Street drinking survey

The place for serious discussion, announcements and breaking news about Sydenham

Moderator: frenzarin

bensonby
Posts: 1650
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 12:28
Location: Kent

Street drinking survey

Post by bensonby »

apparently the SNT is conducting a street drinking survey around Sydenham canvassing local people's opinions.

What are peoples thoughts on this and does anyone have access to the survey itself? The sydenham soc link to one in their email newsletter, but I can't access it...

Thomas
Posts: 632
Joined: 22 Feb 2007 13:08
Location: Upper Sydenham

Post by Thomas »

I received the SydSoc e-newsletter this morning and completed my survey and sent it off to the SNT (safer neighbourhood team). I can't find a way of attaching the survey to this post so if anyone would like to take part in the survey I would suggest they contact Tim and/or Annabel at the SydSoc.

I am against street drinking and would favour tighter controls on this, for reasons I set out in various posts a while back - happy to regurgitate these arguments if anyone's interested.

admin
Site Admin
Posts: 2556
Joined: 20 Sep 2004 21:49

Post by admin »

I was present at a meeting of the Sydenham Assembly Co-ordinating Committee last week where this was discussed. It would appear that the rights/wrongs of allowing street drinking are likely to be overclouded by the problems of enforcement.

It looks like a ban is not the likeliest option open to the community but removal of the bench may be.

I shouldn't pre-judge what the report back to the next Assembly might be. But that is an invite to anyone who feels better qualified.

Admin

Eagle
Posts: 10658
Joined: 7 Oct 2004 06:36
Location: F Hill

Post by Eagle »

Apity if the bench has to be removed but may be the only way to get rid of these 24/7 drinkers. Where do they get the money.
Seat provided by donations from The Sydenham Society and I assume ment for elderly and handicapped to take a 5 or 10 min break in their shopping.
As it is they cannot get near the seat.

bensonby
Posts: 1650
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 12:28
Location: Kent

Post by bensonby »

admin wrote:
It looks like a ban is not the likeliest option open to the community but removal of the bench may be.
That's because a ban, as well as unjust, would be nigh impossible to establish in law.

nork1
Posts: 287
Joined: 9 Jul 2006 12:49
Location: Banned myself - can't be bothered with the Greg/Ulysses show anymore

Post by nork1 »

bensonby wrote:
admin wrote:
It looks like a ban is not the likeliest option open to the community but removal of the bench may be.
That's because a ban, as well as unjust, would be nigh impossible to establish in law.
I might be wrong but it looks like this covers it (chapter2, sections 12 - 16):

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/Acts/acts2001/uk ... t1-ch2-pb1

Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001

Chapter 2 Provisions for combatting alcohol-related disorder

12 Alcohol consumption in designated public places

(1) Subsection (2) applies if a constable reasonably believes that a person is, or has been, consuming intoxicating liquor in a designated public place or intends to consume intoxicating liquor in such a place.

(2) The constable may require the person concerned—

(a) not to consume in that place anything which is, or which the constable reasonably believes to be, intoxicating liquor;

(b) to surrender anything in his possession which is, or which the constable reasonably believes to be, intoxicating liquor or a container for such liquor (other than a sealed container).


etc, etc.

bensonby
Posts: 1650
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 12:28
Location: Kent

Post by bensonby »

nork1 wrote:
bensonby wrote:
admin wrote:
It looks like a ban is not the likeliest option open to the community but removal of the bench may be.
That's because a ban, as well as unjust, would be nigh impossible to establish in law.
I might be wrong but it looks like this covers it (chapter2, sections 12 - 16):

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/Acts/acts2001/uk ... t1-ch2-pb1

Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001

Chapter 2 Provisions for combatting alcohol-related disorder

12 Alcohol consumption in designated public places

(1) Subsection (2) applies if a constable reasonably believes that a person is, or has been, consuming intoxicating liquor in a designated public place or intends to consume intoxicating liquor in such a place.

(2) The constable may require the person concerned—

(a) not to consume in that place anything which is, or which the constable reasonably believes to be, intoxicating liquor;

(b) to surrender anything in his possession which is, or which the constable reasonably believes to be, intoxicating liquor or a container for such liquor (other than a sealed container).


etc, etc.
not this again :roll: - that's not a ban is it? :wink:

nork1
Posts: 287
Joined: 9 Jul 2006 12:49
Location: Banned myself - can't be bothered with the Greg/Ulysses show anymore

Post by nork1 »

Oh my God I've just seen the other thread on this. I'm not even going to start arguing with someone who seems to absorb statute books for enjoyment. :wink:

I know my limits.

bensonby
Posts: 1650
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 12:28
Location: Kent

Post by bensonby »

nork1 wrote:Oh my God I've just seen the other thread on this. I'm not even going to start arguing with someone who seems to absorb statute books for enjoyment. :wink:

I know my limits.
ha ha ha, law is a little bit of a hobby. Law is beautiful....honestly... :P

ALIB
Posts: 1548
Joined: 12 Oct 2006 21:34
Location: East Sussex

Post by ALIB »

The law is an ass.........

