Police to decide who can drink in public? Pissheads in Windrush Sq. to go?

[salem]

Yep just looked this up the Controlled Drinking Zone covers the whole of the LB Camden apart from Hampstead Heath, Regent's Park and Primrose Hill. Seems to be fairly lightly policed in practice.

I am undecided as to whether its a good thing or not.

Yes, I found out about this when a group of us having a beer on the way to a BBQ were forced to empty our beers by an old copper and what appear to be his new rookie.

As we had a bag of weed and only dregs left in the cans (and it was a nice evening, we had loads of beer in and the copper was pretty friendly) we didn't really question him when he said they don't need signs to designate a particular area any more. It's interesting then that someone above suggests it just gives the power to stop people drinking rather then being an arbitrary drinking ban.

This copper though was typical, doing the old matey "I hate to see good beer go down the drain too mate" routine that they seem to do everytime they make someone pour their beer. If I know it's down to his discretion though I'll ask him just how honest he's being.

I've been told past that I shouldn't be drinking by police while walking in both Camden Town and Soho but never made to pour my drink away I had a bit of a showdown when a 'heritage warden' told me I couldn't have a beer on the steps of Trafalgar Square too.

I don't exactly sit around drinking but I think a bit of civil disobedience is thoroughly justified in this case and I will continue to do so (as I do on the tube). Actually I'm not sure if it's civil disobedience in the case of the tube as I keep my bevvie in my pocket until I'm on the platform

 

[nick h.]

Unless you were behaving antisocially it sounds as if the coppers were going a lot further than the mandate of a CDZ - they were preventing all drinking, not just problem drinking. Hmmm. Seems like those of us who want to have a peaceful drink will have to bone up on the law and have debates with officers about whether their instructions to pour our drinks away are unreasonable. Should be interesting. Perhaps it will be necessary to wear a head cam at all times to prove that you are not being antisocial.

 

[toblerone3]

Controlled Drinking zones cover the Boroughs of Richmond, Brent, Hillingdon, Westminster about 30 in London in total.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Unless you were behaving antisocially it sounds as if the coppers were going a lot further than the mandate of a CDZ - they were preventing all drinking, not just problem drinking.

It doesn't have to be "problem" at all in Camden. It's an offence to carry on drinking in public after being told not to, full stop.

edit: http://www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/conten...-behaviour/camden-controlled-drinking-zone.en

 

[nick h.]

So the officer doesn't have to have reasonable grounds to ask you to stop. What a woolly law. It's just begging to be abused.

eta: Here's the law this is based on - the Police and Criminal Justice Act. It confirms the officer doesn't have to have any grounds at all! How dare the council tell us this doesn't amount to a ban? And instead of selecting specific spots as designated public places they want to make the whole borough into a designated public place!

Fucking police state. What fuckwit drafted this law? Why didn't Parliament amend it?

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).

(3)A constable may dispose of anything surrendered to him under subsection (2) in such manner as he considers appropriate.

(4)A person who fails without reasonable excuse to comply with a requirement imposed on him under subsection (2) commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 2 on the standard scale.

(5)A constable who imposes a requirement on a person under subsection (2) shall inform the person concerned that failing without reasonable excuse to comply with the requirement is an offence.

(6)In section 24(2) of the 1984 Act (offences to which powers of arrest without warrant apply), after paragraph (q) there shall be inserted—
“(qa)an offence under section 12(4) of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001.”

 

[toblerone3]

So the officer doesn't have to have reasonable grounds to ask you to stop. What a woolly law. It's just begging to be abused.

Its not a law its a police power.

 

[salem]

It doesn't have to be "problem" at all in Camden. It's an offence to carry on drinking in public after being told not to, full stop.

edit: http://www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/conten...-behaviour/camden-controlled-drinking-zone.en

Interesting link, thanks.

So while it is an offence to continue after being told to stop, it isn't actually an offence to drink in itself.

The CDZ is aimed at those involved in anti-social behaviour, and does not mean that anybody with an alcohol container will have it confiscated.

It also says that they can;

confiscate alcohol from people, even if the drinking vessel (such as a can, bottle or a cup) is unopened

So in theory if your walking home with your shopping which happens to contain a bottle of wine you could be forced to surrender it or face a £500 fine (hopefully that's a far fetched scenario but they do have the power).

I'm very uncomfortable with it. It's worrying how they've targeted some of the most marginalised people who are least likely to mount a challenge in order to bring it in too.

 

[nick h.]

Quite. The law says that if the constable reasonably believes you intend to drink the booze in a public place he can confiscate it. So he could stand outside an off licence and confiscate everything that customers have just bought. Great news for off-licences like House of Bottles which the police are determined to close down.

 

[King of Prussia]

Not even I would suggest that Tony's customers intend to drink in public, but if what you say is true, Nick, then that's an even better reason to close him down.

 

[Isambard]

We had a big dicussion on the ins and outs of CDZs in the B&SW forum a couple of years ago. In the end, after months or maybe years of ongoing debate, the biggest fan of them, a poster who lived in a CDZ aea agreed they weren#t doing any good and she was in favour of getting ride of them.

They are just a licence on for social control.

 

[Mrs Magpie]

Not even I would suggest that Tony's customers intend to drink in public, but if what you say is true, Nick, then that's an even better reason to close him down.

I think Morley's should be closed in case people who purchase handbags from the lady's department hit someone with them, or use a pashmina to strangle or buy sharp implements from the kitchen departments and stab someone. These shops encourage crime.....er wait. I shouldn't have run with Mad King Ludwig's logic.

Just what is your agenda here?

 

[brix]

Just what is your agenda here?

