# Barclays cash point: warning



## editor (Apr 29, 2005)

I'm hearing more and more reports of muggings around the Barclays cash point by the junction of Brixton Rd/Coldharbour Lane.

Last night a mate of mine got smacked three times in the face as he was taking money out, had the cash ripped out of his hands and left battered and bloody.

At fucking *6PM*  

No one helped him. No one tried to stop his two scumbag assailants. No one helped him afterwards.

Cunts.

(Sadly, he didn't report it to the polic because he hates them more than the muggers)


----------



## tastebud (Apr 29, 2005)

Fucking hell.

I always use that one but bloody hate it!

Think I might take money out in Streatham from now on. I'm not the biggest, most strongest Saaf Londoner.


----------



## aurora green (Apr 29, 2005)

I know, I was very sad and angry to hear this news. Most especially how everyone at the bus stop just stood and nothing. What are people like?   
I'm afraid it just goes to show that those cashpoints on the high street are never safe even in *broad bloody daylight* .    It just makes me so angry, and you dont have to be particularly affluent looking either, anyone is fair game it seems.


----------



## dogmatique (Apr 29, 2005)

Christ - it's sooo fucking busy there at that time as well.  I've always hated using those machines.  I feel more vulnerable using them than any others in London to be honest, but I've always told myself that no-one would mug me in such a busy area.

Obviously not any more, eh?


----------



## Loki (Apr 29, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> At fucking *6PM*



6PM!! It's fucking crowded around there that time of day and no-one helped????


----------



## chegrimandi (Apr 29, 2005)

thats fucking horrible.....  



I never use that one as its always too busy and hectic but I guess it could pretty much happen at any cash point anywhere.....  

hope your mates ok....it makes you fucking nervous and jumpy and para when stuff like that happens....


----------



## poster342002 (Apr 29, 2005)

Isn't that corner just *lovely*.


----------



## gaijingirl (Apr 29, 2005)

That's a bit depressing.  And completely shit.  WTF


----------



## hendo (Apr 29, 2005)

Actual Bodily Harm and street robbery. Well worth reporting to the police. Is there not compensation for criminal injury? 
I expect the people at the bus stop were spectators because muggers often carry knives, or worse. But the whole thing will be on camera.


----------



## poster342002 (Apr 29, 2005)

Loki said:
			
		

> 6PM!! It's fucking crowded around there that time of day and no-one helped????


Not surprising. When was the last time anyone stepped in in such a situation? Who's going to risk getting hit/stabbed etc as well?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Apr 29, 2005)

I NEVER EVER use those cashpoints.    

Anyway, where were the police who seem to have been parked up around there the last few days?  Total waste of space   

Was it kids?  There were a load of kids (maybe 7 or 8 of them, a couple on bikes) hanging around by the bus stops


----------



## editor (Apr 29, 2005)

I've jst rung the police to report the crime, although there's not a lot they can do.

They said that they were "fully aware" of the problems around Barclays/KFC.

If they're so 'aware' of the problems, why don't they do something about it?

(CCTV ain't a lot of good when a scumbag's stealing your cash and smashing your face in)


----------



## gaijingirl (Apr 29, 2005)

Yes actually I have noticed a far larger police presence than usual around there recently.  What's going on... why are things seeming so much worse?

And that bloody great big white landrover thing with the "mugging warning" is getting right on my tits...

Also yesterday in Brixton (outside Stockwell Park Estate) I passed a policecar/an ambulance/a large bit of a tree and a large crowd of people tending to some poor woman who'd been hit by the branches falling from the tree!!  Not something you see every day!!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Apr 29, 2005)

gaijingirl said:
			
		

> Also yesterday in Brixton (outside Stockwell Park Estate) I passed a policecar/an ambulance/a large bit of a tree and a large crowd of people tending to some poor woman who'd been hit by the branches falling from the tree!!  Not something you see every day!!



   Reckon a bus must have hit the branch and loosened it maybe?


----------



## editor (Apr 29, 2005)

poster342002 said:
			
		

> Not surprising. When was the last time anyone stepped in in such a situation? Who's going to risk getting hit/stabbed etc as well?


I might be stupid enough to weigh it up and consider having a go, depending on the size of the person doing the robbing and who it was he was mugging (wouldn't you get involved if you saw someone trying to mug and assault an old lady?!)

The thing was, no one went up to him to see if he was OK _after_ the mugging. And that fucking sucks.


----------



## Loki (Apr 29, 2005)

poster342002 said:
			
		

> Not surprising. When was the last time anyone stepped in in such a situation? Who's going to risk getting hit/stabbed etc as well?


Well I've broken up drunken attacks on others before (perhaps not wisely to my own health but I seem to be good at dodging punches/headbutts) but I dunno what I would have done had I been there. At the very least called the police instantly and gone to help the victim after the assault.


----------



## maximilian ping (Apr 29, 2005)

that bit of brixton makes me come over all taxi driver. those blokes who hang out there think they own the fucking place. its one of my worst parts of london. luckily i'm never in brixton. yak


----------



## editor (Apr 29, 2005)

Imagine how much worse it will get if the KFC get their 4am licence.

It'll be a licence for lawless louts to lurk and make no mistake!


----------



## poster342002 (Apr 29, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> I might be stupid enough to weigh it up and consider having a go, depending on the size of the person doing the robbing and who it was he was mugging (wouldn't you get involved if you saw someone trying to mug and assault an old lady?!)
> 
> The thing was, no one went up to him to see if he was OK _after_ the mugging. And that fucking sucks.


Fair point. Especially the last para. 

The fact that everyone just stands around afterwards and doesn't even call the cops or an ambulance or even go and see if they're ok is plain wrong. It sends out the message to muggers that everyone just accepts and tolerates it as part of life.


----------



## poster342002 (Apr 29, 2005)

maximilian ping said:
			
		

> that bit of brixton makes me come over all taxi driver. those blokes who hang out there think they own the fucking place. its one of my worst parts of london. luckily i'm never in brixton. yak


I have had enough of that fuckin' corner to last a lifetime. Even "minor" hassle there is a pain in the arse - such as those berks who thinks it's really clever to get in your way as you try to pass by "accidentally" timing their stroll from the wall over to the bus stop so that they almost bump into you.

If the cops "know" about this problems on that shithole of a corner, why is nothing done?


----------



## Mr Retro (Apr 29, 2005)

Fucking scary that.

I don't know how many times my wife has said to me "I'll just get a few quid out of barclays and meet you in the effra/trinity arms/tescos. 

Thats really, really worrying.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Apr 29, 2005)

poster342002 said:
			
		

> Fair point. Especially the last para.
> 
> The fact that everyone just stands around afterwards and doesn't even call the cops or an ambulance or even go and see if they're ok is plain wrong. It sends out the message to muggers that everyone just accepts and tolerates it as part of life.




Well to tell you the truth, I won't even get my mobile out in Brixton in case I get mugged myself.


----------



## poster342002 (Apr 29, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> They said that they were "fully aware" of the problems around Barclays/KFC.
> 
> If they're so 'aware' of the problems, why don't they do something about it?


Quite.


----------



## aurora green (Apr 29, 2005)

You know, Living on the Loughborough estate, I cannot step outside my front door without being captured by cctv. If I take my kids to the park, there's a camera in the playground monitoring everything. 
I wonder how obvious the cctv is outside Barclays, (haven't noticed myself because Im always walking by quite quickly I guess) and if it is capable of capturing all the 'events' occuring. These people need to be caught, and if the cameras are too discreet, then they need to be seen so that its harder to get away with stuff like this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 29, 2005)

> A CCTV operator has been praised by police after officers were able to stop an attack on a woman in Birmingham just three minutes after they were called.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/4495639.stm

if they can do that in birmingham, why can't they do it in brixton? it's not as though the police station is a million miles from the barclays...


----------



## Isambard (Apr 29, 2005)

Sorry about your mate Editor.   

Banks here have tended to move ATMs inside the building foyer and you enter by swiping your crd. That would improve security a little bit.

What a shitty situtation!


----------



## treefrog (Apr 29, 2005)

I hate that corner, it's really intimidating and I HATE getting money out the Barclays (I usually go over the road to get cash out where it's a bit quieter). Can't believe they're thinking of giving the KFC a 4am licence, that place is just going to get worse...


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 29, 2005)

aurora green said:
			
		

> You know, Living on the Loughborough estate, I cannot step outside my front door without being captured by cctv. If I take my kids to the park, there's a camera in the playground monitoring everything.
> I wonder how obvious the cctv is outside Barclays, (haven't noticed myself because Im always walking by quite quickly I guess) and if it is capable of capturing all the 'events' occuring. These people need to be caught, and if the cameras are too discreet, then they need to be seen so that its harder to get away with stuff like this.


tbh, you can have all the cctv you like, but if the operators aren't watching who's going to notice?

why don't people get onto barclays, and get them to do something about it?


----------



## Pie 1 (Apr 29, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> The thing was, no one went up to him to see if he was OK _after_ the mugging. And that fucking sucks.



That's outrageous. I can forgive people for not wanting to get involved with the muggers, but to ignore someone who's been attacked after they've [the muggers] fled is just fucking wrong. Unbeleivable.   
My sympathies to your mate editor, I hope he's ok.


----------



## aurora green (Apr 29, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> tbh, you can have all the cctv you like, but if the operators aren't watching who's going to notice?


but surely if the faces of the perpertrators are recorded, eventually these peoples' luck might run out.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 29, 2005)

aurora green said:
			
		

> but surely if the faces of the perpertrators are recorded, eventually these peoples' luck might run out.


might...

the quality of cctv pictures varies greatly, as does the length of time it's kept. who operates the cameras round that corner? probably lambeth - and i bet they don't take much care of their cameras. met police cctv cameras are replaced every couple of weeks, so their lenses are usually clearer than local authority operated ones.

but what's the point of this much vaunted cctv if no fucker's watching? is it just a giant intelligence gathering operation?


----------



## poster342002 (Apr 29, 2005)

aurora green said:
			
		

> You know, Living on the Loughborough estate, I cannot step outside my front door without being captured by cctv. If I take my kids to the park, there's a camera in the playground monitoring everything.
> I wonder how obvious the cctv is outside Barclays, (haven't noticed myself because Im always walking by quite quickly I guess) and if it is capable of capturing all the 'events' occuring. These people need to be caught, and if the cameras are too discreet, then they need to be seen so that its harder to get away with stuff like this.


The area seems to be postively bristling with CCTV cameras. But for some reason they rarely seem to be of any use.


----------



## poster342002 (Apr 29, 2005)

In the mornings I see loads of Police Officers and CSOs patrolling the area. The later in the evening it gets, the fewer I see.

Now _that's_ what I call cleaver, well-thought out police scheduling and deployment.


----------



## Pieface (Apr 29, 2005)

I don't use my phone on the streets if I can help it either and only the other night saw a girl on the phone at a bus stop I was waiting at have hers snatched.

The police called me yesterday to see if I got a look at him but all I saw was a hooded figure legging it down the road - no help at all really.  

Anyway - thanks for the heads up, Ed - that's the second one I've heard of at those cash points recently. I think I'll try to stick with the ones over the road in future.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 29, 2005)

poster342002 said:
			
		

> In the mornings I see loads of Police Officers and CSOs patrolling the area. The later in the evening it gets, the fewer I see.
> 
> Now _that's_ what I call cleaver, well-thought out police scheduling and deployment.


they're scared of the dark.


----------



## poster342002 (Apr 29, 2005)

PieEye said:
			
		

> I don't use my phone on the streets if I can help it


Which pretty much negates the point of a mobile phone, really, if you can't use it outside the house.


----------



## rennie (Apr 29, 2005)

that's terrible news editor! I took the bus from just opposit wollies at half 6ish but didn't notice anything as that corner is SO crowded at that time of day.   

I've used those machines before... think im going to stick to the ones opposite from now on...


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Apr 29, 2005)

poster342002 said:
			
		

> Which pretty much negates the point of a mobile phone, really, if you can't use it outside the house.




there's plenty of places you can use them outside the house.  It's just that Brixton's not one of them


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 29, 2005)

i had thought after macintyre's trip to brixton that you had to try really hard to get mugged there. now i see that he didn't have to wander about for days on end trying desperately to get robbed, if he'd just used the barclay's cashpoints he'd have been away within fifteen minutes.


----------



## chegrimandi (Apr 29, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i had thought after macintyre's trip to brixton that you had to try really hard to get mugged there. now i see that he didn't have to wander about for days on end trying desperately to get robbed, if he'd just used the barclay's cashpoints he'd have been away within fifteen minutes.



macintyre is a moronic simpleton.


----------



## aurora green (Apr 29, 2005)

Minnie_the_Minx said:
			
		

> there's plenty of places you can use them outside the house.  It's just that Brixton's not one of them



Look it's awful what happened, but I dont think we should get carried away here. That's proberbly the worst corner in Brixton, but as for not using my mobile in Brixton, thats going a bit far IMO.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 29, 2005)

chegrimandi said:
			
		

> macintyre is a moronic simpleton.


true...


----------



## Loki (Apr 29, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i had thought after macintyre's trip to brixton that you had to try really hard to get mugged there. now i see that he didn't have to wander about for days on end trying desperately to get robbed, if he'd just used the barclay's cashpoints he'd have been away within fifteen minutes.


My take on that truly crap docco was that he was so obviously waving his mobile around and trying to get mugged that any dodgy types thought that something was up.


----------



## editor (Apr 29, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i had thought after macintyre's trip to brixton that you had to try really hard to get mugged there. now i see that he didn't have to wander about for days on end trying desperately to get robbed, if he'd just used the barclay's cashpoints he'd have been away within fifteen minutes.


I think Brixton's got a lot worse recently, to be honest.

And seeing as MacIntyre is quite a stocky fella, it's not surprising he didn't get mugged.

Cowardly scumbag muggers tend to prefer 'soft' targets.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Apr 29, 2005)

aurora green said:
			
		

> Look it's awful what happened, but I dont think we should get carried away here. That's proberbly the worst corner in Brixton, but as for not using my mobile in Brixton, thats going a bit far IMO.





Don't get me wrong.  I'll use my mobile in Brixton, but not on Brixton High Street itself (unless I'm inside a shop).  

Similarly, I don't get my purse out in Brixton High Street, I always make sure if I have to pay cash for a bus that I've got my money ready when I leave the house


----------



## poster342002 (Apr 29, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> I think Brixton's got a lot worse recently, to be honest.
> 
> And seeing as MacIntyre is quite a stocky fella, it's not surprising he didn't get mugged.
> 
> Cowardly scumbag muggers tend to prefer 'soft' targets.


Sadly, I have also noticed a decline recently too. It got better in late 2003 - mid 2004, but things have gradually started to slide again. I hope it doesn't return to 1999 - mid 2003 levels.

Muggers do indeed tend to mug those who seem more vulnerable. A few years ago I saw some fucker strut over to a homeless old sitting on the floor and "ask" her for £1.


----------



## tommers (Apr 29, 2005)

when using those cash points i do feel like one of those zebra at an african watering hole...


----------



## sonicdancer (Apr 29, 2005)

I might be quite handy, (I boxed in the Army, light heavy weight and never lost a fight) however when I am being robbed by 2 or more men like I was in Brasil earlier this year acting weak and letting them take what they want is the easiest safest and best option.

Likewise fIf I happen to witness a mugging involving 2 or more men and one victim, you know what, Im not getting involved.

Poor bastard, even more unfortunate bastard who will struggle and then get stabbed or shot.

Life mimics nature, I liken that corner in Brixton to the Serengeti plain in some ways.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 29, 2005)

it's not as pleasant, though.


----------



## Dubversion (Apr 29, 2005)

that's the cashpoint somebody tried to jack me at a couple of months ago, which went a bit wrong :embarrassed:


----------



## sonicdancer (Apr 29, 2005)

How much was robbed ?

why did they pick out him from what I would imagine would be quite along queue for money at that time of day ?


----------



## editor (Apr 29, 2005)

sonicdancer said:
			
		

> How much was robbed ?


£60. 
And he's not a wealthy bloke by any means.


----------



## poster342002 (Apr 29, 2005)

I think the less wealthy you are, the more likely you are to be mugged. 

Muggers aren't some kind of latterday Robin Hoods - they're cowards who rob from the poor to give to themselves.


----------



## detective-boy (Apr 30, 2005)

*Just a couple of points ...*




			
				poster342002 said:
			
		

> If the cops "know" about this problems on that shithole of a corner, why is nothing done?



Sorry to hear about your mate ed.  Just a couple of points which may help in making something happen ...

1. Designing out crime can improve the situation.  The banks have talked about it around cashpoints (lighting, positioning, painted "exclusion zones" ...) but have done very little.  Put pressure on them (lots of letters / e-mails / visits to the actual Barclays branch may help)  (By the way, the suggestion of ATMs in foyers is a double-edged sword - people tend to move in to them, the swipes are prone to having illegal card readers attached and robberies inside them still happen (and out of sight of passers-by). 

2. Public awareness is a police tactic to help reduce criminal opportunities.  The big white landrover is part of that.  It does help.  We may already know, but we forget and reminders increase our awareness for a shoort time at least.

3. A uniformed police presence 24/7 is not practicable and, in any event would only displace the crimes to somewhere else.

4. There may well be undercover operations, either in operation or being planned (but to tell everyone would be self-defeating!!).  The police work on "hotspots" (which is why EVERY crime / attempt needs to be reported otherwise the basic data is inaccurate), prioritising types of crimes and numbers.  Such operations are very expensive in terms of time and staff hours so there is a limit on how many can be mounted at any one time.  Raise the particular issue at the CPCG to ensure it really is on the list of things to do.

5. Police patrols and numbers are based on demand monitoring.  The peaks of public calls are during the day and evening.  Unfortunately this leads to "skewing" as less things happen later but they tend to be more serious.  Raise the question at the CPCG - find out exactly how the Borough Commander is planning resource deployment and suggest any improvements / issues.

6. As has been mentioned, CCTV needs to be monitored.  In Lambeth it is the responsibility of the borough.  Find out from them the numbers of staff in their control room, their training and their emergency response protocols (I recently came across one control room (outside London) which had to call the police via 999 in an emergency!!).  Lambeth used to have a "hotline" - does it still?  How much intelligence do the police provide to the control room to ensure they know which hotspots to monitor, descriptions to look for, etc?

7. As Burke said (I think!) "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing".  The failure of passers-by to do anything is sadly too common.  It is read by the crims as a green light to do what they like.  They can avoid police activity, they can't avoid passers-by but they know they will do fuck all so they don't give a toss.  One passer-by intervening is at risk.  Twenty aren't.  Don't put yourselves at risk but we can all do other things.  Shout, scream, abuse, throw things ... Do anything to raise a scene.  They will eventually learn! 

<Edit to add last point which I forgot!>


----------



## a14142135 (May 6, 2005)

Thats really crap to hear of this daylight mugging. It has got more interesting in that part of Brixton. The bus stop seems to be all weed dealers and general nutters now?


----------



## Yossarian (May 6, 2005)

That was fast work - the day after I read this thread I was walking to the tube and those bus stops on the corner had been removed! 

Fuck knows where those oregano salesmen who spend their days waiting for a bus that never comes are going to go...


----------



## behemoth (May 6, 2005)

poster342002 said:
			
		

> If the cops "know" about this problems on that shithole of a corner, why is nothing done?


