Switch off street lighting, reduces crime

Seems that switching off street lighting can help reduce crime, should Rochdale follow these examples?

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/localgovernment/2012/10/scare-mongering-over-street-lighting-reduction-not-backed-by-evidence.html

Detective Constable Russ Clarke said:"women walking alone should avoid poorly lit areas"

http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/74744/woman-sexually-assaulted-in-a-subway

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-20136959

Kind of contradicts the official report.

Regarding the opening post. not surprising that website puts forward the arguments that it did, hardly neutral.

UP THE DALE wrote:Regarding the opening post. not surprising that website puts forward the arguments that it did, hardly neutral.

No, but facts are facts.

Lets not turn it into a political point scoring debate please.

FACTS? Just because it's on a website does not make it factual. And it had already become "political point scoring debate" when you quoted a political party's website. Nice to see the site advertising that well known tax exile "Lord" Ashcroft. We are all in it together you know.

I think the ROL news item says it all really. It's a matter of OPINIONS not facts. I don't believe there's going to be a massive increase in accidents or attacks etc, but any increase because of less well lit streets etc is something to be wary off.

Lets get this right. The Telegraph is hardly the most anti government paper going.

Well since our street lights were updated over 8 weeks ago they are still on 24/7 so I guess we are safe day & night beggar the waste of electricity

On a more serious note I have a fear of the dark due to a bad experience in my much younger years which will always leave a frightening memory

I won't go out at night, simple as. I learned today that there has been a 2nd rape in my area (not long after the first one which was widely reported a couple of months ago). I'd heard a rumour that there had been another rape but thought people were just confusing it with the 1st, turns out it is true and they both happened within sight of my home. I feel extremely ill at ease on the streets at night and Police spiel about 'isolated incidents' do nothing to allay my fears i'm afraid.

Charly wrote:Now you mention the new street lights Jeanie, the ones on my street are still not wired up/switched on, how long have they been in situ now?

Ones on our street been in situ over 8 weeks now Charly and are on 24/7 can't believe yours not on yet maybe they have run out of money through ours on day & night

UP THE DALE wrote:FACTS? Just because it's on a website does not make it factual. And it had already become "political point scoring debate" when you quoted a political party's website. Nice to see the site advertising that well known tax exile "Lord" Ashcroft. We are all in it together you know.

I think the ROL news item says it all really. It's a matter of OPINIONS not facts. I don't believe there's going to be a massive increase in accidents or attacks etc, but any increase because of less well lit streets etc is something to be wary off.

You appear to be prejudiced by the website rather than the content UTD. No surprise I guess. Some interesting stats in the article but I guess the fact that it's Tory immediately brings the red filters down over your eyes?

Poppyanna555 wrote:I won't go out at night, simple as. I learned today that there has been a 2nd rape in my area (not long after the first one which was widely reported a couple of months ago). I'd heard a rumour that there had been another rape but thought people were just confusing it with the 1st, turns out it is true and they both happened within sight of my home. I feel extremely ill at ease on the streets at night and Police spiel about 'isolated incidents' do nothing to allay my fears i'm afraid.

I wish there was something helpful to say, but in my experience, the people who should be able to do something about that sort of situation, local councillors etc are as much use as a chocolate fireguard. If people who wanted to work hard for the neighborhood they live in rather than the usual clapped out political animals became local councillors, maybe things could improve, eventually.

Dalelad wrote:

UP THE DALE wrote:FACTS? Just because it's on a website does not make it factual. And it had already become "political point scoring debate" when you quoted a political party's website. Nice to see the site advertising that well known tax exile "Lord" Ashcroft. We are all in it together you know.

I think the ROL news item says it all really. It's a matter of OPINIONS not facts. I don't believe there's going to be a massive increase in accidents or attacks etc, but any increase because of less well lit streets etc is something to be wary off.

You appear to be prejudiced by the website rather than the content UTD. No surprise I guess. Some interesting stats in the article but I guess the fact that it's Tory immediately brings the red filters down over your eyes?

