*My 7-point Sort Out Brixton plan!

[TinyCrendon]

its interesting dis stuff.

There are 2 appraoches. The waht do we do now and the cut to the chase.

Cut to the chase says: prescribe smack and crack cocaine to addicts. Why? Because it removes them from the criminal market. They are the lucrative, repeat buyers, on whom the trade rests. Occasional users, peeps who snort a line of smack twice a year are not the market. This undermines dealers/thugs, provides safe ways of taking drugs, stops epople moving around the country to areas where drugs are more `prevelent`, stops them burglarising and so on to get drugs.

I would suggest that LONG TERM these are ideas that peeps should hold dear and voice in situ's like this, with the proviso that this is a medium to long term aim.

What do you do now? This should be much more dependent on residents, i think the residents between them would work out a solution, be motivated to find a solution, be prepared to compromise, be prepared to be pragmatic, far more so that Mr Paddick, Ms Hoey, the MP, the council, the local OB. all of whom have other people's `interests` to consider, their bosses, the Mail readers they fear so etc etc.

Having been to Brix recently i can see why peeps get upset, i was interested (i never asked u mike) that dealing seems to be going on around the `new` nightspots like the DS, LB and so on. This seems to say that the dealers need/are attracted to the flow of cash/people that comes to these places. yet these places seem to attract lilttle mention, do they have a responsibility to help? do they help?

 

[jonesy]

reply to johnny wisehammer

Within Brixton we already have Outreach teams (drug foccused as well as multi-disciplinary teams focussing on housing and health care etc.) these teams as is the case with everything within the sector are vastly underfunded under resourced and understaffed. There are also services very vey close to Brixton tube that offer the opportunity for rough sleepers to access primary health care housing referrals and prescribing services, a service that is unique within London. There are day centres, hostel based services and a whole plethora of agencies offering a multitude of services as well as one of the best drug projects in the country.The main problem is that many users are just not ready to engage with services a lot of the time. As an answer to Johnny wm earlier in the thread people will not even cross the road to get help if the have "bigger fish to fry" eg. going for a fix, making the money for the next fix or waiting for the initial effects of an earlier fix to wear off so that they have the ability to carry out steps a and b again. These people are notoriously hard to reach unless they are either a) in big trouble with their dealer/fellow users b)on deaths door/in hospital c) banged up in prison or about to be. Most of the time people simply don't have the time as the chaotic lifestyle they lead demands 24 hour attention also they may be to busy "enjoying themselves" if none of the above apply. There are various pots of money flying around that are already earmarked to improve, adapt and expand current services which is really positive, but the problem grows at a rate far and above the efforts being made. Truly a frustrating and sad state of affairs.

 

[pooka]

Thanks for that jonesy: the question would seem to be how to harness the real exasperation and passion that is now widespread in Brixton to ensuring that the resources do get focussed on this problem? It was astonishing that at the time of local elections this stuff, which was in the national media every day - what with the plague of "investigative" journalists that decended on Brixton - barely surfaced in the manifestos of the established parties. Where it did, they had little new on offer. Not surprisingly, voter turnout in Coldharbour ward was one of the lowest in the country - just 14%.

As for making contact with addicts, before they are at deaths door, I'd be interested in your ideas. Offer dealers community service as outreach workers (under supervision) instead of locking them up?

Adam: I entirely agree with your point that drug addiction is a health issue not a criminal one. As for what we do in the short term, see above. But I think a starting point has to be the recognition of how widespread and broad based the popular reaction to this stuff is. For that reason, the march this weekend is significant - symbolic yes, but symbols can be very powerful.

In respect of the clubs etc., on upper CHL - yes, I think both myself and Mrs M have commented elsewhere on these boards that way back, the dealing used to notoriously focussed on Railton Road. It has migrated onto CHL, almost certainly in response to the regular influx of people looking for a good night out. I don't know if the club owners take any responsibility for that. Certainly, they should be expected to chip in to any outreach centre there. Make it a condition of planning permission I'd say - I believe there are precedents in other contexts, so called "Planning Gain".

 

[editor]

Dogstar manager Neil Kindness was on radio a while back saying that he - and other CHL club owners - recognised the additional problems that their presence introduced and were willing to pay extra to provide extra policing along their strip.

Apparently this isn't allowed (although I seem to recall other boroughs doing something similar).

The heroin/crack problem in Brixton is bordering on epidemic. I've never seen so many addicts on the streets as there are now: at times it looks like a shanty town outside Brixton tube station and the needle-strewn, crack-brewin' BR station has to one of the least appealing stations in the UK.

