Brighton and Hove is drugs death capital once more (From The Argus)

Well done, thanks for all the druggies hard work. You should feel proud.

"The Golden Syringe" trophy comes home to where it belongs again!!

I'm think the we should shout out this achievement from the rooftops. Brighton council has once again surpassed themselves and Sussex Police shouldn't get away with no credit, after all it's their network of informers who they allow to sell drugs that help Brighton to keep this prestigious title.

This is old news.
www.crp-news.com/htm
/n20090731.992146.ht
m
Slapped wrists all round at The Argus.

"despite millions of pounds being spent on the problem". Where did these millions go exactly? Into the pockets of incompetent people, that's where.

"Police, NHS and council workers defended their work on dealing with drug problems". Of course they would do that. They never, ever, admit to making mistakes.

Though "It is the sixth time in eight years the city has topped the list" rather shows their work to be utterly useless. A monumental failure.

"The robust multi-agency work". What is robust about it? It has FAILED.

Legalise all drugs, teach people how to use them properly and give them controlled environments to take them in. No deaths from overdoses or bad quality/highly potent scag. Simples.

When the Police ignore blatant dealing on our streets then no wonder :(

worthinglogic wrote:
Legalise all drugs, teach people how to use them properly and give them controlled environments to take them in. No deaths from overdoses or bad quality/highly potent scag. Simples.

What? I expect you'd want them dished out free too?

Stupids.

I'm quite happy to live in the city that is the Home of Natural Selection...

I don't know about dealing on the streets, but I recently watched two student sitting in their car outside my house dividing out some white powder,presumably coccaine, and proceeding to sniff it up. I couldn't believe my eyes but I must say I was pleased when I shouted at them and the substance went everywhere. Serves them right.

BN1 wrote:

worthinglogic wrote:
Legalise all drugs, teach people how to use them properly and give them controlled environments to take them in. No deaths from overdoses or bad quality/highly potent scag. Simples.

What? I expect you'd want them dished out free too?

Stupids.

Why not? Giving heroin to addicts through the NHS would save the country millions in health care costs, and crime statistics - especially muggings and burglaries - would plummet.

Granny wrote:
I don't know about dealing on the streets, but I recently watched two student sitting in their car outside my house dividing out some white powder,presumably coccaine, and proceeding to sniff it up. I couldn't believe my eyes but I must say I was pleased when I shouted at them and the substance went everywhere. Serves them right.

As Brighton & Hove celebrates its victory as Drug Death Capital Champions, Granny celebrates winning the most Boring and Pointless Anecdote of the Year Award.

Variable wrote:

BN1 wrote:

worthinglogic wrote: Legalise all drugs, teach people how to use them properly and give them controlled environments to take them in. No deaths from overdoses or bad quality/highly potent scag. Simples.

What? I expect you'd want them dished out free too? Stupids.

Why not? Giving heroin to addicts through the NHS would save the country millions in health care costs, and crime statistics - especially muggings and burglaries - would plummet.

Substitute the word "billions" for "millions" and you would be right.

The people who have most to lose from such an action can be divided into two groups.
Group 1 is the high level crime bosses. They would lose the most lucrative part of their business.
Group 2 is far more sinister. It is the anti-drugs lobby, including the police, the "war on drugs" idiots and their fellow travellers in government. Within days, there would be a NEED for far less police because there would be far less crime. The police know this, which is one of the reasons, if not the main reason, why they keep on interfering in political matters demanding that this and that be made illegal.

Re-legalising drugs, including giving heroin to druggies, is the answer to this "problem".

Variable wrote:

BN1 wrote:

worthinglogic wrote:
Legalise all drugs, teach people how to use them properly and give them controlled environments to take them in. No deaths from overdoses or bad quality/highly potent scag. Simples.

What? I expect you'd want them dished out free too?

Stupids.

Why not? Giving heroin to addicts through the NHS would save the country millions in health care costs, and crime statistics - especially muggings and burglaries - would plummet.

We could give free alcohol, fags, cream cakes and gold jewellery. Whatever anyone wants.

This will please the council. They like to get awards no matter what they are.

BN1 wrote:

worthinglogic wrote:
Legalise all drugs, teach people how to use them properly and give them controlled environments to take them in. No deaths from overdoses or bad quality/highly potent scag. Simples.

What? I expect you'd want them dished out free too?

Stupids.

Not free, but available at chemists for less than current street prices.
We can't even keep drugs out of prisons, so there's no chance whatsoever of stopping people taking them.

Poor Blackpool, they lost again.

I felt cheered up seeing Western Road's billboards announcing the retention of the crown. The local junkies were still passed out in doorways to care.

So are all these users suddenly going to sprout jobs to pay for their new legal habit then?

Thanks to alcohol this country is turning into s**t-hole - add drugs to the picture... no thanks.

Erm, correction, BRIGHTON is the drug death capital of the UK. Don't drag Hove along! Unfortunately since our unwanted and fought against merger with Brighton in 1997 (resulting in the 'quasi-city' of 'Brighton & Hove'), Hove gets lumped together with Brighton with all the undesirable statistics and culture of our unwelcome neighbour.

If Hove and Brighton reverted to independant towns (if Brighton wants to carry over the city status from 'Brighton & Hove' then so be it!) then Hove wouldn't be considered as part of the 'drug death' statistic as these problems exist (and thus belong) in Brighton, not Hove.

So this adds yet more fuel to the argument for Hove to split from 'Brighton & Hove' and become the proud, independent, town and borough that it once was.

Brighton - keep your problems and your nasty statistics to yourself and stop dragging Hove down with you! You are a noisy, undesirable neighbour and we want to be set free from you! Hove will ALWAYS be a distinctive town and we will NEVER see ourselves as a city called 'Brighton & Hove'! Get over it!

There are more addicts in Hove than Brighton!! Just wander down western road they are everywhere - so get off your high horse!

BN1 I highly suspect you feel that the "golden days" of this country were back times such as the 20s and 30s when people had common decency and respect blah blah... So I suppose you're also aware that up until around then drugs WEREN'T illegal. Queen Victoria was a coke fiend as was Winston Churchill, widely regarded as one of the greatest Britons ever to have lived. Add that to the fact that the British army used to give heroin to soldiers in "fun-packs" during the first world war and I'm having a hard time trying to work out, according to you, exactly when this country wasn't a"Shithole"???

HoveAlone wrote:
Erm, correction, BRIGHTON is the drug death capital of the UK. Don't drag Hove along! Unfortunately since our unwanted and fought against merger with Brighton in 1997 (resulting in the 'quasi-city' of 'Brighton & Hove'), Hove gets lumped together with Brighton with all the undesirable statistics and culture of our unwelcome neighbour.

