Banning drinking in public

[bensonby]

As I was walking past today one of them started using the f-word during an argument. Thankfully I was not with my three-year-old at the time.

We should not have to put up with it, in my opinion, and giving them somewhere to drink 'happily' surely must just compound the problem for them...

Maybe if enough people contacted our local councillors about banning it they might consider doing something. I emailed one of them a long ago with no joy but if more people showed they were unhappy maybe they would do something about it.

It's those of us who are around a lot during the day because we have small children or who are retired who have to encounter it the most.

Ok, so you witnessed a crime (s.5 public order act 1986) - report it!

As I have repeated constantly if they are committing an offence then they can be removed. If they are not, merely drinking, then what problem is there? (apart from liver damage on their parts)

[nasaroc]

Bensonby - the problem is that you are trying to create a communal space here . We want a wide spectrum of Sydenham people to come to these spaces - and the Sydenham Road improvements are attempting to enlarge and create more such communal spaces

Are parents with children - or anyone else - really going to want to sit next to drunks? I don't think so.

Penge has created some nice outdoor areas which are used by the comnmunity. But they've only done so by making these spaces, drunk-free areas and discouraging street drinking.

We want to encourage people to use outdoor seating areas like the one outside the post office. But I have never seen anyone who is not part of the drunken group use the bench whilst the drunks are "in residence".

Street drinking should be made illegal in Sydenham as it is in may other parts of the borough.[/b]

[Eagle]

I agree we need to return the high streets to the well behaved . Cannot see any case for drinking and swearing at passers by.

[leenewham]

Consumers and shop owners also have a right to frequent a high street they feel safe in, that they want to trade or shop in and where they won't face drunks behaving in an unpleasant manner.

Hopefully this will be factored into the design of the high street.

[boon]

It is a tough problem. I very much would like to see no drunks staggering up and down the high street (or any street, for that matter). It's not pleasant, it degrades the area, and it makes me and my partner uncomfortable about safety issues.

That said though, I have to side with bensonby on this - drinking (and staggering) in public isn't illegal. Swearing, fighting, intimidating, etc. is, and should be reported, but until it's made a crime, they have as much right to sit on a bench with a can of Super Tenants as I do to walk past them. It's much preferable to work at stopping the problem using currently available means (reporting swearing, fighting, intimidating, etc.) than to come up with new laws that take away rights because it makes some, even most, people uncomfortable.

But that may just be the (pre-2001) American in me speaking.

[nasaroc]

Agree entirely Boon. Extend the local bye law (already in place in Catford Lewisham and other parts of the borough) which makes drinking alchohol in public illegal and this problem will disappear.

Until then, we can do little about the drunks making our high street less attractive to others unless they break the law by causing a disturbance etc

I shall be writing to local councillors asking them to support such an extension of local bye-laws and I suggest others do as well.

[bag lady]

the trouble is the problem doesn't 'disappear' it moves on. At least in the high street the people who are causing trouble can easily be observed and if necessary reported to the police.
The people who are street drinkers and not causing harm are often the victims of unprovoked attacks by 'responsible' members of the public passing by, so maybe they want to remain in such a public area for their own protection.

[bensonby]

Save for teh fact that "you don't like it" why should people be prohibited from enjoying a drink in public?

We have already aknowledged that abuse/drunkenness/violence and so on are already illegal and can be dealt with accordingly.

Why should the fact that some, or indeed many, people "dont like the look of some people" be grounds to criminalise them?

Agree entirely Boon. Extend the local bye law (already in place in Catford Lewisham and other parts of the borough) which makes drinking alchohol in public illegal and this problem will disappear.
...

I shall be writing to local councillors asking them to support such an extension of local bye-laws and I suggest others do as well.

And where exactly are these "byelaws" in force and what power does the council have to put them in place? (I can only think of the provisions under the Health Act 1865 and the Open Spaces Act 1906 - which only relate to parks and cemeteries &c.)

There are no byelaws in place to ban drinking in public in the London Borough of Lewisham - Drinking is not banned, by law, in public anywhere on the borough. (save for the DLR stations and platforms)

[Thomas]

Thanks for all responses. I would favour designating Sydenham Road as an alcohol exclusion zone. This would give the police the discretion to confiscate alcohol, but would not require them to do so if there is not a problem - some more information on AEZs in Bromley Borough can be found here:
http://www.bromley.gov.uk/community/saf ... _zones.htm.

I accept that this would involve some reduction of civil liberties, but relying on the police to take action only when an offence has been committed does rely on the police to be there when a disturbance occurs, and there are occasions when street drinkers can be anti-social and cause others a nuisance without committing an offence. This is the sort of low-level nuisance that is best addressed by on the spot measures such as confiscating alcohol - making an arrest does create a lot of paperwork for the police, taking them away from other tasks. Furthermore, if restrictions in other nearby areas (such as Penge) push street drinkers in our direction then that is all the more reason to take action, and I would not want them to undermine efforts to create more public spaces - after all would YOU sit next to some of those people outside the Naborhood Centre? There are plenty of people in Sydenham with mobility problems who really do need benches in public spaces - let's not make their lives any harder by allowing antisocial alcoholics from dominating them.

[boon]

Agree entirely Boon. Extend the local bye law (already in place in Catford Lewisham and other parts of the borough) which makes drinking alchohol in public illegal and this problem will disappear.

