Jump to content

Recommended Posts

BrandNewGuy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If it was 5.50ish, it was a regular ticket/Oyster

> inspection - with three-car police back-up and a

> drugs sniffer dog added in for good measure.


I was there maybe an hour earlier and if that's all it was, it was certainly overkill. There must have been 15 police inside and outside the station. When I arrived they were escorting a kid to the van.

all for freeloaders getting stung for non payment of fares.


on the sniffer dog bit, seems an unnecessary addition to the operation - as antantant says, all you're doing is shaking up low level buyers.


here's a thought - decriminalise it, purify the product, control it, sell it, tax it and use the money to educate people properly about drug use and help those with addictions/health problems as a result.


hugely simplistic model of course, but much better than the current farce which is "the war on drugs" which creates a black market and all the repercussions of that.

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Arrest rates - Box Ticked; minimal personal risk -

> Box tixed: Cappucinnos all round at Sainsbury's

> Starbucks


The operation looked to be an anti-drugs op. From the male who is always begging under the railway bridge to the city worker coming home from work, there are drug users everywhere - sometimes where you least expect them. And if you're a user or even a fare evader, you're much more likely to be into something else.


The vast majority of the burglaries which take place in Dulwich aren't because people want TV's and iMacs to use themselves - they're sold on to fund a habit. Random targeting of railway stations, clubs and other public areas aren't just a jolly for the police - they help to catch these guys. And yes it looked like a lot of cops for one op, but people carry do actually carry weapons... Not only was there danger to the police but police also have a duty of care to the public too.


In an era where front line police numbers are going down I think its great that they're doing this on our doorstep and trying to keep criminals on their toes

East Dulwich Safer Neighbourhood (Police) Team have asked me if it is possible to get ticekt barriers added to East Dulwich station. They believe it would make a serious dent in local crime. They suggest having no barriers encourages criminals to visit us - that criminals willing to undertake more serious crimes don't expect to pay for train fairs and cars are easy to target through Automatic number Plate Recognition Systems deployed in some lcoal Police cars.

They've also suggested things have been made worse for East Dulwuch since Denmark Hill and other local stations have had barriers added focusing such miscreants onto our patch


I can't see how we could add barriers. Ideas/comments/thoughts welcome.

There were several ticket inspector and just one sniffer dog, so it's an odd way of running an anti-drugs op. And a youth with a bit of weed in his pocket is not, by and large, out burgling and mugging to 'feed his habit', because weed is as cheap as chips round these parts, I believe.
James interesting you say that about Denmark Hill as everytime I have been there recently the barriers have just been open. I thought it may be that they only have a few and the amount of traffic of people they get going through to visit Kings is huge. Also they have the train destination boards on the side wall and people are standing in the small space trying o work out what platform they need and blocking the barriers. May be worth you checking this out during the daytime, I am not sure about rush hour at the station.

Nigello Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Yeah, EDLove, let's just let the freeloaders get

> away with it, man. After all, it's the weekend and

> the sun is shining! Whatevs, etc?.


You've missed the point, man. I don't think freeloaders should get away with it at all, but I also don't think it's a good use of resources to have such a large amount of police-officers on this job.


If it's non-payment of fares then I'm not sure why a ticket inspector on his own isn't enough (they manage by themselves on the trains) or, at most, with only a couple of police-officers to run after any fare dodger.


If the problem is drugs, the police don't help themselves by waiting at the bottom of a long path in high vis jackets... a drug user with an ounce of intelligence would simply turn around and wait on the platform for the next train out of there.


I do like to see police on the streets but this does seem a bit excessive.

James Barbour - there's plenty of scope. just costs money which you'll need network rail/ Southern trains to spend. the whole station could do with a bit of a refurb really. interesting consequence of not having barriers though - if true.


AV - a very narrow minded and sadly typical view of drug users. nothing you have said addresses the issue. these exercises are a marginal deterrent at best. The police know who the local "hard" users are, they speak to them on a regular basis. If they wanted to they could go and arrest them all every day for possession.


the problem needs a holistic solution to a complex issue which does not simply revolve around criminalising somebody "feeding a habit". perhaps that person needs help to get rid of their habit but can't because currently they are a criminalised for it.

antantant Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> They have plain clothed cops on the platforms /

> top of stairs watching for people who turn around.


That makes sense :)


But it means that there were EVEN MORE police officers there than it originally seemed.


Also, if they are there to weed out (excuse the pun) drug users, why is it generally thought best to do so during busy commuting times? Is this when most drug offenders are thought to be using the trains? - I'm genuinely interested.

James Barber Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> I can't see how we could add barriers.

> Ideas/comments/thoughts welcome.



Certainly overdue, but would almost certainly require investment beyond simply putting barriers in, as there being two entrances would require both to be manned (unless it was only the commuter one which was manned) in addition to any ticket office personnel.


It's a shame this wasn't incorporated into the closure of the Garden Centre as a wider entrance on the office side along with a passage under the railway to the London-bound platform would be a way to limit it to just one entrance (and also allow for a larger ticket machine section on the other side.


There can't be many Zone 2 stations without proper barriers these days, can there?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Thank you for clarifying, James. So why would anybody want to take this on as a franchise if it is staying in this building? If it is now to be a sub office, does that mean that much of  the space could be used as a different kind of business altogether, with just part of it being used as a sub Post Office? Because if it is all to remain solely for Post Office business, (albeit as a sub Post Office it won't be providing all the services which it currently does) I can't see who would want to take it over? If it isn't profitable as a Crown office, how could it be  profitable running just as a sub office, even if staff are being paid less and it's opening for longer hours? Because presumably all the other overheads such as rent will remain the same?
    • Girobank was genuinely innovative, regarding the addressed customer base (significantly the previously unbanked) - but this would have been an ideally outsourced operation to an existing bank which already had the operational systems (and the regulatory experts) to manage a bank for someone else at marginal cost. The Post Office - when you consider the issues over the Horizon software - never originally designed by ICL/ Fujitsu for the application it ran - is a very good reason why the Post Office being involved in banking was long-term a bad idea.  To get back to the topic of this thread, the Horizon debacle is still not over (the software system is still in place) - most of the wrongly penalised sub-postmasters are still out of pocket - I'm not sure I would be leaping to take on the franchise being offered in Lordship Lane.
    • Otherwise in Bellenden Road are brilliant! They’ve made me stage dresses, restructured vintage finds and are working on remodelling my late brothers huntsman tweed suit for my modern husband! Not cheap and rents have meant they are moving premises at mo.
    • Penguin, I broadly agree, except that the Girobank was a genuinely innovative and successful operation. It’s rather ironic that after all these years we are now back to banking at the Post Office due to all the bank branch closures.  I agree that the roots of the problem go back further than 2012 (?), when the PO and RM were separated so RM could be sold. I’m willing to blame Peter Mandelson, Margaret Thatcher or even Keith Joseph. But none of them will be standing for the local council, hoping to make capital out of the possible closure of Lordship Lane PO, as if they are in no way responsible. The Lib Dems can’t be let off the hook that easily.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...