Zero Tolerance for Dublin City Centre, would it work?

dd972

Was walking past Wynn's Hotel the other day and there was a full scale barney going on among the usual nasal voiced pyjama and Nike clad suspects, one of whom was down an alley with his joggers and keks down scratching his family allowance in broad daylight :eek:

No Guards in sight as usual, and to think thousands of tourists from Europe and beyond flock to this kip and usually disembark the Airport bus in this vicinity.

Would it be a better idea if the Methadone clinics were located in Industrial estates in a radius around the M50 and the one on Amiens St for instance was down by the Port? Coupled with a 'what the f**k are you doing here?' crackdown by the Garda.

Lapin

No. The nasal voiced pyjama clad junkies won't stand for it.





Those of them who are able to stand.

Tombi!

Not all scumbags are junkies. So no, it won't work, really.

SimonQuinlank

Don't attempt to solve the problem,just push it out of sight.Very Irish.

Moved from After Hours. Dublin city charter now applies.

Cookie_Monster

there are enough laws in place to deal with this as it stand but just zero interest in enforcement from AGS, especially since they know the court system will let the suspects off with no more than a slap on the wrist

Ben D Bus

SimonQuinlank wrote: »

Don't attempt to solve the problem,just push it out of sight.Very Irish.

There are 2 distinct problems here - the drugs problem and the city centre problem.

I'm more than happy for the latter to be solved by pushing the former out of sight.

cson

SimonQuinlank wrote: »

Don't attempt to solve the problem,just push it out of sight.Very Irish.

It's a problem that'll never be solved, and nor does it want to be.

So yeah, I'm coming around to the thinking of out of sight, out of mind is probably the way to go. Give the people of Dublin their City Centre back.

jimmii

They need to change the laws regarding dishing out ASBOs from talking to Gardai it seems they are almost impossible to get them granted. Give someone an ASBO and a temporary ban from the City Centre and their behaviour will soon improve these people couldn't care less about going to jail for a few months but if they are banned from being in the City then they won't like that one bit.

Reekwind

dd972 wrote: »

Would it be a better idea if the Methadone clinics were located in Industrial estates in a radius around the M50 and the one on Amiens St for instance was down by the Port? Coupled with a 'what the f**k are you doing here?' crackdown by the Garda.

Probably because Dublin is a real city, not some Potemkin village to show the tourists. And I'd rather the Guards were out solving real crimes

ProudDUB

Reekwind wrote: »

And I'd rather the Guards were out solving real crimes

So then, the two Kerry women who I helped outside of Busaras, after they had been mugged at knife point by junkies & had their handbags stolen...the ones that were up for a match, them two. What sort of crime would you define that as being, seeing as it's not a "real" one? Better yet, why not ask them? If they ever come up to Dublin again that is, which I very much doubt.

Reekwind

ProudDUB wrote: »

So then, the two Kerry women who I helped outside of Busaras, after they had been mugged at knife point by junkies & had their handbags stolen...the ones that were up for a match, them too. What sort of crime would you define that as being, seeing as it's not a "real" one? Better yet, why not ask them? If they ever come up to Dublin again that is, which I very much doubt.

I'm not really sure how to respond to that... given that it's got very little relation to my post. Where on earth did I suggest that the Guards should not be investigating muggings? Or did you take my post to mean that tourists are fair game entirely? Very strange

The only connection of logic that I can make between your post and mine is that you are in favour of clearing Dublin city centre of people that you think might commit a crime, just in case they actually do. But I don't think anyone would seriously propose anything that crazy

Ben D Bus

Reekwind wrote: »

And I'd rather the Guards were out solving real crimes

I'd rather the Guards were preventing crimes rather than solving them. Dealing with the junkie scourge in the city centre would help achieve that.

hfallada

It doesnt help that a large amount of housing in the city center is social housing. I not saying all people in social housing cause issues, but a fair amount of them do. I cant understand why in the boom, they didnt flatten a lot of them and redevelop them into privately owned housing, so working people didnt have to live in the suburbs.

It appears to be a difficult problem to solve social problems in the city. People have access to education if they want, they arent segregated from society due to their race or religion and even in the boom they had access to jobs. But yet there is still a large amount of issues with those people.

