Zero Tolerance for Dublin City Centre, would it work?

tricky D

hotbabe1992 wrote: »

These are red/commie/champagne socialists,you can be guaranteed they will offer no real solutions..

There was a clear mod instruction about digs and attacking posters. Warning card given.

bombidol

Well we can all agree that most solutions offered here (including mine) are unreasonable and unrealistic. What would be your idea for a realistic solution to these issues?

Ole Rodrigo

I would like to see enforcement of laws regarding loitering, public intoxication, intimidation etc, especially around the shopping areas and liffey boardwalk. The problem with that is how do you distinguish between junkies and temple bar revellers ? The guards would have to use discretion which makes discrimination likely - maybe thats why they are so reluctant. I also happen to think driving above 35kph in the city centre is antisocial and deserving of zero tolerance, but thats for another thread.

I dont have any answers, unfortunately. Zero Tolerance works in new York because there isn't the culture of public intoxication like there is here. I also suspect that gun culture changes things significantly too.

spurious

Intoxicated Temple Bar revellers causing a ruckus are just as offensive to me as spaced out junkies. Enforce the laws across the board.

Ole Rodrigo

spurious wrote: »

Intoxicated Temple Bar revellers causing a ruckus are just as offensive to me as spaced out junkies. Enforce the laws across the board.

Me too, but they are a source of revenue and would be treated differently if a zero tolerance policy was applied.

SimonTemplar

I was just on the LUAS and two junkies (male and female) were having a full blown shouting match on a packed tram. The women looked rough, but the male looked like death but a raspy guttural voice that, to be honest, was just about distinguishable as a human's voice (I'm not being flippant, that is an accurate description)

Anyway, in the middle of their heated argument, the women shouts "Where were you when I was having a miscarriage behind a skip" :eek:

I have absolutely no tolerance for scumbags taking over the city center, but I couldn't help but feel sorry for her. What kind of life it that?

miss no stars

Wilfork wrote: »

Of course not. That doesn't follow at all. Which is why I didn't say that.

If people can't get clean in jail, what makes you think moving them to a treatment centre will them clean and back on their feet and in a position to learn a skill and rejoin society? Call a spade a spade. Wanting drug addicts out of the city centre is purely a 'not in my back yard' argument.

If they're not dealt with they aren't put in jail so can't get on the programmes in jail... Obviously. The treatment programmes here are fraught with problems, hence I suggested better ones. Here, you have to be OFF heroin before getting on one (what's the point?) and once you've had your dose, that's it, off you go for the day to hang around causing trouble. Hence, I advocate for proper treatment programmes that get people OFF heroin and then keep them occupied so that those who genuinely want to get clean aren't bugged by their mates to go score. I do think many people on heroin would like to get clean but the facilities aren't there, not even the short term supports are there.

SimonTemplar wrote: »

I was just on the LUAS and two junkies (male and female) were having a full blown shouting match on a packed tram. The women looked rough, but the male looked like death but a raspy guttural voice that, to be honest, was just about distinguishable as a human's voice (I'm not being flippant, that is an accurate description)

Anyway, in the middle of their heated argument, the women shouts "Where were you when I was having a miscarriage behind a skip" :eek:

I have absolutely no tolerance for scumbags taking over the city center, but I couldn't help but feel sorry for her. What kind of life it that?

It's not any kind of life. Which is one of the reasons why the addict problem needs dealing with. Other reasons being the harassment and crime associated with them.

hotbabe1992

There was a clear mod instruction about digs and attacking posters. Warning card given.

Wasnt trying to get personal..Anyway point taken will stay on topic.

If they're not dealt with they aren't put in jail so can't get on the programmes in jail... Obviously. The treatment programmes here are fraught with problems, hence I suggested better ones. Here, you have to be OFF heroin before getting on one (what's the point?) and once you've had your dose, that's it, off you go for the day to hang around causing trouble. Hence, I advocate for proper treatment programmes that get people OFF heroin and then keep them occupied so that those who genuinely want to get clean aren't bugged by their mates to go score. I do think many people on heroin would like to get clean but the facilities aren't there, not even the short term supports are there.

