Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Name & Shame drugs tourists??

Blagsta said:
Errr...so getting ripped off and encouraging anti-social behaviour doesn't bother you?


Of course getting ripped off bothers me, so I make sure I don't. As for anti-social behaviour, it's just a sane reaction to an unstoned world.
 
Pie 1 said:
You actually managed to get stoned off stuff you bought on the high street? That's probably a first.

It was no effort - bought it, rolled it, smoked it.

As you see, I have an answer for everything.

Anything else, O moral majority?
 
I have bought excellebt quality skunk in Brixton High Street many times. :p Thankfully I have a regular indoors dealer now.

If the market is removed from Brixton with these measures, where do you think it will go? When the police stamped down hard on dealing in camden, my street dealer in Brixton said business immediately increased.

Unless consumers of cannabis have somewhere else to purchase from, they will use street suppliers.

Not everyone is cool, connected and able to find a regular dealer or even wants to. Smokers come in many shapes and sizes you know.
 
Dopermine said:
Nothing's the matter with me. I want drugs, bloke offers me drugs, I buy em, smoke em, am happy. What part of the word STONED don't you understand?


You must have odd brain chemistry to get stoned off the dealer's mum's homemade basil and oregano mix. :p :D
 
I agree with Topcat here, there are street dealers whose wares are of top quality.

They only supply because demand exists and that demand will never go.

Would be better for all if a blind eye was turned to places like the green leaf
 
Just think how big a slice of the market "Home James" served not that long ago? I would guess 400 ten quid bags a day. How many of those punters now frequent the bus stop by Woolworths?

Yet the police heralded the closure of Home James as a success in "Cracking down on drug dealers."

The whole anti drugs policy is a fucking joke. The police know this but just use the problems as an excuse to demand more resources.
 
the policy is never coherent....

not long ago they were ignoring cannabis to focus on hard drugs now you will be named and shamed for buying in brixton.

as for drug tourists, i would guess most bus stop punters come form within lambeth.

Street dealing is not good anywhere but the problem will only be solved by decreasing demand or an alternative supply.
 
ViolentPanda said:
You must have odd brain chemistry to get stoned off the dealer's mum's homemade basil and oregano mix. :p :D


These are street guys, I can't imagine their mothers preparing such exquisite dinner party fare. Still, I bet her jerk chicken mix would blow your head off.
 
scotlander said:
Street dealing is not good anywhere but the problem will only be solved by decreasing demand or an alternative supply.

People like to smoke dope, including many moaning here. Education campaigns, name and shame policies, police enforcement, draconian penalities have all been tried and have all failed...
 
Dopermine said:
These are street guys, I can't imagine their mothers preparing such exquisite dinner party fare.
Dinner party fare? Are you taking the piss and/or trying to come the class angle?
Basic flavouring for bog standard homemade pizza in [b}my[/B] w/c non-dinner party holding domicile for the last 20 years.
Still, I bet her jerk chicken mix would blow your head off.
Probably not as explosively as mine would blow her head off. :p
 
TopCat said:
People like to smoke dope, including many moaning here. Education campaigns, name and shame policies, police enforcement, draconian penalities have all been tried and have all failed...

Personally, my dislike for street dealing is mostly to do with being of an age where you pretty much always went to your dealer to score, and it was invariably at a flat or house, or in one case (for several years) at a snooker club, so I'm not a fan of trading "out in the open", purely from a customer point of view.

I'd love to see central government move to a rational position on weed, just so local authorities would stop spunking money on publicity-seeking "crackdowns".
 
TopCat said:
People like to smoke dope, including many moaning here. Education campaigns, name and shame policies, police enforcement, draconian penalities have all been tried and have all failed...

Indeed, agree with this as well.

The only option is to move supply off the streets.
 
Much as i hate lambeth council i think the kneejerk reaction from the usual suspects to this one is a bit off..

Theres an endless supply chain of 'dealers' plying their oregano, however if u embarrass the claphamites or whoever the fucking idiots are you see actually buying the stuff on the st then they will stop coming. dont want mummy and daddy to see your face in a full page ad in the metro do they.

which will hopefully lead to the whistling cunts at the bus-stops fucking off too. altho i guess that aint ever gonna change in reality.
 
gabi said:
however if u embarrass the claphamites or whoever the fucking idiots are you see actually buying the stuff on the st then they will stop coming. dont want mummy and daddy to see your face in a full page ad in the metro do they.

which will hopefully lead to the whistling cunts at the bus-stops fucking off too. altho i guess that aint ever gonna change in reality.

You've got to catch them first.
 
gabi said:
which will hopefully lead to the whistling cunts at the bus-stops fucking off too. altho i guess that aint ever gonna change in reality.

You poor shy flower you. Imagine nasty men whistling near you or saying skunk skunk. Please don't ever go down the market, I dunno how you would cope with people shouting apples and pears near you.:p
 
Any sudden dearth of 'drug-tourists' will cause dealers to become more competitive. This may result in more violence!