Strumms

It seems to be getting worse... I was in town on Sunday afternoon for the first time in ages and the number of zombie scumbag, nasal talking junkies was unreal... All around temple bar, the quays, up onto and around Grafton St. Lots of aggressive begging and actually blocking my access to an ATM totally intimidating. I don't know if it's a resource thing with AGS or just not the will to do anything but as someone who would be well travelled I don't see this In any other capital city at least not to this extent. The city should be for the enjoyment of law abiding decent citizens and also visitors... I'm not sure I agree with the out of sight out of mind argument altogether as I'd rather see the problem dealt with in a social regard as much as a criminal one where that would apply but a lot of other countries have their undesirable elements out in the suburbs and the city is left for the enjoyment of those who appreciate it and those decent folk there...

chris85

Reekwind wrote: »

Probably because Dublin is a real city, not some Potemkin village to show the tourists. And I'd rather the Guards were out solving real crimes

Very good, a real city is characterised by some criminals who drain the state of resources at every avenue and are a pain to the people who pay their taxes which fund these program.

I would be happy to have these clinics pushed out of he city and have a zero tolerance policy towards drugs in the city. If someone is caught shooting up in public then send them to jail. A few issues here thought is that would further stretch the already stretch Garda resources and clog the legal system and prisons more which we dont have the money or prison capacity to deal with.

Other option to jail is cut their benefits in half if they are caught committing a crime. If they are getting benefits and drugs from our wonderful government they need to play by our rules.

bombidol

Three prong attack. A garda snatch squad with GoPro cameras mounted to their bodies. See a junkie goofing off? Under the influence, public disorder, whatever it takes. They arrest them, call in the van. Van comes and collects the dirt. And make no mistake, they are dirt. The dirt is then dumped to the local cop shop where they are processed and held until they can be given a court date. They dont show up to court on the day. 30 days in the joy or wherever.
As the OP said, zero tolerance policy worked in New York. It can certainly work in Dublin.

I know this all sounds a bit Judge Dredd and the do-wellers will loose their mind. But I live and work in the city centre. Its prime for a nuclear bomb at this stage. It feels like the regular joe is outnumbered by dirt these days. Something needs to be done that puts the power back into the justice system to actually dole out justice instead of dates and pieces of paper.

endacl

I'm at the limit of my tolerance with them, I must admit. I propose the eastern side of Ireland's Eye as an ideal location for Dublin's only methadone clinic. 'Service users' could swim out triathlon-style in waves from Howth Harbour. They proceed in a clockwise direction around the island, pick up their dose, which is thrown from the shore (obviously they are not allowed land and mess up the fragile ecosystem), before completing a full lap and returning to the mainland. Those that make it back deserve their methadone. Those that don't never annoy real people again.

bombidol

Dont get me wrong. I have nothing but compassion for addicts who want to sort their lives out. Its not just junkies though, we have created and nurtured a section of our population that simply require us to work for them so they can act the bollocks all day and night.
The rules dont apply to them, no authority figure can do anything to them so why should they respect them.

P.Walnuts

bombidol wrote: »

Three prong attack. A garda snatch squad with GoPro cameras mounted to their bodies. See a junkie goofing off? Under the influence, public disorder, whatever it takes. They arrest them, call in the van. Van comes and collects the dirt. And make no mistake, they are dirt. The dirt is then dumped to the local cop shop where they are processed and held until they can be given a court date. They dont show up to court on the day. 30 days in the joy or wherever.
As the OP said, zero tolerance policy worked in New York. It can certainly work in Dublin.

I know this all sounds a bit Judge Dredd and the do-wellers will loose their mind. But I live and work in the city centre. Its prime for a nuclear bomb at this stage. It feels like the regular joe is outnumbered by dirt these days. Something needs to be done that puts the power back into the justice system to actually dole out justice instead of dates and pieces of paper.

I love when people propose solutions to problems that are completely unrealistic and will never happen. Yes let's kit out the Guards with camera's and have endless new recruits to man the stations and process the constant flow of junkies, and then to chase them down when they don't show for their court date.

But before all this happens, first we will need to harvest all of the money from the money tree plantations that obviously exist in your dreamworld.

Reekwind

Ben D Bus wrote: »

I'd rather the Guards were preventing crimes rather than solving them. Dealing with the junkie scourge in the city centre would help achieve that.