If Hove and Brighton reverted to independant towns (if Brighton wants to carry over the city status from 'Brighton & Hove' then so be it!) then Hove wouldn't be considered as part of the 'drug death' statistic as these problems exist (and thus belong) in Brighton, not Hove.

So this adds yet more fuel to the argument for Hove to split from 'Brighton & Hove' and become the proud, independent, town and borough that it once was.

Brighton - keep your problems and your nasty statistics to yourself and stop dragging Hove down with you! You are a noisy, undesirable neighbour and we want to be set free from you! Hove will ALWAYS be a distinctive town and we will NEVER see ourselves as a city called 'Brighton & Hove'! Get over it!

but they still have druggies in Hove, as i have seen them. you will be a joint city when it suits you, but this time it doesn't, does it? if there was to be a big cash handout from the government, you would want to be a joint city then. hove, actually! ha what a bunch of snobs you are. get real, you are a joint city and always will be. you get joint rubbish collections and street sweeping, parking controls, etc. i remember when it was split, and there was always this 'we're better than you' attitude. the two towns have joined, so get over it.

Worthinglogic: are you trying to justify your own drug use? Remember that old line you spun to your mum when she found out you smoked weed? "but it's not as addictive as alcohol, mum"

Wow, with an answer like that you should be a politician! I base my arguement on cold hard facts and the best you can do is come up with a mindless throwaway retort involving my mother. Oh dear.

For Every Sprinkle I Find wrote:
I'm quite happy to live in the city that is the Home of Natural Selection...

Que sera sera,but woe betide any of these cold turkey scagheads that try and nick my Vaio for a couple of hits.....'Get Orrrffff My Land with shotgun in hand

bibble wrote:

Variable wrote:

BN1 wrote:

worthinglogic wrote: Legalise all drugs, teach people how to use them properly and give them controlled environments to take them in. No deaths from overdoses or bad quality/highly potent scag. Simples.

What? I expect you'd want them dished out free too? Stupids.

Why not? Giving heroin to addicts through the NHS would save the country millions in health care costs, and crime statistics - especially muggings and burglaries - would plummet.

Substitute the word "billions" for "millions" and you would be right.

The people who have most to lose from such an action can be divided into two groups.
Group 1 is the high level crime bosses. They would lose the most lucrative part of their business.
Group 2 is far more sinister. It is the anti-drugs lobby, including the police, the "war on drugs" idiots and their fellow travellers in government. Within days, there would be a NEED for far less police because there would be far less crime. The police know this, which is one of the reasons, if not the main reason, why they keep on interfering in political matters demanding that this and that be made illegal.

Re-legalising drugs, including giving heroin to druggies, is the answer to this "problem".

Bibble a number of very in-depth studies have looked into this whole legalisation issue and the cutting of profits to Mr Big due to the State supplying.

They have all found that due to large scale bureaucracy, cultivating, supplying, testing, medical issues the cost per hit would be far far more than the street price of the illegal substance.

Therefore Mr Big would still be able to supply at a reduced price and therefore there would still be big big profits and s/he could undercut the Govt even with state handouts.

Also - would all public figures be completely honest and not shave off large batches to supply themselves.

In principle I do agree with you BUT, and this is a big BUT, the figures do not show that this would work and therefore would not be as successful and you and many others would hope.

HoveAlone wrote:
Erm, correction, BRIGHTON is the drug death capital of the UK. Don't drag Hove along! Unfortunately since our unwanted and fought against merger with Brighton in 1997 (resulting in the 'quasi-city' of 'Brighton & Hove'), Hove gets lumped together with Brighton with all the undesirable statistics and culture of our unwelcome neighbour.

If Hove and Brighton reverted to independant towns (if Brighton wants to carry over the city status from 'Brighton & Hove' then so be it!) then Hove wouldn't be considered as part of the 'drug death' statistic as these problems exist (and thus belong) in Brighton, not Hove.

So this adds yet more fuel to the argument for Hove to split from 'Brighton & Hove' and become the proud, independent, town and borough that it once was.

Brighton - keep your problems and your nasty statistics to yourself and stop dragging Hove down with you! You are a noisy, undesirable neighbour and we want to be set free from you! Hove will ALWAYS be a distinctive town and we will NEVER see ourselves as a city called 'Brighton & Hove'! Get over it!

1) Where is your statisical proof that the majority of drugs deaths happened in Brighton?

2) "If Hove and Brighton reverted to independant towns (if Brighton wants to carry over the city status from 'Brighton & Hove' then so be it!) then Hove wouldn't be considered as part of the 'drug death' statistic as these problems exist (and thus belong) in Brighton, not Hove."

That makes no sense, if both towns were considered seperatly surely the statisics would read x amount of drugs deaths in Brighton and x amount in Hove. How do they become just part of Brighton?

3) What is there in Hove again? the tail end of Western Rd and a few shops in Church Rd.Blatchington Rd and George St. What else of interest is there?

4) Hove has it's undesirable areas to live too like Portslade & Hangleton not to mention the druggies hanging around by the town hall and Hove end of Western Rd.

5) If Brighton and Hove kept their drugs statistics seperate surely that would knock both of the top of the 'drugs death capital' title, even if the stats were split 60/40 in Brightons favour.

At the end of the day your just a Hove snob who thinks you live in an exclusive area of town,but the truth is you ignore Hove's problems and highlight Brighton's to reassure yourself (and maybe boast to your friends) that you live in a nice place. Provide stats saying that there were NO drugs deaths in Hove and you might be right.

as long as we are the drug death capital this is a green light to dealers to come here and do what they want and of no fear of any action against them. zero tolerance is the only way and the council should not encourage drug use by making this city a 'user friendly with all that you want' city, benefits, pretend help and laze around by the sea during the day and the city at night, this is a very bad title for a tourist city, i would not come here to visit reading this, unfortunately i live here not for long hopefully at this rate. this is a sad and tragic reflection on our authorities and soft touch approach to druggies, drunks, travellers, litter and grafitti but at least they catch the motorist going 32mph in a 30mph zone target met thankyou and goodnight.

stan bailey wrote:

Variable wrote:

BN1 wrote:

worthinglogic wrote:
Legalise all drugs, teach people how to use them properly and give them controlled environments to take them in. No deaths from overdoses or bad quality/highly potent scag. Simples.

What? I expect you'd want them dished out free too?

Stupids.

