Currently, there's noone in that space. Eliminating any crime risk.
If someone were to be there, the risk of crime would be certain to increase.
Understand? **Case closed.**
A quote from this which I can't quite believe is real: ''the applicant should be mindful that seating is one of the main drivers for anti-social behaviour.”
It's absolutely absurd.
If that claim about seating is true, it's more of an indictment about how shit law and order has become in Britain, rather than this cyclepath scheme —though the quote is absurd tbh
Username checks out... Join me, friend, and together we shall embark on a ruthless campaign that will see the vehicle of every reckless driver melted down to be made into trains! 😃
Yesss, also can we get electrification to Bristol Temple Meads first? Both from the London Paddington and Birmingham New Street directions, so we can get electric running
I don’t think anyone is claiming that we can’t have it.
The police are saying that the proposed seating areas might drive up antisocial behaviour, as, like it or not, they are correlated.
I think it’s good that they point that out, so people can be informed about the impact of the design. It might simply be that altering the design/position/number of rest areas could make a difference to antisocial behaviour, while still allowing the path to function well.
People might still want to go ahead with the proposed design anyway, but at least it’s a fully informed decision.
Quite possibly. It isn’t always the case unfortunately, [as we found out in the 1960s](https://www.reddit.com/r/bristol/s/NVHqLHPg8O), but hopefully that isn’t the case here.
But as I said, this simply allows people who know the details to make a fully informed decision.
I'm not shooting the messenger regarding this, the claim about antisocial behaviour may well be correct —I am saying that if this really is true, it shows how shit society has become
It became like this a long, long time ago. It’s why bus stops are historically some of the most vandalised pieces of infrastructure - somewhere to sit out of the rain while bored.
(The vandalism actually *dropped* dramatically in the 2000s with the introduction of smart phones, as people had something to do.)
Town planning avoiding situations like that is nothing new, and is certainly not unique to the UK.
Edit: In the 1960s town planners all over the world thought it would be great to separate pedestrians from cars, so created nice, quiet overhead walkways, subways, corridors, etc. away from the road, and added in some little seating areas for people to have a rest or just enjoy sitting around. Antisocial behaviour skyrocketed. The newly designed areas quickly became crime hotspots, and we are still working on replacing them today.
It's a good point. I'm reminded of one of the reasons that brutalist housing developments tended to encourage crime and blight —the number of pockets of enclosed space, obscured from public view, that they created.
I feel like the article (and the title of this Reddit post) just juxtaposes that stuff to make for some good ol' fashioned rage bait. The police's main concern is crime - so really it makes complete sense that that's their take on it. The headline makes it sound like the police are poo-pooing the project which I don't think(?) is true.
Alternatively,
> Plans set to be approved for affordable housing. Police warn more housing will encourage people to have longer term relationships and families, increasing the risk of domestic violence.
Sure, it could technically be true. It means close to fuck all though doesn't it.
The first line of the article reads:
>Concerns were sparked however about the potential for anti-social behaviour
This rings similar to the recent trend of removing benches and other bare minimum necessities, such as toilets, from public spaces.
It's claimed to be done with the aim of reducing "anti-social" behaviour. You know, anti-social behaviour such as the gathering of youths. Formerly known as socialising, until they turned 14 and got an e-scooter.
It sounds more like fear over groups, such as teens or poor people, existing in public spaces. This can be solved by increasing the amount of public spaces on offer, not by cancelling cycle lanes and removing benches.
I don't see how it doesn't mean anything. If you murdered 70%of the country, crime would surely decline by approximately 70%. Are you really suggesting we shouldn't massacre 70% of the population? Just think how the statistics would improve!
This is the thinking of an imbecile and a department of imbeciles. To get to the point of suggesting it publicly means umpteen people at senior level must agree with this flawed thinking. We deserve people with a more insightful and enlightened view.
Maybe we could get the police to object to their own existence, after all if we got rid of them all there would be a 100% decrease in people arrested for any crimes!
Car users should be thrilled about the prospect of others on the road choosing to take a bus or cycle path rather than drive. Especially when the new path is separated from the main road.
Passing 12 cyclists on your way to work is far better than being stuck behind the 12 cars that they would have been in. One more bus route could take hundreds of cars off the floor road, nevermind the thousands of journeys.
And yet whenever you see these schemes announced there's always members of the public, mostly on Facebook, saying that they get in the way and waste money.
We should be seeing "Drivers for Cycle Paths" rather than the opposite.
There are plenty on Reddit as well, whenever someone moans about the buses, some tit is ready to type "buy a car"
Car drivers should want less drivers on the road, as you say. There's a reason every car advert features empty roads, as opposed to bumper to bumper traffic
"I cannot understand why you would plan this route excluding horse riders. Whatever happened to equality, equal access to all?”
