police raid/shut down brixton club.

[detective-boy]

lol - I see this argument going on and on unless someone backs out, and I am not sure I have the typing stamina today......



For the sake of a quiet life - you win, you are right.

It's not a win-lose argument I don't think. You are not alone in thinking the views of those around you represent "the public at large" (tobyjug used to regularly point out that those who use drugs are a small minority of the whole UK population). The police are as prone to it as anyone else. My point is that when everyone's viewpoints are taken into account the police usually end up pissing all of the people off some of the time!

Anyway, bookmark the thread and come back to it when the houseboy starts and you have more time ...

 

[The Groke]

It's not a win-lose argument I don't think. You are not alone in thinking the views of those around you represent "the public at large" (tobyjug used to regularly point out that those who use drugs are a small minority of the whole UK population). The police are as prone to it as anyone else. My point is that when everyone's viewpoints are taken into account the police usually end up pissing all of the people off some of the time!

Anyway, bookmark the thread and come back to it when the houseboy starts and you have more time ...

Indeed matey, it isn't and I shall

 

[Louloubelle]

Why do you keep using phrases which suggest that there is something dodgy or wrong about the system. It is, I would suggest a professional, sound working relationship which means that this sort of operation is not needed very often.

Surely it is the sort of system you all WANT to see? And surely you realise that there will be some form of sanction for those who do not take their responsibilities seriously (or, worse, who conspire to break the law).

I wasn't criticising it, it seems to work well for most of the time from what I hear.

Where I think the system can not work is where, as you say yourself, the 'fluffier' dealers get threatened of warned off by the dodgier dealers. In a situation where the dodgy dealers are paying 'rent' to the club owners, promoters or security (or combination thereof) then it is the 'fluffy' dealers who will be the ones who get arrested and handed over to the police, leaving the dodgy ones to continue trading with relative impunity.

I also think that different club owners and promoters have different ways of dealing with dealing and with the police.

I had a long talk with one promoter who told me (don't know if this is true) that they just confiscated small personal use quantities of drugs and handed them over to the police without kicking the user out of the club. With dealers they used testing kits to test whether the drugs were pure(ish) or dodgy and therefore potentially dangerous. Any dealer caught with dodgy pills was handed over to the police, any with pure pills was just kicked out and the drugs handed to the police. He saw this as a way of trying to keep the club as safe as possible.

The same promoter told me that after a period of a relative drug drought where hardly any pills had been confiscated that he actually went and bought some pills himself just to hand over to the police as he felt worried that if he only handed over tiny quantities they might think he was holding onto confiscated drugs.

 

[detective-boy]

I had a long talk with one promoter who told me (don't know if this is true) that they just confiscated small personal use quantities of drugs and handed them over to the police without kicking the user out of the club. With dealers they used testing kits to test whether the drugs were pure(ish) or dodgy and therefore potentially dangerous. Any dealer caught with dodgy pills was handed over to the police, any with pure pills was just kicked out and the drugs handed to the police. He saw this as a way of trying to keep the club as safe as possible.

The same promoter told me that after a period of a relative drug drought where hardly any pills had been confiscated that he actually went and bought some pills himself just to hand over to the police as he felt worried that if he only handed over tiny quantities they might think he was holding onto confiscated drugs.

Both of those two policies would be the sort of thing which would be acceptable in certain circumstances (so long as agreed with the loca police in advance).

Not sure about the need for the purchase of pills just to hand in though ... would have thought making a phone call to just make sure the local police knew that drugs were scarce (which they had probably noticed themselves anyway) would have been a better idea rather than ... er ... committing a criminal offence just to avoid being ... er ... suspected of one! Not sure they'd thought that one through!

 

[jæd]

No stereotyping there then.

I wonder why...? Someone calls themselves "detective-boy" and defends the police. Why do I think his opinions might be a bit coloured for one side...?