Because victims of crime refuse to report incidents because they hate the police? How many other victims will suffer because of his grand principles? Either you want crime dealt with or not, unless he has a better plan.


----------



## hatboy (May 7, 2005)

Taking bus stops and park benches away so that "undesirables" (who defines these?) have nowhere to sit down is just displacement and it's treating people like rubbish. Not addressing core problems.

It's just an unspoken "move along sonny".

I think its fucking crap. 

I didn't even really have a problem with that corner. The more you push people down the more they'll burst up. We will all see. You can see already if you look. Just check Friday's SLP for a start.

Whatever.


----------



## editor (May 7, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> I didn't even really have a problem with that corner.


Oh, in_ that _case, let's leave things exactly as they are.


----------



## a14142135 (May 7, 2005)

I bet the weed sellers ain't gone away. It just means the CCTV will provide more intelligence and all the pus passengers will get wet when it rains. Why not station a cop or two near the corner instead of outside the tube?


----------



## TeeJay (May 8, 2005)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> 3. A uniformed police presence 24/7 is not practicable and, in any event would only displace the crimes to somewhere else.


Brixton High Street between the tube and the bus stops - the location of this cash point - has a *vast* number of people passing through it every day. What exactly are the police doing all the time that they can't police central Brixton with actual police on the ground?

Why is it that there is never any shortage of police at even the smallest and most peaceful demo? Why do I see police on the ground in most other town centres aound the country, but hardly ever in Brixton (as opposed to speeding past in a squad car)?

Sorry but this doesn't really make any sense to me.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (May 8, 2005)

TeeJay said:
			
		

> Why is it that there is never any shortage of police at even the smallest and most peaceful demo? Why do I see police on the ground in most other town centres aound the country, but hardly ever in Brixton (as opposed to speeding past in a squad car)?



I quite often see police outside Brixton tube.


----------



## pooka (May 8, 2005)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> 4. There may well be undercover operations, either in operation or being planned (but to tell everyone would be self-defeating!!).  The police work on "hotspots" (which is why EVERY crime / attempt needs to be reported otherwise the basic data is inaccurate), prioritising types of crimes and numbers.  Such operations are very expensive in terms of time and staff hours so there is a limit on how many can be mounted at any one time.  Raise the particular issue at the CPCG to ensure it really is on the list of things to do.
> 
> 5. Police patrols and numbers are based on demand monitoring.  The peaks of public calls are during the day and evening.  Unfortunately this leads to "skewing" as less things happen later but they tend to be more serious.  Raise the question at the CPCG - find out exactly how the Borough Commander is planning resource deployment and suggest any improvements / issues.



This was raised at the CPCG meeting last Tuesday. The response was (1) that there is a lot more police activity going on than meets the eye (2) the dealing activity is more than just the obvious guys, in terms of lookouts and so forth, and is hard to pin down (3) there is an intention to tackle demand by naming and shaming 'cityboys' who travel into Brixton to buy drugs (resting on the observation that 50% of people who get nicked for possession in Brixton are from out of the borough).

There will of course be mixed views around that, but that is what was said. My sense is that feeling at the CPCG is that resources have been put, very heavily, into Brixton Town Centre but that the dealers are adept at finding ways back if there is any relaxation on the part of the police.

There was also a presentation on Safer Neighbourhoods  - this is an initiative for dedicated Ward based teams who respond to priorities set by local community panels. Both Coldharbour and Ferndale are now Safer Neighbourhood Wards and the wards meet on Brixton High Street. But the Town Centre is policed by it's own team and so, following the effective suspension of Brixton Forum Crime Working Group, there is no mechanism for Community input. A suggestion was made (from the floor) to mimic the Safer Neighbourhoods set up, but for the Town Centre. 

Brixton Town Centre issues are of course brought up at CPCG, but folk from Clapham, Streatham, Kennington, Waterloo etc get a bit restless if all the focus is on Brixton.


----------



## kea (May 8, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> The more you push people down the more they'll burst up. We will all see. You can see already if you look. Just check Friday's SLP for a start.




why, what's in friday's SLP? i haven't got a copy - does anyone else?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 8, 2005)

no.


----------



## detective-boy (May 9, 2005)

TeeJay said:
			
		

> Sorry but this doesn't really make any sense to me.



There are probably more police officers on the streets of Brixton than most other places in the country.  Unfortunately they also have more to do and, when they do it, they are out of sight (in peoples houses reporting crimes; in the police station dealing with prisoners; in the police station entering information into computers, etc; at Court with the people they nicked a few months ago ....) and not on "random" patrol.

Any officer patrolling Brixton, with an ounce of investigative ability, could arrest someone for serious crime (Class A dealing if nothing else) within minutes.  That is what they do.

To have two officers present 24/7 on that 100yd stretch of Brixton Road would require at least 16 officers  (Four (to allow for cover during meal breaks) x 4 (the lowest number of teams to cover all shifts during a month rota)).  This would NOT ensure cover if they arrested someone - I would estimate you'd need at least 32 to ensure that there were ALWAYS 2 on the street (unless you briefed them not to get involved in anything which would (a) be self-defeating and (b) impossible, because things would find them!)

At busy times, presence at one end of the 100 yd stretch would not ensure safety at the other end anyway - you'd probably need two every 30 yds to ensure they were visible to anyone in the 100 yd stretch.

So we've taken up to 32 officers to ensure a presence on a 100yd stretch of road - on that basis how many would be needed to put a presence at all similar hotspots across London?  It really is NOT easy to ensure that there is a 24/7 presence at a particular point without massive increase in numbers (and I mean doubling or more).  

The oft-quoted improvements in street crime in New York were only possible because numbers of police were increased to that extent.


----------



## TeeJay (May 9, 2005)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> There are probably more police officers on the streets of Brixton than most other places in the country.


But are there the same number in proportion to the number of crimes committed? 


> Any officer patrolling Brixton, with an ounce of investigative ability, could arrest someone for serious crime (Class A dealing if nothing else) within minutes


I'd say that someone getting attacked - ie a violent crime - is more serious than drug dealing. It is also more serious than parking violations - yet Brixton seems to have plenty of car parking officers. Maybe the lesson behind this is that if there is *money* to be made then things get done? Now all we need is a proper system of bounties and rewards on the heads of muggers and the like. Maybe the area would suddenly fill up with private enterprise vigilantes out to make the streets safer (and a quick buck). 

More seriously tho' - isn't this the idea behind community support officers? They can wander round talking to people etc and don't get bogged down in arresting people or the more "serious" end of things. Or is Brixton considered too dangerous and difficult for them? Maybe the new mini-cop-shop on Coldharbour will have a similar effect?


----------



## poster342002 (May 10, 2005)

Yossarian said:
			
		

> That was fast work - the day after I read this thread I was walking to the tube and those bus stops on the corner had been removed!
> 
> Fuck knows where those oregano salesmen who spend their days waiting for a bus that never comes are going to go...


They could bog off up their own backsides, with any luck. Shame they probably won't, though.


----------



## Ms T (May 10, 2005)

kea said:
			
		

> why, what's in friday's SLP? i haven't got a copy - does anyone else?




I think it's the story about people being robbed while in bed.  If you look on the Do You Feel Safer in Brixton thread you'll find a link.


----------



## kea (May 11, 2005)

oh ok cheers! so hatboy reckons that the people doing that are doing it because it's some kind of social uprising?


----------



## editor (May 11, 2005)

kea said:
			
		

> oh ok cheers! so hatboy reckons that the people doing that are doing it because it's some kind of social uprising?


Who knows, but you can guarantee that whatever it is he thinks, he'll be right and you'll be wrong.


----------



## kea (May 11, 2005)

just had a look at that news story - tbh if i was one of the people robbed in that story, i'd be deeply upset and offended that someone on a bulletin board was using it to argue that the people doing the robbing and pistol whipping were doing it because they had been in some way 'oppressed' by newcomers to the area.
i think that's quite a revolting and cynical twisting of a very horrifying news story.


----------



## editor (May 11, 2005)

kea said:
			
		

> just had a look at that news story - tbh if i was one of the people robbed in that story, i'd be deeply upset and offended that someone on a bulletin board was using it to argue that the people doing the robbing and pistol whipping were doing it because they had been in some way 'oppressed' by newcomers to the area.
> i think that's quite a revolting and cynical twisting of a very horrifying news story.


JUDGE: can you offer any mitigating circumstances for your dreadful crimes?
SCUMBAG THIEF: It was moving the bus stops wot done it for me, your honour. They're to blame.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 11, 2005)

Hatboy's thesis about Brixton life is absurd.
He seems obsessed with black culture and infers any criticism of seedy drug dealers in Brixton as a prejudiced attack on blacks, which IMO does Brixton's black people a terrible disservice.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 11, 2005)

You seem to be inferring that I think I'm better than other people. That is not the case. I just think it's wrong to hassle and intimidate people and it's ridiculous and impractical to always have consideration for what cultural, economic and political forces have brought someone to become a drug dealer or a mugger, especially if they are punching you in the face. There are other places where the local ruffians are white, but in Brixton, many happen to be black. This is a reflection of the ethnic make up of the area. So hatboy is wrong to place emphasis of criticism of violence and intimidation in one's neighbourhood as an attack on black culture, in fact in doing so, he is disparaging the culture he ostensibly embraces.


----------



## editor (May 11, 2005)

(several off topic posts removed)


----------



## detective-boy (May 11, 2005)

TeeJay said:
			
		

> But are there the same number in proportion to the number of crimes committed?
> I'd say that someone getting attacked - ie a violent crime - is more serious than drug dealing. It is also more serious than parking violations - yet Brixton seems to have plenty of car parking officers...
> 
> More seriously tho' - isn't this the idea behind community support officers? They can wander round talking to people etc and don't get bogged down in arresting people or the more "serious" end of things. Or is Brixton considered too dangerous and difficult for them? Maybe the new mini-cop-shop on Coldharbour will have a similar effect?



Unfortunately the numbers are not in proportion - there are far more calls on police time in Brixton per officer than in most (but not all) other places.

You may be right about violent crime being more important than drug dealing ... but the latter has been shown to attract the former and the complaints would flood in if officers ignored drug dealing (see the regular comments on other threads here!) waiting for a violent crime to come along.  Uniform patrols may decrease the chances of a violent attack in a small bubble around them but they are not good at arresting suspects - that needs proactive and reactive investigation ... which needs officers off the street or in plain clothes.

As for parking, couldn't agree more.  Unfortunately the parking wardens are all council / contractor employees, nothing to do with the police.  The cost of them is effectively ring-fenced for parking enforcement as they are a single issue organisation, independently funded.

You are right about CSOs but, again, as they have very limited powers, no batons, etc. and limited training there are big issues in their Health and Safety when deployed in high crime areas - a violent offender is unlikely to treat them any differently than a police officer.  There are CSOs in the Brixton area and they are on the street.  They also tend to get used for things like assisting with crime scene cordons, more often a need in the Brixton area than many others - it's a bit of a Catch22 situation!

Don't hold your breath about the Coldharbour Lane police shop - I doubt if it will be open often (to do so would take yet another officer off the street); I don't believe it is to be accompanied by any additional officers so the numbers will be the same.  It will just be a local base for officers in that area to work from, saving them about ten minutes walk to the main station!!


----------



## IntoStella (May 11, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> (several off topic posts removed)


EXCUSE ME.

I made several completely ON TOPIC posts discussing THE TOPIC with orang utan. Which you have deleted because your TOTAL PLOT LOSSAGE is so advanced.  

Or are people not allowed to have a proper discussion any more wthout having their posts deleted by you?

You laid into hatboy many times for interfering with posts when he was a moderator and you're ten times worse.

Besides, I thought FRIDGE was now moderator of this forum. At least he allows people to actually have a debate without launching into spiteful personal attacks on anyone who doesn't agree with him  and who aren't even online at the time. Assuming they haven't been banned already for speaking their mind.

For god's sake get a grip. 

And there is nothing 'off topic' about this -- you deleted my contributions to this discussion for no good reason.


----------



## IntoStella (May 11, 2005)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> You seem to be inferring that I think I'm better than other people. That is not the case. I just think it's wrong to hassle and intimidate people and it's ridiculous and impractical to always have consideration for what cultural, economic and political forces have brought someone to become a drug dealer or a mugger, especially if they are punching you in the face. There are other places where the local ruffians are white, but in Brixton, many happen to be black. This is a reflection of the ethnic make up of the area. So hatboy is wrong to place emphasis of criticism of violence and intimidation in one's neighbourhood as an attack on black culture, in fact in doing so, he is disparaging the culture he ostensibly embraces.


Please note.


The reason this response no longer makes contextual sense is that the post before it was removed for no good reason.


----------



## tarannau (May 11, 2005)

The only post of Orang's I've seen deleted is 'cut it out you two' tbh.

As far as I can tell, Orang's points are still intact - I keep meaning to reply to his last post (local ruffians...disparaging etc) but keep being distracted by this work stuff...

There's some good stuff on this thread, please don't let it go off the same old way again...


----------



## Mr BC (May 11, 2005)

It does, on the face of it, seem hard to see how one side of an argument's posts are 'off topic' whilst the other side's posts are left up!  We therefore have a completely nonsensical line of posts.  if one side's goes, surely the other's does too?

I note that Editor's snipe at Hatboy remains in place although hardly on topic.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 11, 2005)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> Hatboy's thesis about Brixton life is absurd.
> He seems obsessed with black culture and infers any criticism of seedy drug dealers in Brixton as a prejudiced attack on blacks, which IMO does Brixton's black people a terrible disservice.



IS responded to this by suggesting that hatboy doesn't have a narrow conservative outlook and doesn't regard himself as better than other human beings, or words to that effect - IS? Can you confirm this?
I disagreed that I was putting myself above muggers and dealers, but I had every right to onject to them. 
Hope this helps.


----------



## editor (May 11, 2005)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> And there is nothing 'off topic' about this -- you deleted my contributions to this discussion for no good reason.


Your "contribution" was a list of irrelevant whines parroting words I'd supposedly said to your charming friend Anna Key in long-deleted/forgotten unrelated threads from months ago.

It had _absolutely nothing_ to do with the topic of this thread - it was just another of your tedious personal attacks.

To be honest, I'm running out of ideas why I should continue to entertain your unprovoked personal attacks, disruptive lies and defamatory accusations.


> Remember: the admin team run this site in their own time and for no profit, so unprovoked or sustained personal attacks may result in a ban


----------



## editor (May 11, 2005)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> I note that Editor's snipe at Hatboy remains in place although hardly on topic.


I feel it's a fair response to his stance on this thread, and I'm sure the world's slowest-departing poster will be along shortly to counter it.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 11, 2005)

To be fair, there was a part of the message which was a politely worded and reasonable response to my post and on topic, while your last post and the rest of IS's post was just going over well-trodden ground that the rest of us are bored to tears with. Wind your neck in for the sake of the rest of us, please!


----------



## editor (May 11, 2005)

I apologise if I accidentally deleted any relevant content - that wasn't my intent.


----------



## TeeJay (May 11, 2005)

So... as we were saying - about crime and policing in Brixton...


----------



## hatboy (May 12, 2005)

OrangUtan said:

"Hatboy's thesis about Brixton life is absurd. He seems obsessed with black culture and infers any criticism of seedy drug dealers in Brixton as a prejudiced attack on blacks, which IMO does Brixton's black people a terrible disservice".

No that's not it. Though I can see how people might think that about me on urban75. I just don't have a conventional view on who is "seedy" and who isn't.  As for "which IMO does Brixton's black people a terrible disservice".  I can't "diss-serve" so much people all at once - Caribbean, African, all the rest - LOL - I don't have that power. Your opinion on this subject doesn't really matter to me. Though I often listen to black people face to face in Brixton that I learn from on these and other issues. 

What I think is that some other white people are threatened by a white person who is quite comfortable with criticism of white people. I'm interested in becoming a more truthful and conscious person. And if the truth is uncomfortable for other white people (or for me) then that discomfort should be endured. The discomfort goes away the more conscious you are.

As for "obsessed" - yeah I give a shit.  These issues hurt people that I care about as well as mattering generally.

"Seedy" means "morally degraded" - Well I see moral degradation more in the upper ranks of our society. It also means "untidy or shaby" - that's no measure of the value of a person.


----------



## hatboy (May 12, 2005)

Mm - cultural obsession eh....

...unlike the omnipotent white man whose "obsession" with his own culture is so great that he cannot bear the affront when it is resisted by others.

Carry On Colonialism....


----------



## Giles (May 12, 2005)

People who can find no better occupation than to hang around in the street variously robbing other people, often with violence or threat of it, and/or attempting to sell shit drugs to passers-by are seedy scumbags, whatever colour their skin is, is my opinion.

They contribute nothing except to make everyone else go about their business in fear.

That's shit. They are shit.

Giles..


----------



## hatboy (May 12, 2005)

A small viewpoint with no width. Why are they? Why is it? Why.......

Are the robbers the dealers? - and who is buying the shit drugs?

And who controls the shit situation where some "can find no better occupation"?


----------



## hatboy (May 12, 2005)

"They are shit"

No. No human is shit. But those who think some humans are shit may find they are confronted by the vile stink of their own creation.


----------



## editor (May 12, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> And who controls the shit situation where some "can find no better occupation"?


What about the ones who _can_ choose a better situation, but choose to be muggers out because it's easier than working?

What does your 'wide viewpoint' think of them?

And I've no idea what your "white people threatened by a white person who is quite comfortable with criticism of white people" stuff is all about. I'm happy to criticise anyone (and, equally, be criticised) if it's justified and honest. 

I can't see where the colour bit comes into it, to be honest. But then, perhaps I'm not gifted with your extra-special, morally superior "wide viewpoint".


----------



## phildwyer (May 12, 2005)

I've got nothing against street-level drug dealers.  They're just trying to get by, life isn't easy for them.  Would you rather they were working in McDonald's?


----------



## hatboy (May 12, 2005)

"What about the ones who can choose a better situation, but choose to be muggers out because it's easier than working?"

How does a person make "choices"? With what tools? What is "better"? What is "easier"? - The answers are in the question. If you have "no idea", Mr Editor (as you state) and no wish to develop a wider viewpoint that is your responsibility.


----------



## editor (May 12, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> How does a person make "choices"? With what tools?


With their brain and their conscience, I'd expect, just like everyone else.

A straight answer to my question instead of all this cod-philosophical posturing would have been nice, mind.


----------



## hatboy (May 12, 2005)

Here is something to read and think about. Me posting it doesn't mean I agree with all of it. Or that I don't.

http://www.arasite.org/ptc.html


----------



## editor (May 12, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Here is something to read and think about. Me posting it doesn't mean I agree with all of it. Or that I don't.


What is this?
Cryptic Week?

Why is it so hard for you to give straight answers to straight questions on topics you've raised?


----------



## hatboy (May 12, 2005)

It's not. There isn't really a short answer and the question doesn't really make sense.

Why don't you just have a look at what's already on the page and the link and try and think new thoughts.


----------



## Mr BC (May 12, 2005)

Why does everyone rise to Hatboy's bait?  It's self-evidently preposterous to argue that criticism of muggers demonstrates 'colonialist' attitudes, not least because it is so immensely insulting the vast majority of black kids who don't go round inflicting violence on people in order to appropriate their property.