Why not? Giving heroin to addicts through the NHS would save the country millions in health care costs, and crime statistics - especially muggings and burglaries - would plummet.

We could give free alcohol, fags, cream cakes and gold jewellery. Whatever anyone wants.

We already do, we pay the chavs dole money, so effectively their booze, fags etc is free to them!!!!

davyboy wrote:

HoveAlone wrote: Erm, correction, BRIGHTON is the drug death capital of the UK. Don't drag Hove along! Unfortunately since our unwanted and fought against merger with Brighton in 1997 (resulting in the 'quasi-city' of 'Brighton & Hove'), Hove gets lumped together with Brighton with all the undesirable statistics and culture of our unwelcome neighbour. If Hove and Brighton reverted to independant towns (if Brighton wants to carry over the city status from 'Brighton & Hove' then so be it!) then Hove wouldn't be considered as part of the 'drug death' statistic as these problems exist (and thus belong) in Brighton, not Hove. So this adds yet more fuel to the argument for Hove to split from 'Brighton & Hove' and become the proud, independent, town and borough that it once was. Brighton - keep your problems and your nasty statistics to yourself and stop dragging Hove down with you! You are a noisy, undesirable neighbour and we want to be set free from you! Hove will ALWAYS be a distinctive town and we will NEVER see ourselves as a city called 'Brighton & Hove'! Get over it!

but they still have druggies in Hove, as i have seen them. you will be a joint city when it suits you, but this time it doesn't, does it? if there was to be a big cash handout from the government, you would want to be a joint city then. hove, actually! ha what a bunch of snobs you are. get real, you are a joint city and always will be. you get joint rubbish collections and street sweeping, parking controls, etc. i remember when it was split, and there was always this 'we're better than you' attitude. the two towns have joined, so get over it.

I am not saying that Hove does not have its problems, but we never ever wanted to be part of the 'city' in the first place. We were always a seperate town. We had our own council that looked after the needs and interests of Hove, not 'Brighton and Hove'. Do you realise that we were quite happy to have our own dedicated council for Hove? Do you realise that the council merger was fought against, not voted for, and vehmently opposed? (in Brighton as well I hasten to add!)

Why is it so hard for people in Brighton to accept that Hove has never been, and never will be happy to have a joint council with Brighton?

Surely it is in Brighton's interest as well to have it's own council JUST looking after Brighton?

Whilst we have this union, Brighton will never be able to call itself a city because the only city at the moment is 'Brighton & Hove'!

Bog Vern wrote:

bibble wrote:

Variable wrote:

BN1 wrote:

worthinglogic wrote: Legalise all drugs, teach people how to use them properly and give them controlled environments to take them in. No deaths from overdoses or bad quality/highly potent scag. Simples.

What? I expect you'd want them dished out free too? Stupids.

Why not? Giving heroin to addicts through the NHS would save the country millions in health care costs, and crime statistics - especially muggings and burglaries - would plummet.

Substitute the word "billions" for "millions" and you would be right. The people who have most to lose from such an action can be divided into two groups. Group 1 is the high level crime bosses. They would lose the most lucrative part of their business. Group 2 is far more sinister. It is the anti-drugs lobby, including the police, the "war on drugs" idiots and their fellow travellers in government. Within days, there would be a NEED for far less police because there would be far less crime. The police know this, which is one of the reasons, if not the main reason, why they keep on interfering in political matters demanding that this and that be made illegal. Re-legalising drugs, including giving heroin to druggies, is the answer to this "problem".

Bibble a number of very in-depth studies have looked into this whole legalisation issue and the cutting of profits to Mr Big due to the State supplying. They have all found that due to large scale bureaucracy, cultivating, supplying, testing, medical issues the cost per hit would be far far more than the street price of the illegal substance. Therefore Mr Big would still be able to supply at a reduced price and therefore there would still be big big profits and s/he could undercut the Govt even with state handouts. Also - would all public figures be completely honest and not shave off large batches to supply themselves. In principle I do agree with you BUT, and this is a big BUT, the figures do not show that this would work and therefore would not be as successful and you and many others would hope.

Bog, the people who conduct these "studies" are part of my "Group 2". They don't want drugs to be legal, because it would put them out of a job. So they come out with all sorts of reasons why "it won't work".

Brightonscouse2 wrote:

HoveAlone wrote: Erm, correction, BRIGHTON is the drug death capital of the UK. Don't drag Hove along! Unfortunately since our unwanted and fought against merger with Brighton in 1997 (resulting in the 'quasi-city' of 'Brighton & Hove'), Hove gets lumped together with Brighton with all the undesirable statistics and culture of our unwelcome neighbour. If Hove and Brighton reverted to independant towns (if Brighton wants to carry over the city status from 'Brighton & Hove' then so be it!) then Hove wouldn't be considered as part of the 'drug death' statistic as these problems exist (and thus belong) in Brighton, not Hove. So this adds yet more fuel to the argument for Hove to split from 'Brighton & Hove' and become the proud, independent, town and borough that it once was. Brighton - keep your problems and your nasty statistics to yourself and stop dragging Hove down with you! You are a noisy, undesirable neighbour and we want to be set free from you! Hove will ALWAYS be a distinctive town and we will NEVER see ourselves as a city called 'Brighton & Hove'! Get over it!

1) Where is your statisical proof that the majority of drugs deaths happened in Brighton? 2) "If Hove and Brighton reverted to independant towns (if Brighton wants to carry over the city status from 'Brighton & Hove' then so be it!) then Hove wouldn't be considered as part of the 'drug death' statistic as these problems exist (and thus belong) in Brighton, not Hove." That makes no sense, if both towns were considered seperatly surely the statisics would read x amount of drugs deaths in Brighton and x amount in Hove. How do they become just part of Brighton? 3) What is there in Hove again? the tail end of Western Rd and a few shops in Church Rd.Blatchington Rd and George St. What else of interest is there? 4) Hove has it's undesirable areas to live too like Portslade & Hangleton not to mention the druggies hanging around by the town hall and Hove end of Western Rd. 5) If Brighton and Hove kept their drugs statistics seperate surely that would knock both of the top of the 'drugs death capital' title, even if the stats were split 60/40 in Brightons favour. At the end of the day your just a Hove snob who thinks you live in an exclusive area of town,but the truth is you ignore Hove's problems and highlight Brighton's to reassure yourself (and maybe boast to your friends) that you live in a nice place. Provide stats saying that there were NO drugs deaths in Hove and you might be right.