From what I've witnessed he's just a piss-poor troll

 

[King of Prussia]

Handbags don't affect levels of crime, that's why their sale isn't regulated. Alcohol does, that's why you need a license to sell it.

 

[editor]

Not even I would suggest that Tony's customers intend to drink in public, but if what you say is true, Nick, then that's an even better reason to close him down.

Best close down Tescos and Sainsbury's too, along with all the small, independent shops selling booze in the area. After all, it's a FACT that some of their customers will drink their purchased booze in public.

 

[funkydita]

I'm not bothered by street drinkers in Windrush Square. I am however bothered by people leaving empty cans outside our flat and pissing against the wall. I'm also bothered by the woman who fucking barks at me every time I see her (I think I may have given her a side-eye deluxe once when she hoisted her skirt up an pissed like a racehorse outside my previous abode). Wasn't too fond of being called an "INVERT!!!" by (an admittedly perceptive and seemingly erudite) street drinker. Manners people! Street drinking doesn't bother me but pissed people do make me nervous.

More so than anything it's depressing seeing people drinking nasty cheap cider at 9am, makes me feel a bit sad.

I do wish there were Manners Police though, making sure people said please and thank you, enforcing polite queuing and keeping the door open for the person behind you, getting rid of your own rubbish and so on. That would make me happy.

 

[tippee]

What about 15 non-Jamaicans standing about outside a pub stinking the place out with cigarettes?

That shouldn't be allowed as well.

Inconsiderate smelly cancer catching NHS resource wasting non Jamaican smoking BASTARDS.

 

[nick h.]

Spoke to three PCSOs in Windrush Sq. today, standing a few yards from about a dozen of the usual crowd. They said they were enforcing the dispersal zone - anyone who swore would be made to leave. They said they hoped the CDZ would happen - got visibly excited, the word 'power' was used. With a dismissive gesture one said "this lot would all be gone" from the whole central Brixton area, including the churchyard. I countered with the suggestion that alcoholism is a medical problem and that sufferers deserved understanding. No sympathy. I asked whether they would confiscate unopened alcohol from people coming out of shops. They beamed and said they would "use our discretion".

I forgot to ask whether they will allow 'respectable' people to drink.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

As I've said in other contexts: it won't get applied to "respectable" people, because "respectable" people have the resources and social capital to challenge the actions in the courts, at which point the coppers and council would lose. It's a formalised version of the routine harassment that's always taken place, which has relied on the people harassed being too young, poor, fucked-up or otherwise disenfranchised to do anything about it within the legal system, and not physically powerful enough to make it dangerous to try.

 

[nick h.]

How could respectable people challenge this law? The way it's written doesn't give any scope for constructing an argument that one's drinking is reasonable.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Just because Camden Council have said that that is their bylaw, doesn't necessarily mean that that's it. I'd be interested to see how it would be legal for a police officer to simply take my stuff for instance, or arrest me and make me pay £500 if I didn't let them.

 

[nick h.]

See post 35 - it's not a bylaw, it's the Police and Criminal Justice Act. And it says the police can take your stuff, just because it's alcohol in a public place. If they did would you have any option but to appeal to the European Court?

 

[FridgeMagnet]

That's actually different from Camden's stated bylaws, in that there is a "reasonable belief" part. Not that that means a lot but you could challenge that. And yes, you could appeal to the ECHR - and people do, sometimes successfully. (More importantly, the legal aspect gets in the press and makes the council look like cunts.) But it'd be an unusual street drinker, teenager etc who did that.

 

[nick h.]

The law has a reasonable belief bit too. But it's not as bad as I thought - I didn't read it carefully enough. It says they can only seize booze that's been opened.

 

[Isambard]

The law has a reasonable belief bit too.

I have a reasonable belief that at Liz Windsor's next garden party there are going to be pissed up individuals in a publicly funded space. Nick 'em!

 

[lang rabbie]

I have a reasonable belief that at Liz Windsor's next garden party there are going to be pissed up individuals in a publicly funded space. Nick 'em!

Garden parties are "dry".

Since the increased security searches, you can't even get away with smuggling in a hipflask to give you Dutch courage before meeting the Queen.

 

[Isambard]

Never having been to one I didn't know the protocol.

 

[Foucault's Wife]

I have mixed feelings about this.

I am instinctively against anything that gives the police more powers and lets be honest they do abuse the ones they already have, the Food Not Bombs folk being but a small example. However, I have had hassle from some of the street drinkers. Being threatened for 'invading' someone's space while sitting at a bus stop and being called a 'sub-racial species' by someone else. And I really do have a problem with people pissing outside my house - OK I could move - but actually my place is dirt cheap and I can't afford to move, plus I like everything else about it. Maybe it's something about being a woman but having some man leering down at you telling you he'll sort you out and being called a 'sub-racial species' by someone else is quite upsetting and made me feel unsafe walking around the neighbourhood for a while after that.

But I do have serious issues with increasing police powers. Its all very

 

[pboi]

seriously its a good thing. they will just move under one of them railway arches or outside Tesco..they gotta do it somewhere.

this has been covered before, the bums around the station/sq make Brix look crap and hassle people sometimes.

 

[Bob]

So in Brixton now it will be illegal to drink outside. But illegal to smoke inside.

Therefore, apart from beer gardens and private property, illegal to drink & smoke anywhere.

 

[prunus]

I don't actually see any real reason that anyone needs to drink alcohol in the street, at any time, in any place, to be honest.

What? What about "because they want to, and it's not causing any harm or inconvenience to anybody?"

FFS. I don't see any real reason that anyone needs to watch Britain's Got Talent, at any time, in any place, but it seems they want to, so so be it.