----------



## editor (May 12, 2005)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> Why does everyone rise to Hatboy's bait?


How is simply questioning his statements 'rising to the bait'?


----------



## Mr BC (May 12, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> How is simply questioning his statements 'rising to the bait'?



Because you are (rightly) trying to infuse logic into a discussion in which one party doesn't understand the concept.


----------



## hatboy (May 12, 2005)

No Mr BC, you just haven't thought about it enough.

"Racism, the word nobody likes. Whites who don't want to confront racism and who don't name themselves white recoil in horror from it, shun it like the plague. To mention the word in their company disrupts their comfortable complacency. To call a text or methodology under discussion in a classroom ... "racist", or to call a white person (to order) on her or his racism, is to let loose a stink bomb. Like a tenacious weed, racism (creeps) up everywhere - it has a strangle hold on everyone. It is cultivated and produced in families, churches, temples and state institutions (Anzaldua, quoted in Pfhol, 1994: 453)".

From: http://www.britsoccrim.org/bccsp/vol03/agozino.html

But don't read that. Step outside.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 12, 2005)

What the hell are you talking about?
Are saying that some of us are reluctant to talk about racism, or that we are racist?
Personally, speaking, you've got it all wrong. I'm not afraid to discuss race and often bring it up when people are reluctant to discuss it.


----------



## fanta (May 12, 2005)

Are you white Hatboy?

Can't say I've even noticed!


----------



## grosun (May 12, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> And who controls the shit situation where some "can find no better occupation"?



<posts with some trepidation, but hey>

Oh, 'the man', no doubt.

... or how about no-one. It's the system, innit? Whatever system you happen to have, it seems there's going to be someone who ends up at the bottom of the heap... well, or every system I'm aware of seems to have ended up that way anyway. No-one in particular is 'controlling' this; I doubt it's planned, or that anyone *intends* these consequences. Makes them harder to sort out than if someone had tho', & harder to point the finger.

I'm curious to know what action you'd suggest, whether on the part of the government/officials or the people, in order to relieve the problems you (partly) identify.

I don't know what the solution is, but I know there's a big difference between realising that some circumstances make people more likely to be criminals and allowing that to excuse them for (violently) fucking with other people's lives. Plenty people grow up poor, disenfranchised, without prospects and live decently, don't go around robbing other folk. Those who *do* have made that choice. It was not the only one open to them. 

None of that is to say that we shouldn't be looking at ways to make sure people have better prospects & feel more included, and thus hopefully reduce levels of crime & general shitness, but that's another level, & shouldn't be used to let individuals off for something which ultimately was their own choice. No-one in the UK *needs* to rob as far as I'm aware. They choose to.

(& on the dealer front, I have no particular problem with them, whether on the street or elsewhere, provided they're honest & not aggressive. I don't like anyone being aggressive, whether they're trying to sell me something or not, & people who sell fake drugs are just the same as anyone else who dishonestly sells fake or crappy stuff in my eyes.)


----------



## hatboy (May 12, 2005)

"What the hell are you talking about?" = "recoil in horror from it, shun it like the plague..."

"Are you saying that some of us are reluctant to talk about racism, or that we are racist?"

The point at which most of us (white people) think we are not racist is where the journey to not being racist begins, not ends.

"No-one in particular is 'controlling' this"

Yes they are. There are all sorts of levels and controls in society. To the advantage of some and disadvantage of others. Of course. Whether you feel comfort or oppression from these depends where you are looking from. I haven't got a problem with much of what "grosun" says.

But....

Where do our opinions default to? Can we change that?  Where is your default, u75 reader?


----------



## Orang Utan (May 12, 2005)

The more people challenge you, the more oblique your posts get.
Not gonna bother answering any of your points here cos I'm not sure if there are any.


----------



## hatboy (May 12, 2005)

You can give it some thought if you wish. So can I. We are lucky to have the liberty of that choice.

I don't necesarily desire answers to "points". I can percieve discomfort.


----------



## phildwyer (May 12, 2005)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> The more people challenge you, the more oblique your posts get.
> Not gonna bother answering any of your points here cos I'm not sure if there are any.



I think he's saying that a lot of people who don't consider themselves racist at a conscious level are in fact racist by "default."  He's right, too.  Not to single anyone out, but writing "they're shit" about people whose only crime is to hustle you to buy drugs is quite a good example.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 12, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> I think he's saying that a lot of people who don't consider themselves racist at a conscious level are in fact racist by "default."  He's right, too.  Not to single anyone out, but writing "they're shit" about people whose only crime is to hustle you to buy drugs is quite a good example.


i don't like being hustled to buy drugs on the street. the colour of the hustler is to me immaterial.


----------



## phildwyer (May 12, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i don't like being hustled to buy drugs on the street. the colour of the hustler is to me immaterial.



It doesn't bother me in the slightest.  In every single place I've lived as an adult, I've been asked to buy drugs the minute I stepped outside.  Happens to me every day, happened to me just 30 minutes ago.  What's the problem?  If it bothered me I'd move to Surbiton.  And even if it did bother me, I would never describe the hustlers as 'shit.'  And yes, they're *always* black or hispanic, and *never* white.  Hmmm, I wonder why that could be?


----------



## Orang Utan (May 12, 2005)

I grew up in a multi-racial family and I resent the implication that I might be racist by default. My brother (who happens to be black) is lot less liberal about muggers and dealers as I am. He'd round them up and put them in boot camp. He's alway accusing me of being a do-gooder white liberal guilt-tripper. He would find hatboy's assertions on this thread hilarious and absurd.


----------



## phildwyer (May 12, 2005)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> I grew up in a multi-racial family and I resent the implication that I might be racist by default. My brother (who happens to be black) is lot less liberal about muggers and dealers as I am. He'd round them up and put them in boot camp. He's alway accusing me of being a do-gooder white liberal guilt-tripper. He would find hatboy's assertions on this thread hilarious and absurd.



No, Orang, I didn't mean you.  I've met you, you're obviously sound as a bell.  I'm with your bro on the muggers, but the dealers?  Even if they do rip people off, I think boot camp is a bit harsh.


----------



## hatboy (May 12, 2005)

Thankyou.. Phil Dywer. Who ever you are. 

I think many white people on u75 and in general society are very afraid of their subconscious racism. Especially the university-educated middle-classes, who feel they ought to know better, who do "know" better, but don't "feel" better. They feel guilty. It is a frightening thing. Especially if you are a "liberal" or "PC" person publically. 

But we are human. We're allowed to be badly programmed or make mistakes and it is possible to change your subconscious - but you (or I or anyone) has to come clean about it first. That's what I meant by "the more truthful you are the more discomfort goes away". About this and all things really. Like addictions and their meaning too.

Good luck to the unafraid.


----------



## hatboy (May 12, 2005)

And Orang Utan. What is my "assertion" on this thread? That people should think deeper about these issues, not just default subconsciously, which they do.

That's not absurd. It is a very good idea.


----------



## phildwyer (May 12, 2005)

No probs Hatster.  One example of the sort of thing I'm talking about on this board recently was when someone said they'd had to go up to 168th St in Harlem--in the daytime, mark you--and that it was "extremely dangerous."  Now, I know that part of town quite well, and the only reason anyone could consider it dangerous is because there are no white people there.  And because some of the locals will ask a white person to buy drugs.  But its not fucking *dangerous.*  Nor is Coldharbour Lane, IMHO, at least before midnight.  And after midnight, all bets are pretty much off pretty much anywhere in any big city...


----------



## Pickman's model (May 12, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> It doesn't bother me in the slightest.  In every single place I've lived as an adult, I've been asked to buy drugs the minute I stepped outside.  Happens to me every day, happened to me just 30 minutes ago.  What's the problem?  If it bothered me I'd move to Surbiton.  And even if it did bother me, I would never describe the hustlers as 'shit.'  And yes, they're *always* black or hispanic, and *never* white.  Hmmm, I wonder why that could be?


you only notice the black and hispanick ones?


----------



## phildwyer (May 12, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> you only notice the black and hispanick ones?



No mate, there *are* only black and hispanic ones.  Now, a racist might say that's because black and hispanic people are naturally criminally inclined.  But a sensible would person would say that its because white people don't *have* to hustle drugs on the street to make ends meet.  And believe me, it *is* a matter of survival here in Philly. No welfare state here matey.


----------



## hatboy (May 12, 2005)

"No probs Hatster" - Fair enough.

But I'm not going to now do that thing where a couple of us go "oh we're OK, we agree, we're fixed".

I'm not fixed. I'm on a journey to consciousness. I may never complete it. But at least I know its there and worth travelling. It's about everything. It's about truth. It's also about God - which (to me) is the best you can do within and without. Pure-mind.

As regards race I owe the world to get it right because I wish to be a good human. And I owe friends and lovers who are not white - people I love - to be a white man who at least attempts to be part of the solution not part of the problem.

Anyone got a problem with that?


----------



## detective-boy (May 12, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> How does a person make "choices"? With what tools? What is "better"? What is "easier"? - The answers are in the question.



Whilst I would agree with many of the points made in the summary you provided a link for (particularly the labelling theory - who decides what is a "crime" and, hence, who is a "criminal"?) , I would disagree on others.

Any human being has the capacity to decide what they are going to do.  Yes, they may have had poor education; they may have had little or no familial support; they may have been abused / victimised themselves; they may be caught in the "if you have no address you can't get a job to earn the money to get an address" cycle BUT ...

They ALWAYS have a choice about what they then do to survive (with the exception of people with mental illness that makes it inappropriate to hold them responsible for their actions).  There are choices when it comes to crime - you can choose something which directly harms someone else (robbery, violence, domestic burglary, etc.) or you can choose something which only harms other people indirectly (e.g. drug dealing, prostitution, fraud, shop-lifting, non-residential burglary, etc.).  I would suggest that if they make the first choice, bearing in mind that they have no information about the wealth / status of their victim (and many victims of violent crime are from the same socio-economic group as the offenders), they are putting themselves voluntarily into a category of criminal who deserves condemnation by all.  To do otherwise would surely dismiss entirely the rights and interests of the (totally non-voluntary) victim?

I do not see race as being particularly relevant to this argument, with the single point that in a western European society we are likely to have a criminal code which agrees with our majority culture and, inevitably, will conflict in some way with other cultures.  When asked our opinion we will always, automatically state views and opinions which are consistent with our view of life.  Government needs to (a) recognise this and (b) where appropriate (and it won't always be - e.g. so-called "honour killings") make sure allowances / exceptions, etc.  

In short our society (like every other society) is INEVITABLY institutionally racist and can never be anything else - it is awareness of that and striving to deal with the negative implications of that fact which marks out a tolerant and progressive society.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 12, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> No mate, there *are* only black and hispanic ones.  Now, a racist might say that's because black and hispanic people are naturally criminally inclined.  But a sensible would person would say that its because white people don't *have* to hustle drugs on the street to make ends meet.  And believe me, it *is* a matter of survival here in Philly. No welfare state here matey.




i've met white people hustling drugs on the street. walked straight past 'em, mind, but they're out there.


----------



## phildwyer (May 12, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> I'm on a journey to consciousness.



First on the left past the cholo with the rocks, opposite the homie with the Spider bags.  Nah, only joking, I'm totally with you on this.  I mean, the whole bloody world is being run by the biggest gang of thugs and murderers imaginable, and people are worried that some guy on Railton Rd is peddling oregano to Swedish tourists?  Come *on*...


----------



## phildwyer (May 12, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i've met white people hustling drugs on the street. walked straight past 'em, mind, but they're out there.



Not in the USA.  Mind you, last time I was in Brixton there was a little Polish guy outside the Albert.  I'd have thought Brits could just sign on the dole though, no?


----------



## Loki (May 12, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> I'm not fixed. I'm on a journey to consciousness. I may never complete it. But at least I know its there and worth travelling. It's about everything. It's about truth. It's also about God - which (to me) is the best you can do within and without. Pure-mind.



Where to start.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 12, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Not in the USA.  Mind you, last time I was in Brixton there was a little Polish guy outside the Albert.  I'd have thought Brits could just sign on the dole though, no?


yeh. but you say this bloke was polish.


----------



## dum dum (May 12, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Not in the USA.  Mind you, last time I was in Brixton there was a little Polish guy outside the Albert.  I'd have thought Brits could just sign on the dole though, no?



40 quid aweek doesn't go very far unfortunately.


----------



## phildwyer (May 12, 2005)

Loki said:
			
		

> Where to start.



How about one of those "cool parties" at which you're such a fixture?  Won't anyone sort you out there?


----------



## hatboy (May 12, 2005)

LOL at Dwyer's comment on fear of oregano sellers. But that is what is happening in Brixton. The less accepting professionals arriving here now are clearing away people who are not doing harm along with the genuinly anti-social.  The level at which they "tolerate" is set too low for Brixton. It's oppressive.

Detective person said:

"(with the exception of people with mental illness that makes it inappropriate to hold them responsible for their actions)."

People aren't either mentally ill or not mentally ill. If you ahve experience of mental or emotional problems you know there is not a clear divide.

"I do not see race as being particularly relevant to this argument, with the single point that in a western European society we are likely to have a criminal code which agrees with our majority culture and, inevitably, will conflict in some way with other cultures."

A code which can be and is manipulated to the advatage of some and the disadvatage of others, often along lines of class, race and the unconscious (and deliberate too) default thought of those that make the laws.


----------



## phildwyer (May 12, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> yeh. but you say this bloke was polish.



That's my point: he was Polish and so couldn't sign on, and so had to hustle to survive.  Or am I out of date with the EU welfare policies?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 12, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> That's my point: he was Polish and so couldn't sign on, and so had to hustle to survive.  Or am I out of date with the EU welfare policies?


i've yet to meet any black or hispanick poles.

nah, they can't sign on here afaik. but i've seen white people from the uk peddling drugs on the street, it ain't just a black thang.

though it seems to be in brixton.


----------



## dum dum (May 12, 2005)

Why can't Poles sign on?


----------



## fanta (May 12, 2005)

dum dum said:
			
		

> Why can't Poles sign on?



Because we're all racist bastards?


----------



## detective-boy (May 12, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Detective person said:
> 
> "(with the exception of people with mental illness that makes it inappropriate to hold them responsible for their actions)."
> 
> People aren't either mentally ill or not mentally ill. If you ahve experience of mental or emotional problems you know there is not a clear divide.



Of course it isn't but, in any particular incident, the "offender" may, or may not, be found to be responsible for their actions.  And, most importantly, not all mentally ill people are either criminally inclined or violent - the vast majority are neither and, in fact, are a vulnerable group of victims, frequently targetted by violent offenders.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 12, 2005)

fanta said:
			
		

> Because we're all racist bastards?


speak for yourself.


----------



## hatboy (May 12, 2005)

"not all mentally ill people are either criminally inclined or violent - the vast majority are neither and, in fact, are a vulnerable group of victims, frequently targetted by violent offenders".

Yeah, yeah. I know that. 

The end.

And they all lived in unresolved conflict unhappily ever after.

 

Stop now. Bored.


----------



## fanta (May 12, 2005)

You sound well obsessed with race Hatters!


----------



## fanta (May 12, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> speak for yourself.



Come on whitey - you know you're a cunt!


----------



## phildwyer (May 12, 2005)

Tell you what, there's a crack ho who pushes (undoubtedly fake) rock outside my local deli.  She's out there now, I can see her from my window.  If you so desire, I'll go and ask her why she's doing it.  Or anything else, within reason.  I'd invite her in to answer herself but obviously she'd rob the place.


----------



## hatboy (May 12, 2005)

fanta said:
			
		

> You sound well obsessed with race Hatters!



Yep. Have no problem saying it's important to me. Re-read thread for explanation.  

My contribution from now on on this thread is: See above.

Anyone who wants to stop sounding like an idiot should stop saying "whitey".

Peace, gay love and rasta upfullness.  

 xx


----------



## Loki (May 12, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> How about one of those "cool parties" at which you're such a fixture?


I am? News to me.


----------



## fanta (May 12, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Yep. Have no problem saying it's important to me. Re-read thread for explanation.
> 
> My contribution from now on on this thread is: See above.
> 
> ...



Gay love?...oooOOOoo...sounds a tad poofy to me...

...er anyone see the boxing last night?


----------



## phildwyer (May 12, 2005)

Loki said:
			
		

> I am? News to me.



Dude, *any* party you go to is cool.  By definition innit.


----------



## Loki (May 12, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Dude, *any* party you go to is cool.  By definition innit.


Right. Care to get back to the topic.


----------



## phildwyer (May 12, 2005)

Loki said:
			
		

> Right. Care to get back to the topic.



*You* are *my* topic, babycakes.


----------



## hatboy (May 12, 2005)

Now it's just silly chat. Fine if you want to do that, but actually thinking quiety about some of the issues and linked material in the last few pages might be worthwhile for some of us.

I think there's a sense of relief now that this has got away from the discussion on uncomfortable stuff like "default" and unconscious racism.

And a rush to tell jokes and make friends.


----------



## Loki (May 12, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> *You* are *my* topic, babycakes.


Wow. How. Interesting. Back on topic?


----------



## phildwyer (May 12, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Now it's just silly chat. Fine if you want to do that, but actually thinking quiety about some of the issues and linked material in the last few pages might be worthwhile for some of us.
> 
> I think there's a sense of relief now that this has got away from the discussion on uncomfortable stuff like "default" and unconscious racism.
> 
> And a rush to tell jokes and make friends.



And influence people!  But seriously, I'm off to have a word with Ms. Adventure out there.  Wish me luck, if all goes reasonably smoothly I'll report back in 5 minutes.


----------



## Mr Retro (May 12, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> No probs Hatster.  One example of the sort of thing I'm talking about on this board recently was when someone said they'd had to go up to 168th St in Harlem--in the daytime, mark you--and that it was "extremely dangerous."  Now, I know that part of town quite well, and the only reason anyone could consider it dangerous is because there are no white people there.  And because some of the locals will ask a white person to buy drugs.  But its not fucking *dangerous.*  Nor is Coldharbour Lane, IMHO, at least before midnight.  And after midnight, all bets are pretty much off pretty much anywhere in any big city...



"Hatster"   

That was me. And you accused me of unconcious rasism and told me it wasn't dangerous. It was dangerous and don't tell me it wasn't because you were not fucking there.

It wasn't unconcious rasism. It was real rasism directed at me and the other paddies I was digging the road with. I was 19 at the time, first time out of Ireland and I could feel real intimidation. I was never so scared in my life. Maybe now years later, older and more experienced I wouldn't be so scared. 

But don't you fucking dare tell me I'm racist or what my experiences were at the time "Philster".

How do you know 168th street well?


----------



## editor (May 12, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> The less accepting professionals arriving here now are clearing away people who are not doing harm along with the genuinly anti-social.


Do you think crack and smack dealers "do no harm" to Brixton?


----------



## editor (May 12, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> I think there's a sense of relief now that this has got away from the discussion on uncomfortable stuff like "default" and unconscious racism.
> 
> And a rush to tell jokes and make friends.


Ah yes!

Where would we we be without our daily dose of cod-psychological analysis from  hatboy who knows _exactly what all of us are thinking_, because we all fit into a little stereotypical box he labels 'urban75 people'.

