Fuschia

SimonM Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > We are on Underhill and have had this survey too. > Turning part of Melford Road one-way, whilst > superficially attractive , is I feel an absolute > stinker of an idea unless the legal right turn > from the South Circular into Underhill Road is > also restored. If the scheme is implemented in its > present form then those of us who currently have > to turn right on to the Melford Road/Lordship Lane > junction to turn right to get to Underhill will in > future have to drive up Overhill and down > Beauvoir. This is going to make Beavoir a lot > busier and make for quite a long detour for anyone > wanting to get to Underhill. > > I never thought the ban on the right turn into > Underhill Road was necessary in the first place. > Buses are allowed to do it anyway so it cannot be > *that* unsafe. The direct consequence of this ban > was to make Melford the dangerous bottleneck it > now is. Good points

Siduhe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Fuschia Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Which bit of melford Rd is to become one-way, > and > > which direction? > > From Underhill to Lordship Lane. The really > narrow bit! A good idea IMHO, but will make > turning into that group of streets from northbound > London Road/Lordship Lane rather more complicated. > We have asked if they are planning to let you > turn right into Wood Vale. I have long though that bit should be one way... it gets snarled up with stupid drivers with no patience... but there does need to be a way of getting IN for eg turning into Woodvale, as you say.

Which bit of melford Rd is to become one-way, and which direction?

Being able to get free salad while you wait is a tip other places might follow! I don't much like their adult food but it's good for kids. Franky and Benny's is nicer chain IMO, but more expensive.

citizenED Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If a copper said that there were muggings in ED > "mainly due to it's proximity to other areas" that > is one odd statement. Isn't every area of London > in close proximity to other areas? I think that's code for "proximity to Peckham and Camberwell"

Please find space for an icecream freezer... we used to rely on the green for an icecream when playing in the park!

I rest my case. You seem to think it's a school playground.. your own school playground! The OP is a new poster, she asked a perfectly sensible question. Leave her alone, stop bullying her, and don't start on me either! Go and bitch amongst yourselves if you enjoy it so much.

For goodness sake, have people really got nothing better to do with their time? The OP was perfectly entitled to suggest setting up a group. Anyone can make links with and meet anyone else they like! Of course lesbian and gay parents want to make contact with similar. About time this forum expanded a bit from the cliquey "I spend all my time on the forum bitching self-satisfied smug ED-er" types that seem to hijack most posts!!

Maceys call my doctor and get the prescription faxed through if my doctors have messed up, and have also offered to deliver, if needed! The chemist up by the library is good, too.

TRy this: http://shop.btcv.org.uk/shop/level1/8/level

If there is an issue about all day commuter parking near the station, then a residents zone from 10-11am, say, would fix that. As for a broader zone, I feel it would kill off custom for the local shops. I used to live in a CPZ zone and there were lots of issues - having to pay, and pay for visitors, and not being able to have a visitor leave their car for more than 12h, and it being a real pain if you ever had a hire or courtesy car... also bringing wardens to the streets meant that extra penalties used to get imposed for being too close to corners, just outside of the marked bays etc. Not to mention that once the bays have been marked up, you have a substantial loss of actual parking spaces. I also had an estate agent at the end of my road, and far as I could see, they got loads and lods of business permits, so the road almost became a car park for them! Btw, my partner in Ulverscroft Rd did not get a parking survey.

Louisa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > when i've been > forced to park on the schools zigzag lines I get a > ticket. You're joking, I'm sure.

The same has happened to us, parcels gone missing or torn open and contents taken.

I think it's a matter of principle not to allow businesses to flout planning permission and it makes me laugh a bit to see people who have been on their high horse previously, drop their principles because they like going in there! I won't go in there and I wrote to the planning dept asking them not to let the matter drop. I really object to big business thinking it can just get its own way. Hats off to the councillors for standing up to Nero.

I went into the hospice shop, very pregnant, with several bags and they tried to say bring them back another day! I'm afraid I just dropped them and left!

I find the Mind shop pretty unhelpful - for eg they will only take a few books. The Hospice shop sometimes refuses stuff because they are too busy to take it..

Sue Wrote:> I think it's very worrying that people who don't > appear to be sufficiently numerate are writing > reports of this type, since most people reading > them will not notice that there is anything > wrong. It could just be that there were young people in other ethnic groups not counted in with the main 4 ones.

http://www.communitiesthatcare.org.uk/Safer%20London%20Youth%20Survey.pdf According to section 13 fig 3, 7847/11458 or 68% of respondents are included in that part of the survey. I think maybe the Kings report should have said 12% of white respondents said they had carried a knife, 12% of black caribbean, 6% of black african and 6% of asian. Which is a more even spread than saying "12% of those who carried a knife were x" (depending on the proprtion of x in the cohort)

Peckhamgatecrasher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This doesn't add to the debate, but really, what > kind of phrase is this: "economically inactive"? I > presume they mean unemployed, if so, why not say > so? Academics, lol. Can also mean on incapacity benefit, or income support I guess.

