn and he said, "Well, he's not here to comment, thankfully."


----------



## adi baby (Mar 20, 2002)

Great point on BBC autotelik - cmon everyone - lets focus all our anger and pain on Littleshit and try and get him to feel what Brian is feeling - THE FUCKING SHITHEAD AAARRRGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## JoeOrder (Mar 20, 2002)

adibaby, I'd second your motion in a heartbeat, but I get the feeling that RL losing his position at the BBC would barely scratch his bank balance, much less his pride.  If I had them, I'd wager large amounts of money that his salary from News International dwarfs what the BBC give him.  Still, can't be all that bad, a mosquito bite can be irritating as hell.

As for Garry Bushell, I saw the kind of sleazy crap that guy gets up to while working at a pub in Sidcup a few years back.  Very nasty guy with major double standards.

Unfortunately their attitude is reflected a lot in the suburbs and Home Counties.   Many that live there see Lambeth as a world away, and a lot of the time (when visiting family and friends) I can still hear things like "Well, if they let so many darkies live there, what do they expect?".  It's a situation that still makes my blood boil, and the main reason I had to get out of there.  It wouldn't surprise me if a lot of the police in favour of the status quo are from there.  Some really do believe in the 1950s myth.


----------



## adi baby (Mar 20, 2002)

Bushell is ex-National Front - i know lots of pubs in south east greater london area that are whites only - just the sort of boozer for bushell and littlejohn - ethnic groups, gays, 'birds' are all loathed ( classic case of putting someone else down to put yourself up ) yeah these guys are essentially thick and talentless but their prejudism and sexism and willingness to attack the vulnerable gets them work in our right wing fucked up society - and jobs give them cash and status which gets them laid  - honestly its that simple - fucking arseholes.


----------



## Scally (Mar 20, 2002)

Although quite old now, you might find it amusing to read this transcript of a Nicky Campbell show on Radio 1 in June last year, where Mr Littlejohn was a guest - and was truly shown up for what he really is by the other guest on the show - Will Self.  Not of much use to anything in general, but it put a smile on my face.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1390000/1390395.stm

(and very humble apologies for going so far off thread).  (Oh - and hi - sorry- been lurking [with interest] so far!)


----------



## calum (Mar 20, 2002)

i'm sure it was off thread, scally but it made me laugh...


----------



## Mikee (Mar 20, 2002)

check 2nd page www.piratetv.net    for original savveee paddick poster

please copy it n  distribute as welll as


----------



## meltbaby (Mar 20, 2002)

I wonder if we will hear from The 'Respected' Commander on this forum again given the present situation he finds himself in.  

I also wonder the club he so frequents are going to be haunted by the media...

Is there anything we can do to help the Commander other than a protest - can we write to our respective MPs or address the matter to the Home Secretary - I know that public support always catches the eye of politicians?


----------



## Wireman (Mar 20, 2002)

The club has already been "haunted by the media". Just guess where Metro had their Christmas party... and just guess which other "newspapers" are owned by Metro's parent company, Associated Newspapers.

(clue: The D***y M**l & The M**l on S****y)


----------



## Platinum (Mar 20, 2002)

*spam city*

Just an idea, but if anyone ever visits a URL that asks for an email maybe we could all enter littlejohn's email. If we do it enough it may not only flood his personal box, it may even block their server. Just a thought


----------



## meltbaby (Mar 20, 2002)

Wireman what club might that be - the shadow lounge - according to MoS

Platinum - a still question on my part but what would that achieve?

Funny though only back in Jan when Brian warn of us that he needs to be careful with what he says on the net and 2 months later this none sense.  Like Lord Temple said, we all wish to live in a perfect world but we are not so I guess, there are still more bigots in the PD then meets the eye!


----------



## Platinum (Mar 20, 2002)

*'small things amuse....'*

I personally found the idea of clogging up his email attractive, call me puerile.


----------



## Wireman (Mar 21, 2002)

DING!!

Three points to meltbaby.