*Boardist!*


----------



## phildwyer (May 12, 2005)

Mr Retro said:
			
		

> "Hatster"
> 
> That was me. And you accused me of unconcious rasism and told me it wasn't dangerous. It was dangerous and don't tell me it wasn't because you were not fucking there.
> 
> ...



Alright, calm down, I didn't mention your name because I didn't want to accuse you of racism directly.  But still.  I have to wonder what this "real intimidation" involved.  Did anyone threaten you, touch you, abuse you?  I can see that at 19, fresh out of Ireland, you might find Washington Heights scary.  But I lived in Harlem (not W. Heights, admittedly, though I had friends there and visited often) for years, and no-one gave me the slightest bit of racial harrasment.  In fact, I would say that anti-racism is deeply ingrained in black American communities.  They're just not racist, they've experienced too much of it themselves.  Jamaica, different story.  South Africa, very different story.  But black Americans just aren't racist.  Believe me, you weren't at risk, even though I accept that you felt you were.


----------



## Hollis (May 12, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Alright, calm down, I didn't mention your name because I didn't want to accuse you of racism directly.  But still.  I have to wonder what this "real intimidation" involved.  Did anyone threaten you, touch you, abuse you?  I can see that at 19, fresh out of Ireland, you might find Washington Heights scary.  But I lived in Harlem (not W. Heights, admittedly, though I had friends there and visited often) for years, and no-one gave me the slightest bit of racial harrasment.  ...But black Americans just aren't racist.  Believe me, you weren't at risk, even though I accept that you felt you were.



I don't think you can really generalise.. When I was a naive 21 year old just out of uni I was walking around part of Minneapolis to pick up my social security number.. a predominently black area.  And what happens?  A black women comes up to me asks me where I'm going, and says she'll accompany me there, as I didn't really ought to be hanging around the area by myself.

Go figure.. as the yanks would say.


----------



## phildwyer (May 12, 2005)

OK, if anyone's interested (which I very much doubt but WTF), my interview with our local crack ho went as follows (absolutely verbatim AFAIR):

CH: Yo Papi 'sup.
PD: How's it going?
CH: Alright.  Can you help me out today?
PD: Sure (gives $3).  How's business?
CH: Business bad.  Hot as ten muthafuckas out here.
PD: Why are you here then?
CH: What, you don't want people to live?
PD: No, but if its hot you should take a break.
CH: I got to get well.  My baby's sick.
PD: Can't you get help?
CH: You hanging out?
PD: No, can't you get any help for your baby?
CH: I can't get no help.  My baby's dying.
PD: Have you been to the hospital?
CH: What hospital?
PD: There's one on Broad St.
CH: I can't go in there.
PD: Why not?
CH: I can't go in there.
PD: I'm sorry.  Be careful.
CH: *You* be careful Papi.
PD: OK, later.
CH: God bless you.

Well, not much to report really, but whether you believe the baby stuff or not (I do) its pretty obvious that this is a desperate woman who really *does* need to be hustling drugs on the street.  She really *can't* get any help at the hospital without insurance.  Yes, she's an addict, but that's not her fault either.  Maybe its different in Brixton, and I'll be there tomorrow to see for myself, but I suspect the difference is one of degree, not of kind.  One thing's for sure: she's not "shit."


----------



## hatboy (May 12, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Ah yes!
> 
> Where would we we be without our daily dose of cod-psychological analysis from  hatboy who knows _exactly what all of us are thinking_, because we all fit into a little stereotypical box he labels 'urban75 people'.
> 
> *Boardist!*




There is undeniably a party line here. It results from your values, Editor, conscious and unconscious. Also it's just an internet board and who uses the net, etc, comes into it.

But, you, Editor, attract those of a similar mindset to yourself.  You never listen to this though or accept criticism of your own attitudes as you will now go on to show. As always. Probably by taking the piss out of me.

And whether you accept it or not, without me or afew others sticking a spanner in your works this thread would have been all about the "bad people" outside Barclays. At least I've provoked different viewpoints. And if you think "how arrogant" or something, so what. I have helped do that on this thread.

And with no interest or support from the editor of an oh-so-radical Brixton bulletin board.

You have your fingers in your ears Editor.


----------



## hatboy (May 12, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> OK, if anyone's interested (which I very much doubt but WTF), my interview with our local crack ho went as follows (absolutely verbatim AFAIR):
> 
> CH: Yo Papi 'sup.
> PD: How's it going?
> ...



You have my respect for that.  You were kind and it makes the point direct from someone involved.  Have a great day in Brixton tomorrow. I'm sure you will.


----------



## Stobart Stopper (May 12, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> You have your fingers in your ears Editor.


Nah, he's too busy grinding up his corn!
Goodnight Hatboy! 


http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=2983223#post2983223


----------



## Mr Retro (May 12, 2005)

Why can't you take what I say at face value? Again you question if I was intimidated or not.

I got the "Yo .... " <<can't remember the insult. It was slang I never heard before or since >> Followed with this "boom" thing with with finger pointed.

In NYC as you know people sit outside dring the heat of the day. People would place their chairs around where we worked and call to each other making comments about us. Then place them in our way where we were obviously working, refusing to move. Throw balls over heads to each other etc.

Is that ok by you? Does it pass muster or is it also in my mind like the unconcious racism?


----------



## phildwyer (May 12, 2005)

Mr Retro said:
			
		

> Why can't you take what I say at face value? Again you question if I was intimidated or not.
> 
> I got the "Yo .... " <<can't remember the insult. It was slang I never heard before or since >> Followed with this "boom" thing with with finger pointed.
> 
> ...



Eek, they pointed at you and threw balls over your head?  You should have summoned an Officer of the Law forthwith, and had the cheeky blighters locked up.  Look, I don't mean to take the piss, but it sounds to me like they could see you were scared of them and decided to mess with your head.  Did anyone actually touch you, harm you, threaten you?  I mean, have you ever been to a football match in the UK?  You need to grow a thicker skin...


----------



## Mr Retro (May 12, 2005)

Thanks - cherry pick from my quote to make your point. Whatever, I know my experience, you can twist it around to suit what you want to believe the place was like. I'm also willing to bet you are bullshitting about how well you know Washington Heights too.

Grown the skin now thanks, it was 15 years ago after all.


----------



## Mr Retro (May 12, 2005)

<<too drunk to put up an image>>


----------



## editor (May 13, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> And whether you accept it or not, without me or afew others sticking a spanner in your works this thread would have been all about the "bad people" outside Barclays.


No, it's about just the _two_ violent cunts who cowardly beat up someone weaker than them for cash.

Your laughable attempts to project your prejudices my way with some half-cocked, holier-than-thou drivel about 'unconscious racism' simply doesn't wash with me.






			
				hat boy said:
			
		

> There is undeniably a party line here..


Get a fucking grip.

Are  you really claiming that you've somehow managed to post up 3,615 posts without being influenced by this mythical "party line" but all the other poor, weak unenlightened posters simply can't help themselves being taken over by the urban75 meme?

I disagree with lots of posters here. I vehemently oppose many of the opinions posted here, just like some of my opinions are equally opposed.

By trotting out bullshit about 'party lines' you reveal how you're guilty of harbourng the kind of lazy stereotypes and blanket dismissals of people that form the basis of racism.






			
				hat boy said:
			
		

> There is undeniably a party line here..


same negative stereotyping that you're quick to accuse others of.




			
				hat boy said:
			
		

> But, you, Editor, attract those of a similar mindset to yourself.


Says hatboy, still posting on these very boards after many years and still going strong!


----------



## editor (May 13, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Do you think crack and smack dealers "do no harm" to Brixton?


Still waiting for an answer on this one, hatboy.


----------



## hatboy (May 13, 2005)

Party line - its an atmosphere, a flavour. People that attracts/versus people it puts off. It is here. 

The answer to your question is that I will not condemn people outright, even those who do bad things, this includes some crack sellers. But overall I think crack and smack are very destructive, yes. And I wish they hadn't been invented.

I know (or have known) a fair few people who sell and people who take crack. I've taken crack myself. I know this is hard for you to accept, but even crack dealers are just people, with all the qualities, good and bad, that we all have. 

That doesn't mean I think they are all sweeties (god no!), but it does mean I will not condemn these people across the board. There are so many other people who will do that. Such as yourself.

This is nothing to do with liberal or PC - this is to do with my personal experience of people.

And by the way...................

................do you +++++++++

(personal comment removed by editor)


----------



## hatboy (May 13, 2005)

"...some half-cocked, holier-than-thou drivel about 'unconscious racism' simply doesn't wash with me."

       ...equals...

"Racism, the word nobody likes. Whites who don't want to confront racism and who don't name themselves white recoil in horror from it, shun it like the plague. To mention the word in their company disrupts their comfortable complacency."

It "doesn't wash" with you because you refuse to even try to be conscious. This site is therefore comfortable for others who are unconscious.

That is a pity.


----------



## Mr Retro (May 13, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> And by the way...................
> 
> ................do you **************



What a sneaky fucking thing to post in the middle of the night when you knew it wouldn't be removed


----------



## kea (May 13, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> black Americans just aren't racist.




what, NONE of them? blimey that's impressive, you've checked out every single one have you?

and you seem to be pontificating about brixton while sitting in philadelphia and you haven't made this fact clear, so i think some people are under the misapprehension that you know what you're talking about.
oh and one more thing while i'm on this thread - talking about those people who deal on the streets is a diversion from the original topic which was about violence. they are linked yes, because the latter can seem intimidating sometimes. but what's your view of incidents like the one hatboy referred to earlier, where apparently the couple who were robbed at gunpoint in the middle of the night shouldn't be angry with the perpetrators because the perpetrators are fighting back against social oppression. apparently.
THAT is why some people are objecting to hatboy's views. especially when he then calls anyone who disagrees with him racist.


----------



## editor (May 13, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> ................do you *************



_*Way*_ out of fucking order. Twat.

You've been _repeatedly_ warned about posting up personal details.

One 48hr ban coming right up!

Oh, and happy birthday.


----------



## editor (May 13, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> It "doesn't wash" with you because you refuse to even try to be conscious. This site is therefore comfortable for others who are unconscious.
> 
> That is a pity.


No idea what you're on about, but it sure smells of pompous bullshit.


----------



## pooka (May 13, 2005)

Just to say , some of the things you'r esaying in general terms, hatboy, about the need for people to consider and confront their own racism are of course true. 

But in this particular issue - the occupation of KFC corner by street dealers and others - it's not the whole story. Most of the people I hear who are vocal about this issue and the need for something to be done (1) have lived here twice as long as you or I, hatboy and (2) are black.


----------



## phildwyer (May 13, 2005)

kea said:
			
		

> what, NONE of them? blimey that's impressive, you've checked out every single one have you?
> 
> and you seem to be pontificating about brixton while sitting in philadelphia and you haven't made this fact clear, so i think some people are under the misapprehension that you know what you're talking about.
> oh and one more thing while i'm on this thread - talking about those people who deal on the streets is a diversion from the original topic which was about violence. they are linked yes, because the latter can seem intimidating sometimes. but what's your view of incidents like the one hatboy referred to earlier, where apparently the couple who were robbed at gunpoint in the middle of the night shouldn't be angry with the perpetrators because the perpetrators are fighting back against social oppression. apparently.
> THAT is why some people are objecting to hatboy's views. especially when he then calls anyone who disagrees with him racist.



First of all, I know Brixton very well, members of my family live there and I often visit.  In fact, I'm going to be there tonight.  (I'm in King's Cross at the moment, just got off the plane).  Second, I've never made any secret of the fact that I live in Philly, I go on about it all the time.  Third, I would say that black Americans are the least racist single group of people in the Western world.  Anti-racism is a very important part of their culture.  Although, TBH, I've seen signs of that breaking down recently--directed against Asians though, not whites.  Go figure.  Fourthly, anyone robbed at gunpoint should be very angry indeed at the perpetrators.  I've been robbed at gunpoint, and I was so angry that I actually went back looking for the guy, which was a ridiculously silly thing to do.  That doesn't mean that society's not to blame though.  Lastly, I was agreeing with Hatboy about *some* people's unconscious racism--the poster who called street dealers "shit," Mr. Retro's Washington Heights Torment etc.  My aspersions were cast no further than that, nor will they be.


----------



## Hollis (May 13, 2005)

I think part of the problem is that this term 'unconscious racism' is by its nature very emotive.  What hatboy seems to be saying is just about what any social anthropologist would say.. i.e. that people tend to form groups with 'their own' or similar people, that these processes work impersonally, and that there's often suspicion towards 'outside' groups or cultures.  

It always interests me in London that some of the least 'mixed' things tend to be ones with zero barriers to entry - like pubs, or parties.. How many ethnics d'you get at alot of free parties.. for example.. I know this isn't purely down to 'group processes' but I'm sure this plays a part.


----------



## Mr Retro (May 13, 2005)

Unconscious racism is a term that has become a buzz word since Michael Moores Stupid White Men. I’m not saying it doesn’t exist, it does and it’s an insidious thing. But to have it levelled by people against people who they don’t even know, on a bulletin board? Give me a fucking break. 

I was accused of it by Philster (who twists the facts I put forward to suit his point) when I said I felt a dangerous area of New York was, in fact, dangerous.  He doesn’t even know the area. What a fucking joke.

If an accusation like this was levelled against me even 3 years ago I’d have been really angry. But now I know myself well, I’m not racist, subconsciously, unconsciously or overtly.

Perhaps you have examined you conscious Philster and found something lurking there? 
Are you racist philster?  I think you may be and are guilty about it, why else bang on and on, and accuse people you don’t even know of it? I find that interesting.


----------



## pk (May 13, 2005)

Highly likely our little cashpoint thieves will pick the wrong person one day and get a bullet in the head, or get hit by a car running away from the scene.

Naturally I will be most upset if this were to happen.

After all, they really _need_ the money, being that they are poor, oppressed members of a minority just trying to raise enough funds to purchase a nice bit of crack from their nice friendly crack dealer.

It's all part of the colourful world of Brixton.

And sometimes made even more colourful, by the pools of blood that gather beneath the bodies of young men and women, shot or stabbed over a few pounds worth of drugs, or the flashing of blue lights eminating from a police car arriving at a crime scene, three hours after an emergency call was placed to report another mugging.

Get a grip. Muggers are surplus scum. 
Violent muggers even more so. 
There is no debate.

If they get through a rehab session after prison and find Jesus, wow, great, they may be able to become fine upstanding members of the community.

But until then they are muggers, pure and simple.

Worthless, surplus, muggers that bleed all of what is potentially good in a challenged area.


----------



## Loki (May 13, 2005)

Mr Retro said:
			
		

> <<too drunk to put up an image>>









(Simpsons on now btw.. Channel 4).


----------



## hendo (May 13, 2005)

pk said:
			
		

> Highly likely our little cashpoint thieves will pick the wrong person one day and get a bullet in the head, or get hit by a car running away from the scene.
> .



This appears to have already happened; outside the KFC when I passed today was a sign appealing for witnesses to a shooting incident.


----------



## detective-boy (May 13, 2005)

Hollis said:
			
		

> How many ethnics d'you get at alot of free parties..



I think you probably mean "members of minority ethnic groups".  We are all "ethnic" of one sort or another.  Use of the term "ethnic" in this way is considered offensive by many as it implies superiority by the majority ethnic group. 

A fine example of unconscious / institutional racism!


----------



## pk (May 13, 2005)

Hollis is cool, no racist.


----------



## Mr Retro (May 14, 2005)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> I think you probably mean "members of minority ethnic groups".  We are all "ethnic" of one sort or another.  Use of the term "ethnic" in this way is considered offensive by many as it implies superiority by the majority ethnic group.
> 
> A fine example of unconscious / institutional racism!



What a load of absolute bollox. Hollis made an observation. What is the fucking difference in the way it's worded?


----------



## detective-boy (May 14, 2005)

Mr Retro said:
			
		

> What is the fucking difference in the way it's worded?



One way it is accurate and inoffensive.  The other way it is inaccurate and potentially offensive.  Why choose the latter (unless, of course, you mean to be offensive (which, by the way, I do not suggest was the case))?


----------



## phildwyer (May 14, 2005)

Mr Retro said:
			
		

> Unconscious racism is a term that has become a buzz word since Michael Moores Stupid White Men. I’m not saying it doesn’t exist, it does and it’s an insidious thing. But to have it levelled by people against people who they don’t even know, on a bulletin board? Give me a fucking break.
> 
> I was accused of it by Philster (who twists the facts I put forward to suit his point) when I said I felt a dangerous area of New York was, in fact, dangerous.  He doesn’t even know the area. What a fucking joke.
> 
> ...



I know the area well.  Test me.  And I still say that you *experienced* the situation as dangerous, when it was not *in fact* dangerous, because of your unconscious assumptions about the people who live there, and your unconscious misreading of their behavior.  BTW, I think any 19 year-old white guy with little experience of Dominicans would have felt just as you did.  I'm not blaming you, just pointing out the truth.  As to whether I'm unconsciously racist myself, well obviously I don't know.  That's the thing about unconscious feelings, you're not conscious of them.


----------



## phildwyer (May 14, 2005)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> I think you probably mean "members of minority ethnic groups".  We are all "ethnic" of one sort or another.  Use of the term "ethnic" in this way is considered offensive by many as it implies superiority by the majority ethnic group.
> 
> A fine example of unconscious / institutional racism!



I've certainly got no beef with Hollis, but you're quite right here.  This is something I notice in the USA, where people talk about "white ethnics" when they mean Poles, Italians etc.  Even "minorities" is a silly term--white Hispanics, as white as me, get preferential treatment because of their "minority" status.  I often point out that, as a Welshman, I'm an "ethnic  minority" too, you can imagine how popular that makes me.


----------



## Belushi (May 14, 2005)

Hollis definately aint a racist.

Except to the Welsh


----------



## Mr Retro (May 15, 2005)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> One way it is accurate and inoffensive.  The other way it is inaccurate and potentially offensive.  Why choose the latter (unless, of course, you mean to be offensive (which, by the way, I do not suggest was the case))?



Choose the other because you are just making a point.

The irony of somebody from the most racist institution in England, preaching the minutiae of racism, is biting and laughable.


----------



## detective-boy (May 15, 2005)

Mr Retro said:
			
		

> The irony of somebody from the most racist institution in England, preaching the minutiae of racism, is biting and laughable.



It's amazing how much an organisation changes, and how much individual members learn, from ten years of unremitting criticism, training, advice and guidance isn't it.   Maybe others would benefit from it too    

Whilst I acknowledge it is not perfect, and never will be, there is no way that the police service is the "most racist institution in England" any more (if it ever was).


----------



## bluestreak (May 16, 2005)

what a carcrash of a thread.

that corner is the only place in the world where i have ever been successfully mugged, so i'm not a fan.  i too think that muggers are scum, and to assert that violent theft, crack and smack dealing and all that are a legitimate response to an unfair world is i think incredibly offensive to every ethnic minority person, especially those who grew up in poverty, who haven't decided to make a living out of hurting other people.  violence is wrong except in self-defence IMO.  how is saying that violent theft is wrong a racist statement, even if it is unconscious.  it's wrong when white people do it, it's wrong when black people do it.  perhaps i'm just a misanthrope pure and simple.


----------



## Pie 1 (May 16, 2005)

Well, I had a delightful conversation with a dealer whilst waiting outside Sainsbury's local yesterday afternoon whilst Mrs pie was inside grabbing a couple of things.