I agree that it's absolutely a health problem and not a criminal one. Much as I hated it when addicts were regularly congregating outside my block to inject, ringing the police seemed pointless: what on earth are they supposed to do with them?!

To sort this problem out, addicts have to be properly helped to get off their addiction and back on their feet, and that'llcome woith a heavy price, both economically and politically.

Dealers have to be stamped down hard by the forces of Babylon, and Paddick's mantra of 'help the addicts, screw the dealers' needs to made clear on the streets.

But I doubt if politicians have the nerve or the bottle to really address this problem - just look at the way they bodged the cannabis experiment!

 

[LDR]

Originally posted by editor

The heroin/crack problem in Brixton is bordering on epidemic. I've never seen so many addicts on the streets as there are now: at times it looks like a shanty town outside Brixton tube station and the needle-strewn, crack-brewin' BR station has to one of the least appealing stations in the UK.

Does this have any relevance to whether the cannabis experiment was a success or not? I mean, I thought things were getting better because of it.

 

[editor]

The whole point of the cannabis experiment was to concentrate resources on the elements that were causing most harm to the community: i.e., crack and smack.

Sadly, once the Daily Mail and various 'family values' types shoved in their moralistic oar, the whole experiment was sidetracked into a media sideshow.

'Serious' journalists seemed more interested in whether 'GAY COP' Paddick's ex GAY boyfriend smoked a GAY spliff or not instead of try to address the real human suffering on the streets,

Instead of debating the real issues we had to put up with irrelevant, useless, publicity-hungry shits like Kate Hoey blathering out a load of bullshit about 'schoolkids being stoned'.

And they wonder why no one votes for them...

 

[Mr Retro]

Dogstar manager Neil Kindness was on radio a while back saying that he - and other CHL club owners - recognised the additional problems that their presence introduced and were willing to pay extra to provide extra policing along their strip. Apparently this isn't allowed

I don't believe the stupidity of that. Surely all the help on offer should be snapped up?

 

[Anna Key]

planning gain

Originally posted by pooka
...the regular influx of people looking for a good night out. I don't know if the club owners take any responsibility for that. Certainly, they should be expected to chip in to any outreach centre there. Make it a condition of planning permission I'd say - I believe there are precedents in other contexts, so called "Planning Gain".

An intriguing idea - using section 106 planning agreements to force the upper CHL nightclubs to contribute towards the increased policing and drug rehabilitation costs caused by their presence. Interesting that Kindness has acknowledged the linkage.

Particularly as the Merrett clubs, in the form of Dogstar and Living Bar, have a proven record of breaking planning law.

But in principle it seems a good idea (and a new one). The clubs place additional strains on police resources and attract drug tourists and associated dealers. Therefore, let the clubs mitigate those costs.

One possible problem:-

At present 106 agreements (so-called because they arise from section 106 of the 1990 Planning Act) can be secret deals between a developer and the Local Authority. I believe the government is currently consulting on changing this so the Local Authority must publish the agreement.

[I also believe Ken Livingstone's been using 106 agreements big time to embed social housing provision in yuppie flat developments: a 106 deal forces the inclusion of a certain percentage of cheap rented flats in the yuppie scheme.]

The thought of Lambeth Council entering into secret deals with the Merrett establishment sends a shiver down my spine. Given their planning record it seems unreasonable to trust them an inch in this field.

Still, if Kindness/Merrett offered to pay for extra coppers and a drug treatment programme, I'd take his money. So long as the agreement was published for all the see and the community was involved in negotiating it.

I'll ask the Lambeth planners whether policing and drug rehabilitation costs could legally form part of a 106 deal. I've never heard of such a linkage but maybe it's possible.

Link to legislation.

 

[newbie]

This ties in with the street warden scheme, funded by the Home Office. Wardens have been operating around Clapham Junction for a year or so, and apparently Lambeth is identified for the next phase. I think there is provision for additional funding from local traders, as in the Oxford St scheme, but I can't find a reference.

