nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Why there are so many junkies (chavs/knackers)in Dublin?

eduzzino5

Please don't get me wrong - I don't want to offend or to insult anyone.
I don't even know the right word to use (knackers/chavs/scumbags/junkies). I moved from Boston to Dublin last year and it seems to me there are so many knackers in the city.

Just wanted to understand if there is a reason (bad welfare? high level of drugs? low police enforcement?) of why there are so many knackers in Dublin (especially in the city center)

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

MartyMcFly84

But it is there already? Are you saying we knock it all down? As time goes on and they age, then yes I think they should be sold off to the highest bidder but with the proviso that a certain percentage is for affordable housing, not necessarily social housing, but affordable. I don't want Dublin turning into a place where only the rich can live, f*** that.

Why not knock it down though and rebuild it with better housing(example) 20% social 30% affordable and 50% open market. That would be a fair enough blend, if good enough for housing estates it should be the same for the city centre.

If they keep the rules consistent it could work out.

wakka12

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3383872,-6.2652003,180m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en
But look at how inefficient the use of space is? Look at all the wasted space in between each block and how they are set back from the street? It leaves these awkward patches of dead space between each block that is large enough to be a big waste of space but too small to be used for any recreation or leisure.
You could build a nice street front with shops, you could build a story higher, you could fill in the entire block more densely.
Overall you could fit twice as many people living in that area off stephens green, if 20% was social housing then many of the people from that area would still get to stay and live in upgraded far superior modern development.

And again, can we just talk about how ugly the blocks are? Ruins the end of camden /aungier street. Its like they tried to make the blocks as ugly and oppressive as possible

Dr Crayfish

BillyBobBS wrote: »

What's social housing got to do with it?

Because they are deprived blocks of social accom right in the city centre. Generations of people who don't work. Just look at the people and listen to them, who would employ them? Ok they're not all like that but it seems to be most of them are. This is coming from someone who has spent a long time over the years in the North Inner City and had schoolfriends from Sherrif St. I remember my mate from Sherrifer's 3 sisters all had kids by the time they were 21. I think they all got gafs in the surrounding areas.
F*ck them out beyond the M50 if they're not going to contribute. I'm sick of these parasites.

Dr Crayfish

I'd like to add I think O'Connell st looks fantastic now around the Spire and GPO, they've done a great job, it's gleaming.

Dublin Spur

wakka12 wrote: »

I agree. But 100% social housing blocks should not be practically filling the city centre.
Social housing off stephens green, st patricks cathedral, charlemont, should be for the reserve of people who can afford such valuable space. Those least contributing to society should not be occupying the most important land in the city.

yep, it should be a privilege to live in these areas, a reward for hard work. If this happened there would be huge improvements in crime and cleanliness.

Generally speaking, if you pay a lot for some thing you tend to look after it.
If you pay little or nothing, or get it for free you have less regard for it. And that's part of the reason why certain sections of the city are much more desirable than others.

That said, I do agree that a % of all developments should be set aside for affordable housing.

Lux23

MartyMcFly84 wrote: »

Why not knock it down though and rebuild it with better housing(example) 20% social 30% affordable and 50% open market. That would be a fair enough blend, if good enough for housing estates it should be the same for the city centre.

If they keep the rules consistent it could work out.

I think that is what they're doing in St Teresa Gardens and O'Devaney Gardens and that is exactly what I think should be happening everywhere. But I am not entirely convinced that knocking down perfectly good housing is the way to go in the middle of a homelessness crisis. Maybe block by block but it would take a long time.

ger_r

Purple Mountain wrote: »

You picked up the lingo fairly quickly!

Not really. None of those words mean a drug user except junkie.

wakka12

Lux23 wrote: »

I think that is what they're doing in St Teresa Gardens and O'Devaney Gardens and that is exactly what I think should be happening everywhere. But I am not entirely convinced that knocking down perfectly good housing is the way to go in the middle of a homelessness crisis. Maybe block by block but it would take a long time.