For your information I have a lot of experience through being an (ex-) cop but I also have a lot of experience of the gay club scene in London (being a gay man); of the users of drugs (I choose not to use drugs myself but I have many friends who do, in a variety of ways) and I would support the idea that they should (with very few exceptions) be legalised.

So you know all about drugs apart from actually using them...

The negativity comes ENTIRELY from the fact that the drug dealing world IS inhabited by large numbers of very dangerous, ruthless and increasingly powerful individuals who kill people. Lots of people. I make no apologies at all for wanting everything possible to be done to take them out of circulation.

Then legalise it all and and some kind of tax to it. Quickest way to stop people doing a crime...? Make it impossible to do the crime... Simplistic, but...

 

[jæd]

Where I think the system can not work is where, as you say yourself, the 'fluffier' dealers get threatened of warned off by the dodgier dealers. In a situation where the dodgy dealers are paying 'rent' to the club owners, promoters or security (or combination thereof) then it is the 'fluffy' dealers who will be the ones who get arrested and handed over to the police, leaving the dodgy ones to continue trading with relative impunity.

Well... None of me friends who have drugs to sell on would consider going to club and selling them there. Too risk transporting them there, and there wandering around saying "pills, pills, pills..." A mate of mine is a manager for a London club... And its depressing the number of stupid kids that get pulled over with quantities of pills...

 

[2 Hardcore]

There is no "certain quantity" which the police expect from any venue. But they are not stupid. If a venue like the Fridge claims NOT to have found and confiscated any (or very many) drugs despite allegedly exercising their agreed policy then that WILL attract attention. That attention may well be the deployment of undercover officers to find out what is going on there (though this is expensive and will only usually be pursued if some warnings have been ignored). And, if necessary, an operation like this may be mounted - if the management won't manage their premises then the police will.

Isn't there a problem here for clubs though of 'damned if they do, damned if they don't', to some degree?

If they don't hand much/anything over to the police - it's suspicious.

If they do hand over larger quantities - how much would be 'too much', in the sense that the quantity would be construed as indicating a serious problem with drugs in a given club, meriting closure/licence review?
Or does handing over large amounts indicate that the club is acting responsibly and (perhaps successfully) tackling its 'problem' (hence licence safe, at least in the short-term until next scheduled review)?

 

[Louloubelle]

Well... None of me friends who have drugs to sell on would consider going to club and selling them there. Too risk transporting them there, and there wandering around saying "pills, pills, pills..." A mate of mine is a manager for a London club... And its depressing the number of stupid kids that get pulled over with quantities of pills...

My impression is that, while the law says that if you supply drugs to someone else you are a dealer, in reality there are lots of different levels ranging from kids clubbing their money together to buy in bulk at cheap prices and taking it in turns to buy from the dealer, through to the dealers who supply doctors, lawyers, film producers, etc, and who wouldn't dream of dealing in a club, through to to the naive kids you mention and of course the dangerous people with guns.

It seems to me that sometimes some drug dealers can be much more vulnerable, manipulated and abused than some consumers. I'm thinking especially of the kids I knew who really were very vulnerable and were eager to earn respect and to gain the love and admiration of women and also to get contacts with people in the music business. These boys grew up in a poor area and I could be wrong but I don't think they had a violent bone in their body, they were just star struck with the idea that being a drug dealer was cool and would get them lots of girls and contacts.

Thing is, until they were caught and sent to prison, everything went as planned and they got girls, records, fun nights out, etc. They made contacts with DJs and producers (who they either gave drugs too or sold at a bargain price) but of course once they got nicked nobody was crying any tears for them or felt in any way indebted to them, it was just seen as their tough luck.

 

[ddraig]

Isn't there a problem here for clubs though of 'damned if they do, damned if they don't', to some degree?

If they don't hand much/anything over to the police - it's suspicious.