----------



## Complex (Mar 21, 2002)

*Staying off topic ...*

Richard Lttilejohn is the host of a live phone-in programme on national radio (6-0-6, BBC 5live on saturdays).

Wouldnt it be a shame if people phoned in, and the conversation went:

Richard: "Hello caller"
Caller: "Hello, yeah, I was at the match, and everyone there thought that the ref was wrong about the penalty, and that you are a homophobic twat"

Complex.


----------



## fela fan (Mar 21, 2002)

Complex, that is very laugh out loud, good one.

I only hope it happens. Do they not have some sort of time lag though?

If it does happen, please post up his reply.


----------



## Dean Becker (Mar 24, 2002)

*Office of Disinformation*

This appears to be at best a big lull at this site, more likely the end of a noble experiment.

America claims it is the "land of the free, home of the brave".  I only wish it were true.  Sadly, unless the American citizenry can develop sufficient backbone, like you brave English, we are doomed.

As a private citizen who managed to wrangle an arrangement with the NY Times to present guests to their Drug Policy Forum, I can only lament what has befallen Commander Paddick.  Certainly the move to a brighter day for drug policies is assured thanks to his efforts.

It seems no good deed goes unpunished.

This is certainly true for Colin Davies, who still waits inside Strangeways prison.  For the Commander who managed to create the spark that even now moves your country towards societal enlightenment and "drug peace," I can only say "thank you for your sacrifice."

May the rainbow efforts of his fellow citizens restore him to his rightful place as commander!


----------



## adi baby (Mar 25, 2002)

Littlejohn was at Brians throat again on friday - who does this fucking snidey shithead THINK HE FUCKING WELL IS?  His tone however was carefully non-homophobic compared with his earlier ' they are all abhorrent' rantings.  R we all bombarding him? - i know i have been letting absolutely rip on his email - letting him know the strength of feeling for pro- progressive policing vs anti-hatemongering- little englander - scumbag parasitic journalism.  So maybe hes getting a little 'worried'?  who knows?is there anyone out there who can spill any beans on this bloated holier-than-thou poisoned-penned nazi tosser?

Dean - thank you for your comments - i think this site is quiet because people feel a mixture of real disappointment at the turn of events, theres the usual sense of disillusionment which follows when the right wing papers flex their muscles and beat up the good guys.  I personally feel like fuck it, theres really no hope for this country with the class stranglehold in place choking the life out of it. 

Maybe a little bit of 'well its all been said' too.  

But hey, there have been some fantastic postings and there is so much to fight for ( here in Brixton, Europe, the US, all over) and this is still a fantastic life despite the best efforts of Littlejohn and his ilk to turn it all into shit.

Keep on rocking


----------



## editor (Mar 25, 2002)

Please note: updates, press reports and more information about Brian Paddick and Brixton can be found here...


----------



## adi baby (Mar 25, 2002)

A very useful link Ed.  It's not at all quiet!  All systems go.  The rags are starting to look real tatty - unity and tolerance is in the air along with the promise of spring.

very cool indeed!


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 25, 2002)

*On the phoning Littlejohn on Saturday Radio 5 idea*



> I only hope it happens. Do they not have some sort of time lag though



Sadly, I believe they do


----------



## adi baby (Mar 26, 2002)

Why Tories must support Commander Paddick
michael gove
His 'crime' is homosexuality, his 'sin' has been a successful experiment

Above is a quote from todays Times newspaper which presumably is not the same Times newspaper whose sister paper The Sun has been in the forefront of crucifying Brian?

truly pathetic - rupert murdoch - u r a twat.


----------



## marshstarman (Mar 27, 2002)

Speaking of legalising/decriminalising drugs.. and Holland.  Does anyone have any figures on the drug addiction/death toll for Holland?  I'd be interested to compare our situations for drugs and shit.


----------



## Caspar Hauser (Mar 27, 2002)

Figures from 'The Annual Report 2001 on the state of the drugs problems' - EMCDDA - the EU drugs agency.