Dealer: Skunk, mate, skunk?
Me < Moved away>
D : <approches me again> "Skunk, skunk?"
Me "No. can you leave me alone please"
D: "C'mon Good skunk, man"
Me : "Look, piss off, I don't want any weed, ok?"
D ; What you say motherfucker? I stab you in the face fucker, yeah? what d'say?
Me <walked inside Sainsbury's>


----------



## phildwyer (May 16, 2005)

Pie 1 said:
			
		

> Well, I had a delightful conversation with a dealer whilst waiting outside Sainsbury's local yesterday afternoon whilst Mrs pie was inside grabbing a couple of things.
> 
> Dealer: Skunk, mate, skunk?
> Me < Moved away>
> ...



Why'd you have to tell the guy to piss off?  He was only doing his job.  If you went into Sainsbury's you'd have seen lots of in-you-face ads for products a lot more harmful than his.  You don't go round telling people to piss off when they come up and tell you about the latest special offer on mobile phones or whatever do you?  Salesmen of any kind don't usually take the first "no" for an answer, that's the first thing they teach you in salesman-school.


----------



## rennie (May 16, 2005)

A polite no thank you mate works well for me.


----------



## editor (May 16, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> You don't go round telling people to piss off when they come up and tell you about the latest special offer on mobile phones or whatever do you?  Salesmen of any kind don't usually take the first "no" for an answer, that's the first thing they teach you in salesman-school.


In store promotion teams don't usually offer up the "stab you in the face" option on refusal though!

I've done door to door selling and I had my fair share of abuse, but that goes with the territory: if you're invading someone's personal space and harassing them without invitation, some folks are liable to get gnarly.


----------



## phildwyer (May 16, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> In store promotion teams don't usually offer up the "stab you in the face" option on refusal though!
> 
> I've done door to door selling and I had my fair share of abuse, but that goes with the territory: if you're invading someone's personal space and harassing them without invitation, some folks are liable to get gnarly.



When I get unsolicited phone-sales calls, I pretend to be really interested but busy, and ask if I can call them at home later.  They say they can't give out their home numbers.  Then I ask if that's because they don't want total strangers calling them to discuss business propositions at home.  No doubt I'm the most hated man in Bangalore...


----------



## editor (May 16, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> When I get unsolicited phone-sales calls, I pretend to be really interested but busy, and ask if I can call them at home later.  They say they can't give out their home numbers.  Then I ask if that's because they don't want total strangers calling them to discuss business propositions at home.  No doubt I'm the most hated man in Bangalore...


I like that approach!

Not so sure if it would go down well with a street dealer ("Love to buy some of your drugs, but I'm a bit short right now - so give us your home phone number and I'll be sure to pop around to buy some crack later!")


----------



## Pie 1 (May 16, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Why'd you have to tell the guy to piss off?



Because it was his third approach to me. I'd already knocked him back twice. Possably not the best choice of words but he didn't exactly seem to have got the message the 1st two times.

And your analagy of him 'doing his job' to Sainsburys or phone companies pushing promotions is frankly, one of the most absurd I've ever heard. (Also as editor said, supermarkets generally don't threaten to stab you in the face in my expirence - I can't speak for supermarkets in Philly though  )


----------



## poster342002 (May 16, 2005)

I suppose protection-racketeers, muggers, arms-dealers, torturers and so-forth are "just doing their (indefensible) job" as well.


----------



## phildwyer (May 17, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Not so sure if it would go down well with a street dealer ("Love to buy some of your drugs, but I'm a bit short right now - so give us your home phone number and I'll be sure to pop around to buy some crack later!")



They do give out business cards in Philly, apparently.  The practice arose following a major crackdown on open-air drug markets in Kensington (a.k.a. "the Badlands").  Dealers are still there, but they give out cards instead of drugs.  They can be quite inventive, apparently, they give their stuff brand names ("Poison," "Dead Man Walking," "Blue Thunder" have been reported). Of course, one imagines that the guys on Coldharbor Lane aren't carrying anything harder than sugar and oregano anyway.


----------



## dogmatique (May 17, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> When I get unsolicited phone-sales calls, I pretend to be really interested but busy, and ask if I can call them at home later.  They say they can't give out their home numbers.  Then I ask if that's because they don't want total strangers calling them to discuss business propositions at home.  No doubt I'm the most hated man in Bangalore...



Damn!  I knew Jerrry Seinfeld had stolen that story from somewhere!


----------



## hatboy (May 17, 2005)

Pie 1 said:
			
		

> Well, I had a delightful conversation with a dealer whilst waiting outside Sainsbury's local yesterday afternoon whilst Mrs pie was inside grabbing a couple of things.
> 
> Dealer: Skunk, mate, skunk?
> Me < Moved away>
> ...




You brought that upon yourself by acting like (and being?) a weak snob.  You won't see this though. Sainsbury's Local - Sanctuary of the Frightened Yuppie.


----------



## editor (May 17, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Sainsbury's Local - Sanctuary of the Frightened Yuppie.


I don't like the place and can't remember the last time I bought anything from there, but do you _really_ believe that's it's only "yuppies" that shop there?


----------



## hatboy (May 17, 2005)

Sainsburys shop in Brixton seems one of the most disconnected shops from Brixton to me.  I've noticed alot of people who are rude with their fear in there.

Pooka said:

"But in this particular issue - the occupation of KFC corner by street dealers and others - it's not the whole story. Most of the people I hear who are vocal about this issue and the need for something to be done (1) have lived here twice as long as you or I, hatboy and (2) are black."

I know. And that's fine. That doesn't contradict me saying that some of those people are OK and that I won't condemn people as "scum".


----------



## pk (May 17, 2005)

Yeah, some muggers/gun-toting crack dealers/brutal pimps are OK.

I mean, they're just people.

They have feelings too y'know!

(Do me a favour)


----------



## chegrimandi (May 17, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> I don't like the place and can't remember the last time I bought anything from there, but do you _really_ believe that's it's only "yuppies" that shop there?



I think hatboy is referring to pei 1 running off into Sainsburys as sanctuary etc....

anyway I said ages ago that Sainsburys local = gentrified area - hatboy is so old....errr....hat. (boy)


----------



## Pie 1 (May 17, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> You won't see this though. Sainsbury's Local - Sanctuary of the Frightened Yuppie.



You nob. 
And you don't see that your constant patronising, cod philosophical bleatings have turned you into a fucking charicature. 

"I just want to love and give love, blah blah blah"

Then why do you do nothing but spit condicention and bile at everyone on these boards?


----------



## hatboy (May 17, 2005)

PK - What are they then, if not human? Aliens?

People who do bad things are still people.


----------



## Pie 1 (May 17, 2005)

So you _keep_  saying...


----------



## hatboy (May 17, 2005)

Pie1 said:

"Then why do you do nothing but spit condicention and bile at everyone on these boards?"

Because they are not truthful.


----------



## Pie 1 (May 17, 2005)

Christ, here we go.

PS It would also help if you would make use of the 'quote' function occasionally.


----------



## magneze (May 17, 2005)

Err, I must have missed something, but Pie 1 moving away from the nice dealer chappie would generally indicate that he wasn't interested. Why should he get any more hassled? He was quite polite and firm the second time and got pissed off the third. Why was there a third offer when the previous two were turned down? I'd be pissed off after a third offer I didn't want, whether it was sex, drugs or rock & roll...


----------



## Pie 1 (May 17, 2005)

Magneze said:
			
		

> Why was there a third offer when the previous two were turned down?



I'd obviously mis-interprted the first two - he was actually just trying to make friends with me.


----------



## dogmatique (May 17, 2005)

My Mum was called a "dirty white bitch" outside the Sainsbury's local by one of our lovely local dealers for politely turning down an offer of skunk.

If only I'd known she'd brought it on herself for failing to understand how much of an important and integral part these vibrant young people are to our community.

God.  If only she wouldn't go round oppressing people all the time.  Tsk.


----------



## pk (May 17, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> PK - What are they then, if not human? Aliens?
> 
> People who do bad things are still people.



And the people who do REALLY bad things, like deal crack, mug people at cashpoints, etc. are SURPLUS people, whatever the colour of their skin.

They are the scum of the earth.

The only upside is that they tend to die young, and often by violent means.


----------



## pk (May 17, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Pie1 said:
> 
> "Then why do you do nothing but spit condicention and bile at everyone on these boards?"
> 
> Because they are not truthful.



And you are truthful?

My friend, if you champion the rights of those who mug innocent people because you percieve them as part of the gentrification of Brixton, or some such bollocks, your perception is seriously twisted.


----------



## Pie 1 (May 17, 2005)

pk said:
			
		

> The only upside is that they tend to die young, and often by violent means.



Not the most helpful of comments, pk.


----------



## pk (May 17, 2005)

Fuck 'em.

Live by the sword, etc.

Watch me weep when these cashpoint thieves die from bullet wounds when they rob the wrong person. Not.


----------



## aurora green (May 17, 2005)

I would just like to say, that although I have been offered weed more times than I can possibly remember at afore mentioned hotspots, I have never, ever been insulted in any way, upon declining.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 17, 2005)

I can't ever remember having been insulted either. Mind you, I'm usually on my way somewhere, rather than hanging about... though even waiting for people outside the Ritzy, "no thanks" or a shake of the head has been okay. It's like paper sellers or something.

This instance seems fairly unusual. After all, it's a bit odd trying to *persuade* somebody to buy some weed. What, they're going to say "no thanks... oh okay then, go on"? Either you want to buy fake drugs or you don't.


----------



## dogmatique (May 17, 2005)

To be honest I was more surprised that she was offered them in the first place than the insult.

I don't really consider a lady pensioner from Bolton as being in the "Oregano in a bag" buying demographic.

Ho hum.


----------



## Pie 1 (May 17, 2005)

FridgeMagnet said:
			
		

> "no thanks" or a shake of the head has been okay.



Which is my normal policy, and yes, most of the time it works. But this guy was unusually persistant and yeah, I got fucked off.


----------



## dogmatique (May 17, 2005)

Yeah, cos he wasn't proffering fois gras, you Sainsburys Local doorway gentrifyin tosspot


----------



## Streathamite (May 18, 2005)

pk said:
			
		

> And the people who do REALLY bad things, like deal crack, mug people at cashpoints, etc. are SURPLUS people, whatever the colour of their skin.


umm....just seeking to oil the wheels of debate here..... but isn't there a key difference between crack-sellers and person-muggers, in that crack dealers' 'targets' are generally only too willing to be, well, 'engaged with'? they do - ultimately - choose, and invariably go some way to make it clear that they do?


----------



## Streathamite (May 18, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Pie1 said:
> 
> "Then why do you do nothing but spit condicention and bile at everyone on these boards?"
> 
> Because they are not truthful.


errr. EVERYONE other than you is not truthful?????
how humble I feel in  your presence!


----------



## pooka (May 18, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Sainsburys shop in Brixton seems one of the most disconnected shops from Brixton to me.  I've noticed alot of people who are rude with their fear in there.
> 
> Pooka said:
> 
> ...



Agreed. At least two of the people I referred to are clergy. I doubt they need teaching that people may do bad things without being wholly and irredeemably bad.


----------



## editor (May 18, 2005)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> errr. EVERYONE other than you is not truthful?????
> how humble I feel in  your presence!


That's about the gist of it, I believe.

*urban75 people* = big homogeneous, easy-to-lump-together, mono-thought collective of untruthful bad people, all deeply saturated in unconscious, nasty racism. Bad people.

*hatboy* = completely untouched by racism in all its forms. Local hero. The most marginalised boy in the village. 'Understands' everyone, unless they disagree with him, in which case, see above.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 18, 2005)

I haven't read the whole thread, so this is meant in all honesty.

I get the impression that most of the 'bad actors' around this corner are black: am I right about this?


----------



## editor (May 18, 2005)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> I get the impression that most of the 'bad actors' around this corner are black: am I right about this?


Mainly, but not exclusively - not that the colour is the issue to me. 

You can get all shades of people getting _agitatus _there.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 18, 2005)

Going by this, I think I can answer my own question:

http://www.urban75.org/vista/brixton7.html

That is a HUGE KFC, btw.


----------



## editor (May 18, 2005)

Looks a bit different at night, Johnny!


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 18, 2005)

Probably more crack pipes in the mouths of the people sitting on those red pipes.

But didn't the robbery occur at 6 pm?


----------



## editor (May 18, 2005)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> But didn't the robbery occur at 6 pm?


Sadly, yes. And at the time the streets would have been packed with people of every age, colour, religion and nationality.


----------



## TeeJay (May 18, 2005)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> I haven't read the whole thread, so this is meant in all honesty.
> 
> I get the impression that most of the 'bad actors' around this corner are black: am I right about this?


 Why are you asking?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 18, 2005)

Is there a reason that I shouldn't ask the question?


----------



## TeeJay (May 18, 2005)

I was wondering what relevance it has to the thread and what people are discussing. You might ask if "most of the bad actors are men", if they are right or left handed, if they are between 16 and 30, if they wear trainers and so forth. If you feel like it then by all means ask whatever you want. I'd still like to know why you are asking and what relevance it has...

(Can I also point out that the people learning on the 'red poles' are just normal people waiting for the bus IMO.)

ps. If you want to know about the demographics of the location in question, have a look here: 

...and type in "lambeth" (see map of boroughs here:  )

More specifically you might look at the following wards (the four wards which mostly make make up 'brixton'): 

Coldharbour
Ferndale
Tulse Hill
Brixton Hill

(see map here: )


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 18, 2005)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Going by this, I think I can answer my own question:
> 
> http://www.urban75.org/vista/brixton7.html
> 
> That is a HUGE KFC, btw.


It's not really as big as it looks there! I think the panorama is stretching it out, and the photos were taken fairly close to it.


----------



## hatboy (May 18, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> That's about the gist of it, I believe.
> 
> *urban75 people* = big homogeneous, easy-to-lump-together, mono-thought collective of untruthful bad people, all deeply saturated in unconscious, nasty racism. Bad people.
> 
> *hatboy* = completely untouched by racism in all its forms. Local hero. The most marginalised boy in the village. 'Understands' everyone, unless they disagree with him, in which case, see above.



Mosty agree wit the first thing. There are afew exceptions. Some of the people who are untruthful are doing it deliberately.

Second thing - I'd be harsher on myself. I've never claimed to be a "local hero" or thought of myself as one. I do however, get on with some people who are rejected by most. And if you re-read my posts you'll see I don't claim to be untouched by racism either. I care about the people close to me and things to be fairer in general that's all.


----------



## editor (May 18, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Mosty agree wit the first thing.


Then you're a hypocritical bigot, guilty of the very same thing you're quick to accuse others of.






			
				hatboy said:
			
		

> I care about the people close to me and things to be fairer in general that's all.


And no one else here does?


----------



## hatboy (May 18, 2005)

You make an atmosphere of unconsciousness. Others feel either comfortable or uncomfortable with that.

Mono-culture or mono-thought is closer to the truth of u75 than you acknowledge.

That's all really.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 18, 2005)

Oh fuck, it's Snidey Jesus again.


----------



## hatboy (May 18, 2005)

It's over.  This is futile.


----------



## Pie 1 (May 18, 2005)

See you soon.


----------



## editor (May 18, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> You make an atmosphere of unconsciousness.


Wow! That sounds way cool!

Have I got a secret lab for brewing up the chemicals or something, and how do I go around spraying the stuff? Does it seep out of the browser or something?.

And if it's as incredibly potent as you suggest and able to effortlessly bend the minds of thousands of posters, maybe I should market the stuff?


----------



## phildwyer (May 18, 2005)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Is there a reason that I shouldn't ask the question?



No, its a good question to ask.  And the answer is that, as elsewhere in the Western world, the vast majority of people selling drugs on Coldharbour Lane are black.  This is important, because there can only be two explanations for this fact: (a) black people are naturally criminally-inclined, or (b) black people have less opportunities than others to make money legally.  Assuming that, like me, you accept (b), then it starts to seem a bit silly, and even racist, to say that street dealers are scum, shit, should die young and so forth.


----------



## Hollis (May 18, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> No, its a good question to ask.  And the answer is that, as elsewhere in the Western world, the vast majority of people selling drugs on Coldharbour Lane are black.  This is important, because there can only be two explanations for this fact: (a) black people are naturally criminally-inclined, or (b) black people have less opportunities than others to make money legally.  Assuming that, like me, you accept (b), then it starts to seem a bit silly, and even racist, to say that street dealers are scum, shit, should die young and so forth.




I feel you are making afew false oppositions there, or conflating afew different things.  However I can't be arsed to work out what.


----------



## pinkmonkey (May 18, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> No, its a good question to ask.  And the answer is that, as elsewhere in the Western world, the vast majority of people selling drugs on Coldharbour Lane are black.  This is important, because there can only be two explanations for this fact: (a) black people are naturally criminally-inclined, or (b) black people have less opportunities than others to make money legally.  Assuming that, like me, you accept (b), then it starts to seem a bit silly, and even racist, to say that street dealers are scum, shit, should die young and so forth.



Isn't it more to do with  most of the drug trafficers in that area tending to be black?  Its the ethnicity of the people/gangs who control the dealers isn't it?

Out in Essex isn't it more Kenneth Noye types? i.e. white?  Where I live (off Green Lanes), it's Turkish controlled - perhaps because it's a Turkish area?

Depends where you live.  We've had our fair share of drug related crime out here in Palmers Green the past year - no one involved was black.


----------



## Mr Retro (May 18, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> It's over.  This is futile.



Where have we heard this before?


----------



## kea (May 18, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Assuming that, like me, you accept (b), then it starts to seem a bit silly, and even racist, to say that street dealers are scum, shit, should die young and so forth.




are you suggesting that people wouldn't think street dealers *who hassle people who are not interested in their wares* were cunts if they happened to be white?


----------



## phildwyer (May 18, 2005)

kea said:
			
		

> are you suggesting that people wouldn't think street dealers *who hassle people who are not interested in their wares* were cunts if they happened to be white?



No.  I'm suggesting that if you think to yourself "Hmm, why are they all black?" (and Brixton is NOT a black majority area), you will inevitably be led to the conclusion that they are there for some other reason than because they're cunts.  Unless you are a racist.  And hassling people who initially do not seem to be interested in their wares is what any salesman worth his salt does.  Frabkly I don't know what's so horribly offensive about someone whispering "skunk" in your ear a couple of times.  Unless its a comment on your personal hygene.  I think people who find it horribly offensive are unconsciously racist.


----------



## Giles (May 18, 2005)

hatboy said:
			
		

> PK - What are they then, if not human? Aliens?
> 
> People who do bad things are still people.



Sometimes, not, in my opinion.

I reserve the right to decide who I am going to treat as "people" and who I'm not.


----------



## kea (May 18, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> No.  I'm suggesting that if you think to yourself "Hmm, why are they all black?" (and Brixton is NOT a black majority area), you will inevitably be led to the conclusion that they are there for some other reason than because they're cunts.  Unless you are a racist.



so someone can't be black and a cunt? 




> And hassling people who initially do not seem to be interested in their wares is what any salesman worth his salt does.  Frabkly I don't know what's so horribly offensive about someone whispering "skunk" in your ear a couple of times.  Unless its a comment on your personal hygene.  I think people who find it horribly offensive are unconsciously racist.



but that's not what we're talking about tho is it. and to suggest it is, is to deliberately misrepresent the situation.
yes those people who complain about the initial offer are probably over-reacting. however, being threatened and abused subsequently is NOT on, it is the actions of a cunt whatever your skin colour, and i can't believe that you consider it acceptable, let alone that you suggest that those who have the effrontary to get upset about it are racist!