That's your OPINION of how I approach the piece and or website. I merely pointed out that the website is bound to support the government's position and find supporting beliefs to back that view up. I don't agree with the views put forward by the agency in the article , nor the conclusions of the website. I would rather believe the reality of what actually happens when there is increased attacks due to such policies, such is put forward in the ROL article. Also the AA and RAC put forward that they believe cut backs in lighting will or can lead to more accidents.

I rarely accept or believe most political party websites, especially of ones that I am fundamentally opposed to. You don't honestly think I should believe the propaganda of a website that belongs to a party of the government I am ideologically opposed to. At least I admit my opposition and support for political beliefs, unlike yourself.

What would be nice would be for you to have addressed the statements made in the article, such as whether burglars don't like darkness because you can see their torches more, or whether another 98 miles fewer lighting on motorways out of 3000 will cause more accidents. Instead you bring up Lord Ashcroft?
Thanks for admitting your mind is pretty much closed by the way. What on earth your last sentence means escapes me but thanks. I must learn to pick one side or the other and judge everything from my resulting prejudices.

Burglars DO like darkness, and those that operate at night time usually use torches. When there are power cuts there are rises in burglaries. They do NOT like light, especially things like night lights, sensor lights etc. Less lighting increases the chances of thugs, rapists etc being undetected-obvious really. I put the safety of people over the saving of a few quid.

98 miles will not make a lot of difference, but then again I would suppose it would depend on where those 98 miles are. Like I have said, the RAC and AA both say that less light means more chance of accidents.

No my mind is not closed, you just don't like my viewpoint, your problem not mine. What I meant is that at least I admit to by political stand point and beliefs. Some support this government, but don't admit to it, while trying to make people think they are neutral. If people don't support a particular political belief then fine, but there are plenty who are closet Tories, or Labour etc, or opponents of a particular party, but won't admit to it.

La,la,lalala,lalalala - Here we go again. When will you two numpties get your own forum for your political rantings. Keep it out of non-political discussions and have some respect for others on here. How many times do you need reminding it 'loses' members who get fed up with it.

And now back to the 'point' of this topic -. Having some street lights would be a bonus in the first place. Let alone whether they are lit or not.

Rubbish. I have been discussing the subject. FACT is, that cuts are being made to street lighting etc is political. It's you who is the numpty if you can't see that. And besides, who makes you a moderator of what can and cannot be discussed?

Depends where the 98 miles are really. Will it be sections of the M62 that are turned off next?

Atlas wrote:La,la,lalala,lalalala - Here we go again. When will you two numpties get your own forum for your political rantings. Keep it out of non-political discussions and have some respect for others on here. How many times do you need reminding it 'loses' members who get fed up with it.

And now back to the 'point' of this topic -. Having some street lights would be a bonus in the first place. Let alone whether they are lit or not.

If you are referring to me and UTD, Atlas, then you are wrong. I was merely asking him to stick to the topic and discuss the issues based on the info given not the website the info came from, as you are requesting here. I don't do political rantings. I often agree with UTD's viewpoint, just not the way he appears to judge everything from what he thinks political persuasion of the contributor to be.

And you are wrong as well Dale Lad because all through the post I HAVE been discussing the subject, and putting forward my OWN views, unlike you, as well as agreeing and saying so why with other views put forward, unlike you, and also disagreeing with other views and explaining why, unlike you. I have often agreed with political and other views of people who usually I am opposed to. I also explained why the website was not a neutral site. Rochdale on-line is neutral and therefore their report is far more appropriate to quote on the issue.

Like what Chill says, which I had said my self, where the lights are switched off can make the difference as to whether or not it might increase accidents. Like I have said the leading motor organisations, who are neutral, state bad lighting increases the chances of accidents.

As far as street lighting, ask a burglar or mugger. They would love to see a continuation of street lighting reducing. The majority of people would not like to see a reduction in street lighting, do to feeling more unsafe.

I agree! Although not completely. But in the main.

UP THE DALE wrote:
As far as street lighting, ask a burglar or mugger. They would love to see a continuation of street lighting reducing. The majority of people would not like to see a reduction in street lighting, do to feeling more unsafe.

I agree !

Now strangely enough I thought you and Dalelad were /was/is the same person

I see your street lights are still on 24/7 Jeanie.

What a waste!

They have still to connect ours, we have got holes, new poles and barriers which the kids love to move, the barriers not holes!