 

[pooka]

Thanks for that Anna - useful info

 

[Gramsci]

Interesting to see that Editor heard the manager of the Dogstar on the radio say that their presence introduced additional problems.This was not always the case.When Merrett(then of the Dogstar)took the Council to court because they would not give him a late license(and this was only because one Labour councillor broke ranks and voted to refuse the application along with the Tories and LibDems)his lawyer took a very different angle.He argued that the former Atlantic was a "den of iniquity"(it had gone downhill in its last years).His client had invested money in the area(forgetting the Brixton Challenge money the Dogstar received)and was regenerating a rundown area.My local councillor(New Labour)also said that the new Dogstar would help clean that corner of Brixton up.
As has already been said the new frontline is now Coldharbour Lane.I regard this as a direct result of the policies of Brixton Challenge and the Council of that time.They encouraged the emphasis on late night entertainment through grants and sympathetic planning and licensing approvals.It was always the Tories and LibDems who were much more sceptical.I think that New Labour of that time nievely believed that youthful "Cool Britannia" entrepreneurs like Merret would transform and clean the area up.They also made big promises for CCTV.This has proved to be an expensive failure.Someone like me who was sceptical of this "modernisation"was obviously someone who was not moving with the times and against change in Brixton.

 

[Gramsci]

I have now read most of this thread specifically Trotboy versus Editor.I feel torn as I(as someone who lives in the centre of Brixton on CL)can understand both points of view.I agree with the Editor that a treatment centre in CL will be the usual underfunded government botch up in practise.If it was done properly in the way that Trotboy suggests I would be more interested.In the long run the government could save money if proper treatment was given to addicts.I am also sick of Central Brixton being regarded as a dumping ground for everything people dont want in their area.The attitude is its your fault for living their.An example is that the Brixton Neighbourhood Forum (not urban75 but the council run organisation)in its submission to the UDP revision wants all late night entertainment centred in central Brixton.I am also sick of the dealers.I sometimes see them in the morning on Atlantic Road with the desperate junkies looking for their morning fix.I have seen junkies shoot up in the morning by the rec.My block of flats had junkies breaking in to shoot up on the stairs at one point.You can tell the difference between the junkies and the dealers as the dealers are all black and the junkies all white mediteranians.In particular the needles left lying around are never cleaned up.If you ring up the Council (as it is a health hazard)they take days to come around to take them away.Some councils have a needle patrol whose sole job is to go around and remove needles.


This problem is also found across the West End.One of the posts pointed out that the junkies move around different areas.This usually happens when the police(after complaints from local residents in a particular area)sweep an area.The junkies and their dealers move around Kings Cross,Covent Garden,Soho.
It looks like Brixton is becoming part of this loop.


I was listening to a programme about addiction which made several interesting points.

1. Addiction is part of a way of life.GIs from the Vietnam war who used hard drugs stopped(usually)when they came back.The reason was they were back in their original lives.It has been found that addicts can be cleaned up but once they leave a treatment centre if they return to their original friends they get drawn back into junkie way of life.

2. The cost of hard drugs causes crime.A doctor on the programme who treated addicts pointed this out.Someone who is addicted to alcohol does not need to steal all the time(they might beg but thats not stealing)as drink is cheap.A wealthy person might use hard drugs his/her personal life might be affected but they do not cause crime.Street drinkers(who kill themselves slowly)get a lot less attention as whilst they can be a nuisance do not cause half the social problems of junkies.


Therefore I have two proposals :

1. Legalise all drugs hard or soft and make them affordable so people do not have to steal and get drugs off gangstas.

2. As Trotboy suggests set up treatment centres for addict of hard drugs.These have to be given proper long term funding for the complete rehab of addicts of hard drugs.

 

[fanta]

Is it not the case that if we are serious about finding an effective solution to the hard drug related menace that plagues areas like CHL and Brixton, then we have to be prepared to be taxed more?

All of the sensible ideas that posters have forwarded here essentially come down to one thing - funding!

At the end of the day how well we address and tackle this problem will depend on how much more the average joe in the street is prepared to contribute.

Quite frankly, it is looking grim.

 

[Anna Key]

Originally posted by fanta
... At the end of the day how well we address and tackle this problem will depend on how much more the average joe in the street is prepared to contribute.

Couldn't agree more.

It's also a powerful argument for pre-Thatcher uncapped local democracy with tax-raising powers. Most European countries have this. Why can't the poor old Brits?

I can easily imagine Lambeth people voting to pay a bit more Council Tax to mitigate the problems highlighted on this thread. A large proportion of the borough's population is on 100% CTAX benefit anyway, so it wouldn't actually cost them anything!

It would also be good if a locally elected politician could contribute to this thread, and maybe link it to the expensive Lambeth Council web site which, incidentally, is covered in stuff about the Council embracing 'open government.'

It's bizarre and somewhat surreal that an unelected senior police officer, Brian Paddick, talks directly to the community, while the elected people fail to do so, yet bang-on about 'open government' on a web site which we pay for!