----------



## phildwyer (May 18, 2005)

kea said:
			
		

> so someone can't be black and a cunt?



Obviously you can.  My point is that, anywhere you go in the world, you'll find that the people selling drugs on the street are from the most oppressed racial groups in that society.  Therefore, it seems logical to infer a causal relation between racial oppression and selling drugs on the street.  Therefore, people who are selling drugs on the street are doing so because they are racially oppressed.  Therefore, they are deserving of solidarity and support, not hatred, contempt and death-wishes.  Is this really all that complicated, it seems blindingly bleedin obvious to me...


----------



## kea (May 18, 2005)

yeah but none of that addresses my point that we're not talking here about people who sell/offer drugs on the street, we're talking about people who threaten violence and abuse people who are not interested in said drugs.

there's no excuse for being a cunt, whatever the colour of your skin. no?


----------



## phildwyer (May 18, 2005)

kea said:
			
		

> yeah but none of that addresses my point that we're not talking here about people who sell/offer drugs on the street, we're talking about people who threaten violence and abuse people who are not interested in said drugs.
> 
> there's no excuse for being a cunt, whatever the colour of your skin. no?



I believe that the person who made the threat had just been told to "piss off."  This will usually cause a person of any race to react in a hostile manner.  The poster who was threatened seemed to think that the insult was justified because the insultee had offered weed three times.  I disagree.  I suggest that this poster would not have told an equally persistant seller of cabbages or cottages to "piss off."  I could, of course, be wrong.


----------



## tarannau (May 18, 2005)

kea said:
			
		

> yeah but none of that addresses my point that we're not talking here about people who sell/offer drugs on the street, we're talking about people who threaten violence and abuse people who are not interested in said drugs.
> 
> there's no excuse for being a cunt, whatever the colour of your skin. no?



We're talking about one person who abused one person on the street as far as I can tell. 
Like Aurora and others on this thread, I've never had any bad dealings (sorry) with these street crews - they ask, I say no and that's it. In fact, I have good-humoured banter with the guys at the end of my road every day; they honestly keep an eye out for me, despite the fact I've never bought anything off them over the last 5 years...

That's not to belittle Pie1s experience, which sounds out of order, but that's a comparatively rare experience as far as I know. Slightly annoying 'skunk, skunk' hassle aside, Pie's is the only violent threat I've heard of. Let's keep a little perspective.

And that's not to excuse the wankers who physically attack people at cashpoints either - that's clearly out of line. No excuses for them...


----------



## editor (May 18, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> The poster who was threatened seemed to think that the insult was justified because the insultee had offered weed three times.  I disagree.  I suggest that this poster would not have told an equally persistant seller of cabbages or cottages to "piss off."  I could, of course, be wrong.


Be honest: when was the last time you were persistently hassled to buy something you didn't want in the street that _wasn't_ drugs?


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (May 18, 2005)

not  drugs?  the child line people  out side of brixton tube?

or  the bible bashers ....      but then  again they are less lightly to stab you in the face


well i'm not certain about some of the   overly zelous religious ones


----------



## tarannau (May 18, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Be honest: when was the last time you were persistently hassled to buy something you didn't want in the street that _wasn't_ drugs?



Get hassled plenty of the time, usually asking for money rather than offering drugs tbh.


----------



## phildwyer (May 18, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Be honest: when was the last time you were persistently hassled to buy something you didn't want in the street that _wasn't_ drugs?




Er, bungalows in Bodrum, blow-jobs in Brooklyn, baltis in Bangkok...  No, I take your point, but it depends what you mean by "hassled."  I can't turn on my TV without being hassled to buy something I don't want.  All I'm saying, really, is its not worth getting upset about petty drug dealing on Coldharbour Lane.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 18, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> people who are selling drugs on the street are doing so because they are racially oppressed.  Therefore, they are deserving of solidarity and support, not hatred, contempt and death-wishes.


I agree, and think putting people outside the human category is vile, but I'm still going to be annoyed by anti-social behaviour.


----------



## Hollis (May 18, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> My point is that, anywhere you go in the world, you'll find that the people selling drugs on the street are from the most oppressed racial groups in that society.  Therefore, it seems logical to infer a causal relation between racial oppression and selling drugs on the street.  Therefore, people who are selling drugs on the street are doing so because they are racially oppressed.



Well atleast you admit to inferring the causality from a correlation.. Most burglary in Britain is committed by 'white ethnic groups'.. what can you infer from that?


----------



## kea (May 18, 2005)

> I suggest that this poster would not have told an equally persistant seller of cabbages or cottages to "piss off." I could, of course, be wrong.



i can't comment on how you would react, of course, but if anyone was persistently trying to interest me in something i had no interest in, and had informed them already that i had no interest in, then i would probably tell them to piss off. regardless of their skin colour.


----------



## phildwyer (May 18, 2005)

Hollis said:
			
		

> Well atleast you admit to inferring the causality from a correlation.. Most burglary in Britain is committed by 'white ethnic groups'.. what can you infer from that?



Most, yes, but a *disproportionate* amount of "crime"--at least, detetcted "crime"--is committed by people of Afro-Caribbean descent.  What can you infer from that?  I suggest that you must either make a racist inference, or you are forced to admit that crime results from oppression.  In the latter case, your attitude towards "criminals" would surely have to be more lenient than that expressed by some posters on this thread.


----------



## poster342002 (May 18, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Frabkly I don't know what's so horribly offensive about someone whispering "skunk" in your ear a couple of times.


Because it's *not* that subtle: it's often a case of someone lurching out of a doorway into your personal space and and going "skunkskunkskunk". 

And to imply objecting to this is in any way racist is just absurd. Nobody cares about the race of the persons involved. People find it irritating nomatter what race or colour the hasslers are.


----------



## gaijingirl (May 18, 2005)

Yesterday as I walked past Boots a guy did call out "skunk" under his breath.  I shook my head and carried on.  Fine.

Last week, coming out of the tube a guy blocked my path to ask me for my travelcard.  "Sorry mate I don't have one", I replied and went to walk around him.  He stepped in front of me again, came up _very_ close to my face and said much more forcefully.. "Give me your travelcard".. I replied "I *don't* have a travelcard" more forcefully myself and skipped round him and carried on to the bus stop.  

One of these guys was black, one was white.  One pissed me off and frankly was potentially intimidating.  I can think of many friends who would have found that scary.  The fact that both of them were acting illegally is beside the point.. if the second guy had approached me with that attitude selling cabbages then I would have been equally as annoyed.

I think that most people on here can appreciate the difference between overly forceful approaches (whether the person is selling legally or otherwise) and basic enquiries and act appropriately and I don't think that colour or race really comes into it.


----------



## tarannau (May 18, 2005)

poster342002 said:
			
		

> Because it's *not* that subtle: it's often a case of someone lurching out of a doorway into your personal space and and going "skunkskunkskunk".
> 
> And to imply objecting to this is in any way racist is just absurd. Nobody cares about the race of the persons involved. People find it irritating nomatter what race or colour the hasslers are.




True, but street haggling and trading is an huge part of many countries and cultures. Brixton's easy work compared to the hassle you'd experience India or many towns in Guyana for example.  

I don't care about race either, but your talk of 'personal space' on a main high street strikes me as a little optimistic and perhaps something of an English trait.

Good point by Gaijingirl by the way - I don't have an objection with people asking whatever, but if they've got an aggressive attitude I'm likely to take offence....


----------



## Hollis (May 18, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Most, yes, but a *disproportionate* amount of "crime"--at least, detetcted "crime"--is committed by people of Afro-Caribbean descent.  What can you infer from that?  I suggest that you must either make a racist inference, or you are forced to admit that crime results from oppression.  In the latter case, your attitude towards "criminals" would surely have to be more lenient than that expressed by some posters on this thread.



No - crime doesn't just result from 'oppression' - its caused by loads of factors, entirely unrelated to this.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 18, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> No, I take your point, but it depends what you mean by "hassled."  I can't turn on my TV without being hassled to buy something I don't want.  All I'm saying, really, is its not worth getting upset about petty drug dealing on Coldharbour Lane.


I've been hassled (dumpy Gran with shopping waiting for bus) and no has not been taken for an answer...I have on more than one occasion in broad daylight been followed by aggressive dealers who won't take a firm but polite "No." for an answer. My son was first offered "Powders" when he was barely 12 and waiting for a bus home after school on Coldharbour Lane


----------



## editor (May 18, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> I suggest that you must either make a racist inference, or you are forced to admit that crime results from oppression.


You'd be daft to make such wild, sweeping assumptions, IMO.

Not all violent drug dealers are "oppressed", for example.


----------



## editor (May 18, 2005)

gaijingirl said:
			
		

> Last week, coming out of the tube a guy blocked my path to ask me for my travelcard.  "Sorry mate I don't have one", I replied and went to walk around him.  He stepped in front of me again, came up _very_ close to my face and said much more forcefully.. "Give me your travelcard".. I replied "I *don't* have a travelcard" more forcefully myself and skipped round him and carried on to the bus stop.


I nearly got my face mashed in a while ago when I stepped in to stop a big bloke hassling the fuck out of a young woman leaving Brixton tube.

He'd already demanded her travelcard twice and she'd politely said no both times - so he then followed her up the stairs and start yanking on her arm, trying to pull her back down.

I told him to leave her alone and then next thing I knew I was in chest-beating macho land.

If only I'd completed that karate course when I was a kid.....


----------



## past caring (May 18, 2005)

tarannau said:
			
		

> True, but street haggling and trading is an huge part of many countries and cultures. Brixton's easy work compared to the hassle you'd experience India or many towns in Guyana for example.
> 
> I don't care about race either, but your talk of 'personal space' on a main high street strikes me as a little optimistic and perhaps something of an English trait.



Can't speak for Guyana - but I've been to India plenty. Whilst I might have experienced what I might call _persistent_ attempts at selling I don't think I've _ever_ felt threatened or unsafe.

And in regards to feelings about personal space being a specifically "English" trait, I'm far from convinced. But what if it were? Perhaps poster342002 _is_ English? He certainly lives in England. Any putative invasion of said space is happening in England - so what's your point?


----------



## pk (May 18, 2005)

PhilDwyer said:
			
		

> My point is that, anywhere you go in the world, you'll find that the people selling drugs on the street are from the most oppressed racial groups in that society



Sorry Phil, with respect, that's bollocks.

Plenty of white kids out there selling drugs, Goa, Thailand, many of them trustafarians on the make.

I don't give a fuck what colour you are - rob people violently at a cashpoint instead of doing an honest days work and you can fuck right off.

Trick is not to buy weed off the streets.

Anyone actively seeking to buy what passes for weed outside Brixton tube or the KFC deserves a fucking slap, it encourages the cunts.

I don't mind the odd discreet "skunkskunk" as I'm walking past... but there are some utter fucking wankers that hang outside the KFC, looking for trouble, and intimidating women at the bus stop, tube station, seen it happen and even stepped in... not all of these surplus tossers are black men, there are some white wankers too... (albeit the "yeah, u get mi innit, my mans are round de corner wid a blade" type of white "wigga" wanker) ...


----------



## Pie 1 (May 18, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> I believe that the person who made the threat had just been told to "piss off."  This will usually cause a person of any race to react in a hostile manner.  The poster who was threatened seemed to think that the insult was justified because the insultee had offered weed three times.  I disagree.  I suggest that this poster would not have told an equally persistant seller of cabbages or cottages to "piss off."  I could, of course, be wrong.



phildwyer, your posts are very well argued and I respect your point of view as a result, but I'm afraid in my case you are wrong. I tend to respond to any kind of aggresive marketing that is persisantly pushed in my face after I've said no, with a very curt response.
I'd also like to add that the "piss off' remark in actual tone, wasn't that aggressive, something that I realise that text on a bulliten board cannot convey - it was more of a resigned, weary 'oh, piss off' And whilst I accept that in hindsight, it wasn't the best choice of phrase, I'm still not going to apologise for it under the circumstanses.


----------



## detective-boy (May 18, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> .. This is important, because there can only be two explanations for this fact: (a) black people are naturally criminally-inclined, or (b) black people have less opportunities than others to make money legally...



There is a third (sort of linked to the second) - disadvantage.  History shows new immigrant groups tend to initially to be disadvantaged in many ways - accommodation, income, education ... - for a variety of reasons.  Crime (esp. petty crime) is commonplace in the so-called "ghettos" but, over time, they improve their situation and move away.




			
				pinkmonkey said:
			
		

> ... Depends where you live ...



Yep.




			
				phildwyer said:
			
		

> ... and Brixton is NOT a black majority area ...



DEpends on the source of the stats.  In census terms, no (albeit one of the highest visible minority ethnic percentages in the UK) but in relation to the "street population" - i.e. those on the street, not those on the formal census - it is very much a majority visible minority ethnic area (see work done by Home Office sociologist Mario Fitzgerald in the late 1990s during the stop-search disproportionality debate).




			
				phildwyer said:
			
		

> ... Therefore, it seems logical to infer a causal relation between racial oppression and selling drugs on the street ...



See above.  Oppression (racial or otherwise) may be part of the reason for the disadvantage but I would argue it is not the whole.




			
				Hollis said:
			
		

> ... Most burglary in Britain is committed by 'white ethnic groups'.. what can you infer from that? ...



And don't even think about looking at the demographics (racial or financial) for corporate fraud or paedophilia ...




			
				past caring said:
			
		

> ... And in regards to feelings about personal space being a specifically "English" trait, ...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 18, 2005)

TeeJay said:
			
		

> I was wondering what relevance it has to the thread and what people are discussing. You might ask if "most of the bad actors are men", if they are right or left handed, if they are between 16 and 30, if they wear trainers and so forth. If you feel like it then by all means ask whatever you want. I'd still like to know why you are asking and what relevance it has...
> 
> (Can I also point out that the people learning on the 'red poles' are just normal people waiting for the bus IMO.)
> 
> ...



Your response speaks volumes.


----------



## past caring (May 18, 2005)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> Personal space is an aspect of non-verbal communication ("body language").  Non-verbal communication is culturally specific.  Most western european european cultures become uncomfortable with people closer than about 0.5m away.  That is not the case in other cultures where even physical contact is considered perfectly normal, even between relatively distant acquaintances.



So not specifically "English" then?   

Anyway, that wasn't really my point - tarannau seemed to be going down the "we shouldn't be so uptight" road about invasion of body space. I'm just wondering how he might feel about a similar lack of cultural sensitivity in other situations. English ex-pats in Spain, as an example?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 18, 2005)

TeeJay said:
			
		

> ps. If you want to know about the demographics of the location in question, have a look here:
> 
> ...and type in "lambeth" (see map of boroughs here:  )
> 
> ...



Thanks for these links btw. Frankly, I didn't know that london was divided into boroughs. It helps to make sense of what a lot of people are referring to.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 18, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> No, its a good question to ask.  And the answer is that, as elsewhere in the Western world, the vast majority of people selling drugs on Coldharbour Lane are black.  This is important, because there can only be two explanations for this fact: (a) black people are naturally criminally-inclined, or (b) black people have less opportunities than others to make money legally.  Assuming that, like me, you accept (b), then it starts to seem a bit silly, and even racist, to say that street dealers are scum, shit, should die young and so forth.



There are very few black drug dealers here. Mind you, there aren't that many blacks, proportionally speaking.

If you're talking about street vendors, the bulk of them are hispanic, mostly from Honduras. There's also a smattering of your standard lowlife white drug dealer as well.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 18, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> No.  I'm suggesting that if you think to yourself "Hmm, why are they all black?" (and Brixton is NOT a black majority area), you will inevitably be led to the conclusion that they are there for some other reason than because they're cunts.  Unless you are a racist.  And hassling people who initially do not seem to be interested in their wares is what any salesman worth his salt does.  Frabkly I don't know what's so horribly offensive about someone whispering "skunk" in your ear a couple of times.  Unless its a comment on your personal hygene.  I think people who find it horribly offensive are unconsciously racist.



Is that what they do? I got the impression that they were tripping people, and trying to sell drugs to them as they lay prostrate in the street.

If you go to Granville mall, you'll get mostly younger white guys who say 'weed?' to you as you walk by. What you usually do, is just keep walking, and continuing to look in the windows at the shoes or anime posters. Personally, I find the evangelicals down there to be more intrusive. They're yelling about jesus, and singing, and trying to hand you flyers about King David and sin.

They're white too.

I agree, if someone with a black face and a big striped toque whispers skunk to you, and your  whole day is ruined, you've probably got some problems with race.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 18, 2005)

kea said:
			
		

> yes those people who complain about the initial offer are probably over-reacting. however, being threatened and abused subsequently is NOT on, it is the actions of a cunt whatever your skin colour, and i can't believe that you consider it acceptable, let alone that you suggest that those who have the effrontary to get upset about it are racist!



If the drug dealers are threatening and abusing people, why can't the cops send in a few undercover officers, and bust them? Surely if they're threatening assault etc, it's gone way beyond mere drug dealing?

Those guys on Granville Mall, must have gotten the goat of the cops. Some of them took a couple of the marijuana dealers into Stanley Park, and beat them up. The cops ended up out of a job, and are just now going through trial on criminal charges. 

And this was just for the guys saying 'weed?' in your ear.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 18, 2005)

Shippou-Chan said:
			
		

> not  drugs?  the child line people  out side of brixton tube?
> 
> or  the bible bashers ....      but then  again they are less lightly to stab you in the face



Is that a big problem there, i.e. drug dealers stabbing people in the face?

You'd think that for a guy with a pocket full of illegal drugs he's got to flog, because if he loses them, he still has to pay for them, that stabbing people in the face would be considered extremely bad for business.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 18, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Be honest: when was the last time you were persistently hassled to buy something you didn't want in the street that _wasn't_ drugs?



The most hassled I've ever been was by rickshaw drivers in Singapore.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 18, 2005)

poster342002 said:
			
		

> Because it's *not* that subtle: it's often a case of someone lurching out of a doorway into your personal space and and going "skunkskunkskunk". .



That's very descriptive. It conjures up images of the Black Boogeyman.

It must be frightening.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 18, 2005)

Hollis said:
			
		

> No - crime doesn't just result from 'oppression' - its caused by loads of factors, entirely unrelated to this.



How many children of middle class professionals are down in Brixton selling drugs on the street?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 18, 2005)

Mrs Magpie said:
			
		

> I've been hassled (dumpy Gran with shopping waiting for bus) and no has not been taken for an answer...I have on more than one occasion in broad daylight been followed by aggressive dealers who won't take a firm but polite "No." for an answer. My son was first offered "Powders" when he was barely 12 and waiting for a bus home after school on Coldharbour Lane



But is that a drawback of being female in an urban environment? I've had a panhandler approach me, and then take off after I've given him a look, only to see him go up to some woman behind me and be much more forceful.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 18, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> I nearly got my face mashed in a while ago when I stepped in to stop a big bloke hassling the fuck out of a young woman leaving Brixton tube.
> 
> He'd already demanded her travelcard twice and she'd politely said no both times - so he then followed her up the stairs and start yanking on her arm, trying to pull her back down.
> 
> ...