I don't suppose you've heard of the concept of 'crime and punishment'? The key is that one very much follows the other. You cannot, without grossly violating someone's fundamental rights, punish them (including deportation) for a crime that they might commit. I mean, this is all very basic

Seriously, some of the attitudes in this thread (clearing out the city centre of the "dirt") can only be described as Stalinist

hfallada wrote:

It doesnt help that a large amount of housing in the city center is social housing. I not saying all people in social housing cause issues, but a fair amount of them do. I cant understand why in the boom, they didnt flatten a lot of them and redevelop them into privately owned housing, so working people didnt have to live in the suburbs.

It appears to be a difficult problem to solve social problems in the city. People have access to education if they want, they arent segregated from society due to their race or religion and even in the boom they had access to jobs. But yet there is still a large amount of issues with those people.

Yeah, clearly they face no discrimination from other parts of society

Ole Rodrigo

hfallada wrote: »

It doesn't help that a large amount of housing in the city center is social housing. I not saying all people in social housing cause issues, but a fair amount of them do. I cant understand why in the boom, they didnt flatten a lot of them and redevelop them into privately owned housing, so working people didn't have to live in the suburbs.

It appears to be a difficult problem to solve social problems in the city. People have access to education if they want, they arent segregated from society due to their race or religion and even in the boom they had access to jobs. But yet there is still a large amount of issues with those people.

The problem in the inner city is how long term unemployment creates decay in a community that is all but impossible to fix in the short term. It will probably take generations to correct itself. People should not be penalised for that. Creating ghettos in the suburbs won't solve the problem - mixed council /private schemes are best solution, not only from a social point of view but also from a cost benefit one. When Ireland had close to full employment there was still 80000 on the live register, most of these were long term unemployed unable to hold down a job. More effective social services are needed - such as mandatory work programs for payments - plus a tough response to anti social loitering in public places.

P.Walnuts wrote: »

But before all this happens, first we will need to harvest all of the money from the money tree plantations that obviously exist in your dreamworld.

Money is not the problem, the HSE squanders so much anyway. The recent issue over the CRC directors pay only came to light because of the current climate of intolerance of that sort of behaviour. Given how this was deemed acceptable by the HSE, you can only imagine how much reckless spending has gone on over the years without it being public knowledge. A few million through less waste diverted to a more results focused program for drug addicts is feasible imo.

bombidol

Obviously im taking the piss a bit with a three pronged judge dredd approach. However, the system in place certainly doesnt work. Its simply not safe to walk the streets any more. Im from what would be classed as an impoverished area near the city centre and I currently live very close to Summerhill, which is about as bad as it gets.
The city centre is treated like a back yard by dirt, and ill continue to call them dirt. As inner city youths doesnt cover it. There are plenty of inner city dwellers that are perfectly fine members of society. By being in town you are in their space, they set the rules. They walk through crowds aggressively, saunter through moving traffic and harass people unrestricted. They have literally nothing to lose, so is the key to something like this a social improvement direction like trying to increase education and general employment? Or is it a crack down on the anti social behaviour?
As was mentioned, during the boom the live register stood at 80000. Figures are way past that now, and the reason? Social welfare culture.
We all may have to sign on for a while during our lives, it may even be inevitable, but theres a large slice of our population using the dole as its main source of funding.
I signed on for almost a year a few years ago. There was a kid in the line in front of me and his words were "I just finished school and my ma told me to come here and sign on"

Ole Rodrigo

bombidol wrote: »

Obviously im taking the piss a bit with a three pronged judge dredd approach. However, the system in place certainly doesnt work. Its simply not safe to walk the streets any more. Im from what would be classed as an impoverished area near the city centre and I currently live very close to Summerhill, which is about as bad as it gets.
The city centre is treated like a back yard by dirt, and ill continue to call them dirt. As inner city youths doesnt cover it. There are plenty of inner city dwellers that are perfectly fine members of society. By being in town you are in their space, they set the rules. They walk through crowds aggressively, saunter through moving traffic and harass people unrestricted. They have literally nothing to lose, so is the key to something like this a social improvement direction like trying to increase education and general employment? Or is it a crack down on the anti social behaviour?
As was mentioned, during the boom the live register stood at 80000. Figures are way past that now, and the reason? Social welfare culture.
We all may have to sign on for a while during our lives, it may even be inevitable, but theres a large slice of our population using the dole as its main source of funding.
I signed on for almost a year a few years ago. There was a kid in the line in front of me and his words were "I just finished school and my ma told me to come here and sign on"

That could have been out of resignation that he simply wasn't going to get a job anyway, due to his address, accent, education history etc.