Our country is in a good place economically. There will always be an excuse not to not knock it down, always some crisis, countries economies will grow as will the population, housing will always be in shortage to some extent to keep markets competitive. Knock it down now, its important that cities look nice. For mental health of citizens, this is seriously under considered part of urban planning.
I don't know what blocks you're talking about, some are modern and don't need redevelopment, but for instance the ones I posted look like they're from the 80's and they could certainly do with modernisation and improvement. Just because they're not falling down doesn't mean they're 'perfectly good' and shouldn't be knocked down and modernised, especially when they look like utter ****. Their interior of many council apartments looks overly cramped and dark also.

Dr Crayfish

personally I think all the social housing in the inner city should be redeveloped and turned into affordable housing for working people, and maybe keep 10% of it for the non working classes (0% if I had my way but for some reason they think certain types should get everything free). The rest should be moved to less expensive real estate elsewhere. It would really reinvigorate the city with new life.

But let's face it. Will never change. Imagine Paul Murphy and Sinn Fein etc going nuts if you tried to change anything for these people.

Pointless worrying about it. If I were a woman though from the inner city, and finishing school I'd seriously consider knocking a few kids out to get a free gaf, with the way the housing market is now.

alastair

Dr Crayfish wrote: »

personally I think all the social housing in the inner city should be redeveloped and turned into affordable housing for working people, and maybe keep 10% of it for the non working classes (0% if I had my way but for some reason they think certain types should get everything free). The rest should be moved to less expensive real estate elsewhere. It would really reinvigorate the city with new life.

You do realise that most local authority tenants aren't unemployed, and nobody gets a 'free gaff'? And that local authority housing makes up a small percentage of inner city residential stock. Local authority housing comprised 20.4% of Dublin's inner city housing stock in 2006, and, if anything, it's lower now. In the same year inner city unemployment figures stood at 14.1% for men, and 10.8% for women. Those figures were during the celtic tiger years, so they'd be higher now, but it puts the lie to the notion that the inner city is jammed full of idle benefit scroungers. Most people are gainfully employed - even if they're not rich.

BillyBobBS

Dr Crayfish wrote: »

Because they are deprived blocks of social accom right in the city centre. Generations of people who don't work. Just look at the people and listen to them, who would employ them? Ok they're not all like that but it seems to be most of them are. This is coming from someone who has spent a long time over the years in the North Inner City and had schoolfriends from Sherrif St. I remember my mate from Sherrifer's 3 sisters all had kids by the time they were 21. I think they all got gafs in the surrounding areas.
F*ck them out beyond the M50 if they're not going to contribute. I'm sick of these parasites.

I have plenty of friends who live in social housing as i once did years ago and the majority of them work. But sure go on with your stereotyping of people in social housing. Let's knock them all down and rehouse them to make for the Latte sipping brigade.

MadYaker

BillyBobBS wrote: »

I have plenty of friends who live in social housing as i once did years ago and the majority of them work. But sure go on with your stereotyping of people in social housing. Let's knock them all down and rehouse them to make for the Latte sipping brigade.

So you why do you think it is the case that areas with high concentrations of social housing also have higher crime rates and higher levels of drug and alcohol addiction? Compared to most other european capitals the centre of Dublin is a filthy mess and the methedone clinics and social housing are part of the reason.

Dr Brown

Dr Crayfish wrote: »

I'd like to add I think O'Connell st looks fantastic now around the Spire and GPO, they've done a great job, it's gleaming.

The spire is an eyesore that should be taking down.

It makes O'Connell St look like an even bigger kip than it already is.

Dr Brown

Part of the reason there is so many scumbags in Dublin city centre is because there is never any Gardas around especially at night.

Contrast that to when the Queen came over and we had many thousands of Gardas in the city centre.

The Garda resources are there they are just not being used.

Dr Crayfish

Anyway my beef was with all the social housing in the city centre, I don't think it's right.