 

[fanta]

Originally posted by Anna Key


It's bizarre and somewhat surreal that an unelected senior police officer, Brian Paddick, talks directly to the community, while the elected people fail to do so, yet bang-on about 'open government' on a web site which we pay for!

A very good point that needs driving home to one Ms K Hoey, I think.

 

[Gramsci]

I fail to understand the argument that "we" should pay to clean up a mess that is not our fault.Lambeth is one of the poorest boroughs in the country with a concentration of social problems.The wealthy who can afford to live in nice protected areas should be made to cough up.Also as I have said before Brixton has been subject to various (expensive) initiatives that have failed to sort out these problems(whilst promising to do so).The money that is available is not used wisely.There is also not the long term commitment.I also question whether money is the only issue.The Heroin/Crack problem is also a more recent social problem.

I talked to a friend today and he backed up some of the comments of the editor.Brighton is the Heroin capital of the UK.It has become known as having good funded services for addicts and they have gravitated towards Brighton as a consequence.

 

[fanta]

Gramsci:

'I fail to understand the argument that "we" should pay to clean up a mess that is not our fault.'

This is precisely the attitude that is probably the biggest impediment to ultimately solving the problem.

Gramsci - it is called being socially responsible!

People who are in hospital or are receiving treatment for terrible ailments like aids and cancer are not there becuase it is 'my' fault, yet who would say they should fare for themselves apart from the Anne Widdecombes of this world?

Taken to it's logical conclusion, your 'failure to understand' our collective responsibility leads to dishonest malicious initiatives like Thatcher's 'care in the community' which was a euphemism for abandoning the mentally ill.

Of course the rich could and should contribute more (has that not always been the case?) - how do you propose to make them?

I do not doubt you're right about money being spent foolishly in the past, but this is not a reason to tighten the purse strings. Rather, spending should perhaps be directed with consultation with those whose expertise and focus lies with caring for addicts NOT career-minded politicos.

So what if addicts are attracted to Brighton because that town has better than normal treatment. That is surely a good thing, certainly better than addicts staying where treatment is less than adequate, right? Better more effective treatment means less drug related crime I would have thought.

Do we want the probelm solved?

Yes? How much are we all willing to spend then?

 

[Mrs Magpie]

Originally posted by Gramsci
You can tell the difference between the junkies and the dealers as the dealers are all black and the junkies all white mediteranians.

This is actually a sweeping generalisation and I know it not to be the case....there are plently of white british junkies, there are white british dealers, as well as Portuguese dealers, and I know of at least one black junkie (not crackhead) too.....and that's just what I have observed...I'm sure there is plenty of stuff that the beady eyed Magpie misses as well.

 

[TopCat]

I am not a Brixton resident but...

I think you all do need to take action to sort out the problems with drug sales and use in the area.

A two fold approach of providing free smack under clinical conditions nearby coupled with a community action type action ie wallop any person leaving needles about or indeed offering smack for sale.

Bit tricky to do in practice as a lot of the dealers have access to arms and are stupid enough to use them coupled with a spineless govt who are not brave enough to go down the clinical shooting gallery type road.

But lots of communites have taken action against dealers and users and given the state of Brixton at the mo I think hard measures are called for.

Good luck!

<TC snug/smug in Suburbs>

 

[John Wisehammer]

"a nice spanking mobile info centre/referal point/needle exchange/clinic that could park up in town, but tour the estates too"

This happens in a small Russian city I was in last year - by all accounts, it works relatively well (and, astonishingly, has the support of the police chief).

 

[John Wisehammer]

Hold on, Fanta - I think one of us has misread Gramsci - I thought s/he was saying that it's not fair to make Lambethians pay lots to clear up a national drugs problem that has manifested itself in Brixton, not that "junkie scum should pay themselves, not my problem" sort of line.

Can you clarify, gramsci?

 

[Gramsci]

A reply to Fanta and Mrs Magpie

My objection when people start saying "we" should pay more to deal with the Drugs problem in Lambeth is as I thought I clearly stated in my piece that Lambeth is a poor borough and that the wealthy should pay more.The idea of "collective responsibility" in a post Thatcherite age has almost disappeared.The gap between rich and poor increased under Thatcher.This was intentional to provide people with (under her ideology) an incentive to work harder.The New Labour governments Third Way has done very little to close this gap.Talking about "we" and "social responsibility" in a country as unequal as this sounds like Blair going on about rights and responsibilities.It seems to me the wealthy have all the "rights" and the poor the "responsibilities" in actual practise.Managing Directors who live in nice little executive devolopments in the home counties dont have to deal with the crap that those who live in Brixton do everyday.They can buy themselves out of it.