It is not about snobbery, it is about fact. I made a thorough recce of both Hove and Brighton when looking for a place to live. I couldn't stand Brighton for many many reasons. Central Brighton on a Friday/Saturday night is dreadful. Chavs everywhere, junkies, homeless, drunken slaggy girls. Awful! During the day the town centre is like a Vicki Pollard lookalike contest! When the number 6 bus goes through Hove and arrives at Brunswick/Adeldaide, I feel a huge sigh of relief! The reason why people choose to live in Hove is because it doesn't have that brash, noisy, boozy culture that Brighton has. I live here because it is quieter, more refined, leafier, and more suburban than Boozy Brighton. Yes, I have seen homeless people and junkies, but I certainly haven't seen it in the same volumes as I have in Brighton!

I keep asking the question again and again: Why do Brightonians have a problem accepting that Hove wants to be seperate again? I wonder if this is because that if 'Brighton & Hove' were to seperate, the city status held by the joint council will be lost, and may not be transferable to the new Brighton-only council!

If Brighton is so desperate to be a fantastic 'culturally rich', 'diverse', city (it will always be a scruffy south coast town as far as I am concerned), then it needs to set Hove free and go it alone. There will be no tears from the Hove side as we will finally get our own council back.

'Hove Borough Council' - you are sorely missed!

HoveAlone, Hove

You never did provide any form of stats to prove that the drug problem is solely a Brighton problem?

You claim if the two towns were to split Brighton would remain the drugs death capital of England and Hove would record little or no drugs related deaths, can you back this up?

I'm not painting Brighton out as an amazing place but i think you look at it with blinkers on, You describe "Chavs everywhere, junkies, homeless, drunken slaggy girls" well i would suggest you don't go down to West St of an evening seeing as they all congregate down there. Anyone who knows Brighton knows that is the area to avoid if that's not your particular thing.
As for the druggies, there's just as many in Hove and there's even a homeless shelter that attracts them in Hove (but don't tell me they all come from Brighton).
If you find Hove so refined and with all the amenities that you could possibly need why come in/out of Brighton at all on the no 6 bus?
You keep saying that Brightonians have a problem with Hove seperating but it's yourself that keeps bringing the issue up (and like i said) highlighting Brightons worse points, i've even read a letter you posted on the subject a while back and your comments on here seem to consist of the same point over and over.I don't recall anyone from Brighton saying it shouldn't happen.
You're the person creating the issue but then telling the people of Brighton: "Brighton - keep your problems and your nasty statistics to yourself and stop dragging Hove down with you! You are a noisy, undesirable neighbour and we want to be set free from you! Hove will ALWAYS be a distinctive town and we will NEVER see ourselves as a city called 'Brighton & Hove'! Get over it!"

If you could answer or at least address any of the points i made in my original post re each respective towns drugs deaths that would be much appreciated seeing as you have eluded to in your reply, thankyou.

This is good news if it means the other cities have to put up with living junkies.
Dead ones are better and the more that die the better.

Concur with TheInsider
Liquidate the addicts and the supply chain dries up. Then our pathetic council and police "force" can get home even earlier for lunch .

Rocky Balboa wrote:

stan bailey wrote:

Variable wrote:

BN1 wrote:

worthinglogic wrote:
Legalise all drugs, teach people how to use them properly and give them controlled environments to take them in. No deaths from overdoses or bad quality/highly potent scag. Simples.

What? I expect you'd want them dished out free too?

Stupids.

Why not? Giving heroin to addicts through the NHS would save the country millions in health care costs, and crime statistics - especially muggings and burglaries - would plummet.

We could give free alcohol, fags, cream cakes and gold jewellery. Whatever anyone wants.

We already do, we pay the chavs dole money, so effectively their booze, fags etc is free to them!!!!

You are dead right!!!

Brightonscouse2 wrote:
HoveAlone, Hove You never did provide any form of stats to prove that the drug problem is solely a Brighton problem? You claim if the two towns were to split Brighton would remain the drugs death capital of England and Hove would record little or no drugs related deaths, can you back this up? I'm not painting Brighton out as an amazing place but i think you look at it with blinkers on, You describe "Chavs everywhere, junkies, homeless, drunken slaggy girls" well i would suggest you don't go down to West St of an evening seeing as they all congregate down there. Anyone who knows Brighton knows that is the area to avoid if that's not your particular thing. As for the druggies, there's just as many in Hove and there's even a homeless shelter that attracts them in Hove (but don't tell me they all come from Brighton). If you find Hove so refined and with all the amenities that you could possibly need why come in/out of Brighton at all on the no 6 bus? You keep saying that Brightonians have a problem with Hove seperating but it's yourself that keeps bringing the issue up (and like i said) highlighting Brightons worse points, i've even read a letter you posted on the subject a while back and your comments on here seem to consist of the same point over and over.I don't recall anyone from Brighton saying it shouldn't happen. You're the person creating the issue but then telling the people of Brighton: "Brighton - keep your problems and your nasty statistics to yourself and stop dragging Hove down with you! You are a noisy, undesirable neighbour and we want to be set free from you! Hove will ALWAYS be a distinctive town and we will NEVER see ourselves as a city called 'Brighton & Hove'! Get over it!" If you could answer or at least address any of the points i made in my original post re each respective towns drugs deaths that would be much appreciated seeing as you have eluded to in your reply, thankyou.

Unfortunately I don't have any actual statistics because the said statistics are counted together for 'Brighton & Hove'. My assessment of the statistic weighing towards Brighton purely comes from what I have seen with my own eyes ever since I moved down here 13 years ago with my family (when I was 16 years old). We started off living in Brighton for the first year, then we moved to Tongdean, Hove, and I have lived in the town ever since and currently live in Palmeira Square. I have had many jobs in Brighton and have commuted to and from both towns. I currently work in London and sometimes get the train from Brighton if I miss the Hove train. I know Brighton, and Hove, very very well. I can tell you that I have lost count of the amount of junkies, beggers, homeless people etc I have seen in Brighton town centre, Western Road etc. I have not seen the same volume in Hove. I suggest that you come to Hove and have a wander around and you will see what I am talking about. A friend of a colleague moved down here from London 6 months ago (to Brighton), and she said to me how shocked she was with all the druggies and 'down and outs' on Western Road/central Brighton! She has since moved to Hove and she doesn't have any complaints.

When Hove was an independant borough, we never ever heard of any statistics regarding 'drug deaths' or 'drug use' for Hove (my parents back this up!) however it was often reported about Brighton. That is why we were always happy to be next to each other, but administratively seperate.