However I don't get all this drama about Dublin being packed with knackers etc. It's grand, it's a bustling city and there's all sorts around but I've never had any trouble and I'm in town every day.

Well apart from the time my friend and I were robbed in 1996 with a syringe on O'Connell st in broad daylight, but I think things have improved since then!

strandroad

BillyBobBS wrote: »

I have plenty of friends who live in social housing as i once did years ago and the majority of them work. But sure go on with your stereotyping of people in social housing. Let's knock them all down and rehouse them to make for the Latte sipping brigade.

The ones who work are not a problem obviously, they are at work. It's the ones who don't and therefore have a whole day to wander around in dirty trackies or leggings roaring their heads off and pushing past people. It's just that due to the concentration of social housing in the city centre their type is really visible.
I have absolutely no problem with social welfare or social housing, but I cannot understand its concentration in such prime area of Dublin.

Ste-

Dr Crayfish wrote: »

Anyway my beef was with all the social housing in the city centre, I don't think it's right.

However I don't get all this drama about Dublin being packed with knackers etc. It's grand, it's a bustling city and there's all sorts around but I've never had any trouble and I'm in town every day.

Well apart from the time my friend and I were robbed in 1996 with a syringe on O'Connell st in broad daylight, but I think things have improved since then!

I'm also in town everyday well (Monday - Friday) and there's days (usually Thursdays!) that it's like night of the living dead.

Take the junction of North Earl St and Talbot St. that's a good hang out for them.

gormdubhgorm

eduzzino5 wrote: »

Please don't get me wrong - I don't want to offend or to insult anyone.
I don't even know the right word to use (knackers/chavs/scumbags/junkies). I moved from Boston to Dublin last year and it seems to me there are so many knackers in the city.

Just wanted to understand if there is a reason (bad welfare? high level of drugs? low police enforcement?) of why there are so many knackers in Dublin (especially in the city center)

Because they don't have organised gangs like the Bloods / Crips in America.

If they had that they could at least be referred to as 'gang members' instead. :rolleyes:

MartyMcFly84

This is also true , very very few guards on the beat in the city centre. I often walk through town and not see any.

That compared to move other European cities, there are visible police on main plazas and streets. Who act as a deterrent more than anything.

But then this leads into, what do the courts do when police do make arrests? Generally is a slap on the wrist or a suspended sentence. Hardly motivating for the guards to put in work and see the same people with multiple conviction's on the streets the next day.

For the neerdowell once again no real need to take responsibility for ones self. As there is little consequence.

That leads on from lack of room in prisons etc. Its all a circle that needs to be dealt with at the start

the_syco

Lux23 wrote: »

I think that is what they're doing in St Teresa Gardens and O'Devaney Gardens and that is exactly what I think should be happening everywhere. But I am not entirely convinced that knocking down perfectly good housing is the way to go in the middle of a homelessness crisis. Maybe block by block but it would take a long time.

Pretty sure they're rebuilding that area now.
Compare 2009 to 2014 https://goo.gl/maps/xAMmJmFrTf72 Large difference.
Also, fairly sure that there was an apartment complex where that big green area is now.

Dr Brown wrote: »

Part of the reason there is so many scumbags in Dublin city centre is because there is never any Gardas around especially at night.

IMO most of the scumbags come to Dublin, as the courts there won't jail them for petty crime, which leads to them being allowed back out to commit more crime, and the Gardai see that their efforts are futile, so in future, they don't bother with them.

wakka12

BillyBobBS wrote: »

I have plenty of friends who live in social housing as i once did years ago and the majority of them work. But sure go on with your stereotyping of people in social housing. Let's knock them all down and rehouse them to make for the Latte sipping brigade.

What argument is there against giving the central cbd area over to those who can afford it? Who are contributing the most to the economy. I am not advocating putting social housing out on the outskirts of dublin. But theres plenty of suburban areas around dublin well served by transport that the rest of us live in without the privileges of a stephens green addrress. Milltown has abundant free space and its on the luas line, would they not be happy there?
The cbd of dublin is a relatively tiny area and it has by far the most concentrated levels of social housing of the entire county
And I say this as somebody who isn't very wealthy and wouldn't be able to afford a very central apartment.
But the cbd should be an expensive well maintained area where top business people work and reside.