From the Kings Report: "Who does ?knife crime? affect most? Knife-related offences, as with most types of crime, appear to affect different groups of the population to greater and lesser degrees. From the research available, it seems that children and young people, those living in poor areas, and members of black and minority ethnic communities are more likely to be the victims of knife use. ...People living in poor neighbourhoods also stand a far greater chance of finding themselves at the wrong end of a knife. The unemployed have a BCS violence victimisation rate more than double the national average, and those living in ?hard pressed? ACORN areas are also over twice as likely to be victims of violence than those in wealthier areas. For 10 to 25 year olds, the characteristics of those at higher risk of being frequently victimised included being part of households that had difficulties managing on their income and living in areas experiencing disorder problems. A brief look at those reporting being a victim of mugging as part of the 2006?2007 BCS is illustrative of the issue. Men aged 16 to 24 are almost three times more likely to be mugged than any other age group. Whites are less than half as likely to be mugged as non-whites and the economically inactive are four times more likely to be mugged than the employed. For homicides by any method, ?both offenders and victims tend to come from lower socio-economic groups?. Despite the rise in the homicide rate that Britain has experienced over the last two and a half decades, the wealthiest 20 per cent of areas have actually witnessed the homicide rate fall. Meanwhile, the homicide rate in the poorest tenth of areas in Britain rose by 39 per cent in the eighties and nineties. Moreover, by far the most common way in which people are murdered in the poorest fifth of areas in Britain is through being cut with a knife or broken glass or bottle. About 60 per cent die that way, much more than by firearms, which are the method of homicide in only 11 per cent of cases. In the wealthiest areas, cutting with knife or glass accounts for just over 30 per cent of homicides, and firearms account for 29 per cent. Black and minority ethnic communities ?Afro-Caribbeans and Asians are more at risk of homicide than Whites.? Considering too that black and minority ethnic (BME) communities are disproportionately concentrated in deprived areas, the members of those communities are more likely to experience violent crime, and muggings in particular, which involve a high proportion of knife usage. ... More work needs to be done to determine whether particular BME groups or communities suffer more knife-related offences or are more likely to carry knives. Limited information is available. Following a recent Freedom of Information Act request concerning the ethnicity of those accused of knife-enabled robbery, knife-enabled violence and knifeenabled crime and the ethnicity of the victims of these crimes, the Home Office responded that ?this information is not held centrally?. The only data the Home Office was able to provide were figures on the ethnicity of homicide victims killed by ?sharp instruments?. Those figures for the decade to 2006 reveal that each year, on average, 12 per cent of homicide victims by sharp instrument have been black ? around five times over-represented against population estimates. Asians occupy a similar position, accounting for each year, on average, 7 per cent of victims. As for knife carrying, although the 2004 YJB Youth Survey found little difference in weapon carrying by mainstream school pupils based on ethnicity (38 per cent of white pupils, 41 per cent of black pupils and 33 per cent of Asian pupils reported having carried a weapon of some sort) there were some differences in knife carrying habits. Of those children in mainstream schools: ? White pupils are more likely to say that they carry a penknife than young people from black or minority ethnic groups (26 per cent compared with 20 per cent). ? On the other hand, young people who are black are more likely to admit to carrying a flick knife ? illegal and likely to be more dangerous ? than white or Asian young people (15 per cent compared with 9 per cent and 8 per cent respectively). The Safer London Youth Survey 2004 found that the rates for knife carrying in the capital are significantly higher for white British and black Caribbean young people than for black African and South Asian young people. Of the respondents who indicated they had carried a knife in the past 12 months, 12 per cent were white British, 12 per cent black Caribbean, 6 per cent black African and 6 per cent South Asian. I think what this reflects is that many young black men, in particular, are at higher risk of violent crime, due to living in deprived areas. This is born out by the high profile killings of teenagers over the last year. White british youths are just as likely to carry knives as young black people.

http://news.aol.co.uk/school-metal-detectors-proposed/article/20080119232009990001 "Airport-style metal detectors are to be installed at hundreds of schools in a new drive to curb the rise of youth knife crime, it has emerged. ... Details of the plan emerged as it was disclosed that the number of under-18s convicted or cautioned for crimes of violence has increased by more than a third in just three years. A newspaper reported that the total rose from 17,590 in 2003 to 24,102 in 2006 - the last year for which figures are available - an increase of 37%, according to Ministry of Justice figures."

Keef Wrote: I just said > that I don't think it's a new thing. I was at > school in the 90s, so not really that long ago, > and things were the same! The huge no of teenagers stabbed in the last couple of years IS a new thing. (Have a read of that Kings College report on knife crime)

lozzyloz Wrote:> teenagers always kick up, but the worrying trend > today is the increase in knife and gun crime > amongst teenagers whether or not it results in a > death. Indeed!

Keef Wrote: > The quotes you've used are interesting, and no > doubt true. However, all they really show is that > it's far more dangerous to be a kid than to be an > adult. Well yes, that is exactly the point I'm making! As I said at the start of the thread " life as a teenager is pretty perilous these days. People are naive if they don't realise that, and that it impacts on East Dulwich."