If they do hand over larger quantities - how much would be too much, in the sense that the quantity would be construed as indicating a serious problem with drugs in a given club, meriting closure/licence review?
Or does handing over large amounts indicate that the club is acting responsibly and (perhaps successfully) tackling its 'problem'?

this was discussed in a national ents conference for student unions in relation to safer dancing and harm reduction.

some unions wanted to put such schemes in place for the benefit of their members but we were warned that by doing so we'd be 'admitting to a drug "problem" '
ie - one outcome of doing something like this would've meant us having a drugs box and conducting searches, then handing over the drugs to police. it was obvious that if you look for drugs you'll find them and anyone handing over large quantities on a regular basis will be bringing to the attention of the authorities something they can't ignore.
even things like providing free drinking water etc can bring unwanted investigations.
like if you do this you're admitting to illegal activities which you should stop.
so, better education, advice and harm reduction was presumed as 'rocking the boat' and not worth the hassle. wrong way round again methinks.

 

[2 Hardcore]

this was discussed in a national ents conference for student unions in relation to safer dancing and harm reduction.

some unions wanted to put such schemes in place for the benefit of their members but we were warned that by doing so we'd be 'admitting to a drug "problem" '
ie - one outcome of doing something like this would've meant us having a drugs box and conducting searches, then handing over the drugs to police. it was obvious that if you look for drugs you'll find them and anyone handing over large quantities on a regular basis will be bringing to the attention of the authorities something they can't ignore.
even things like providing free drinking water etc can bring unwanted investigations.
like if you do this you're admitting to illegal activities which you should stop.
so, better education, advice and harm reduction was presumed as 'rocking the boat' and not worth the hassle. wrong way round again methinks.

was/is it ever otherwise?
These were also concerns raised by club owners and promoters when the Home Office published its 'Safer Clubbing' guidelines a few years back.
A kind of lose-lose situation.

 

[detective-boy]

So you know all about drugs apart from actually using them...

Well you seem to know all there is to know about policing without ever having fucking done it. It'd lay an awful lot of money that I have met more fucking drug dealers than you and have far, far more idea of how the business operates. But, hey, don't let that put you off ignoring everything I say cos I is a pig.

Twat.

 

[detective-boy]

Isn't there a problem here for clubs though of 'damned if they do, damned if they don't', to some degree?

Not really. As long as they are in regular contact with the police, act on current advice and nothing out of order comes to notice on routine visits or as a result of incidents to which police are called then there is usually no problem.

The idea that you have to confiscate X amount of drugs or it will look suspicious is imaginary.

 

[detective-boy]

My impression is that, while the law says that if you supply drugs to someone else you are a dealer ...

It seems to me that sometimes some drug dealers can be much more vulnerable, manipulated and abused than some consumers.

The does say that there is no need for money to change hands - it is the physical act of handing over which constitutes the offence of supplying controlled drugs or possessing them with intent to supply.

Although a charge of supply would be possible, in such circumstances it would be quite likely to be dealt with by some other means if there were no aggravating circumstances.

I have not been including these theoretical dealers in the definition of dealer" I have been using - I have been referring to commercial dealers who, as you point out, range from those basically funding their own drug use to those making mega-bucks.

And regarding your point about some (I presume fluffy) drug dealers being vulnerable, etc. that has been precisely my point - they are at risk from the nasty bastards out there.

 

[detective-boy]

so, better education, advice and harm reduction was presumed as 'rocking the boat' and not worth the hassle. wrong way round again methinks.

And absolute bollocks. Whoever gave you that advice was talking out of their arse. If they were a police officer then even worse.

For at least ten years now the police have worked with club management to agree an appropriate drugs policy. That regularly includes confiscation of found drugs and on the health front many clubs not only supply water, etc. but employ paramedics to patrol the club looking for symptoms of extreme drug use.

None of this shows out anything other than a responsible approach to management of the venue. It will really not surprise the police to know that some clubbers use drugs ...

 

[pdxm]

Despite normally being slightly right of Atilla the Hun I really can't see the point of raids such as this. Dealers get sod all done to them at court and I can't see the point of pissing off two hundred potential jury members. I'm always dubious when the press and the MPA turn up at anything. As for the drugs hurt people further up the food chain argument, well to be frank I ain't interested. Everyone who gets involved in the drug dealing business knows the score.