National prevalence estimates of problem drug use in the EU and Norway (prevalence rates of problem drug use per 1 000 inhabitants aged 15-64), 1996-98 

Netherlands          2.5-2.9

United Kingdom        2.3-8.9


Lifetime prevalence of drug use in recent nation-wide surveys among general population in some EU countries 

Netherlands (1997/8 - Age group 15-64)
19,1% Cannabis
2,6% Cocaine/Crack
2,2% Amphetamines
2,3% Ecstasy

United Kingdom (1998 - Age group 16-59)                      
25,0% Cannabis                                   
3,0% Cocaine/Crack
10,0% Amphetamines
4,0% Ecstasy


Trends in acute drug-related deaths in some EU countries, 1995-99 

Netherlands (1995)  0,8 per 100.000

United Kingdom (1998)  2,9 per 100.000

http://www.emcdda.org/ 


The Dutch National Drug Monitor 2001 Annual Report

The European Union has 1½ million problem hard drug users, or four per thousand inhabitants. We are mainly concerned with opiate use here.

Table 5 Problem hard drug users in the European Union and in Norway 

Country  Numbers per thousand inhabitantsa 

United Kingdom  5.6 

The Netherlands  2.5 

http://www.trimbos.nl/ndm-uk/ 

I hope this will help


----------



## hatboy (Apr 30, 2002)

Oops!

Sorry Mike I found it!  

But please can you archive it so that it dfinitely doesn't fall off. It was on the last page about three from the bottom.


----------



## Scally (Apr 30, 2002)

*there's hope yet....*

"Sources have suggested that the Metropolitan police may clear Commander Brian Paddick, the openly gay officer who is facing an inquiry over alleged drug use."
Read the whole story  here


----------



## Andria (May 5, 2002)

*there's hope yet....*

"Sources have suggested that the Metropolitan police may clear Commander Brian Paddick, the openly gay officer who is facing an inquiry over alleged drug use."

And there was I hoping that we could get him to establish an international org called "Cops for drug peace" or Cops against the Drug War" (or whatever they may choose to call it.) There are SO many Police Officers who seem to have had enough of their role in drug prohibition, and/or oppose it for an entire plethora of different reasons that I thought we might assist 'our' guy to do this.

I'm almost certain that one of the current millionaire/billionaire philantropists against the drug war would fund it. Oh well, one way or the other, he's gonna make a positive difference.. it seems.

Just a thought.

Andria Mordaunt
Editor/the Users Voice


----------



## newbie (May 29, 2002)

Beaten to it by another thread


----------



## Eddie E (Jun 1, 2002)

Bump
Hi Andria
DRC Net beat you to it on "Cops Against the Drug War" - original eh!


http://www.drcnet.org/cops/

Regards again
Eddie E


----------



## Caspar Hauser (Jun 1, 2002)

Very interesting link Eddie!


----------



## Clapham Omnibus (Jun 2, 2002)

I have read this site in detail.
We are the best pople to post

There are a lot of problems comming up London wide I know I can get your imput,which is valued.

Have a good weeked folks


----------



## pooka (Jun 2, 2002)

Hmmm - something in the water?


----------



## editor (Jun 2, 2002)

After trawling through more increasingly bizarre posts than I care to recall, I can safely say that  BL2ALLb is creating far more disruption than he/she is worth and has become a worthy candidate for the homour of being banned.


----------



## pooka (Jun 2, 2002)

Perhaps just an off night? BL2ALLb's posts are usually entertaining, in a sort of stream of conciousness sort of way


----------



## RubyToogood (Jun 2, 2002)

Yes, possibly she just needs time out.


----------



## hatboy (Jun 2, 2002)

I think that's harsh (although the above is abit juvenile).  I quite like the sort of poetic "stream of consciousness" way he/she writes.  

BL thingy - keep a lid on it abit mate.   Please.


----------



## RubyToogood (Jun 2, 2002)

She's on temporary ban for a couple of weeks to give her a chance to chill.