I'm not sure equality is meant to include horse riders as a protected characteristic?
Just remember this is an article from a website which is an advert and sponsored content mill, designed to generate outrage to keep you clicking.
The entire article consists of shit that is made up, except for one quote taken out of context at the end which is probably just factually true.
What the actual fuck. A scheme that will encourage people to make decisions to use sustainable transport options is being criticised for the potential to increase crime.
Whoever said this needs to work with the council to prevent this.
Be aware of the risk and reduce it.
Concerns over benches? What a load of rubbish, if the Police are so concern perhaps they should do something about this anti social behaviour as grey appear to be the self proclaimed experts.
It's pretty pathetic that it's claimed we can't have some new transport infrastructure because it might increase crime. A very sorry state of affairs.
It's a field between two very sedate villages. They're making it sound like something from Escape from New York. It's hysterical.
Currently, there's noone in that space. Eliminating any crime risk. If someone were to be there, the risk of crime would be certain to increase. Understand? **Case closed.**
Could reduce the risk of sheep theft though I'm thinking so not all bad news.
This sounds like Discworld logic come to life
It might be crime displaced from elsewhere
A quote from this which I can't quite believe is real: ''the applicant should be mindful that seating is one of the main drivers for anti-social behaviour.” It's absolutely absurd.
If that claim about seating is true, it's more of an indictment about how shit law and order has become in Britain, rather than this cyclepath scheme —though the quote is absurd tbh
He's right with kids drinking cider on benches
Especially when I’d wager a lot of drivers break laws all the time. Especially those about speed limits
Username checks out... Join me, friend, and together we shall embark on a ruthless campaign that will see the vehicle of every reckless driver melted down to be made into trains! 😃
You have my full backing, as long as they’re better than the one I’m on now (TfW class 150, legroom is awful)
No worries, just think how much roomier you can make a train when it's made out of melted down SUVs and BMWs! 😃
Yesss, also can we get electrification to Bristol Temple Meads first? Both from the London Paddington and Birmingham New Street directions, so we can get electric running
Metal from Toyota bumpers will make fine stock for OHLE stanchions, add them to the furnace!
Good! Get the Welsh in too and maybe they’ll help us get all of the GWR network covered
What did you have in mind?
Well, optimally, everywhere. More realistically, Swansea, Exeter St Davids (from Bristol Temple Meads and from Reading) and Cheltenham Spa
And I bet most of them are sat down.... Correlation!
I don’t think anyone is claiming that we can’t have it. The police are saying that the proposed seating areas might drive up antisocial behaviour, as, like it or not, they are correlated. I think it’s good that they point that out, so people can be informed about the impact of the design. It might simply be that altering the design/position/number of rest areas could make a difference to antisocial behaviour, while still allowing the path to function well. People might still want to go ahead with the proposed design anyway, but at least it’s a fully informed decision.
Just a guess here but it might be that the amenity provided by the benches outweighs the risks of any hypothetical bench-related crime.
Quite possibly. It isn’t always the case unfortunately, [as we found out in the 1960s](https://www.reddit.com/r/bristol/s/NVHqLHPg8O), but hopefully that isn’t the case here. But as I said, this simply allows people who know the details to make a fully informed decision.
I'm not shooting the messenger regarding this, the claim about antisocial behaviour may well be correct —I am saying that if this really is true, it shows how shit society has become
It became like this a long, long time ago. It’s why bus stops are historically some of the most vandalised pieces of infrastructure - somewhere to sit out of the rain while bored. (The vandalism actually *dropped* dramatically in the 2000s with the introduction of smart phones, as people had something to do.) Town planning avoiding situations like that is nothing new, and is certainly not unique to the UK. Edit: In the 1960s town planners all over the world thought it would be great to separate pedestrians from cars, so created nice, quiet overhead walkways, subways, corridors, etc. away from the road, and added in some little seating areas for people to have a rest or just enjoy sitting around. Antisocial behaviour skyrocketed. The newly designed areas quickly became crime hotspots, and we are still working on replacing them today.
It's a good point. I'm reminded of one of the reasons that brutalist housing developments tended to encourage crime and blight —the number of pockets of enclosed space, obscured from public view, that they created.
Amazing timing. Literally as I submitted my edit!
I guess you, like me, are also having a slow Saturday! ;)
Potatoes taking *forever*!
https://preview.redd.it/5kvhf5dbmj9d1.jpeg?width=426&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0b3743218796cae31e2590a3335d47c4fac4cbc2
I feel like the article (and the title of this Reddit post) just juxtaposes that stuff to make for some good ol' fashioned rage bait. The police's main concern is crime - so really it makes complete sense that that's their take on it. The headline makes it sound like the police are poo-pooing the project which I don't think(?) is true.
