Police vet live music, DJs for 'terror risk'

[charlyfarly]

A London rapper, "Giggs" has had his entire UK tour cancelled by promoters after consulting the Metropolitan Police over security.

 

Story

 

Seems to be a hard working chap who has patiently delivered his demos to all and sundry until it paid off.

Maybe they got cold feet because Giggs has done "time" for gun charges. :)

 

"I just want to thank the police for all this great promotion that they're giving me, all these cancellations and that is just making me more powerful."

[Guest lightnix]

Maybe they got cold feet because Giggs has done "time" for gun charges. :)

Or maybe because he (according to his Wikipedia entry) is still a member of an outfit with strong ties to a certain South London gang.

 

Call me an unreconstructed snob, but I don't think I'd want his fans coming to my part of town, thank you very much. I understand the potential for abuse of Form 696, but I think the Police have got it right this on this occasion, TBH.

[charlyfarly]

Having been on the receiving end of a "kick off" at a rap gig some years ago I tend to agree. Even if an artist eschews his past, others do not and take a gig as an opportunity to settle old scores. :)

[Chris Adam]

Do you have other knowledge of the acts or crowds attending that would need special considerations to be made to limit crime and disorder (e.g. problems at previous venues, the make up of the patrons, whether they are local or are expected to travel from long distances to the event, etc.)?

Yes ☐ No ☐

now who in they're right mind would tick yes? :wacko: (knowing that this was going to the police to vet the event)

 

 

Now call me daft, but as a production manager, it's always in MY best interest to be in communication with the local authority on a "high risk" event.

Personally I see this article to be little more than media hype and speculation surrounding the local authority trying to crack down on unorganised music promoters. If they scare the (lets call them amatuer promoters for want of a better term) promoters into filling in a "risk assesment, then they will have half a chance of finding out about the level of organisation surrounding many events about which they might have very little info about.

In the real world we have Venue Advances from the promoters, which gives the venue a heads up on what to expect so that they can liase specifically with police and licence authorities. This is effectively a "risk assesment" as well, and if an event was deemed to be an issue - it would be dealt with in advance.

 

I can see why some of you are up in arms about them using terrorism laws in the title, but once again - how much of that is just media hype?

[Jivemaster]

Also in the real world most venues will have tickets sold for tomorrow and next week which may not be possible if the venue has been trashed by riot or is still a taped off crime scene. MOST venues have a licence to protect for both drinks and events, without both you may be BUST.

[Grum]

Also in the real world most venues will have tickets sold for tomorrow and next week which may not be possible if the venue has been trashed by riot or is still a taped off crime scene. MOST venues have a licence to protect for both drinks and events, without both you may be BUST.

 

True, but surely that's for the venue to choose to take that risk rather than for the police to dictate.

 

I don't think anyone here is saying that gigs shouldn't be assessed for these risks or that a close working relationship with the police shouldn't exist. But why do they need to use anti terror legislation to do it?

 

A few years ago I worked in a venue that ran under 18's club nights. We constantly got complaints from the police that there was an increase of trouble in the town on these nights and any trouble in town (even in adult clubs at the other end of town) was often attributed to our venue. In this case the police could have used ANTI TERROR legislation to shut down the venue.