Hang on, I'm saying that I *don't* support any new bans on legal behavior in public places. Yes, they're drinking in public, but unless that becomes an issue whereby they're actually breaking laws *currently* on the books, I will tolerate it in the interest of maintaining their rights.

Of course as soon as someone starts a fight or tries to intimidate me or anyone around me I'll be the first on the phone to the police (as I've done in the past) - because *that* is illegal. Consuming alcoholic beverages in public isn't, and shouldn't be, as far as I'm concerned. It's not necessarily pleasant, but unless it impacts me directly in a tangible way (beyond minor disgust) I don't support curtailing a legal activity.

[leenewham]

Having lived in an area where public drinking got out of hand, the noise, violence, bawdy behaviour, litter, fights and eventually knifings and shootings, I'm in favour of a ban.

This was only a few miles from Sydenham, and despite constant meetings with the police they really weren't bothered and neither were the police or our glorious mayor who personally stated on the record that he would personally try to resolve the 'crisis'.

He did nothing.

Petty crime quickly escalates and becomes almost impossible to sort out (as I witnessed over 7 years first hand). You don't paint a fence once it's gone rotten. Paint it to stop it getting rotten in the first place.

[bensonby]

but relying on the police to take action only when an offence has been committed does rely on the police to be there when a disturbance occurs,

why? - if there is a disturbance then ring them....

and there are occasions when street drinkers can be anti-social and cause others a nuisance without committing an offence.

What do you define as "anti-social" and a "nuisance" ? - is it just that you don't like the look of them? Anything beyond that probably could well be an offence..... think s.5 POA or Drunk and disordely....or just plain Drunk in a public place.....all offences. Even if there is the real possibility of alcohol fuelled disorder then the police can issue a local dispersal order to induviduals under s.27 Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006.

an arrest does create a lot of paperwork for the police, taking them away from other tasks.

You bet it does - and guess what's going to happen when you take boozer away from someone minding their own business.... they are going to get angry (and get arrested) or try t heir luck and crack open another can (and get arrested)

Furthermore, if restrictions in other nearby areas (such as Penge) push street drinkers in our direction then that is all the more reason to take action,

And where are they going to go then? They are going to move onto back-streets and alleyways being even more intimidating to people that live locally!

How about using the laws we already have effectively before we start prohibiting things. Shall we ban hoodies next because they make you feel uncomfortable? How about not allowing black youths out after dark because some find them "intimidating", or should we not allow white males to drive white vans because they are more likely to commit traffic offences?

Come on! - lets penalise people for committing offences - not because we don't like the look of them!

[bensonby]

Having lived in an area where public drinking got out of hand, the noise, violence, bawdy behaviour, litter, fights and eventually knifings and shootings, I'm in favour of a ban.

But all of those things are illegal..... There is nothing wrong with alcohol, all of that stuff is down to bad people who should be punished for those specific offences.

[bag lady]

here here!

[leenewham]

But all of those things are illegal..... There is nothing wrong with alcohol, all of that stuff is down to bad people who should be punished for those specific offences.

1. They weren't punished.
2. There was a big difference between sober and drunk 'bad people'
3. Alcohol was the fuel that added to the fire, alcohol was one reason people congregated there so alcohol was a large part of the problem.

I totally agree that alcohol, in the hands of responsible people (like your good self bensonby) is fine. In the hands of less responsible people it is not. Unfortunately, for some reason I can't explain, alcohol abuse seems to be a huge problem in the UK, something I don't see on travels to such a degree elsewhere in the world.

If people cause problems through the use of alcohol, then take away the right to use alcohol in public. Who wants to drink on a bench in a busy high street anyway? You can't in Australia. Public drinking there is illegal.

(Lee sits back awaiting 'let people drink' backlash).

[Eagle]

No backlash from me Lee. I agree 100%. We have a severe drinking problem in The UK. It is worse in small towns.

Cannot see any problem in banning dring alcohol in public areas. Why cannot these people go in a cafe and have a cup of tea.

[Juwlz]

Cannot see any problem in banning dring alcohol in public areas.

And no more for you Eagle, you're already slurring your words.

[Eagle]

Well spotted Juwiz. I really should check before posting.

[digime2007]

I say move them on.

Antisocial behaviour from drunks on the high street is common and expecting the police to come running every time an F word is dropped is unrealistic. And lets face it the problem is worse than a bit of bad language.

Yes, it moves the problem somewhere else but the solution isn't to let them carry on what they doing either.

I agree with the compassion shown by people who say these troubled people should be allowed to stay but that just avoids the issue and is of no help to anyone. It's a convenient way of drawing a blind eye. Just cross the street and feel warmly tolerant with yourself. This ignores the negative impact they are having on other people, validates their behaviour and end up colluding in the problem.

[poppy]

Thanks Dig, I started a thread on this a long time ago and immediately some people thought I was being too harsh! Thankfully it seems more people agree with me this time...

Anyway, Lee, are you referring to Brockley, I think you used to live there didn't you? I looked at a flat there in the conservation area about eight years ago and two drunks staggered up to me and asked for money on a residential street putting me right off the area...I'm sure this is what happens to people who visit Sydenham and don't know any better...A bloke asked me for money on one of the Thorpes the other day, stupidly I gave him some, which he probably spent at the local off licence!

Apart from the local bans on drinking which could be responsible for giving us this problem, can anyone else shed any light on why the high street still does not reflect the majority?