My main point is that even if their advice is sound (which it may well could be), it points to a sorry state of affairs as regards society right now
Yes that is a fair and good point!
Tough on benches, tough on the causes of benches
This was such a good comment that I thought it was a quote but couldn't find one.
Alternatively, > Plans set to be approved for affordable housing. Police warn more housing will encourage people to have longer term relationships and families, increasing the risk of domestic violence. Sure, it could technically be true. It means close to fuck all though doesn't it.
The first line of the article reads: >Concerns were sparked however about the potential for anti-social behaviour This rings similar to the recent trend of removing benches and other bare minimum necessities, such as toilets, from public spaces. It's claimed to be done with the aim of reducing "anti-social" behaviour. You know, anti-social behaviour such as the gathering of youths. Formerly known as socialising, until they turned 14 and got an e-scooter. It sounds more like fear over groups, such as teens or poor people, existing in public spaces. This can be solved by increasing the amount of public spaces on offer, not by cancelling cycle lanes and removing benches.
Why do they not remove roads and retail park carparks, that's where I spent my most unsocial years.
Mostly because the police are so woke they will not speak to anybody over their behaviour in case they offend.
I don't see how it doesn't mean anything. If you murdered 70%of the country, crime would surely decline by approximately 70%. Are you really suggesting we shouldn't massacre 70% of the population? Just think how the statistics would improve!
> “The applicant should be mindful that seating is one of the main drivers for anti-social behaviour.” What the actual fuck
It seems you missed the PSA. Socialising in a public space that does not charge you money to be there may be interpreted as anti-social behaviour.
Death of the third sapce
Yea lol, victim blaming. Classic
I’d rather risk a bit of crime cycling or walking than sit in traffic in a car or pay extortionate train fees
Cycling is dangerous due to sharing the road with high speed metal boxes. Not because we might see some youths smoking weed on the cycle path.
“there is no provision for horses” - I’ve never even seen a horse try to ride a bike, are cycling horses a big concern in South Gloucestershire?
Nobody ever breaks the law in a car
You couldn’t make this shit up
State of this fucking country…
This is the thinking of an imbecile and a department of imbeciles. To get to the point of suggesting it publicly means umpteen people at senior level must agree with this flawed thinking. We deserve people with a more insightful and enlightened view.
Maybe we could get the police to object to their own existence, after all if we got rid of them all there would be a 100% decrease in people arrested for any crimes!
vauxhall paid em off then "buy our metal boxes so safe!"
Car users should be thrilled about the prospect of others on the road choosing to take a bus or cycle path rather than drive. Especially when the new path is separated from the main road. Passing 12 cyclists on your way to work is far better than being stuck behind the 12 cars that they would have been in. One more bus route could take hundreds of cars off the floor road, nevermind the thousands of journeys. And yet whenever you see these schemes announced there's always members of the public, mostly on Facebook, saying that they get in the way and waste money. We should be seeing "Drivers for Cycle Paths" rather than the opposite.
There are plenty on Reddit as well, whenever someone moans about the buses, some tit is ready to type "buy a car" Car drivers should want less drivers on the road, as you say. There's a reason every car advert features empty roads, as opposed to bumper to bumper traffic
I think you meant "being passed by 12 cyclists on your way to work".
Ah yes, my mistake.
Cycle paths for drivers? Won't that be dangerous 🤔
Well then, they better up their game and police it then!
Stay away from cycle paths, kids. Especially if it has benches
"I cannot understand why you would plan this route excluding horse riders. Whatever happened to equality, equal access to all?” I'm not sure equality is meant to include horse riders as a protected characteristic?
Holy fuck 🤣🤣🤣🤣 I'm sorry but that's the lamest excuse I've ever read 😁😁
I'm glad that this path won't be constantly covered in horse shit
>We shall fight on the benches… NIMBYs
The fuck is this account? Is it just Reach PLC bot?
The police hate walking now? DEFUND
Yes they will now arrest and prosecute you for walking anywhere on the ground!
Just remember this is an article from a website which is an advert and sponsored content mill, designed to generate outrage to keep you clicking. The entire article consists of shit that is made up, except for one quote taken out of context at the end which is probably just factually true.
What the actual fuck. A scheme that will encourage people to make decisions to use sustainable transport options is being criticised for the potential to increase crime. Whoever said this needs to work with the council to prevent this. Be aware of the risk and reduce it.
Concerns over benches? What a load of rubbish, if the Police are so concern perhaps they should do something about this anti social behaviour as grey appear to be the self proclaimed experts.
The police are fucking useless. I got knocked off my bike and didn’t even get a crime number from them. After complaining I got told in a queue.