For the record, Hove people do not have anything against Brighton or Brightonians, we just feel incredibly bitter and angry that we were left alone for years to govern ourselves seperately from Brighton, and then all off a sudden we were forced into a marriage that wasn't even asked for!

If you look at the old Argus archives, you will see that there was outrage in Brighton also when the merger was proposed.

The solution to all of this, is for everyone in both Hove AND Brighton, to campaign for seperation. Surely you would want to be known as the 'City of Brighton' instead of the 'City of Brighton & Hove'???

I also find it amusing that Brighton people get on the defensive when Hovites mention the issue of seperation - I am told that this is because Brighton could not have attained city status without Hove as it was too small on its own, and that any seperation would cause it to lose city status and not have the option to get it applied solely to Brighton!

Anyway, if you feel so passionately about Brighton as I do about Hove then you will also start the call for seperation.

Let Brighton flourish, and let Hove flourish, but let's do it on our own!

@ Hove Alone.

I think you may have a fixation. You have hijacked a story about death from drug use to waffle on about something that frankly most people couldn't give two hoots about. Really, there are so many subjects actually worth the passion you obviously have, shame it's such a worthless cause. Don't sweat the small stuff.

indiebright wrote:
@ Hove Alone. I think you may have a fixation. You have hijacked a story about death from drug use to waffle on about something that frankly most people couldn't give two hoots about. Really, there are so many subjects actually worth the passion you obviously have, shame it's such a worthless cause. Don't sweat the small stuff.

Surprise surprise. You are from Brighton. Why doesn't that surprise me? People in Brighton might not give two hoots about the issue of Hove breaking away, but people in Hove certainly do.

I hope that the people who report future drug statistics will gather the data solely from Brighton (which I think they did anyway but they put it under the banner of 'Brighton & Hove').

If you are so 'Brighton-centric' then please stay your side of the boundary, and leave us Hovites in peace.

bibble wrote:

Bog Vern wrote:

bibble wrote:

Variable wrote:

BN1 wrote:

worthinglogic wrote: Legalise all drugs, teach people how to use them properly and give them controlled environments to take them in. No deaths from overdoses or bad quality/highly potent scag. Simples.

What? I expect you'd want them dished out free too? Stupids.

Why not? Giving heroin to addicts through the NHS would save the country millions in health care costs, and crime statistics - especially muggings and burglaries - would plummet.

Substitute the word "billions" for "millions" and you would be right. The people who have most to lose from such an action can be divided into two groups. Group 1 is the high level crime bosses. They would lose the most lucrative part of their business. Group 2 is far more sinister. It is the anti-drugs lobby, including the police, the "war on drugs" idiots and their fellow travellers in government. Within days, there would be a NEED for far less police because there would be far less crime. The police know this, which is one of the reasons, if not the main reason, why they keep on interfering in political matters demanding that this and that be made illegal. Re-legalising drugs, including giving heroin to druggies, is the answer to this "problem".

Bibble a number of very in-depth studies have looked into this whole legalisation issue and the cutting of profits to Mr Big due to the State supplying. They have all found that due to large scale bureaucracy, cultivating, supplying, testing, medical issues the cost per hit would be far far more than the street price of the illegal substance. Therefore Mr Big would still be able to supply at a reduced price and therefore there would still be big big profits and s/he could undercut the Govt even with state handouts. Also - would all public figures be completely honest and not shave off large batches to supply themselves. In principle I do agree with you BUT, and this is a big BUT, the figures do not show that this would work and therefore would not be as successful and you and many others would hope.

Bog, the people who conduct these "studies" are part of my "Group 2". They don't want drugs to be legal, because it would put them out of a job. So they come out with all sorts of reasons why "it won't work".

Bibble - trouble is - there not from either group - honestly - that is the problem.

Drugs will never go away but I do think that we need a grown up debate on this rather than the politicians saying one thing and meaning another.

so the number has stayed the same despite millions being spent..So stop all of the spending and sack all the workers involved that have had no effect thus saving us all millions

security word waste of money

Ok, I apologise for deviating from the drug death issue by going on about Hove seperation etc - there needs to be another forum/blog for this! (Argus take note!).

Dealing solely with the drug subject, I have just come back from central Brighton and seen people 'off their faces', beggers, homeless people, and all kinds of weirdos (not to mention the usually spattering of chavs, scruffy students that look like they need a wash, vikki pollards, gymslip mums with velour tracksuits and hoop earings etc etc etc).

On my return home to Hove (phew!) I did not see any of this, only yummy mummies, elderley folk shopping, 30-something couples eating lunch on terrace restaurants and trendy bars, etc.

My original argument is that the drug death statistic should not have come under the banner of 'Brighton & Hove' as although Hove is no more perfect than other towns on the south coast, it certainly does not have the same level of drug abuse or drug deaths as Brighton.

It is unfortunate that the Office of National Statistics collates their data based on each local authority in the UK, and as Hove and Brighton fall under the 'Brighton & Hove' unitary authority, the statistics are presented accordingly with no regard to the actual statistics from each of the towns of Hove and Brighton. If there was any way that they could solely present statistics from Brighton, and statistics from Hove, I am absolutely 100% convinced that it would be Brighton that would produce the vastly more negative results.

In the meantime, Hove will just have the very unfortunate situation of being spoken of in the same sentence as Brighton when it comes to undesirable statistics.

For the record, many people in the ir mid-thirties plus have told me that the former Borough of Hove never had any problem with excessive drug abusers, drug deaths etc and didn't produce any damning statistics to this effect. They said that it was quite common to hear bad statistics in th e press coming out of Brighton e.g homelessness, drug abuse, drunken behaviour etc, but never for Hove.

Therefore, this reinforces my argument that the recent statistic was because of Brighton, and should have been reported as such, instead of painting a bad picture for Hove as well!

Hovealone,

This quote sums your whole argument up if you ask me:
"On my return home to Hove (phew!) I did not see any of this, only yummy mummies, elderley folk shopping, 30-something couples eating lunch on terrace restaurants and trendy bars, etc.

My original argument is that the drug death statistic should not have come under the banner of 'Brighton & Hove' as although Hove is no more perfect than other towns on the south coast, it certainly does not have the same level of drug abuse or drug deaths as Brighton."
The above is based on nothing more than your blinkered opinion and assumption. You have no way of proving that the majority of drugs deaths have occured in Brighton and as long as you don't hear about it happening in Hove all the better as far as your concerned. As for the quality of people in Brighton and Hove respectivley, Have you ever travelled to Portslade,Mile Oak,Hangleton and the Knoll Estate? I think you'll find they have their fair share of people you describe seeing in Brighton unless your suggesting they travel through Hove and only shop in Brighton. As for " 30 something couples and trendy bars" have you ever been to the Wetherspoons on George St or perhaps The Seafield on Church Rd? You claim there's plenty of terrace restaraunts in Hove (i presume you don't mean the kebab shops at the Hove end of Western Rd) but fail to acknowledge there are in Brighton too. Like i said this is an issue that you yourself have but you then take issue with anyone from Brighton who has the audacity to question you. Neither town are perfect but the snobbish attitude you convey in your comments doesn't do your cause any good.