Its supposed to be one of the hardest things to get off heroin bc it is so addictive,how they expect you to be clean before going on a treatment programme is ridiculous..

Imagine the horror of going off heroin on the streets,especially this christmas winter going cold turkey,i couldnt imagine it.

You would have to have a will of titanium to do this no bother..

It's not any kind of life. Which is one of the reasons why the addict problem needs dealing with. Other reasons being the harassment and crime associated with them.

Addiction causes misery all round,for the addict themselves,for their families,for their friends,for the people who commute for the tourists who are afraid of being mugged/hassled there is an air of intimidation in the air with drug users about in the city.

Something needs to be done,decisive action needs to be taken for all involved.

Straight Talker

Reekwind wrote: »

Again with this hysterical overreaction. Someone has told you that they saw someone get mugged after getting off a bus and now apparently there are hordes of hardened criminals waiting for fresh pickings off every bus? That's just silly

Are you afraid to visit Australia in case you're eaten by dingos?

In a nutshell, yes. Randomly arresting people who have committed no crime is, in itself, deeply illegal. You have the right not to be arrested for doing nothing wrong. It's a right that you're blasé about waiving for people other than yourself

Really, this is as above. Let me ask the question though: are you really suggesting that an entire population of people (hundreds of entirely innocent bystanders) be arrested on a daily basis and held for nine hours a day just so you can go shopping without being plagued by baseless fears?

That is insane. Not only does it criminalise 'standing around' (let's arrest everyone waiting by the Spire or GPO, right?) but the odds of you actually being robbed or stabbed in Dublin during these peak hours is minuscule. As for the shopping, well, at least Stalin justified his crimes by appealing to the big picture

And yet you are statistically almost twice as likely to be murdered or violently assaulted in New York than you are Dublin. Your perception of safety is entirely wrong

Not in the slightest. "A load of rambly and waffly liberal do gooding nonsense" or not, you clearly didn't read my post at all. Nothing in there, or anything that I have written in this thread, suggests that. That is a simple strawman on your part

So I suggest that you go back, read my posts and formulate an argument that actually addresses it. Hint: try to understand the possibility of fighting crime without pulling innocent people off the street and interning or deporting them

But they won't be pulling innocent people off the streets.That's not what any of us want.Unless you call people that steal, deal drugs in public, inject drugs in public, assault, rob and intimidate people who are trying to mind their own business and who are trying to get on with their own lives innocent.;) There is nothing wrong with people demanding that Dublin be as safe a city as possible for it's citizens and it's visitors and that is not the case with parts of Dublin city centre at the moment.I have solutions and they are an increased garda presence in areas of Dublin city centre that are blighted by drugs related crime.A zero tolerance approach to this carry on.I have already highlighted how police in an English city wouldn't tolerate this carry on around the citys main shopping areas.Finally Dublin City Councill,The HSE and The Gardai need to form a strategy to deal with this issue and try and get these addicts off heroin because the banging out methadone approach doesn't seem to be working.At the end of the day we have laws in this country and if you break those laws then the law should be enforced.That's how a civilised country works.So stop calling people that want the laws of our country enforced and who don't agree with your agenda as Stalinist!I find it ironic that you demand solutions from me when you have offered no solutions yourself and you have branded those of us that have offered solutions as right wing nazis!Why don't you try and offer a solution without talking about stailinists or making strawmans arguments about dingos.

Straight Talker

alastair wrote: »

Yes it is. Unless they're doing something illegal - and they generally are not.

What about when they are doing something illegal which going from what i have seen and what other people have seen is quite often or has robbing,assaulting and intimidating members of the general public been legalised without people knowing about it?If i was just loitering around the front wall of your house late at night would you just ignore me and say to yourself that i have a right to loiter around your property or would you call the guards and say that someone is acting in a suspicious manner around the vicinity of your house?

alastair

Straight Talker wrote: »

What about when they are doing something illegal which going from what i have seen and what other people have seen is quite often or has robbing,assaulting and intimidating members of the general public been legalised without people knowing about it?If i was just loitering around the front wall of your house late at night would you just ignore me and say to yourself that i have a right to loiter around your property or would you call the guards and say that someone is acting in a suspicious manner around the vicinity of your house?