I also put forward a radical plan to try to solve the situation by legalising all drugs.This would take away the gangster element and stop theft to fund a drug habit.I thought this was a potentially socially responsible way to start to solve the problem but Fanta ignored this part of my argument on a previous post on this thread.I did state that in the discussion between Trotboy and the Editor on this thread I could sympathise with both sides.

Fanta talks about collective responsibility and then asks me how to make the wealthy pay their share!Surely Fanta should answer this question before criticising me.The problem is any form of government that proposes a radical redistribution of wealth and power will be nobbled from the start.An example is Brazil where a left wing canditate may become President.There is already a threat of a flight of capital from the country.Perhaps our present form of democracy is to limited.

As for Mrs Magpie saying that I was making sweeping generalisations on the ethnicity of the junkies/dealers I was only talking about my small part of Brixton(the market area).When I walk through Brixton its always Black guys who offer me drugs on the street.Everytime I see a junkie trying to shoot up they are always white around my area.

I brought the Brighton example up as the Editor had made a similar point on a previous post.A needle exchange outside his block of flats had according to him made the situation worse not better in his area.I was not saying that I support the Anne Widdecombe mentality.What I would like to suggest is that a lot of these initiatives whilst providing humane services do not solve the problem at all.Which is why I am arguing for a much more radical solution-complete legalisation(see my previous posts on this thread).

After all people kill themselves legally (or shorten their lives )by smoking and over drinking without recourse to gun toting dealers or stealing to fund an expensive habit.Their is no logical drugs policyin this country.Also their are drugs that are considered "hard" like Cocaine and E which whilst having some dangers I dont see why people should not be allowed to take recreationally.All life contains risk.I think people should be fully informed and make their own choices.

 

[Mrs Magpie]

Originally posted by Gramsci
As for Mrs Magpie saying that I was making sweeping generalisations on the ethnicity of the junkies/dealers I was only talking about my small part of Brixton(the market area).When I walk through Brixton its always Black guys who offer me drugs on the street.Everytime I see a junkie trying to shoot up they are always white around my area.

I am talking about the area in the Atlantic Road, Coldharbour Lane, Brixton Road triangle......I do know one of the homeless Junkies quite well, and sometimes sit with her chatting for quite long periods, and I see who offers her Junk, the people she knows and fixes up with. Also because I am 'invisible' ie middle-aged, anonymous looking woman with shopping bags who spends a lot of time in queues, bus stops, waiting for my kids etc etc and am also very observant I just see all this...I have lived here for a long time and just notice what goes on.....I am very rarely offered drugs on the street so I am not using that as my criteria as who is a dealer or not...dealers just don't see me as a customer...they don't see me at all really..but I see them.....

 

[pooka]

1.I've seen black and white people comotose in Brixton with needles sticking out of them.

2. 75% of local government spending comes from central government, a does 100% of special initiative money eg Brixton Challenge, £5.4 bn Neighbourhood Renewal, the £1.2m "crack" money.

 

[pk]

I would suggest closed circuit TV, using hidden cameras, on the stretch of Coldharbour Lane between the Dogstar and the Kentucky Fried Chicken.

Fit the cameras into the walls, on the roofs of buildings, in order to build up a picture of the active dealers in the area. Fit microphones up in obvious dealing areas.

Monitor the situation. Use MI5 agents.
Move in when your intelligence is sufficient, after a period of maybe even a year, utilising the army. Work out who is armed (infra-red/radiographic imagery) and who is "grass roots" dealer. Discern who is selling what to whom.

It is a war, the crack trade, a war against every decent human being who lives there.

Cut off the supply and demand of dealers to Coldharbour Lane.. even temporarily this would be a healthy thing. Free the weed guys, and the crack dealers, well, use your imagination.... I won't spell it out... though forcing them all to share a small cell would soon half the paperwork I would have thought.

As for potholes in the roads in Lambeth, well... it wouldn't be Lambeth without it's shitty road/pavement surfaces now would it....?

Oh, and reinstate Brian Paddick.

pk

 

[fanta]

Originally posted by Gramsci
A reply to Fanta and Mrs Magpie

Fanta talks about collective responsibility and then asks me how to make the wealthy pay their share!Surely Fanta should answer this question before criticising me.The problem is any form of government that proposes a radical redistribution of wealth and power will be nobbled from the start.An example is Brazil where a left wing canditate may become President.There is already a threat of a flight of capital from the country.Perhaps our present form of democracy is to limited.