Brightonscouse2 wrote:
Hovealone, This quote sums your whole argument up if you ask me: "On my return home to Hove (phew!) I did not see any of this, only yummy mummies, elderley folk shopping, 30-something couples eating lunch on terrace restaurants and trendy bars, etc. My original argument is that the drug death statistic should not have come under the banner of 'Brighton & Hove' as although Hove is no more perfect than other towns on the south coast, it certainly does not have the same level of drug abuse or drug deaths as Brighton." The above is based on nothing more than your blinkered opinion and assumption. You have no way of proving that the majority of drugs deaths have occured in Brighton and as long as you don't hear about it happening in Hove all the better as far as your concerned. As for the quality of people in Brighton and Hove respectivley, Have you ever travelled to Portslade,Mile Oak,Hangleton and the Knoll Estate? I think you'll find they have their fair share of people you describe seeing in Brighton unless your suggesting they travel through Hove and only shop in Brighton. As for " 30 something couples and trendy bars" have you ever been to the Wetherspoons on George St or perhaps The Seafield on Church Rd? You claim there's plenty of terrace restaraunts in Hove (i presume you don't mean the kebab shops at the Hove end of Western Rd) but fail to acknowledge there are in Brighton too. Like i said this is an issue that you yourself have but you then take issue with anyone from Brighton who has the audacity to question you. Neither town are perfect but the snobbish attitude you convey in your comments doesn't do your cause any good.

The argument is not which town in better, the argument is I, and many other people I have spoken to over the years, feel that Hove and Brighton should revert to seperately governed towns. This would allow both towns to be looked after by their own councils. Brighton wouldn't interfere with Hove, and vice versa.

If such a thing happened (which it will one day as the Conservatives are already talking about local government reform if the got elected), then there would be seperate statistics for Hove and Brighton respectively. This would solve the entire argument.

If towns like Manchester & Salford, Bournemouth & Poole, Bexhill & Hastings can exists right next to one another (and merge into one another with no clear divide), then there is no reason why Hove and Brighton should be any different.

One day we will be talking again, and comparing statistics from Hove, and from Brighton. Then we will see.

I know the argument isn't which town is better, you have contradicted yourself . You say you want seperation from Brighton based on the towns drug problems and the type of people that inhabit it. It's you that brought up which town is better. As it stands both towns are joined together (by local authority and geograpically) and there's not alot you can do about it so i would suggest you lay off branding the people in Brighton as "people 'off their faces', beggers, homeless people, and all kinds of weirdos (not to mention the usually spattering of chavs, scruffy students that look like they need a wash, vikki pollards, gymslip mums with velour tracksuits and hoop earings etc etc etc)." You generalise the people of Brighton as the above and claim the people of Hove are mostly middle class and in their thirties,yummy mummies or elderly folk to imply that Hove is the better town. But of course it's not about which town is better and of course your not a snob.
Having lived in both Brighton and Hove over the last 26 years i know your evaluation of the people of both towns is wide of the mark and i also know that the drugs sitiuation isn't one exclusive to Brighton.

Hove has a high number of sex offenders.
Now why is that?
Is there a probation settlement programme at that end of the city or it it simply that its quiet and dark and more opportunities for perverts to conduct their business.

People on here with your 'oh I want to be counted as a Hove person rather than a Brighton person so I don't have to be associated with this' attitude... Jesus. Scared about your house prices. F*cking Daily Mail readers. You think more police are the answer to everything don't you?

Prohibition doesn't work. Don't you get it? It has never worked. Prohibition creates a black market. Here are some facts for you :
1) in 2006/7, 59% of drug deaths were due to accidental poisoning i.e. overdose. Those people would not have died if they could trust drug purity. More at http://www.drugscope
.org.uk/resources/fa
qs/faqpages/how-many
-people-die-from-dru
gs.htm

2) in the meantime, 2538 people were killed in motor accidents
http://news.bbc.co.u
k/1/hi/uk/8118341.st
m

Brightonscouse2 wrote:
I know the argument isn't which town is better, you have contradicted yourself . You say you want seperation from Brighton based on the towns drug problems and the type of people that inhabit it. It's you that brought up which town is better. As it stands both towns are joined together (by local authority and geograpically) and there's not alot you can do about it so i would suggest you lay off branding the people in Brighton as "people 'off their faces', beggers, homeless people, and all kinds of weirdos (not to mention the usually spattering of chavs, scruffy students that look like they need a wash, vikki pollards, gymslip mums with velour tracksuits and hoop earings etc etc etc)." You generalise the people of Brighton as the above and claim the people of Hove are mostly middle class and in their thirties,yummy mummies or elderly folk to imply that Hove is the better town. But of course it's not about which town is better and of course your not a snob. Having lived in both Brighton and Hove over the last 26 years i know your evaluation of the people of both towns is wide of the mark and i also know that the drugs sitiuation isn't one exclusive to Brighton.

Listen, I am telling you with what I have seen with my own eyes over the past 13 years. Finally, I would like to address some of your comments:
1) You mentioned kebab shops etc in Hove - since the merger of the councils there was an almost immediate flurry of take away shops, bars, clubs popping up. I remember at the time there were many complaints, and the reason why so many of these establishments cropped up was because the new 'Brighton & Hove' council freely issued licenses. The old Hove Borough Council were very prudent to issue licenses because they knew that the residents of Hove didn't want this kind of 'scene' in Hove (and we still don't).
2) I don't feel that I have a snobbish attitude because I chose to live in Hove over Brighton after a thorough assessment and recce of each town. I found Hove much nicer, quieter, and somewhat removed from the 'hustle and bustle' and Brighton. I found Brighton quite 'boozy', and more chavvy than Hove. It is a honest assessment based on experiences and what I saw. Being a snob is when you make judgements based on prejudices. I don't have any prejudice towards Brighton because I have experience the town first hand.
3) I feel that both towns do not benefit from having a joint council. I think Brighton would flourish, as would Hove, if they each had their own councils again. There are many areas in the UK that are similar (Bournemouth & Poole is the closest example in terms of size and layout of the two towns) that have their own councils.
4) Geographically, Brighton & Hove is not a city. The 'letters patent' only applies city status to the local authority, as oppose to Borough or District status. It purely gives the said authority the right to call itself a city council. It does not bestow any priveledges or change the geographical status of the town(s). If Brighton & Hove council were to be dissolved and replaced with another council, the new council would have to reapply for city status for it's new district. Therefore, the term 'city' when referring to 'Brighton & Hove' only refers to the council area/
5) Can you blame the people of Hove for their desires for distinction and seperation from Brighton when their town is constantly referred to as 'here in Brighton', 'this part of Brighton' etc etc I even met with a council official the other week, who kept on referring to Hove as 'Brighton' in his conversation! Why do you think they call the council 'Brighton AND Hove' if it was just to be considered as 'Brighton'!!!