Everyone has the right to loiter where they like in a public space. It's not a crime to 'look suspicious'. Robbery, assault, intimidating begging etc are crimes, and remain so - no-one has legalised them. I live in the inner city, and am well used to people loitering around my property. I really don't see why I should be bothered about it, unless they do something illegal, at which point I'd have no compunction in calling the guards.

There's clearly a number of delicate souls who confuse the annoyance of junkies etc with a threat of violence or crime. 'Zero tolerance' for loitering junkies etc is just a recipe for shifting a nuisance, not any measure that would impact on crime whatsoever. Personally, I'd prefer meaningful policing and judicial sentencing to empty gestures that make a few timid types feel better about their trips into the city centre.

maninasia

alastair wrote: »

Everyone has the right to loiter where they like in a public space. It's not a crime to 'look suspicious'. Robbery, assault, intimidating begging etc are crimes, and remain so - no-one has legalised them. I live in the inner city, and am well used to people loitering around my property. I really don't see why I should be bothered about it, unless they do something illegal, at which point I'd have no compunction in calling the guards.

There's clearly a number of delicate souls who confuse the annoyance of junkies etc with a threat of violence or crime. 'Zero tolerance' for loitering junkies etc is just a recipe for shifting a nuisance, not any measure that would impact on crime whatsoever. Personally, I'd prefer meaningful policing and judicial sentencing to empty gestures that make a few timid types feel better about their trips into the city centre.

So you don't have a problem, but a lot of people do, obviously.
Anybody with a family they care about for a start....

hmmm

Build a few methadone clinics and the usual free accommodation for "the deprived" in Foxrock and the judges won't be long changing their tune on releasing persistent offenders.

alastair

maninasia wrote: »

So you don't have a problem, but a lot of people do, obviously.
Anybody with a family they care about for a start....

Heh. You're quite the charmer. Anyone who feels the need to criminalise 'loitering' really needs to reassess their priorities in life. Lets keep criminalisation reserved for actual crimes, eh?

Isolt

Seven years ago I would have burst into this thread defending Dublin city because it's my home and it's where I live my life. I am originally from a very rural town and heading up to ''the big smoke'' as a 17 year old was quite the adventure. I loved it and I grew up quickly, definitely quicker than my friends who remained in my hometown anyway. I became confident, I had a great social life, I found a brilliant job up here. I did my degree and my masters here. I have many, many precious memories of this city.

However, I am sad to have to agree that it has changed significantly over the last couple of years. There have always been scumbags around but never as much as today. I would go as far as to say that I hate Dublin city now. It's dirty, smells of urine, disgusting and littered with obnoxious wasters who do what they want.

Also this:

P.Walnuts wrote: »

The junkies will literally not bother anyone but other junkies. The only danger to the average person is phone snatching from what I can see.

This is absolutely incorrect. I am a small girl, under 5 ft. I have been robbed twice (I guess I don't look intimidating when there's a gang of them). Once on O Connell St. That was just a bag snatch, nothing too distressing. The second time I was walking near Stephen's Green SC and two adult men tried to take my bag and when I refused they pulled out a scalpel from under their sleeve. I roared at them (no way was I losing everything again!) and they dropped the knife and ran off down Grafton St.
Both incidents happened within 8 months of eachother and happened after me living here for 4 years without much hassle (bar the norm you get in any city). There has been a definite increase of antisocial behaviour.

My boyfriend was recently chased on Camden St by two scumbags with a knife, looking for his phone. He had to punch one of them off of him as he was trying to restrain him while the other robbed him. They chased him for a long time until my boyfriend slipped into an estate in Rathmines. This is totally unacceptable.