I enjoy the principle that the spirit of the law (rather than the letter) is adhered to. I hope. The jury is still out on this one...........

Ali b

Precedent is a bigger ass.
Ahhhhh , Bensonby, we'll have to discuss at the GL soon

Ali B

bensonby
Posts: 1650
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 12:28
Location: Kent

Post by bensonby »

ALIB wrote:The law is an ass.........

I enjoy the principle that the spirit of the law (rather than the letter) is adhered to. I hope. The jury is still out on this one...........
ah, but the letter of the law can work both ways.... think of the big time crook that cleverly evades prosecution but can be brought to book on some technicality (think al capone?) or the abusive spouse who is arrested for something minor in order to protect their partner from something potentially terrible...

Precedent is a bigger ass.
That, again, is conditional... precedent and the freedom of judges allows for a fluid and more common-sense interpretation of law.
Ahhhhh , Bensonby, we'll have to discuss at the GL soon
sounds like a plan ALi!







anyway, the point of this thread was to see if anyone could provide a copy of this survey.... how did the SNT distribute it?

ALIB
Posts: 1548
Joined: 12 Oct 2006 21:34
Location: East Sussex

Post by ALIB »

[Precedent is a bigger ass.
[/quote]

That, again, is conditional... precedent and the freedom of judges allows for a fluid and more common-sense interpretation of law.

No, my experience of precedent is that judges make a decision based on their frame of mind (or lack of). Similar to jury service......
A pint of Pride if you please.

bag lady
Posts: 147
Joined: 5 Mar 2008 22:23
Location: se26

Post by bag lady »

It was attached to the Sydenham society's e- news letter.

I have tried to attach it but cannot work out how to, doh.

These are the questions it asks and it's heading.

Community Survey.

Before.

Implemention of Controlled Drinking zone In Sydenham Road

- How long have you been associated with this area?

-How do you feel about the street drinkers general demeanor.

-Have you ever been threatened by a street drinker in Sydenham Road.

- Have you been the victim of violence from Sydenham street drinkers?

-Have you ever seen another person become the victim of violence from a sydenham road drinker?

- have you ever been approached by a sydenham road street drinker if so what for?

- Have you ever seen someone else approached by a sydenham road street drinker, how did that person react?

- Are you happy with the situation as it is now?

- Please add any comments you feel relevant, thank you.

That's it, these are more thoughts-

There are no published facts in the survey of the problems street drinkers have presented. i.e cautions and police involvement, the survey does seem to assume we've all encountered problems. I haven't, am i the only one?

There is no information of what actually in practise a 'controlled drinking Zone' is,is it absolute or can people drink untill they appear to be intoxicated or problematic? How will it be policed?

This survey in it's subjective questioning serves only to install fear, in my opinion. The people who where drinking here will probably move on and regroup, with them there reputation ( rightly or wrongly as no facts have been offered) which has been promoted and reinforced by this police survey.

chrisj1948
Posts: 519
Joined: 15 Jul 2008 15:12
Location: Sydenham

Post by chrisj1948 »

bag lady wrote: There are no published facts in the survey of the problems street drinkers have presented. i.e cautions and police involvement, the survey does seem to assume we've all encountered problems. I haven't, am i the only one?

There is no information of what actually in practise a 'controlled drinking Zone' is,is it absolute or can people drink untill they appear to be intoxicated or problematic? How will it be policed?
I think it is intended to survey opinion. Publishing facts or information could potentially bias the results. The survey is more neutral without them.
This survey in it's subjective questioning serves only to install fear, in my opinion. The people who where drinking here will probably move on and regroup, with them there reputation ( rightly or wrongly as no facts have been offered) which has been promoted and reinforced by this police survey.
It is a survey about negative reactions to street drinking, which are what is relevant if restrictions are being considered. I do not see how the questions would instill fear. If you respond to the survey indicating that street drinking does not occasion you any problem then you have made your point

Regards
Chris

bensonby
Posts: 1650
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 12:28
Location: Kent

Post by bensonby »

bag lady wrote:There is no information of what actually in practise a 'controlled drinking Zone' is,is it absolute or can people drink untill they appear to be intoxicated or problematic? How will it be policed?

just for the record, the Drinking Control Zone is precisely what it says on the tin. Police Constables have the discretionary power to remove containers of alcohol off people in public if that person has been drinking. They do not have to; it is up to the local police as to how they want to persue the strategy. It becomes an offence if you refuse to hand over your booze.