But on the plus side a lot of the guys selling gear are aggresssive businessmen. You'd have to be to put up with the shit they get everyday. If the local drug economy forced a lot of these guys away from dealing they'd, possiblly, look into other areas to make money(their drug, I think). No bad thing for Brixton.
 
3 coppers* stationed by the no 2/432/196/333/133 bus stop this evening outside Woolies.






*although at least one of them is one of those community support blokies.
 
TopCat said:
You poor shy flower you. Imagine nasty men whistling near you or saying skunk skunk. Please don't ever go down the market, I dunno how you would cope with people shouting apples and pears near you.:p

Fruit and veg sellers don't tend to follow people down the street trying to sell to them.
 
I've never found it much of a problem, to be honest. Should one catch a merchant's eye, an almost imperceptible shake of the head is all I've ever found necessary. I'm far more offended by the bloody butchers, and their stink. Oh, yeah, and the pub crowd, and their stink. Ah, almost forgot the heavy metal traffic grind, at its stink.

But they all bring in business and money to the area, so I'm not wild about the naming and shaming puffers, flesh eaters, jolly juice guzzlers, or the motorised metrobrigands. Sure, regulate and be sensible, but this is a fookin' pantomine, right? Posture politics, innit?

Some problems just have to be managed, and a lively and potentially damaging human fascination for intoxicants happens to be one of them. Do any readers here seriously doubt that prohibition has failed? And that all the nasties of the drug scene are made less manageable by prohibition?

Prohibition costs too much already. Stunts like this are adding insult to injury.
 
detective-boy said:
Yes. Provided it is accurate and true. But it must also comply with the Human Rights Act which means that the breach of the individuals privacy must be proportionate, legal, accountable and necessary when balanced against the problem being addressed.

But, broadly speaking, yes, it is legal if done properly.

And the "attack" on the customer base (especially the travelling one) is a deliberate additional tactic, not in place of harassing the dealers (the principle being (as with prostitution and kerb crawlers) that if you remove the dealer but the market remains, they will be instantly replaced by others whereas if you remove the market then the dealers will disappear too.

Not doubting you - in fact I know this to be true. What I can't get my head around though is if I were to walk into a police station and ask details of someone who had previously been convicted of something I'd be told they couldn't tell me anything due to the Data Protection Act. Fair enough, except how come they can then publish those same details in the local paper for all to see? :confused:
 
MadFish said:
Not doubting you - in fact I know this to be true. What I can't get my head around though is if I were to walk into a police station and ask details of someone who had previously been convicted of something I'd be told they couldn't tell me anything due to the Data Protection Act. Fair enough, except how come they can then publish those same details in the local paper for all to see? :confused:
You could ask the same question on a larger scale: "If I had a load of people who could go and sit in every Magistrates and Crown Court in the country, taking note of all the convictions (and the previous convictions often read out before sentence) which take place (which are all in open court even in the very few cases where some of the evidence is in camera), how come criminal records are not publicly accessible?

The answer is similar to the one used by people arguing against computerisation of medical records - ease of access. If you fall out with your neighbour, you may happen to know something of them from local paper or whatever but you could not find out about their record if that were not the case.

The breach of privacy involved in circulating details locally (or even nationally in some cases (e.g. release of details following conviction in high-profile cases)) is significantly less than making details available on a permanent, searchable database.

(I personally think that (unspent) criminal records should be a matter of public record - we have huge problems in all sorts of areas with vetting being part of the issue - the private sector (including most security) cannot as a matter of course check whether someone is lying about their record. Yes, there are issues of stigma but they apply to nyone telling the truth on their application form anyway - why penalise them as opposed to the liars??)
 
detective-boy said:
(I personally think that (unspent) criminal records should be a matter of public record - we have huge problems in all sorts of areas with vetting being part of the issue - the private sector (including most security) cannot as a matter of course check whether someone is lying about their record. Yes, there are issues of stigma but they apply to nyone telling the truth on their application form anyway - why penalise them as opposed to the liars??)

Bollocks. If a conviction is spent, it should remain spent. The private sector can check criminal records, using the CRB, if the job being applied for is what is called an "exempt post", i.e. exempt from the Rehabiliation of Offenders Act. This includes posts like bank manager, insurance manager and other responsible financial positions, security guards, any job where you will be handling explosives and firearms etc.

The system is not perfect by any means. However to make all spent convictions a matter of public record is completely unacceptable and a breach of privacy.
 
Was it on 5 live this morning some police rep. (??) from Brixton seemed to be blaming drug / gun crime in Brixton on "hoardes of celebs, plus the Hampstead dinner party crowd visiting Brixton on a Friday night to score their cocaine" ?

:confused:
 
Apart from that there Craig Charles alledgedly :p

(you'd think he could have done better than an old coke can to smoke it too ;)
 
Might work, I suppose but I've been muttering skunk/sensi and whistling for ages and ages and no-one will sign my little book.
 
Back
Top Bottom