----------



## Clapham Omnibus (Jun 4, 2002)

I Do'nt think Brian will efectivley be  back in Brixton. 
A sideways move.
However his ideas have REVALUED policeing in Inner Cities on a lighter note!
Any one got a tip on the 2:30
thats's when I have got to see the Chinese Dentist I dislke dentists.


----------



## doghot23 (Jun 27, 2002)

*right on commander!*

Hi Brian and all the rest of u who r replying to this thread, this is what we need! Communication!
BUT!
I quote -
So why don't we just sweep away the dealers? We have mounted every kind of police operation in Coldharbour Lane. We have had under-cover cops, uniform cops working off what the CCTV shows, everything. We have arrested about 50 street dealers in the past 12 months and within hours of arresting one, another takes their place. As long as there is the demand, as long as there are poor, desparate and gullible people willing to put their necks on the line for the bigger dealers further up the food chain, there will be street dealers.
Legalisation of all currently illicit substances will take the dealers 'off the streets' 
Lets stop this war on our own communities, treat it as a health matter and not a crimminal one.
PS Brian, come and pay our forum a visit:
http://www.northwalespolice.com
visit the forum and find out how well respected you r!
Take care brother, don't let them grind you down!


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Oct 10, 2002)

Don't worry hatboy, none of the Paddick stuff gets deleted. When I thread prune I have strict orders to leave Paddick threads alone. I can archive it now but it will then be a closed thread.


----------



## IntoStella (Oct 10, 2002)

Just to stick my oar in, as you're going to archive the thread. 

There has been a big sweep on drug dealing in the chl area lately, and a hell of a lot of high visibility cops on the beat. 

While this is lovely in itself, I think the timing  is immensely suspicious. Brian Paddick didn't have the resources to do what he wanted to do. Now he has been sidelined and those resources have 'magically' appeared from somewhere. And then, to be REALLY obvious, we had the very dubious Brian Moore ''Have-a-go Hero'' incident.
I think it is all part of the Met's Great Paddick Stitch Up.


----------



## Caspar Hauser (Oct 10, 2002)

I 'm sorry Mrs M but I think one major Paddick thread got already deleted. 
The _Brian, it's more than just a few bad apples_ thread is not there anymore. It's not archived and I can't find any of the posts from this thread in the search program anymore.


----------



## editor (Oct 10, 2002)

No 'major Paddick threads' have been deleted by me: they should all be still here (although people should ALWAYS make their own copies of interesting threads)

And the reason why this thread hasn't been archived is because it's linked from a host of internal and external pages (BBC/Guardian etc).


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Oct 10, 2002)

AAARRGGGHHHH Caspar...one of us has fucked up there  (I desperately hope it wasn't me).......it may well be on someone's hard drive...I'll make enquiries


----------



## editor (Oct 10, 2002)

I linked to all the major Paddick threads from the Paddick homepage several months ago, and they're still all there. 

However, it should be remembered that this is a very, very busy bulletin board run for free by unpaid moderators and it is absolutely impossible to guarantee that threads will be here forever.

Obviously, we make every effort to archive important threads, but with an average daily posting rate of 2,000+ posts, users can't rely on interesting material being here forever.

*Please make your own backups!* 

[Note: if anyone has backups of any important threads that have been deleted, please forward them to me and I will put them back up]


----------



## Caspar Hauser (Oct 10, 2002)

Mike, I didn't mean to criticize you or any other moderator for that matter. 
I just stated that this thread got obviously deleted and I think it was one of the major Paddick threads (remember the headlines: _Paddick claims: Some officers are thugs_)

I did make a back-up of this thread but unfortunately I crashed my hardware this summer and lost this file together with some others. 

When I searched for this thread last month (some research for the lambeth4paddick Media links) I couldn't find it anymore.


----------



## hatboy (Apr 15, 2004)

Just bumping this to the top. With "I'm very pissed off". Possibly two of the most viewed threads ever on the Brixton forum, this one the most viewed ever on urban75 as a whole.

You're gonna miss me you know. LMFAO.