I suspect the proportion of lifestyle welfare recipients against those who need and deserve the service is small. Maybe its an acceptable cost against the greater good that the system does ? Anyway..getting back on thread, better services - which is a systemic problem in the HSE / Social Services/ AGS - combined with tougher action on anti social behaviour in the city centre is the way forward I think.

Also, as someone who has lived in D1 for over 10 years I'd say it is safe to walk the streets. Its just depressing at times.

Ben D Bus

Reekwind wrote: »

I don't suppose you've heard of the concept of 'crime and punishment'? The key is that one very much follows the other. You cannot, without grossly violating someone's fundamental rights, punish them (including deportation) for a crime that they might commit. I mean, this is all very basic

I only spoke of crime prevention. Do you object to this? To solve a crime requires a crime to be committed. Which means somebody becoming a victim of crime. Do you want to wait for this to happen before dealing with an issue?

I have simply said the scourge of city centre junkies needs to be dealt with. And that it's better to prevent a crime than to solve one. Which part of that do you specifically disagree with?

I have absolutely no objection to compassionately dealing with the sufferers of drug addiction, but as per my original response in this thread, it should be a separate issue to the problems they cause in the city centre.

ror_74 wrote: »

Also, as someone who has lived in D1 for over 10 years I'd say it is safe to walk the streets. Its just depressing at times.

I agree with this. I've worked in D1 for close to 25 years. And lived in D1/D7 for many of those. I feel safe, but partly because I know my way around and don't look like a victim. But what I see is indeed sometimes depressing. And frustrating. And just plain unpleasant.

moxin

Some of them are on disability allowance too as they are unable to work for obvious reasons.

What's happening is killing town, alot of families will not go to town because of widespread anti-social behaviour by junkies, skangers in tracksuits and aggressive begging. They instead go to suburban shopping centres as its far more safer there than town. For example in my workplace and amongst family and friends, hardly anyone goes to town anymore due to the above reasons. Town is now left for the unsuspecting tourists and undesirables to roam as they please.

tomboylady

I was on a bus a few weeks ago and they were discussing this on the radio (can't remember which station, will have a look). They were talking about O'Connell Street and how it has changed over the years. People were phoning and texting in and the majority were saying they basically avoid the area now. And this wasn't just locals saying this; there were also people from other parts of the country who would regularly travel to Dublin for the day with their families. It was quite sad to hear it.

I have to admit that while I don't mind it during the day, I do try to avoid the general O'Connell Street area after dark. I don't particularly like waiting for a bus home there anymore. It just doesn't feel as safe to me as it did even a mere 2-3 years ago. But that's just me.

alastair

moxin wrote: »

Some of them are on disability allowance too as they are unable to work for obvious reasons.

What's happening is killing town, alot of families will not go to town because of widespread anti-social behaviour by junkies, skangers in tracksuits and aggressive begging. They instead go to suburban shopping centres as its far more safer there than town. For example in my workplace and amongst family and friends, hardly anyone goes to town anymore due to the above reasons. Town is now left for the unsuspecting tourists and undesirables to roam as they please.

And those who aren't intimidated by a few junkies or spides here and there of course. It's actually pretty jammers - you should summon up the courage to check it out.

Ole Rodrigo

moxin wrote: »

Some of them are on disability allowance too as they are unable to work for obvious reasons.

What's happening is killing town, alot of families will not go to town because of widespread anti-social behaviour by junkies, skangers in tracksuits and aggressive begging. They instead go to suburban shopping centres as its far more safer there than town. For example in my workplace and amongst family and friends, hardly anyone goes to town anymore due to the above reasons. Town is now left for the unsuspecting tourists and undesirables to roam as they please.

DMcW had an interesting article on disability in Ireland.

http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/2013/04/04/the-mystery-of-disability

P.Walnuts

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.

From reading these threads you'd get the impression Dublin city centre was downtown Damascus. There are loads of junkies but that doesn't mean its not safe.

endacl

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.

From reading these threads you'd get the impression Dublin city centre was downtown Damascus. There are loads of junkies but that doesn't mean its not safe.

They bother me. 'Spaaaarree chaaannnge buuuuuudddd....?'

Reekwind

Ben D Bus wrote: »

I only spoke of crime prevention. Do you object to this? To solve a crime requires a crime to be committed. Which means somebody becoming a victim of crime. Do you want to wait for this to happen before dealing with an issue?

I have simply said the scourge of city centre junkies needs to be dealt with. And that it's better to prevent a crime than to solve one. Which part of that do you specifically disagree with?