...or been carrying a Pbman Special.....


----------



## TeeJay (May 18, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Most, yes, but a *disproportionate* amount of "crime"--at least, detetcted "crime"--is committed by people of Afro-Caribbean descent.  What can you infer from that?  I suggest that you must either make a racist inference, or you are forced to admit that crime results from oppression.


What a simplistic load of crap.


----------



## TeeJay (May 18, 2005)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Your response speaks volumes.


Does it? What do you think it says?


----------



## meems (May 18, 2005)

**nosos**

*unsubscribes from thread*


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 19, 2005)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> But is that a drawback of being female in an urban environment? I've had a panhandler approach me, and then take off after I've given him a look, only to see him go up to some woman behind me and be much more forceful.



Am I right in thinking that 'panhandler' is basically the same as 'beggar'? I'm not talking 'Any spare change?'. I'm talking about men selling drugs (or fake drugs) and hassling someone to buy them, to the extent of following them and aggressively demanding that drugs WILL be bought from them...

The best course of action is to walk away as fast as possible and, if need be, duck into a large shop with security guards. It's scary because I doubt very much that I look like a typical archetype of their 'niche market' for smack or crack or even recreational drugs. I know drug use spans all demographics blah blah blah......but even so, I find it baffling. Are they so drug-addled that they cannot see that I am not a punter? Perhaps I'm misreading the situation totally and it's all an elaborate joke along the lines of 'Business is slack, lets have a laugh and hassle a granny.'


----------



## Streathamite (May 19, 2005)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> If the drug dealers are threatening and abusing people, why can't the cops send in a few undercover officers, and bust them? Surely if they're threatening assault etc, it's gone way beyond mere drug dealing?


Johnny, mebbe this'll broaden those BC-shaped horizons, but central Brixton is NOT directly analogous to vancouver. you really DO need to know the territory in question


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 19, 2005)

Johnny, for undercover police to bust people you need something like three different cops to buy drugs on different days from a targetted dealer for a prosecution to be even considered as worthwhile (ie a reasonable probablity of a conviction). Also for every dealer that is gaoled another pops up in their place...It's like pissing into the wind....there has to be some lateral thinking, because so far nothing has worked. I didn't hold the view that legalisation of all drugs is a possible solution, but a policeman I really respect convinced me otherwise (and no, it wasn't Brian Paddick btw)...I'd rather see drugs controllled by the State than armed criminals.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 19, 2005)

Mrs Magpie said:
			
		

> Am I right in thinking that 'panhandler' is basically the same as 'beggar'? I'm not talking 'Any spare change?'. I'm talking about men selling drugs (or fake drugs) and hassling someone to buy them, to the extent of following them and aggressively demanding that drugs WILL be bought from them...
> 
> The best course of action is to walk away as fast as possible and, if need be, duck into a large shop with security guards. It's scary because I doubt very much that I look like a typical archetype of their 'niche market' for smack or crack or even recreational drugs. I know drug use spans all demographics blah blah blah......but even so, I find it baffling. Are they so drug-addled that they cannot see that I am not a punter? Perhaps I'm misreading the situation totally and it's all an elaborate joke along the lines of 'Business is slack, lets have a laugh and hassle a granny.'




Yes, a panhandler is a beggar. And I'm not talking 'any spare change' either. These are guys who go up to women, get close in order to intimidate them with their larger size, offensive odour, etc, and then just won't let up. They don't make direct threats, but the whole thing appears to be very threatening via intimidation.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 19, 2005)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> Johnny, mebbe this'll broaden those BC-shaped horizons, but central Brixton is NOT directly analogous to vancouver. you really DO need to know the territory in question



I realize that London is so uber cosmopolitan, but perhaps your parochial views, remant of your cultural superiority spawned in empire, might admit that it's possible that other cities in the world have urban problems that might be closely analogous. The racial mix, etc might be different, but the basic tensions etc are likely very similar.

Scratch the surface of some brits, and you get a superior, self-satisfied snob.

I've been to many places in the world that claim unique problems, etc, only to get off the plane in the next place and find the same problems, different actors.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 19, 2005)

Mrs Magpie said:
			
		

> Johnny, for undercover police to bust people you need something like three different cops to buy drugs on different days from a targetted dealer for a prosecution to be even considered as worthwhile (ie a reasonable probablity of a conviction). Also for every dealer that is gaoled another pops up in their place...It's like pissing into the wind....there has to be some lateral thinking, because so far nothing has worked. I didn't hold the view that legalisation of all drugs is a possible solution, but a policeman I really respect convinced me otherwise (and no, it wasn't Brian Paddick btw)...I'd rather see drugs controllled by the State than armed criminals.



I wasn't talking arrests for possession of drugs. Some posters are talking of intimidation and harassment by people in the area that sounds to me to be approaching assault. That is the crime that the undercover cops would be effective in combatting.


----------



## Loki (May 19, 2005)

Mr Retro said:
			
		

> Where have we heard this before?


In at least two, multi-page flounce threads if I'm not sorely mistaken.

HB didn't even acknoweldge my friendly greeting at the last Offline; I had to say hi with his real name before he would even deign to acknowledge my presence with a minute nod of his regal head. Never again will I bother.


----------



## TeeJay (May 19, 2005)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Your response speaks volumes.


Any chance you could explain what my response 'said'?


----------



## Mr Retro (May 19, 2005)

Loki said:
			
		

> In at least two, multi-page flounce threads if I'm not sorely mistaken.
> 
> HB didn't even acknoweldge my friendly greeting at the last Offline; I had to say hi with his real name before he would even deign to acknowledge my presence with a minute nod of his regal head. Never again will I bother.




Don't take it too harshly. He is busy saving the world.


----------



## pinkmonkey (May 19, 2005)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> How many children of middle class professionals are down in Brixton selling drugs on the street?



Non - because they are in the nightclubs, selling drugs to other middle class kids.


----------



## editor (May 19, 2005)

Loki said:
			
		

> HB didn't even acknoweldge my friendly greeting at the last Offline; I had to say hi with his real name before he would even deign to acknowledge my presence with a minute nod of his regal head. Never again will I bother.


I had a brief, friendly chat with him when he visited my club, only to find him publicly whining here a few days later that he "wished I hadn't spoken to him".

Well, don't come to my club and don't _join in_ with the conversation. Tosser.


----------



## phildwyer (May 19, 2005)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> The most hassled I've ever been was by rickshaw drivers in Singapore.



This got me thinking about the most hassle-prone places I've ever been.  I'd rank them as follows:

1.  Morocco.  By "guides."  You basicaly have to hire the least offensive of them to keep the others away, its completely impossible to walk down the street unaccompanied.

2.  Jamaica.  By drug-dealers.  Unlike Brixton, many of these guys are *extremely* aggressive, including physically.  They won't hit you, but they'll grap you, push you etc.

3.  Cuba.  By "guides," drug dealers and prostitutes.  Bad, but nowhere near as bad as the above.

4.  New York.  By beggars.  Got very bad for a while in the 80's, but Giuliani cleared all that up.

5. Dominican Republic.  By drug dealers, prostitutes and shoeshine boys.  Had to pretend to only speak Welsh, which was unpleasant but not terrible.

6.  Thailand.  By prostitutes.  Not really a problem, mildly irritating at worst.

Coldharbour Lane is a *very* long way down the list...


----------



## Belushi (May 19, 2005)

> 4. New York. By beggars. Got very bad for a while in the 80's, but Giuliani cleared all that up.



Bit of a diversion here Phil, but as someone who lived in New York what do you think of Giuliani's 'Zero Tolerance' policy, was it effective or did it unfairly target minorities?


----------



## tarannau (May 19, 2005)

Belushi said:
			
		

> Bit of a diversion here Phil, but as someone who lived in New York what do you think of Giuliani's 'Zero Tolerance' policy, was it effective or did it unfairly target minorities?




I think that's the the nub of the issue for me. I can't say I've any inclination to defend aggressive beggars and drug dealers, but the seeming haste to eliminate any unsightly groups or possible risks from the centre bothers me more than a little - hence the 'personal space' comments earlier. For whatever reason many people seem quick to associate groups of youths hanging around busy parts of the high street with negative events and added risk.  I know there are some bad apples out there, but the vast majority of folks 'lurking' about are simply passing time and socialising on the streets in my experience - I used to do very much the same when I was (much) younger, walking the main strip and continually bumping into groups of friends doing the same thing. 

The haste to remove risk and bustle from the high street has seemed to affect the character of the area - perhaps backed up by Detective Boy's assertion that black/ethnic minority people tend to make up the dominant group on the streets. This tallies with my experience - drinking outside and getting out of the (often run-down) house was a common occurence back then, cheaper than the pub and seemingly  just as sociable. But now the old boys have been turfed off of Tate Gardens, benches and any public seating has been designed out of the area, the sight of seeing a front door open with a couple of folks sitting outside and music booming has become comparatively rare (probably ASBO'd out of existence)  - there's even less sympathetic treatment of some of the long established street traders (from fizzy fish to incense sellers). As the Effra Residents Group newsletter seemed to suggest, groups of people hanging around are often seen a unneccesarily threatening, regardless of what they're actually doing.

I don't want aggressive beggars, but I don't want sanitised pavements outside of Sainsbury's Local either. And the push towards zero or less tolerance seems to affect certain groups of the local population more than others.


----------



## poster342002 (May 19, 2005)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> That's very descriptive. It conjures up images of the Black Boogeyman.
> 
> It must be frightening.


What *are* you on about? I make *no* mention of race as I couldn't care less what the race/nationality/colour of the people involved was.


----------



## poster342002 (May 19, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Not all violent drug dealers are "oppressed", for example.


I would go so far as to say they were, in fact, _"oppress*ors*"_ of the rest of the people in the area.


----------



## phildwyer (May 19, 2005)

Belushi said:
			
		

> Bit of a diversion here Phil, but as someone who lived in New York what do you think of Giuliani's 'Zero Tolerance' policy, was it effective or did it unfairly target minorities?



Both.  It was very effective in making NYC lose its "edge," rendering it much more like other big American cities.  I've no doubt that a lot of poor and homeless people were unjustly thrown in jail.  OTOH, the city *feels* much safer now, at least if you're a respectable-looking white person.  Its a matter of taste, I suppose--speaking personally, I think Giuliani ruined the city.  I was 23 when I moved there in 87, and I found all the in-your-face vice fascinating and thrilling.  Since I was young and fearless it didn't intimidate me at all.  Maybe if I'd been 73 and/or female I wouldn't have been so happy.  But give me the old Times Square (swarming with crackheads, transvestites etc.), over the new, (swarming with Disney stores, families from Iowa etc.) anytime.


----------



## poster342002 (May 19, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Both.  It was very effective in making NYC lose its "edge," rendering it much more like other big American cities.  I've no doubt that a lot of poor and homeless people were unjustly thrown in jail.  OTOH, the city *feels* much safer now, at least if you're a respectable-looking white person.  Its a matter of taste, I suppose--speaking personally, I think Giuliani ruined the city.  I was 23 when I moved there in 87, and I found all the in-your-face vice fascinating and thrilling.  Since I was young and fearless it didn't intimidate me at all.  Maybe if I'd been 73 and/or female I wouldn't have been so happy.  But give me the old Times Square (swarming with crackheads, transvestites etc.), over the new, (swarming with Disney stores, families from Iowa etc.) anytime.



I doubt all those people who were on the sharp end of all that "fascinating and thrilling" dysfunction and violence were sorry to see the back of it, somehow.


----------



## tarannau (May 19, 2005)

poster342002 said:
			
		

> You *are* taking the piss, now, aren't you?
> 
> I doubt all those people who were on the sharp end of all that "fascinating and thrilling" dysfunction and violence were sorry to see the back of it, somehow.



Yes, but there are undoubtedly innocent/likeable people who suffered in that clean up as well - there were pretty awful stories of mis-arrests, terrible treatment of some homeless folks and people whose face didn't fit. Not everyone manhandled and turfed off their spots was disfunctional or violent

And - as much as I struggle to agree with phildwyer - Time Square is a pale reflection of what it used to be. It's a sanitised spot for chain stores and tourists now - it felt more like Croydon than the Times Sq I remembered last time I went. There's got to be a better balance than that,


----------



## phildwyer (May 19, 2005)

poster342002 said:
			
		

> I doubt all those people who were on the sharp end of all that "fascinating and thrilling" dysfunction and violence were sorry to see the back of it, somehow.



I was on the sharp end of it myself a couple of times (see "places where you were attacked or robbed" thread).  But you're right, I was a bit voyeuristic as a youth.  I think you might have felt the same at my age, in New York for the first time.  But maybe you'd have been shocked and horrified, lots of people I knew were definitely on Giuliani's side and wanted all the homeless and junkies locked up/shot.  Personally, I didn't see anything wrong with letting them roam the streets, but as I said, if I'd been old or female, and especially if I'd had kids, I'd have felt very different.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 19, 2005)

The question is of course how widespread the effect was, and whether it was localised.

I also understand that the decrease in crime was helped by a dramatic (and apparently unconnected) drop in the population of young males in NYC at the time.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 19, 2005)

Incidentally, having lived for two years in Philly (well, on the outskirts) I found people very polite. Even when asking for money on the street they would say "excuse me sir" and apologise for bothering me. A couple of people tried to run scams on me but nothing you'd not expect. This was city centre, admittedly, I wasn't walking around North Philly at midnight or anything.

In fact the only time I lost anything at all during that period was when I came back to London and had my pocket picked.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 19, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> This got me thinking about the most hassle-prone places I've ever been.  I'd rank them as follows:
> 
> 1.  Morocco.  By "guides."  You basicaly have to hire the least offensive of them to keep the others away, its completely impossible to walk down the street unaccompanied.
> 
> ...



For me, in no particular order, it would be the singapore rickshaw drivers, beggars in Bombay, especially children and people with obvious physical deformities, middle class college boy types in Sri Lankan villages who would literally follow you everywhere and question you like it was their god given right to do so, gypsies in Rome. There was one time in Seattle that a group of white street people got a little intimidating, demanding the six pack of beer I was carrying. They laughed and let me pass when I said I needed all six for myself.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (May 19, 2005)

poster342002 said:
			
		

> I would go so far as to say they were, in fact, _"oppress*ors*"_ of the rest of the people in the area.



Thats the way it worked in any neighborhood that I've lived in.

Most of the drug dealers in my neighborhood are middle-class white boys.  (With the except of the Asian gang kids, who were smart enough not to shit in their own nest.)


----------



## sipotential (May 20, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Both.  It was very effective in making NYC lose its "edge," rendering it much more like other big American cities.  I've no doubt that a lot of poor and homeless people were unjustly thrown in jail.  OTOH, the city *feels* much safer now, at least if you're a respectable-looking white person.  Its a matter of taste, I suppose--speaking personally, I think Giuliani ruined the city.  I was 23 when I moved there in 87, and I found all the in-your-face vice fascinating and thrilling.  Since I was young and fearless it didn't intimidate me at all.  Maybe if I'd been 73 and/or female I wouldn't have been so happy.  But give me the old Times Square (swarming with crackheads, transvestites etc.), over the new, (swarming with Disney stores, families from Iowa etc.) anytime.


b4 giulliani you  couldn't use central park, or the subway, or times sq...


----------



## editor (May 20, 2005)

sipotential said:
			
		

> b4 giulliani you  couldn't use central park, or the subway, or times sq...


Well, I used all three in the 80s.

But it was scary.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 20, 2005)

Most apprehensive I've ever felt on public transportation, was in the London Underground in the 1980s.


----------



## phildwyer (May 20, 2005)

FridgeMagnet said:
			
		

> Incidentally, having lived for two years in Philly (well, on the outskirts) I found people very polite. Even when asking for money on the street they would say "excuse me sir" and apologise for bothering me. A couple of people tried to run scams on me but nothing you'd not expect. This was city centre, admittedly, I wasn't walking around North Philly at midnight or anything.



You wouldn't be here to tell the tale if you had.  North Philly, specifically Kensington, is the most dangerous place on the planet, and I say that without fear of exagerration.  But you're right, the rest of the city is remarkably safe and civil.  City of Brotherly Love innit.  People, including homeless people, take pride in their politeness, it was quite a shock after New York.  Where were you, on the Mainline?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 20, 2005)

I lived in King Of Prussia for a year (which was shit) and then moved to Manayunk. Now _there's_ gentrification for you. Anyone who thinks Brixton's getting bad needs to take a look at the high street, it's in a whole different class.

I used to get the R6 or the bus into the city a fair bit. I had some friends who lived... uh... can't remember the name of the area but not too far away. Very walkable city anyway even if you're not meeting up with anyone, you can just wander about quite happily.


----------



## editor (May 20, 2005)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Most apprehensive I've ever felt on public transportation, was in the London Underground in the 1980s.


Nah. London was like a kiddie's party compared to subways around Alphabet City in NYC in the 80s!


----------



## phildwyer (May 20, 2005)

FridgeMagnet said:
			
		

> I lived in King Of Prussia for a year (which was shit) and then moved to Manayunk. Now _there's_ gentrification for you. Anyone who thinks Brixton's getting bad needs to take a look at the high street, it's in a whole different class.
> 
> I used to get the R6 or the bus into the city a fair bit. I had some friends who lived... uh... can't remember the name of the area but not too far away. Very walkable city anyway even if you're not meeting up with anyone, you can just wander about quite happily.



I like Manayunk a lot, its still got quite a bit of working-class housing once you get off the main drag, and the canal is lovely.  I live in Center City, and as you say, I can walk everywhere that I'd want to from there (except Manayunk).  Its a beautiful city to wander in, many of the buildings are C18th, its older than most European cities in terms of the structures still standing.  Quite a bit of drug-dealing and prostitution around me, Spruce and Pine between 12th and Broad can get a bit hectic, but its quite a civilized type of vice.  Occasionally you get gangs of black kids doing what I believe you Brits call "steaming" up and down South St., but never when I've been there, thank God.


----------



## phildwyer (May 20, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Nah. London was like a kiddie's party compared to subways around Alphabet City in NYC in the 80s!



I don't know, there's always the threat of *random* violence from pissheads in London, and throughout the UK.  In New York, the threatening people always want something identifiable (money), and will rapidly leave the scene if provided with it.  Americans don't really fight for fun, like drunken Brits do.


----------



## editor (May 20, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> I don't know, there's always the threat of *random* violence from pissheads in London, and throughout the UK.  In New York, the threatening people always want something identifiable (money), and will rapidly leave the scene if provided with it.  Americans don't really fight for fun, like drunken Brits do.


I'm talking about New York in the 80s when crackheads/mad ex-Vietnam veterans/muggers and general ne'er do wells roamed around the Lower East Side/Alphabet City.

Here's what my subway to Coney Island looked like in 1986.


----------



## comstock (May 20, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> I'm talking about New York in the 80s when crackheads/mad ex-Vietnam veterans/muggers and general ne'er do wells roamed around the Lower East Side/Alphabet City.
> 
> Here's what my subway to Coney Island looked like in 1986.



Gawd and I though bits of the tube looked rough


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 20, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> I don't know, there's always the threat of *random* violence from pissheads in London, and throughout the UK.  In New York, the threatening people always want something identifiable (money), and will rapidly leave the scene if provided with it.  Americans don't really fight for fun, like drunken Brits do.