Dr Crayfish

Why do they always shout across/down the road at each other?

Dr Crayfish

Ste- wrote: »

I'm also in town everyday well (Monday - Friday) and there's days (usually Thursdays!) that it's like night of the living dead.

Take the junction of North Earl St and Talbot St. that's a good hang out for them.

Well yeah I work in the Dawson st area so it's not quite as bad. I do cycle through Amiens st etc every day though so I see the methadone carry on and pill dealing every day. They don't bother me though, I just feel bad for them, imagine that was your life it's just sad.

wakka12

Also I think it really just highlights the problem when you know that Dublin GDP is amongst the highest of any urban area in europe, it is 20th most economically powerful urban area in the EU. Yet Dublins population is about 0.4% of the EU population. It punches well above its weight when compared to the population. It is an incredibly wealthy city in world terms, yet many parts of the north city centre could pass for a much much poorer nation like macedonia or something.
It is because the richest Dubliners live in far suburbs. And the city centre is occupied by council housing

Dublin Spur

wakka12 wrote: »

But the cbd should be an expensive well maintained area where top business people work and reside.

Yep.
Like it is for proper well managed forward thinking cities
We have a lot of catching up to do.

Dr Brown

strandroad wrote: »

I have absolutely no problem with social welfare or social housing, but I cannot understand its concentration in such prime area of Dublin.

Property prices in the city centre have only been expensive since the celtic tiger.

Back in the 80s you could buy a house in dublin city centre for little or nothing.

Tombo2001

Deleted User wrote: »

No policing or political interest

This annoys me.

Its an excuse for not taking personal responsibility.

There is a massive drug problem in this country. It affects primarily a small part of our community in a major way, and affects wider society in a minor way.

'No political interest' means 'society doesnt care'.

People vote in politicians. Politicians do what people want. People dont care about junkies. Or more specifically, they dont care enough to make it a political issue.

There have been junkies been wandering up and down O'Connell St and Temple Bar for 25 years. People say its getting worse. Personally to be honest I dont think it is. Its been bad for 25 years, and its no worse now than it was in 1995.

Its never ever been an election issue. Why not? Because irish society hasnt consider it important enough to make it an election issue.

Allied to this is that local issues are what drive Irish elections - the people who vote in Danny Healy Rae certainly dont care about junkies in Dublin.

Dr Crayfish

Why did they decide to house everyone in the city centre anyway? Were they just tearing down old Georgian slums and putting blocks of flats etc there instead? Was there even one person thinking of the future back then?
I often thought maybe because we were poor and everyone worth their salt emigrated lead to no one ever believing this country would actually grow and prosper so there was no point planning for the future.

Dr Brown

Dr Crayfish wrote: »

Why did they decide to house everyone in the city centre anyway? Were they just tearing down old Georgian slums and putting blocks of flats etc there instead? Was there even one person thinking of the future back then?
I often thought maybe because we were poor and everyone worth their salt emigrated lead to no one ever believing this country would actually grow and prosper so there was no point planning for the future.

I'd imagine because back in the day there were no suburbs in dublin.

50 years ago tallaght and finglas were just farm land.

Tombo2001

Dr Crayfish wrote: »

Why did they decide to house everyone in the city centre anyway? Were they just tearing down old Georgian slums and putting blocks of flats etc there instead? Was there even one person thinking of the future back then?
I often thought maybe because we were poor and everyone worth their salt emigrated lead to no one ever believing this country would actually grow and prosper so there was no point planning for the future.

Come on.....its the 1980s..... unemployment is 25%.....there's hunger strikes and bombs going off.....lets plan our strategy for a time when Dublin is a prime European commerical centre? I dont think so.

Hindsight is wonderful.