Anyway, all I would ask of you, is that you and your fellow Brightonians respect the fact that Hove is a seperate town (even with the 'Brighton & Hove' district) and deserves the right to be considered as a seperate town, just as Brighton should also. Please also respect the fact that Hove and Brighton ARE different and that we are not just a 'suburb' of Brighton.

We choose to live in Hove over Brighton because we like it here and we should not feel guilty about it. It seems that Brightonians have a real problem understanding why you could possibly not want to live in Brighton.

Hove is Hove, Brighton is Brighton, no further argument.

Yeah, and North Hove is infinitely better than South Hove... well the top end of North Hove anyway... certain streets excepted, of course.

Wow, this Hovealone fellow comes across as a right ****! And I live of Dyke Road, but which side? eh? eh?

Spreadly wrote:
Wow, this Hovealone fellow comes across as a right ****! And I live of Dyke Road, but which side? eh? eh?

Oooo notice how all the Brightonians are getting defensive when anyone suggests to break up their precious 'city' by Hove going alone!
Notice how no one from Hove is being defensive and vocal? Mmmm, there's a pattern forming.

It kind of proves my point really that 'Brighton & Hove' is for Brighton, not the two towns together.

Anyone from Hove wish to comment or shall we suggest another forum?

Come on Hovites - defend your town against the Brighton occupation!

HoveAlone wrote:

Brightonscouse2 wrote:
I know the argument isn't which town is better, you have contradicted yourself . You say you want seperation from Brighton based on the towns drug problems and the type of people that inhabit it. It's you that brought up which town is better. As it stands both towns are joined together (by local authority and geograpically) and there's not alot you can do about it so i would suggest you lay off branding the people in Brighton as "people 'off their faces', beggers, homeless people, and all kinds of weirdos (not to mention the usually spattering of chavs, scruffy students that look like they need a wash, vikki pollards, gymslip mums with velour tracksuits and hoop earings etc etc etc)." You generalise the people of Brighton as the above and claim the people of Hove are mostly middle class and in their thirties,yummy mummies or elderly folk to imply that Hove is the better town. But of course it's not about which town is better and of course your not a snob. Having lived in both Brighton and Hove over the last 26 years i know your evaluation of the people of both towns is wide of the mark and i also know that the drugs sitiuation isn't one exclusive to Brighton.

Listen, I am telling you with what I have seen with my own eyes over the past 13 years. Finally, I would like to address some of your comments:
1) You mentioned kebab shops etc in Hove - since the merger of the councils there was an almost immediate flurry of take away shops, bars, clubs popping up. I remember at the time there were many complaints, and the reason why so many of these establishments cropped up was because the new 'Brighton & Hove' council freely issued licenses. The old Hove Borough Council were very prudent to issue licenses because they knew that the residents of Hove didn't want this kind of 'scene' in Hove (and we still don't).
2) I don't feel that I have a snobbish attitude because I chose to live in Hove over Brighton after a thorough assessment and recce of each town. I found Hove much nicer, quieter, and somewhat removed from the 'hustle and bustle' and Brighton. I found Brighton quite 'boozy', and more chavvy than Hove. It is a honest assessment based on experiences and what I saw. Being a snob is when you make judgements based on prejudices. I don't have any prejudice towards Brighton because I have experience the town first hand.
3) I feel that both towns do not benefit from having a joint council. I think Brighton would flourish, as would Hove, if they each had their own councils again. There are many areas in the UK that are similar (Bournemouth & Poole is the closest example in terms of size and layout of the two towns) that have their own councils.
4) Geographically, Brighton & Hove is not a city. The 'letters patent' only applies city status to the local authority, as oppose to Borough or District status. It purely gives the said authority the right to call itself a city council. It does not bestow any priveledges or change the geographical status of the town(s). If Brighton & Hove council were to be dissolved and replaced with another council, the new council would have to reapply for city status for it's new district. Therefore, the term 'city' when referring to 'Brighton & Hove' only refers to the council area/
5) Can you blame the people of Hove for their desires for distinction and seperation from Brighton when their town is constantly referred to as 'here in Brighton', 'this part of Brighton' etc etc I even met with a council official the other week, who kept on referring to Hove as 'Brighton' in his conversation! Why do you think they call the council 'Brighton AND Hove' if it was just to be considered as 'Brighton'!!!

Anyway, all I would ask of you, is that you and your fellow Brightonians respect the fact that Hove is a seperate town (even with the 'Brighton & Hove' district) and deserves the right to be considered as a seperate town, just as Brighton should also. Please also respect the fact that Hove and Brighton ARE different and that we are not just a 'suburb' of Brighton.

We choose to live in Hove over Brighton because we like it here and we should not feel guilty about it. It seems that Brightonians have a real problem understanding why you could possibly not want to live in Brighton.

Hove is Hove, Brighton is Brighton, no further argument.