In all cases the Gardai were notified and in all cases there were no arrests made. Although the Gardai were very nice and very sympathetic, they are clearly incredibly frustrated by this kind of behaviour.

DebDynamite

P.Walnut, Reekwind,would either of you be happy for your mother/grandmother to go shopping on their own around O'Connell Street/Talbot street area, then walk down to Bus Aras to get a bus home?

Are you both young and male? Perhaps you need to realise that not everyone is as fearless or streetwise as you are. I'm a tall, fit looking woman, who walks stong and tall, so not to appear vulnerable, which probably gives me a false sense of security, but I can certainly see the anti-social behaviour going on around me. If I was a bit more vulneranble/ less street-wise I would feel extemely unsafe walking around certain parts of the city, and not dark, dingy areas off the beaten path either - main thoroughfares and brightly lit shopping areas.

languagenerd

This thread is making me really pessimistic for the future of Dublin

It's not extreme to suggest that something be done about the heroin problem and the anti-social behaviour it spawns, as well as the anti-social behaviour that has nothing to do with heroin too. It's not extreme to expect that troublemakers are moved on or locked in a cell for a couple of hours or barred from public transport. It's not extreme to ask that Gardaí patrol areas of the city where the most trouble happens. It IS extreme to suggest that anyone who looks like they might cause trouble be jailed, however.

Personally, I agree that the heroin problem is not going to be solved easily. Furthermore, I don't think that ALL troublemakers are addicts, nor that all addicts are troublemakers. For that reason, I think the heroin problem and the antisocial behaviour issues should be dealt with separately. Treat heroin addicts as a medical case and deal with the criminality as something entirely separate. If only there was the money to do it, we could get the guards out and apply the laws that are already in place. The laws that forbid stealing, assault, drug-dealing, public intoxication, etc. are applicable to junkies and non-junkies alike - keeping an eye out for public order offences on the main thoroughfares of Dublin and arresting people on the spot for such crimes would help cut the crime rate and make everyone else feel much safer.

maninasia

alastair wrote: »

Heh. You're quite the charmer. Anyone who feels the need to criminalise 'loitering' really needs to reassess their priorities in life. Lets keep criminalisation reserved for actual crimes, eh?

You are missing the point.

I don't know any family who would be happy with randomers hanging around outside their door all day and night with unknown intentions, let alone junkies.

Whether it's legal or not doesn't mean people will put up with it or just accept it. It's legal for a pedophile to live in certain neighbourhoods. But when they get found out...they get moved on by the community. That's what people do, look after themselves, their families and their communities.

maninasia

languagenerd wrote: »

This thread is making me really pessimistic for the future of Dublin

It's not extreme to suggest that something be done about the heroin problem and the anti-social behaviour it spawns, as well as the anti-social behaviour that has nothing to do with heroin too. It's not extreme to expect that troublemakers are moved on or locked in a cell for a couple of hours or barred from public transport. It's not extreme to ask that Gardaí patrol areas of the city where the most trouble happens. It IS extreme to suggest that anyone who looks like they might cause trouble be jailed, however.

Personally, I agree that the heroin problem is not going to be solved easily. Furthermore, I don't think that ALL troublemakers are addicts, nor that all addicts are troublemakers. For that reason, I think the heroin problem and the antisocial behaviour issues should be dealt with separately. Treat heroin addicts as a medical case and deal with the criminality as something entirely separate. If only there was the money to do it, we could get the guards out and apply the laws that are already in place. The laws that forbid stealing, assault, drug-dealing, public intoxication, etc. are applicable to junkies and non-junkies alike - keeping an eye out for public order offences on the main thoroughfares of Dublin and arresting people on the spot for such crimes would help cut the crime rate and make everyone else feel much safer.

I really think it's easy to deal with a lot of the criminality associated with heroin addicts, you move the treatment centres away from populated areas and provide a junkie bus which makes it easy for them to get to the centre and back to where they live. In this manner the amount of time that they interact with the general public is reduced and they are not concentrated in the city centre.
Nobody's rights are being infringed, and it's a low conflict and low stress solution.