----------



## newbie (Apr 15, 2004)

miss you already


----------



## Clapham Omnibus (Apr 16, 2004)

Hi Folks
I'm Back. Been too busy but I haven't forgotten you lot.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 16, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Just bumping this to the top. With "I'm very pissed off". Possibly two of the most viewed threads ever on the Brixton forum, this one the most viewed ever on urban75 as a whole.
> 
> You're gonna miss me you know. LMFAO.



Agree with newbie.

We'll see if this is the most viewed once Glastonbury 2004 is over. That one's catching up fast in view numbers  ...

But this is one of the most _important_ I agree ...  so the numbers are just a reflection of that and don't in themselves matter too much


----------



## hatboy (Apr 16, 2004)

Oh piss on my parade why don't you!


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 16, 2004)

Not that I'm competitive or anything, like ...


----------



## Streathamite (Apr 16, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Oh piss on my parade why don't you!


oh, come back once you've had a break!  
either way-this is the only thread that made it into the national press, evening Standard AND 6 o'clock news on EVERY channel!!


----------



## Clapham Omnibus (Apr 23, 2004)

*Be thankful for what we have, could do better but not tomorrow*

Hi Folks 
I'm back. Seen some sights that would make you thankful you live in 'Our country'. Don't knock  it too much! 
We only have limited resources and these have to be allocated as best we can.
This unfortunatly is a country wide issue. Unlike previous treats to the peeps of this country. The nutters have got no rationale or a real belief. The drugs issue will follow the NI issue money/guns/politics/money.
If you were to pay a terrorist and show him a better life than he was living with £250,000 then he would give up the cause.
Such causes religious/political or otherwiswe are shells.
All to be washed up in later life on some loanly beach


----------



## hatboy (Apr 23, 2004)

Indeed.  I'd prefer to be washed up on a lonely beach tho. "Loanly" beaches come with come County Court Judgements.


----------



## NormalNorman (Oct 28, 2004)

*You have very sterotypical views of an addict*

undefined



			
				Brian said:
			
		

> Sure many addicts resort to crime to feed their habit,but drugs cut across ,all classes and types of people..The illegality of drugs causes more problems than the drugs themselves..Thats if they are clean ,legal drugs off doctors but look at all the nasty drugs the can prescribe...Drink,fags,food all drugs,Iam an addict have to pay for my drugs,very fussy what i take,went to university,got the house,family etc and bet you couldnt uess i was hard drug user...Do think they have been a waste of time personally now..Hindsights a wonderfull thing....The N.H.S failed me and hunders of others,so why the G.M.C putting 7,decent,caring,doctors,prepared to look at the problem from all angles,not "one size fits all",on trial right now..The polticians buckets of sand job...Do you want the Yardies running the supply or Doctors,i live very near Harlesden ,the consquences of present,drug policy,manifest in regular shootings,deaths,etcetc...If you dismiss everything ive said believe me METHADONE is a nasty drug,along with many legal drugs prescribed..Still no doubt your remain ,entrenched in your preconcieved,ideas,unless you look at the problem,with open mind and reality of the situation...
> 
> What to do about crack and smack, especially in Brixton?  My take - "don't damage my community".  Translates into top priority = don't openly deal on the streets - it frightens people and raises their fear of crime - street deal and I'm after you.  That means arrest, charge, court, long prison sentence (I hope).
> 
> ...


----------



## NormalNorman (Oct 28, 2004)

*Sick off Therapist,ssssss*

Never vist them myself but come across many a type making ajob for themselves,on the backs of other peoples problems...Normally done six month course,come in think they can mess with peoples lives...


----------



## Streathamite (Oct 28, 2004)

2 observations
1) that ain't a therapist, but YOu have very stereotypical views of them
2) DAC Paddick does not - on the whole and IMO - have stereotypical views


----------



## Blagsta (Oct 28, 2004)

NormalNorman said:
			
		

> Never vist them myself but come across many a type making ajob for themselves,on the backs of other peoples problems...Normally done six month course,come in think they can mess with peoples lives...



What on earth are you on about?


----------