Hovealone,

1) re; kebab shops in Western Rd, there's been kebab shops there for before the two councils merged. You say you've only lived here 13 years, that would mean you've experienced 3 years of Hove council and 10 years of the two councils joined together. In the 26 years i have lived here trust me there have been kebab shops,pubs etc down that end of the road pretty much the entire time i've been here (that Hove council would have given licences to) so you blaming it on the joined council is a flawed argument. Even if this did happen when the council merged how does this make it entirly Brightons fault?
2) By your reasoning Hove would record little or no deaths due to drugs and "Brighton is dragging Hove down". Again what you say is circumspect and is based on your own opinion not fact. You also say "Being a snob is when you make judgements based on prejudices. I don't have any prejudice towards Brighton" but going on your recent posts you clearly do. I would say branding the people of Brighton as "people 'off their faces', beggers, homeless people, and all kinds of weirdos (not to mention the usually spattering of chavs, scruffy students that look like they need a wash, vikki pollards, gymslip mums with velour tracksuits and hoop earings etc etc etc) is a generalistic judgement based on a very blinkered opinion or just simply being a snob.
3) But on the other hand what's the point in having two sets of council officials doing the job that's being done now? Of course the conservatives are going to be in favour of it seeing as you can then have 2 conservative councillers, one for each town and more people on the payroll won't this lead to a rise in council tax?
4) It also applies to the geography of the city itself as boundaries at either end state welcome to Brighton & Hove as an entire city made up of two towns.
5) At the end of the day you're taking this far too personally but you keep claiming the people of Brighton are the ones bothered about it. Like i said in an earlier post this is an issue of your own making not the people of Brighton. I have no problem understanding why you wouldn't want to live in Brighton (i know Brighton's flaws aswell as Hove's), the problem i have is you've chosen not to live in Brighton (which is fair enough) but then choose to brand the people of Brighton in a certain light. You also continually blame Brighton entirly for the drugs problem with no evidence just spurious opinion.
Brighton also has it's leafy suburban parts much the same as Hove has it's rough council estates, you conveniently ignore both these points in your argument.

Hovealone,

"Notice how no one from Hove is being defensive and vocal? "

Except yourself ofcourse.

You read a headline stating Brighton and Hove is the drugs death capital of England and jump to the defence of Hove blaming the problem on Brighton.
It's like your the kid at school stealing sweets from the tuck shop who then blames it on the kid next to him when caught.

Brightonscouse2 wrote:
Hovealone, "Notice how no one from Hove is being defensive and vocal? " Except yourself ofcourse. You read a headline stating Brighton and Hove is the drugs death capital of England and jump to the defence of Hove blaming the problem on Brighton. It's like your the kid at school stealing sweets from the tuck shop who then blames it on the kid next to him when caught.

Ok, all fair points. I went to a dinner party last night in Brighton, and brought up the subject of 'Brighton & Hove' versus 'Brighton' and 'Hove', and all the Brightonians I was with said that they would prefer for Brighton to be seperate from Hove as the 'City of Brighton', as they felt that having a 'city' named after two towns was a bit of an oddity - they all considered Brighton to be Brighton, and Hove to be Hove and would much rather have a dedicated city council for Brighton only. No one considered themselves living in a city called 'Brighton & Hove'. So it seems that people from Brighton as well as Hove would prefer to be seperate entities. There were a couple of born and bred Brightonians present, and they both said that they have always considered Brighton to be a town anyway as it is not 'city-like' at all.

Anyway, rather than argue the toss about which in better, maybe a debate could be opened for the following:

1. Seperate the council to make the 'City of Brighton' and the 'Borough of Hove'.
or
2. Remove Hove from the union and latch it on to the neighbouring 'Adur District Council' area (which was the original and preferred plan before the merger).
or
3. Set up a 'Hove Town Council' that exists with the 'Brighton & Hove' unitary council, just like 'Rottingdean Parish Council' (this is far by the easiest and quickest option). Brighton would be more than welcome to set up a 'Brighton Town Council' also.

Food for thought I think!

Honestly what are the chances of the abvove 3 things happening? The residents of Brighton and Hove wouldn't have a choice in this it would be down to the people that are meant to represent us. They (or their predecessors) campaigned for city status why would they go back on it?
As far as i'm concerned what's done is done and i've never heard of a city being downgraded to a town.
Brighton & Hove as two towns being classed as a city isn't that much of an oddity when you consider most cities are made up of several towns joined together. Manchester,Birmingha
m and even London consist of this (ok Manchester and London do it under the umbrella of greater Manchester etc). As i have already stated numerous times my issue isn't which town is better it's the fact that you seem to think that there's this magical border at Palmiera Sq' where the horrors of boozy,drug infested Brighton end and the splendour of suburban Hove begin and any problems attributed to Hove must be Brightons' doing. Each town repectivly has a problem with drugs and each town joined together as a city have landed it with the unwanted title of 'drugs death capital of England'. Have you noticed that neither town held this title when the local authorities where a seperate entity. Your accusation is Brighton had this problem before the two towns merged and it's brought it with it and "dragged Hove down". This is not true.

HoveAlone wrote:

Spreadly wrote: Wow, this Hovealone fellow comes across as a right ****! And I live of Dyke Road, but which side? eh? eh?

Oooo notice how all the Brightonians are getting defensive when anyone suggests to break up their precious 'city' by Hove going alone! Notice how no one from Hove is being defensive and vocal? Mmmm, there's a pattern forming. It kind of proves my point really that 'Brighton & Hove' is for Brighton, not the two towns together. Anyone from Hove wish to comment or shall we suggest another forum? Come on Hovites - defend your town against the Brighton occupation!

Although I do concede that St George's St on a grey and windy Saturday Afternoon has more of a capacity to depress me than Golden Brown by the Stranglers, Hove and Brighton will never be split up on the demands of a few apartheidists trying to pass the buck of 'Drug Death capital'

Brighton is a great place to be for young people / students / hedonists / the gay community. But it also contains Moulsecoomb and Whitehawk.

Hove is a great place to be for Daily Mail readers, young couples, failed musicians, suburbanite conservatives, (and now supporters of the Green Party) so let's just leave it that.

most smack heads died in brighton due to super strong herion maybe we should not lock up the dealers help them a bit and maybe we can get them all to overdose and stop draining the tax payers money only good smack head is a dead smack head

indiebright wrote:
@ Hove Alone. I think you may have a fixation. You have hijacked a story about death from drug use to waffle on about something that frankly most people couldn't give two hoots about. Really, there are so many subjects actually worth the passion you obviously have, shame it's such a worthless cause. Don't sweat the small stuff.

Maybe we should build our very own Berlin Wall between Brighton & Hove with machine gun nests,search lights,dogs and border guards etc lol,

Hovealone,
You are clearly an uneducated chav and out of place in Hove. I know this because:
1. You are unable to spell separate or separation correctly, despite repeated prompts by your spellchecker.
2. You have been on a bus. Calling you a chav for having been on a bus is not snobbish because I have experience of bus and non-bus scenarios.
3. I have met many people in both Brighton and Hove, especially during my recce in 1996. Your parents can vouch for the fact that you are an uneducated bus-using chav, and I can confirm that they are also.

And it's "privileged", rather than "priveledged". Example : "I'm a petty snob because I'm insecure about my poor education but choose to pick on the poorest of society rather those who I consider to be more privileged than myself. This is because I fear them and have a chip on my shoulder."