Don't forget if one is "intoxicated" or "problematic" then they are already committing an offence: Either the offence of being drunk in a public place, or the offence of Drunk and Disorderly.

bag lady
Posts: 147
Joined: 5 Mar 2008 22:23
Location: se26

Post by bag lady »

Thank you both for your comments and the information.

I still feel the survey offers a Bias, by asking questions of a group of people's violent behaviour supposes and infers this has been problematic in the past.

If the same questions where asked on a survey of other marginalised groups, this could have been perceived as (depenending on the group) racist etc.

The survey has also been distruputed via the Sydenham societ's e-news, surely this will reach a limited demographic of the community.

Sorry to go on about this it's just that i think there could be more creative ways of resticting and preventing antisocial behaviour from street drinkers.

Restricting them in one area will only serve to move them on else where, i would feel less intimidated meeting this group in a busy high street with CCTV than a quieter road or Park.

I have filled my survey in with my comments, now i'll leave it there.

Phew.

bensonby
Posts: 1650
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 12:28
Location: Kent

Post by bensonby »

I agree absolutely Bag Lady, especially regarding your point of distributing it through the Sydenham Society's e-newlsetter....

chrisj1948
Posts: 519
Joined: 15 Jul 2008 15:12
Location: Sydenham

Post by chrisj1948 »

The survey is not neutral in the sense that what it is trying to determine is if public attitudes tick the boxes which would be required to justify a drinking ban. I have some sympathy for the issuers because that is what they want the survey results for - not as part of a general sociological investigation - and it is an improvement on acting on hearsay and lobbying.

Your point about the Sydenham Society is valid, its members are not necessarily representative of the Sydenham population in general. Any survey depending on voluntary response also means that the results represent the attitudes of the proportion who are prepared to respond.

I think the specific questions about anti-social behaviour are actually useful, because they give more hard information on which action can be based than the general "I don't like 'em because I don't like 'em" response.

Regards
Chris

bensonby
Posts: 1650
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 12:28
Location: Kent

Post by bensonby »

why can't they just deal with any offences as it is? Or look and see if there is a high proportion of offences in the area associated with this and put in a DCZ if there is a proportionately high number of offences in the area...

nasaroc
Posts: 602
Joined: 1 Oct 2004 12:41
Location: Sydenham

Post by nasaroc »

I’m sure that this question will be heavily influenced by discussions at the next Sydenham Assembly. Why not come along and put your view.

One thing that locals should be aware of when discussing the SE26 street drinkers is that there are very real concerns from local police – and very real evidence to support this concern – that this group are heavily involved in trading drugs and in serious drug abuse locally. Hardly surprising since the link between street drinking and serious drug taking is extremely high.

Two months ago one of the regular street drinkers was arrested and imprisoned for selling Class A drugs in Sydenham Approach and many of the others have been held by police in and around Sydenham Road under suspicion of using Class A drugs and warned of their future behaviour.

The problem in catching drug dealers and users is fraught with difficulties. The street drinkers may be apprehended with a pocket full of unused syringes for example (nothing untoward here – you can pick up unused syringes free of charge from local chemists). But even in their inebriated state, the drinkers know never to actually have drugs in their possession. They learn quickly to use them, then immediately throw away the evidence.

On Wednesday 21st I took time off to go to LA Fitness. As I approached Sydenham Approach, arouns 10.25am I saw two of the “regulars” looking into one of the wheely bins. I stopped on the bridge to see what they were up to. One of them reached down into the bin, pulled out a syringe and both then squeezed into the toilet together.

Again this is a very familiar way of making sure neither drug dealer or user are easily apprehended. The deal is done somewhere else and the dealer then deposits the drugs where they can be picked up by the user with relative impunity.

I’ll leave it to others to defend street drunks, drug dealers and users. They are the enemy of civic society and we should use any reasonable legal means of removing them from our high street and its environs.

For those who wish to protect groups such as these, or offer "creative ways" of dealing with the problem, why not offer your front garden or those of your neighbours so that the group can have a safe environment in which to carry on their activities?

What do we do with a group such as this? I really don’t know. That’s a question for health care experts, government and politicians. But please don’t insist that our high street is the place for alcohol or drug rehabilitation.

Post Reply