As for the regular scumbags, that needs to be dealt with by undercover patrols and harsher sentencing.

The solutions seem fairly obvious, the question then is why are they not being implemented?

alastair

maninasia wrote: »

You are missing the point.

I don't know any family who would be happy with randomers hanging around outside their door all day and night with unknown intentions, let alone junkies.

Whether it's legal or not doesn't mean people will put up with it or just accept it. It's legal for a pedophile to live in certain neighbourhoods. But when they get found out...they get moved on by the community. That's what people do, look after themselves, their families and their communities.

Flag-waving for mob rule isn't any more convincing than suggesting that those who don't subscribe to your personal worldview can't care about their families.

Families being unhappy about people loitering near their homes is rather too low a bar for the criminalisation of standing still too long imo - and thankfully most of the rest of society agree.

maninasia

Well I'm not familiar with the current legal status, but anybody who is 'ok' with having people hanging around outside the door all day and night, especially if they include junkies, doesn't really care about their family.

Also caring for your community is certainly not the same as mob rule.

Very far from it. If the state can't take of the problem, it's up to the community to take care of it. That doesn't mean violence, it can mean pressure. The same thing happens in all societies, workplaces etc. everywhere. It's just usually it's hidden or not discussed.

Maybe Irish people haven't woken up to the fact yet that the go soft approach is not working, or maybe a lot of people don't have a good comparison base. The level of crime in Dublin is shocking compared to most cities in Asia, from my personal experience. However many people in Dublin (or other parts of Ireland) have grown up in a culture of understated violence in schools and a culture of alcohol abuse in the streets or at home, so feel this is perfectly normal. I only really understood this after living overseas for a long period.

The only time I've been physically threatened in 10 years was on a brief visit to Dublin on the city streets by people looking for trouble and I've been pretty much around the world and back!

alastair

maninasia wrote: »

Well I'm not familiar with the current legal status, but anybody who is 'ok' with having people hanging around outside the door all day and night, especially if they include junkies, doesn't really care about their family.

Also caring for your community is certainly not the same as mob rule.

Very far from it.

I agree - but the problem is you're advocating mob rule.

Repeating slurs about how those who disagree with your views mustn't care for their families is frankly just juvenile.

Straight Talker

alastair wrote: »

Flag-waving for mob rule isn't any more convincing than suggesting that those who don't subscribe to your personal worldview can't care about their families.

Families being unhappy about people loitering near their homes is rather too low a bar for the criminalisation of standing still too long imo - and thankfully most of the rest of society agree.

So you are saying that if i saw a gang of people (let's say that they were all wearing hoodies and had their faces covered) standing outside the front of my house late at night for say 10 to 15 minutes then i would have to put up with that and that there would be no need to feel unnerved?Would the same logic also apply to a business owner in Dublin City Centre.If i as a business owner saw a gang of people loitering outside my shop for a certain amount of time acting in a suspicious manner and perhaps harassing my customers making their way in and out of the shop for money.Would i have to put up with that so?

alastair

Straight Talker wrote: »

So you are saying that if i saw a gang of people (let's say that they were all wearing hoodies and had their faces covered) standing outside the front of my house late at night for say 10 to 15 minutes then i would have to put up with that and that there would be no need to feel unnerved?

How sheltered a life have you actually had? Hoodies, groups of young people? Quick - call the guards! I can't speak for how unnerved you might get, but the city I live in has groups of hoodies as a daily experience - before and after dark, and it generally means either A. Nuisance value, or B. Not a damn thing. Unless there's a crime involved, they can wear whatever they like, and congregate wherever they like.

Straight Talker wrote: »

Would the same logic also apply to a business owner in Dublin City Centre.If i as a business owner saw a gang of people loitering outside my shop for a certain amount of time acting in a suspicious manner and perhaps harassing my customers making their way in and out of the shop for money.Would i have to put up with that so?