My problem with this is that your version of "crime prevention" is "to be solved by pushing [an entire population] out of sight". Welcome to social cleansing as a crime-fighting technique. Lets move everyone whose appearance offends Ben out to the 101st kilometre

If someone commits a crime then they get punished. If someone does not commit a crime then they do not get punished. That is a fundamental basis of the law. To argue that people should be arrested or moved out of the city because you think that they might commit a crime is... well, so obviously wrong as to not need an explanation. I hope

moxin

alastair wrote: »

And those who aren't intimidated by a few junkies or spides here and there of course. It's actually pretty jammers - you should summon up the courage to check it out.

Office workers who work in town contribute to the jammers. They do leave once their working day is over for their commute home, they don't live in town for the reasons outlined.

SimonTemplar

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.

I'm sorry, but that is incorrect. A junkie following me for about 10 seconds with their face right up against mine asking for change is very unpleasant and intimidating. It happens to me a few times a year.

A junkie also randomly walked up to me and punched me in the chest on O'Connell St in broad daylight while saying he will shove my glasses down my throat.



I've been living in Dublin for 6 years and I always have to have my guard up when in the city centre. The city had gone to the dogs

bombidol

"That could have been out of resignation that he simply wasn't going to get a job anyway, due to his address, accent, education history etc."

This is simply thinking too deeply about this issue. I was almost one of the gang lots of my family still are. There's no philosophy involved, there's just free money and only saps work when you can be given everything for free mentality. And even that is too deep for their minds.
Talk to any social worker or anyone who works in community outreach programs, I have, they will write a paper on social injustice and inequality to secure funding and public sympathy from the suburban wasteland dwellers but will tell you to your face that they want to dig a big hole.

ProudDUB

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.

Rubbish. I used to live in Dublin 1, in an apartment behind Connolly Station. It was right across the street from the methadone clinic off Amiens St. Trust me, I personally witnessed a lot of crap that was a hell of a lot worse than simply junkies bothering other junkies. So did my neighbours and friends and family who came to visit me, or who worked in the area.

I really wish people would stop attacking other people who simply want to be able to go about their business in the city centre, without fearing for their safety & or having to put up with the mental anguish that comes with always worrying about it. We are not cruel, heartless Nazi types who want to ring fence anyone who is does not fit a certain demographic off in some sort of Siberian gulag, where they will never be heard from again.

Nor do we want the city centre cleanzed of all its character and turned into a sterile Disneyesque theme park for the tourists. We just want to be able to get a train, or pop to the local shops for a loaf of bread, or go out for a pint, or walk home from work, without having to worry what will happen to us. Is that so bloody wrong?

JustAddWater

Reekwind wrote: »

Probably because Dublin is a real city, not some Potemkin village to show the tourists. And I'd rather the Guards were out solving real crimes

So phone robberies, bike robberies and banging up on heroin to name but a few, are not real crimes???

alastair

moxin wrote: »

Office workers who work in town contribute to the jammers. They do leave once their working day is over for their commute home, they don't live in town for the reasons outlined.

They might contribute - but primarily it's shoppers. I've lived in the city centre for over a decade. There's all sorts of people to be found here - no need to take refuge in Dundrum SC.

Reekwind

ProudDUB wrote: »

Is that so bloody wrong?

When your solution is to move a complete subsection of the community to the outskirts of the city then yes, yes it is "bloody wrong"

Increased Garda presence is fine and better treatment for junkies is fine. What's not fine is suggesting that the clinics, and the local people that they serve, be moved to some sort of Hamsterdam in a M50 industrial estate. That is social cleansing, pure and simple

We are not cruel, heartless Nazi types who want to ring fence anyone who is does not fit a certain demographic off in some sort of Siberian gulag, where they will never be heard from again.

The language used by some in thread, and the general 'clear them off the streets' sentiment, is in fact little different to Nazi and Soviet attitudes to 'asocials' and 'socially harmful elements', respectively. That you'd condemn them to Clondalkin rather than Chukotka doesn't make it that much less unpleasant

JustAddWater wrote:

So phone robberies, bike robberies and banging up on heroin to name but a few, are not real crimes???

You didn't read post #12, did you?

poolboy

I already have zero tolerance for Dublin.

Hootanany

Why not get all registered Heroin users to a big facility make them live there and control their intake and seen them off it.
Solves the problem with them on the streets and cuts the pushers out as well.