 

[topaz]

detective boy, you're a really useful member of this community, obviously intelligent, articulate and well educated. i cannot fathom why you, of all people, need to retaliate with obscenities and insults.

 

[ddraig]

innit!
i think it's cos it's his job innit? PR for the PLOD

and DB - it wasn't bollocks it was what some had already experienced, and no it was not by a copper it was from someone from an organisation like 'release' iirc. not release but similar - sorry my onion brain forgets

this was a while ago mind (maybe even 'safer dancing' as 2hardocre said) and maybe the police have wised up and given into the inevitable.

so calm down dear! have a cuppa! a stroll in the sun! you have got a day off haven't you?

 

[free spirit]

This whole raid was a high profile muscle flexing excercise aimed at showing club owners what could happen to them under the new licencing laws if they aren't perceived to be playing ball with the police IMO.

They recently did the same to the new monkey club in sunderland (having previously given the club an asbo ).

 

[jæd]

Well you seem to know all there is to know about policing without ever having fucking done it. It'd lay an awful lot of money that I have met more fucking drug dealers than you and have far, far more idea of how the business operates. But, hey, don't let that put you off ignoring everything I say cos I is a pig.

Twat.

Dunno... The way you respond to situations is fairly similar... Cop in being heavy handed/belligerence shocker..!

 

[Mr.Bishie]

Well you seem to know all there is to know about policing without ever having fucking done it. It'd lay an awful lot of money that I have met more fucking drug dealers than you and have far, far more idea of how the business operates. But, hey, don't let that put you off ignoring everything I say cos I is a pig.

Twat.

 

[detective-boy]

detective boy, you're a really useful member of this community, obviously intelligent, articulate and well educated. i cannot fathom why you, of all people, need to retaliate with obscenities and insults.

Wilful fuckwittedness and knee-jerk, sterotyped, unthinking responses just piss me off big time. Sorry. Maybe I should preface such posts with a BBC-style intro: "And now for D-B's latest response. But be warned, this post contains strong language from the very start ..."

 

[Greebozz]

200 police raid the Fridge in the wee small hours. Some serious munchies going on in Brixton. I blame the drugs.

Lol love it

 

[Tays]

This discussion is so early noughties. Come next year the old bill can raid anywhere if they suspect people of smoking something called a "cigarette" on the premises.

 

[Jessiedog]

Not sure about the need for the purchase of pills just to hand in though ... would have thought making a phone call to just make sure the local police knew that drugs were scarce (which they had probably noticed themselves anyway) would have been a better idea rather than ... er ... committing a criminal offence just to avoid being ... er ... suspected of one! Not sure they'd thought that one through!

Surely if someone obtains illicit drugs with the sole purpose of turning them over to the police at the earliest opportunity, there is no offence?



Woof

 

[Jessiedog]

I'll tell that to the nice, fluffy dealer who got killed by their own suppliers because they thought (wrongly) that they had grassed them up then shall I?

Or the dead one, who was murdered by thugs wanting the money the sweet little rich kid was making.

Or the dozens of others who, one way or another, have pissed off the bad guys one or two steps behind them in the chain.

You are on a different planet if you cannot see that the violence and thuggery starts only a very short way behind the sort of pink and fluffy dealers you describe.

But the problem is wholly and solely caused by prohibition, nothing else.

And whereas I agree that the police are not responsible for prohibition, neither are drug users or small-time (and hopefully "fluffy") dealers. Neither are the nasty fuckers who will bring violence and death for the money made available (through prohibition). Neither are the "Mr Bigs".

The problem remains that it is the end users and small dealers that suffer, disproportionately, the effects of prohibition. They need to associate with peeps they would probably not deal with otherwise, to get supplies. There is no quality control over supplies and it's they who tend to suffer the "sharp end" of police activity such as this.