Fair enough. The truth is I don't know how Gramsci!

My point is I don't think there is a realistic way for us to make the better-off contribute what they could and should afford to. I agree with you - no political party seems able to get into power these days on a platform of 'we would tax more to spend more'. The only people who get into power - like Blair - do so with an assurance and nod that what they do in office will not hurt the greedy and the mean too much

Hell will freeze over while we're waiting for the comfortably well-off to dig deeper, in the meantime the problem on our streets deteriorates. Given the situation, what else can be done but that local people make a start? If that means the cost of tackling it is met in the instance by locals in Lambeth, then though I'd whinge like everybody else, I think I would ultimately support it.

(PS - I know you're nothing like the horrendous Widdecombe )

 

[HurryUpHarry]

Brixton Fayre

seeing as Brixton is Brixton and everyone is fascinated by drugs nowadays - why not use Brixton's reputation and turn it into a theme park for drugs? Not the actual drugs themselves but the simulated experience; rides etc; movies; installations...The Albert/Granville Arcade/Electric Avenue could be dope; a big helter skelter; lots of bean bags and coloured oil lights; tressel tables selling stodgy sweet cakes, wobbly salvador dali clocks that go at half the speed; dangling conversational threads hanging off walls that no one can be bothered to pick up but that look nice; beer that was twice the price because you'd forgotten to pay for your last; soggy mirrors and all the walls would be bent. The overground station could be crack - here you have to pay up front, shout a lot, run around - everyone would steal each others clothes and have to sleep with each other to get them back. It would all end up in a fight. The underground station and its surrounds would be smack - with those gravitational rides at fun fairs shaped like hypodermics and groups of disneyland style workers dressed in shawls and carrying scythes. Brockwell Park could be acid - people wondering about on their own in nature. And Windrush Gardens ecstacy - a sort of wimpy version of the same...Living Dogstar etc could be coke - everyone talking to eachother, in expensive clothes, no one listening. And the Beehive speed, everyone talking to eachother in cheap clothes, no one listening, etc etc....

 

[Anna Key]

Originally posted by HurryUpHarry
seeing as Brixton is Brixton and everyone is fascinated by drugs...

I know who you are! Or should I say "Your Majesty?"

 

[hipipol]

Last people who care

Lets face it folks the wasted, junky heaps of flesh posing as human dont give a fuck about the people who live CHL.
I have wasted a vaste part of my life shooting smack into meself so I feel perhaps a little insight into the way that works will help.
I have been a junkie in Ibiza-everyone scored round the Gypsy/Gaetano area, Sa Penya, then used to go hit up on the cliffs-the cops let anyone into the district but blockaded the way out, so that the rich, very often foriegn owners of the big yachts etc didn't get any wierd fucks hanging round em banging up. There was a cave half way down the cliff, 40-50ft drop just outside it.
One day some Spanish geezer a speedball fiend(thats smack and coke kiddies, by the way, the needle fiends of Sarf Lunnon have worked out how to disolve rocks so they are doing a mix of smack an crack these days-Ikid you not!!) fell down the cliff. He landed in a bed of used works around 8-9ft deep-thats used spikes full of good knows who's rotting blood. Anyway when the ambulance guys got there they refused to go in to get him out, two other junkies were threatened by the Gaurdia, so they went<you move if the Guardia say so, BELIEVE!!>. This kinda shit is coming, unless something happens.
Seriously it is very much a Mediterranian thing, this hittin up in the open air, never used to happen here, but I've seen it all over Spain, an all the Italians I used to knock round with in Kings Cross(I lived in Caledonian road for 5years) told me it was the same at home.
I have no answers but forcibly takin off the street may be the only way, Junkies dont give a fuck, almost by definition- and you DEFINATELY have to be away from home ground for a while, otherwise you have no chance to stay away from it.
Good luck Mike, in the meantime I suggest you get a good hose with a controllable nozzle, then soak the fucks, they DONT like it, an it may just remind em other people exist.

 

[jonesy]

Originally posted by John Wisehammer
"a nice spanking mobile info centre/referal point/needle exchange/clinic that could park up in town, but tour the estates too"

This happens in a small Russian city I was in last year - by all accounts, it works relatively well (and, astonishingly, has the support of the police chief).

This happens in Brixton too but has had to move it's location on several occassions due to objections from local residents. this too has the support of the local police chief