P.Walnuts

Hootanany wrote: »

Why not get all registered Heroin users to a big facility make them live there and control their intake and seen them off it.
Solves the problem with them on the streets and cuts the pushers out as well.

So prison essentially?

Spanish Eyes

There are too many drug treatment centres in the city. It's a small city relatively speaking, and that's why the problem seems so large.

There is s treatment centre near Christchurch, and another on the quays opposite the
Four Courts, at a bus stop too. Intimidating? Yes. For me, not a tourist, just trying to get home.

Because there are so many treatment centres in the city, the addicts are commuting in on their free bus Luas Dart card all day. And clogging up the Boardwalk, and all the rest of it. It is not nice at all. And I don't care if we cleanse the place to Gulag proportions, those living and working and paying for all this sh!t deserve to enjoy the city. I am mad as hell, because the junkies don't care who they intimidate, they just don't care. And there is zero consequence for their actions.

But if I parked in the wrong place I'd be clamped. No question.

Better move them out really. I'm sick of it. Really fed up. And we are paying for all this, twice, when you think about it.

Dublin is a great place, but it is being ruined.

Hootanany

P.Walnuts wrote: »

So prison essentially?

No controlled environment stay there till clean what the problem with that, Disturbed people are locked away are you Ok with that?

Ben D Bus

Reekwind wrote: »

What's not fine is suggesting that the clinics, and the local people that they serve, be moved to some sort of Hamsterdam in a M50 industrial estate.

Do they only serve local people? Genuine question.

My understanding was that most drug treatment centres are in or about the city centre and that junkies from all over the city travel into town for their methadone.

My strong preference is for local clinics serving local people citywide. The issue here of course is NIMBYism and local political interference.

Thomas D

Mixed housing is ultimately to blame. For some reason certain liberal types think it horrific if parts of a city are gentrified and the poor are pushed out. Why have swathes of unemployed people living in the city centre beside all of the jobs?

Frank Grimes

Thomas D wrote: »

Mixed housing is ultimately to blame. For some reason certain liberal types think it horrific if parts of a city are gentrified and the poor are pushed out. Why have swathes of unemployed people living in the city centre beside all of the jobs?

For starters maybe they will be able to get one of those jobs, and secondly do you think that people living in the city centre should be relocated to other parts of the county/country just because they lose their jobs?

Edit: "all of the jobs" are not in the city centre either.

Thomas D

Frank Grimes wrote: »

For starters maybe they will be able to get one of those jobs, and secondly do you think that people living in the city centre should be relocated to other parts of the county/country just because they lose their jobs?

Edit: "all of the jobs" are not in the city centre either.

Do you think the people the OP is talking about have jobs? Yes, they should be relocated to the edge of the city. They can stay in the city centre if they can afford to the rental prices like the rest of us.

Frank Grimes

Thomas D wrote: »

Do you think the people the OP is talking about have jobs?

I don't know them so I can't really answer that, I assume you don't think all unemployed people act in that manner though? Or attend methadone clinics? Because that's what your sweeping generalisation implies.

Yes, they should be relocated to the edge of the city. They can stay in the city centre if they can afford to the rental prices like the rest of us.

So going by your 'logic' all unemployed people should be relocated from the edges of the city, as naturally we don't really want their 'types' around here either, or is there some sort of pecking order that you have in mind? Is social housing/rent allowance/general unemployment whilst living somewhere only acceptable to you when it's out of sight and in suburbs? Why should someone have to forgo their housing, regardless of where it is, just because they are unemployed?

Thomas D

Frank Grimes wrote: »

I don't know them so I can't really answer that, I assume you don't think all unemployed people act in that manner though? Or attend methadone clinics? Because that's what your sweeping generalisation implies.

So going by your 'logic' all unemployed people should be relocated from the edges of the city, as naturally we don't really want their 'types' around here either, or is there some sort of pecking order that you have in mind? Is social housing/rent allowance/general unemployment whilst living somewhere only acceptable to you when it's out of sight and in suburbs? Why should someone have to forgo their housing, regardless of where it is, just because they are unemployed?

Yes. I'd rather live in a city with professional go getters and not have to witness scumbags.

Frank Grimes

Thomas D wrote: »

Yes. I'd rather live in a city with professional go getters and not have to witness scumbags.

Ok, so anyone who is unemployed/on rent allowance/in social housing is a "scumbag" - fantastic attitude you have there.