Last I heard - harassment, in the form of intimidating begging is a crime. Gathering in a group outside a shop is not.

maninasia

alastair wrote: »

I agree - but the problem is you're advocating mob rule.

Repeating slurs about how those who disagree with your views mustn't care for their families is frankly just juvenile.

It's not a slur, it's the truth! Nobody in their right mind could feel that their family is safe with strange people, especially drug addicts, hanging around outside their house all the time. If they can't figure out that their kids or wife or partner may not feel safe (even if they feel okay about), well yes they don't care about their families then.

Again community care is not equal to mob rule.

All decent neighborhoods and communities have certain standards that they like to uphold, parking, rubbish, noise, traffic, vending, pets on a leash etc...there are explicit and implicit understandings. If these understandings and regulations didn't exist, people wouldn't want to live there.

The main difference in terms of dealing with anti-social behaviour between Britain and Ireland, AFAIK, is their use of ASBOs. The British have taken the bull by the horns and decided to do something about the situation. They see it as an extension of the maintenance of a safe and clean neighbourhood along with the usual regulations they enforce such as dumping, noise, illegal vending etc.

As they state...

People have a right to feel safe in their communities. It is unacceptable for people to be afraid to use public spaces, cash points, shops or parks because they feel threatened by groups of people hanging around.
In a designated dispersal area, the police can direct individuals to leave the area and may be barred from the area for up to 24 hours. This area could be as small as a cash point or shopping arcade where groups often gather, or it could be as large as a London borough, as long as there is evidence of anti-social behaviour. Merton Council must also agree on the dispersal area.

alastair

maninasia wrote: »

It's not a slur, it's the truth! Nobody in their right mind could feel that their family is safe with strange people, especially drug addicts, hanging around outside their house all the time.

Uncaring and now crazy - you're on a roll! Your argument is becoming all the more compelling. :rolleyes:

maninasia wrote: »

Again community care is not equal to mob rule.

Again - what you're advocating is mob rule.

Straight Talker

alastair wrote: »

Uncaring and now crazy - you're on a roll! Your argument is becoming all the more compelling. :rolleyes:


Again - what you're advocating is mob rule.

Mob rule right so if i saw a gang of suspicious people hanging around the house of an elderly person then reporting it to the guards would not be the thing to do?By your logic a neighborhood watch scheme is probably seen as a form of mob rule!

Frank Lee Midere

returnNull wrote: »

or maybe live in the cities I mentioned.If you think the carry on you see in dublin city centre is unique you're delusional.I could write a post that would cause every poster to reply with 'tl;dr'.

I've lived in the cities I mentioned. Which is why I mentioned them. Feel free to post examples of the main shopping streets of other cities with Dublins problem.

You can't. Oconnell st has its problem because it is close to the methadone clinic on Talbot St. Grafton street isn't close so it doesn't. Even in Ireland there is no equivalent. Patrick street is just a busy street.

Frank Lee Midere

alastair wrote: »

How sheltered a life have you actually had? Hoodies, groups of young people? Quick - call the guards! I can't speak for how unnerved you might get, but the city I live in has groups of hoodies as a daily experience - before and after dark, and it generally means either A. Nuisance value, or B. Not a damn thing. Unless there's a crime involved, they can wear whatever they like, and congregate wherever they like.



Last I heard - harassment, in the form of intimidating begging is a crime. Gathering in a group outside a shop is not.

People can't actually loiter. It's why pickets move in circles.

alastair

Straight Talker wrote: »

Mob rule right so if i saw a gang of suspicious people hanging around the house of an elderly person then reporting it to the guards would not be the thing to do?By your logic a neighborhood watch scheme is probably seen as a form of mob rule!

No - if you've a suspicion of crime - and you let the guards know, this obviously would not be mob rule - you're letting the authorities deal with it, rather than taking the law into your own hands.

Now - You repeatedly call the guards every time you see a group of kids (wearing hoodies of course!) congregating on the street outside your grannies gaff - you're a crank. The guards like to focus on criminality, not sartorial policing.