That was my impression. You'd get guys on the subway in london who would be glaring about, and you just knew that if you accidentally made eye contact with them, it would immediately escalate into some sort of confrontation.

In NA, there's a chance of that, but it's usually mentally disturbed people doing it, not angry young men.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 20, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> You wouldn't be here to tell the tale if you had.  North Philly, specifically Kensington, is the most dangerous place on the planet, and I say that without fear of exagerration.  But you're right, the rest of the city is remarkably safe and civil.  City of Brotherly Love innit.  People, including homeless people, take pride in their politeness, it was quite a shock after New York.  Where were you, on the Mainline?



People love to brag about how bad their bad area is.

I visited East St Louis a couple of years ago. It's a bad place, but we made it out with our skins intact.

I ran into a friend of mine back here; he is originally from St. Louis. When I told him where I'd gone, he started going on and on about how they'd sooner kill you there than look at you, no matter what your skin colour, etc. It was somewhere that even he wouldn't go.

He seemed disappointed when I said that yes it was bad, but nobody shot at us from passing cars, or tried to drag the womenfolk out of the van.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 20, 2005)

North Philly, though, is statistically speaking a very good place to get murdered. I'd probably have been safer than a local, being a foreigner and all - you get the whole "what the fuck are you doing here?" factor which insulates you from possible assault. But not _completely_ safe by any means.

I'll tell you one thing - when I first went to the States, staying in Baltimore, I was very paranoid in public situations where anyone was being in the slightest odd, because I wasn't familiar with the social behaviour. There are subtle differences. If you grow up in London, you learn to pick up on little things as indicators of potential hostility, and that just don't work in a foreign country. I got much more comfortable with things as time went on.

There is definitely something about being approached in the US where I was vs. being approached in London. In London you simply do not talk to anyone you don't know on public transport - if you do, you're either a tourist, drunk, insane, hostile or any combination of the above. On the train in Philly I had people asking me if I'd heard the Good News, trying to sell me shoes out of a plastic bag and so on. I'm guessing that if I'd been in NYC more my instincts would have been more accurate - I think it's a population size thing, large cities develop a stricter code as concerns communication with people you don't know, because you *can't* talk to people all the time otherwise you'd go mad from the sheer volume.


----------



## phildwyer (May 21, 2005)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> People love to brag about how bad their bad area is.
> 
> I visited East St Louis a couple of years ago. It's a bad place, but we made it out with our skins intact.
> 
> ...



Well, north Philly certainly isn't "my" area.  In fact, I've only ever driven through it by mistake, I wouldn't dream of going there on foot.  A friend of mine had his windscreen smashed by a brick while he was waiting at the lights.  It looks like, and effectively is, a warzone.  They say its changed now because the black mayor (he is quite literally called John Street) has put a cop on every corner 24/7.  But its says something that that's what it took, and I *still* wouldn't go there.  The cops search white people on sight, because the only reason they'd be there is to buy drugs.  

For the same reason, the locals will automatically rob white people, assuming that they have drugs or money on them.  Its very different from Harlem, which has always had a solid middle-class base.  Civic leaders of the mayor Frank Rizzo era used to deliberately write off north Philly, seeing it as the price to be paid for keeping the rest of the city safe, which they did very effectively.  Well, the Mafia keeps south Philly safe for white people and dangerous for blacks, but Center City and west Philly are pretty well policed for everyone, AFAICT.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 21, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Well, north Philly certainly isn't "my" area.  In fact, I've only ever driven through it by mistake, I wouldn't dream of going there on foot.  A friend of mine had his windscreen smashed by a brick while he was waiting at the lights.  It looks like, and effectively is, a warzone.  They say its changed now because the black mayor (he is quite literally called John Street) has put a cop on every corner 24/7.  But its says something that that's what it took, and I *still* wouldn't go there.  The cops search white people on sight, because the only reason they'd be there is to buy drugs.
> 
> For the same reason, the locals will automatically rob white people, assuming that they have drugs or money on them.  Its very different from Harlem, which has always had a solid middle-class base.  Civic leaders of the mayor Frank Rizzo era used to deliberately write off north Philly, seeing it as the price to be paid for keeping the rest of the city safe, which they did very effectively.  Well, the Mafia keeps south Philly safe for white people and dangerous for blacks, but Center City and west Philly are pretty well policed for everyone, AFAICT.



Well, if North Philly is anything close to East St. Louis, then your country should be ashamed for allowing two such places to exist.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 21, 2005)

http://www.american-pictures.com/gallery/usa/book230t.htm


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 21, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Well, north Philly certainly isn't "my" area.  In fact, I've only ever driven through it by mistake, I wouldn't dream of going there on foot.  .



The mantra of the white american.


----------



## newbie (May 22, 2005)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> He seemed disappointed when I said that yes it was bad, but nobody shot at us from passing cars, or tried to drag the womenfolk out of the van.




because you're breaking down the carefully honed anti-gentrifiation message.


----------



## phildwyer (May 22, 2005)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> The mantra of the white american.



Yeah right, you'd walk through Kensington would you?  I don't think so... Kensington, London maybe...


----------



## phildwyer (May 22, 2005)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Most apprehensive I've ever felt on public transportation, was in the London Underground in the 1980s.



The mantra of the North American tourist...


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 23, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Yeah right, you'd walk through Kensington would you?  I don't think so... Kensington, London maybe...



I'm not white. I might be able to pull it off, so long as I kept my mouth shut.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 23, 2005)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Yeah right, you'd walk through Kensington would you?  I don't think so... Kensington, London maybe...



The point is that there's an area of your city that you avoid like the plague, wouldn't even drive there. 

I might not walk through your worst ghetto, but I'd drive through it, to get a bit of a look for myself. I usually try to check out the worst areas of any US city I visit. Some sort of perverse curiosity. I've driven through the south side of Chicago, Watts, East LA, the aforementioned East St Louis, etc. Yes, I'd drive through north philly or whatever - after consulting a map, knowing where the main throughfares were, any dead ends, and with a full tank of gas.... I'm not perfect.....


----------



## Mr BC (May 23, 2005)

I've been to [suburb of American City] in [American City] and it was _soooo_ scary and is _sooo_ rough. 

 Yawn.


----------



## jannerboyuk (May 23, 2005)

Make sarcastic comment that adds nothing to the conversation.

 Yawn.


----------



## Pie 1 (May 23, 2005)

jannerboyuk said:
			
		

> Make sarcastic comment that adds nothing to the conversation.
> 
> Yawn.



Yes, But you've got to admit that the conversation has become a tini bit boring for anyone but Johnny & Phildwyer, sorry chaps


----------



## CA9I (May 31, 2005)

Hi All,


How many of us walk through Angeltown?

Not in a mob going to a party.

Not escorted to purchase some intoxicants.

Not in a car, not in a cab.

Just walking, through Angeltown?


Regards,

CA9I.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (May 31, 2005)

i live just by the edge of it so i often walk past it ... i don't really go through it much  but thats mainly because my route doesn't take me that way ...  

i have certainly walked through it on numours ocations


----------



## editor (May 31, 2005)

CA9I said:
			
		

> Hi All,
> 
> 
> How many of us walk through Angeltown?
> ...


I walk through Angeltown fairly regularly.

What's your point?


----------



## IntoStella (May 31, 2005)

*A pedanticist writes*

It's Angell Town.


----------



## nodrama (May 31, 2005)

Wow, everyone is so streetwise here.
Why do people love to flirt with this crap so much?  
Perhapps because some people (like the idiot from Chesire Sunday night at the bug bar) asked me where he could score. 
A situation like that begged for me to do some heinous crime.
Then, lo and behold, we would have read about him in the evening standard with an obligatory picture nearby of a youth in a hoodie


----------



## editor (May 31, 2005)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> It's Angell Town.


I wasn't really in the mood to get picky with the poster, but although I would normally spell it Angell Town, it would appear that the other spelling is quite common in official circles: 

http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/Services/Environment/ParksGreenSpaces/AdventurePlaygrounds_EXTRA.htm
http://www.lambethfirst.org.uk/displayOrganisation.cfm?OrganisationID=214
http://www.met.police.uk/lambeth/news/060404.htm
http://www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/groups/odpm_urbanpolicy/documents/page/odpm_urbpol_029125-08.hcsp



> The area is still known as 'Angell Town', after the original 19th Century development by a Mr Benedict John Angell Angell (and yes, that was his real name!).
> http://www.urban75.org/brixton/photos/233.html


----------



## detective-boy (Jun 1, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> ... it would appear that the other spelling is quite common in official circles:   ...  http://www.met.police.uk/lambeth/news/060404.htm



You're taking spelling advice from the Met Police ....   

Isn't Angeltown some sort of imaginary place in some American novels (may even be a real place in LA or somewhere for all I know) - the quote looks like a bit of lyric or a couple of lines from a book ...


----------



## editor (Jun 1, 2005)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> You're taking spelling advice from the Met Police ....


Easy. I'm not taking 'advice' from the plod, merely commenting on how common the other (incorrect) spelling is.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jun 1, 2005)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> You're taking spelling advice from the Met Police ....


I gave a witness statement last week and the practically adolescent young policeman on the other side of the desk asked me for about 20 spellings.......does that make me a spelling advisor to the Met, I wonder?


----------



## phildwyer (Jun 1, 2005)

Mrs Magpie said:
			
		

> I gave a witness statement last week and the practically adolescent young policeman on the other side of the desk asked me for about 20 spellings.......does that make me a spelling advisor to the Met, I wonder?



When I was burgled my passport was stolen.  It took me about half an hour to explain to the PA state cop what a "passport" is.  The concept was entirely foriegn to him.


----------



## aurora green (Jun 1, 2005)

CA9I said:
			
		

> How many of us walk through Angeltown?
> 
> Not in a mob going to a party.
> 
> ...





I live there actually.  Please do tell us your point.


----------



## Bob (Jun 1, 2005)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> You're taking spelling advice from the Met Police ....
> 
> Isn't Angeltown some sort of imaginary place in some American novels (may even be a real place in LA or somewhere for all I know) - the quote looks like a bit of lyric or a couple of lines from a book ...



Los Angeles - City of Angels
Angell Town - Town of Angels - just fewer angels - that's all.   

Other similarities - err...


----------



## Bob (Jun 1, 2005)

Mrs Magpie said:
			
		

> I gave a witness statement last week and the practically adolescent young policeman on the other side of the desk asked me for about 20 spellings.......does that make me a spelling advisor to the Met, I wonder?



Spelling consultant - I'd charge £30 an hour.


----------



## IntoStella (Jun 1, 2005)

*A pedanticist adds*




			
				editor said:
			
		

> I wasn't really in the mood to get picky with the poster, but although I would normally spell it Angell Town, it would appear that the other spelling is quite common in official circles:
> 
> http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/Services/Environment/ParksGreenSpaces/AdventurePlaygrounds_EXTRA.htm
> http://www.lambethfirst.org.uk/displayOrganisation.cfm?OrganisationID=214
> ...


 But those all say 'Angel Town', which is at least closer than Angeltown. 

I wouldn't trust either the Met or Lambeth Council to spell names right, let alone anything to do with John Prescott.


----------



## editor (Jun 1, 2005)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> But those all say 'Angel Town', which is at least closer than Angeltown.


Oh, there's some people calling it Angeltown too: http://www.192.com/directory.cfm/BRIXTON/BANK/T1571577

What's a 'time bank' anyhow?! Do you deposit yer watch or summat?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jun 1, 2005)

A time bank in the sense I understand it is for getting volunteers for community stuff, charities etc.


----------



## rennie (Jun 1, 2005)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> I might not walk through your worst ghetto, but I'd drive through it, to get a bit of a look for myself. I usually try to check out the worst areas of any US city I visit. Some sort of perverse curiosity. I've driven through the south side of Chicago, Watts, East LA, the aforementioned East St Louis, etc. Yes, I'd drive through north philly or whatever - after consulting a map, knowing where the main throughfares were, any dead ends, and with a full tank of gas.... I'm not perfect.....



did you ever make it to anacostia in SE  DC? i got stuck there one night n ended up in a gay strip club   but that's a story for another time.


----------



## detective-boy (Jun 2, 2005)

Bob said:
			
		

> Spelling consultant ...



"No, no, no - you're mixing up your "Eye of toad" and your "Tongue of newt" ..."

"Oh thanks, Mrs M ... and by the way, is that your broomstick being towed away out the front?"


----------



## CA9I (Jun 9, 2005)

Hi All,

My point?

No biggie.

It was just that there was rather a debate about what determines a dangerous area. And it that it might be more illuminating to take a walk through one?

But perhaps I'm wrong. Maby the Editor should have the last word on this:
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=117484


Regards,

CA9I.


----------



## editor (Jun 9, 2005)

CA9I said:
			
		

> But perhaps I'm wrong. Maby the Editor should have the last word on this:
> http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=117484


You've lost me here. Why should I want the last word about a different thread relating to a different incident in a different area?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jun 9, 2005)

Yeah, I was confused by that too....


----------



## BCB (Jun 9, 2005)

Loki said:
			
		

> 6PM!! It's fucking crowded around there that time of day and no-one helped????




disgraceful   that wouldnt happen in Dublin


----------



## fanta (Jun 10, 2005)

BCB said:
			
		

> disgraceful   that wouldnt happen in Dublin



Why not?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jun 10, 2005)

I remember someone saying the same about Liverpool in that people would always help someone in distress and how Scousers looked after their own. This was the week before Jamie Bulger was killed... personally I don't have a very high opinion of Dublin. It's the only place a mate of mine has had repeated openly racist abuse in the last 30 years. He'll never ever go back. It upset him enormously as his mother was from Dublin.


----------



## Mr Retro (Jun 10, 2005)

Mrs Magpie said:
			
		

> I remember someone saying the same about Liverpool in that people would always help someone in distress and how Scousers looked after their own. This was the week before Jamie Bulger was killed... personally I don't have a very high opinion of Dublin. It's the only place a mate of mine has had repeated openly racist abuse in the last 30 years. He'll never ever go back. It upset him enormously as his mother was from Dublin.



The "we look after our own" syndrome is something I've never found exists more in one race/people/place than another.

Ireland is pretty racist in my view. I seem to find it's mainly an older generation thing, but to be honest this could be because I only have my peers to judge this and also because I really want to believe this to be the case.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jun 10, 2005)

Mr Retro said:
			
		

> Ireland is pretty racist in my view. I seem to find it's mainly an older generation thing, but to be honest this could be because I only have my peers to judge this and also because I really want to believe this to be the case.


Sadly it was across the board, from children upwards. Not really surprising as children learn attitudes just as much from parents as their peer group.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 10, 2005)

BCB said:
			
		

> disgraceful   that wouldnt happen in Dublin


it does happen in  dublin.


----------



## marco mark (Jun 10, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> might...
> 
> the quality of cctv pictures varies greatly, as does the length of time it's kept. who operates the cameras round that corner? probably lambeth - and i bet they don't take much care of their cameras. met police cctv cameras are replaced every couple of weeks, so their lenses are usually clearer than local authority operated ones.
> 
> but what's the point of this much vaunted cctv if no fucker's watching? is it just a giant intelligence gathering operation?






Sorry pick: replaced every couple of  weeks, ..... I think NOT, who told u that rubbish, and the whole lot is contracted out anyway


----------



## detective-boy (Jun 10, 2005)

marco mark said:
			
		

> Sorry pick: replaced every couple of  weeks, ..... I think NOT, who told u that rubbish, and the whole lot is contracted out anyway



I don't know what Pickmans Model was referring to as the "Met Police CCTV cameras" but they have very, very few themselves - those on police buildings (mainly for security) and some they deploy temporarily around major public order events.

Almost all street CCTV in London (and elsewhere) is actually operated by local authorities (albeit often in partnership with police) or, in London, Transport for London (traffic cameras).

There is no reason to replace lenses every few weeks (they don't wear out!) but good systems are regularly cleaned and serviced to check they haven't gone out of line, etc.  Most modern cameras have wash/wipe facilities as standard.

Guidance on the retention of recorded CCTV is 30 days (to give an opportunity for a crime to be reported / investigated whilst footage still exists) unless there are very special reasons for longer.  After that tapes are wiped and reused (and digital images are deleted) UNLESS a specific request re- a specific incident has been received in which case it should be kept until it could no longer be of any use (to either party).

The big issue with recorded image quality on VHS is overuse of the tapes - again the recommended number of re-uses is 12, with degaussing (magnetic wiping) in between each use.  Councils will generally comply with this but corner shops use their tapes (or even tape!!) constantly until it is so thin you can see through it!    

Code of Practice is at:

www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk/cms/DocumentUploads/cctvcop1.pdf

if you are having trouble sleeping


----------



## Mr Retro (Jun 10, 2005)

Mrs Magpie said:
			
		

> Sadly it was across the board, from children upwards. Not really surprising as children learn attitudes just as much from parents as their peer group.



Agree. This is a seperate thread really but was it from children through teenagers, young adults etc? Surely when children learned to think for themselves they lost this attitude? 

But then again it wouldn't suprise me if they didn't. There is no real official anti racism movement or education in Ireland


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jun 10, 2005)

From kids through to pensioners  The kids just shouted insults but adults in pubs were actually threatening.


----------



## Mr Retro (Jun 11, 2005)

Mrs Magpie said:
			
		

> From kids through to pensioners  The kids just shouted insults but adults in pubs were actually threatening.



Don't know what to say really. For every loud wanker there are 10 times as many decent quiet people.

One example is a couple of Chef friends were hiding (for want of a better word) and employing an immigrant and teaching him their trade. Nobody ever  knew until the person moved on equipped with a new language and a trade.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jun 11, 2005)

Mr Retro said:
			
		

> For every loud wanker there are 10 times as many decent quiet people.


Oh, probably at least 30 times as many decent quiet people. This man was not easily shocked, he'd done time in some of the worst prisons in this country. It just took him completely by surprise, because he was visiting his Mam's home town, which he'd never been to before and perhaps had a bit of a romantic idea about from her stories, which made it worse. He'd never experienced such overt racism in in the UK though.


----------



## brixtonman (Oct 13, 2005)

I just read through all this.

There is very interesting stuff on the first few pages. Gives me a good idea of how many on this message board see Brixton.


----------



## magneze (Oct 13, 2005)

brixtonman said:
			
		

> I just read through all this.
> 
> There is very interesting stuff on the first few pages. Gives me a good idea of how most on this message board see Brixton.


Welcome to the boards. 

How do you think this message board sees Brixton?


----------



## Badgers (Oct 14, 2005)

Mrs IHB has had two narrow squeaks at this cashpoint. Considering she does not spend a lot of time in Brixton it is a pretty high statistic!! 

Take care of each other out there


----------



## rennie (Oct 14, 2005)

and go other cashpoints! cross the road for your own safety.


----------



## top_biller (Oct 14, 2005)

reNnIe said:
			
		

> and go other cashpoints! cross the road for your own safety.



Friend had her card snatched at the Natwest over the road. She's a pretty feisty customer though and snatched it back telling her would-be snatcher to fuck off in no uncertain terms. The snatcher girl apologised and slinked/slunk off.

*goes to Thesaurus to look for synonyms of snatch and Dictionary to look for past tense of "to slink"*


----------



## rennie (Oct 14, 2005)

ouch... that's shite.   glad she came out of it relatively unscathed.


----------