I would argue that, as a part of the "system", the police bear far, FAR greater responsibility for the damaging effects of prohibition, than do users or small time dealers. For the VAST majority of illegal drug users, the single most damaging aspect of their usage is what happens to them should Mr Plod decide they are gonna be busted - this really fucks their lives over. How many people have a criminal record for possesion of drugs and yet no other criminal record whatsoever? I would imagine that a majority (probably a vast majority,) of those with a drug related criminal record have no other convictions.

Given this disgusting state of affairs and given the power that the police have, I feel it is incumbent on members of the police service (both individually and collectively,) to "do something about it". STOP busting people for possession. Stop it. STOP IT!

Without the aquiesence of the police in enforcing these illogical, damaging laws that have been proven to have the opposite effect to their purpose (illegal drug use has plummeted since 1971, has it?), these laws would soon be overturned, as they should be.

The police have a duty to serve the public. These laws are wrong and are not in the public interest. A little bit more interest in serving the public and a little less interest in busting users would go a long way in restoring public faith.

What about the police union getting together and putting out a statement that its members can no longer enforce such unjust laws and will stop doing so after 6 months, giving the govt. sufficient time to repeal and replace with something more sensible?

Frankly, "I was just following orders", doesn't cut it when it comes to war crimes investigations. I cannot see why the police should be allowed to use this as an excuse to enforce stupid, unjust and damaging laws.

The law must change. The police are doing far from enough in this aim.

No victim. No crime.



Woof

 

[Greebozz]

I think detective boy does have a point. But I think that people are looking to two different situations regarding the dealing of drugs in clubs.

The fact is most people get sorted out with drugs though there mates or dealers who are friends of friends. So a lot of people one this forum are arguing against the police approach, and the impression given that the club was awash with evil dealers.

Even the people who fall into the above category will admit that there are some nastier elements at certain clubs just in it for the money selling shit drugs or dud pills which actually happened to a friend of mine the the Fridge funnily enough.

Detective boy used to be in the police so I expect he has far more experience of these scabby little bastard dealers. That said I think Detective boy has a overly negative view of clubbing, Most clubs are very friendly places particularly the underground ones. The good dealers are the ones who love the scene and come back every month. So the people that regularly go to the clubs know who the 'nice' dealers are. And like I said most people get sorted out before entering the club.

To sum up there are dangerous harmful doggy dealers. But they don't play that bigger part in the club scene. And the good dealer don't do much harm to anyone. And most people bring there own.

So my conclusion is that this Police raid was in fact a waste of money and police resources because dodgy and dangerous dealers are only a small percentage of the club crowd. The proof of this is the low number and relatively small amount of drugs found.

 

[Jessiedog]

To sum up there are dangerous harmful doggy dealers.

*runs*



Woof

 

[jæd]

Wilful fuckwittedness and knee-jerk, sterotyped, unthinking responses just piss me off big time. Sorry. Maybe I should preface such posts with a BBC-style intro: "And now for D-B's latest response. But be warned, this post contains strong language from the very start ..."

Why...? Can't you write a reply without swearing...? Personally, if someone can't it really undermines their point...

 

[jæd]

Detective boy used to be in the police so I expect he has far more experience of these scabby little bastard dealers.

Yep... I'm guessing "scabby little dealers"/"gun-toting gangsters" are going to be attracting more attention to the police...

 

[detective-boy]

IDetective boy used to be in the police so I expect he has far more experience of these scabby little bastard dealers. That said I think Detective boy has a overly negative view of clubbing, Most clubs are very friendly places particularly the underground ones. The good dealers are the ones who love the scene and come back every month. So the people that regularly go to the clubs know who the 'nice' dealers are. And like I said most people get sorted out before entering the club.

Not at all. I TOTALLY agree with your view and I really couldn't give a toss what they get up to cos, as you say, they do not have a major impact on other's lives. (And I suspect most police officers, certainly those responsible for directing activity and assigning scarce resources, would agree)

That said, whilst it remains a crime they MUST expect some sort of restriction being applied, if only an agreed search / confiscation / ejection policy agreed with police and applied by management.