Drugs..?

[curiousgeorge]

I've only skimmed this, so if the meaning/message about this has already been stated then I'm sorry. But what exactly is the message? What did the tramps totally understand?

Is it pointing the easy availability of said items? Or just a in-yer-face shock tactic? I would not be best pleased if my child was to stumble upon this and ask questions, I dunno i just don't 'get' this,please explain as i would like to understand it

BTW Insite is bang on about "going equipped to commit fraud"

[bennyhedgehog]

Really sorry to be a buzz-kill but, seriously, I think, if you havent checked it out already, that you should know what you are getting yourself into before you place these...

Just a cursory look down www.cps.gov.uk/legal/section10/chapter_a.html#15 shows that what you are proposing to do is every bit as prosecutable as filling it with the real mccoy. Read to the end of the section, seems a precedent on this, or similar, has already been set - "R v Dhillon 2000 CLR 760"

I know its not particularly "rock n roll" but neither is a fine, community service or being the brunt of some firebrand judge's ire - of course, the consequences of a drugs offense on your "record", no matter how minor, should also be thought about - it can cause difficulty in all manner of spheres - education, travel, employment. Personally, I wouldnt view this in the same terms as graffiti or tagging - its a whole 'nother basket of snakes.

Don't get me wrong, I wish we lived in a society where this would and could be a statement (of sorts), however we actually live in a society where the next large town along the coast "the locals" nearly lynched a paediatrician. Just don't be un-informed... it's you that would suffer the consequences, not the forum members.

[VisualImprints]

I think this is a great piece, particularly here in Brighton. I wouldn't be surprised if you get into some trouble, because it is in the street and people like to shut their eyes and avoid most problems these days, and then have an over-reaction when they finally deal with it.

If you don't want to hear the bad news why not shoot the messenger?

[curiousgeorge]

Any news bump

[Daniel Silk]

[dmandpenfold]

Sept 24, 2008 15:07:25 GMT 1 bennyhedgehog said:

Really sorry to be a buzz-kill but, seriously, I think, if you havent checked it out already, that you should know what you are getting yourself into before you place these...

Just a cursory look down www.cps.gov.uk/legal/section10/chapter_a.html#15 shows that what you are proposing to do is every bit as prosecutable as filling it with the real mccoy. Read to the end of the section, seems a precedent on this, or similar, has already been set - "R v Dhillon 2000 CLR 760"

I think you're wrong on this bennyhedgehog further down your reference page it also states

"The offences of being concerned will cover conduct which is preparatory to the actual supply, although the prosecution must prove that a supply, or an offer to supply, has been made. You must examine the actual conduct of the defendant carefully to decide which offence is the most appropriate"

Imbue's intent is not one of supply or offering to supply. The fact he is using it as an artistic statement and has discussed it here demostrates his intent, at the very worst he might get a ticking off the federalis for some sort of potential public order offence, although that would be difficult to pin too. The police might be a lot of things but they aint that stupid and if they were it wouldn't get further than the magistrates court.

I think the meaning/message behind this is fairly clear and comes from a few angles, drugs are all pervasive in today's society, they are so cheap and readily available they may as well be sweets from a vending machine, in addition the use of sweets and a vending machine also points out the modern evil that said drugs are peddled to children to create future addicts and maintain demand.

Imbue should be applauded for trying to focus attention on an issue that is a major problem in our society, it should cause raised eyebrows, shock even, generate debate and discussion, that is the idea otherwise its message would be impotent. As mentioned above placement is crucial to generate the most impact, outside an arcade on a pier etc.

I think the message and irony would not be lost on most people who take more than a nanosecond to think about it, as long as he remembers to use only sherbert and pepper and glues up the coin slots no one can complain about losing their money. If they really thought they were buying drugs from a vending machine on the street they'd deserve to lose their money anyway.

Nice work imbue, has anything come of it yet?

[bennyhedgehog]

Sept 27, 2008 2:24:20 GMT 1 dmandpenfold said:

Sept 24, 2008 15:07:25 GMT 1 bennyhedgehog said:

Really sorry to be a buzz-kill but, seriously, I think, if you havent checked it out already, that you should know what you are getting yourself into before you place these...

Just a cursory look down www.cps.gov.uk/legal/section10/chapter_a.html#15 shows that what you are proposing to do is every bit as prosecutable as filling it with the real mccoy. Read to the end of the section, seems a precedent on this, or similar, has already been set - "R v Dhillon 2000 CLR 760"

I think you're wrong on this bennyhedgehog further down your reference page it also states

"The offences of being concerned will cover conduct which is preparatory to the actual supply, although the prosecution must prove that a supply, or an offer to supply, has been made. You must examine the actual conduct of the defendant carefully to decide which offence is the most appropriate"

Imbue's intent is not one of supply or offering to supply. The fact he is using it as an artistic statement and has discussed it here demostrates his intent, at the very worst he might get a ticking off the federalis for some sort of potential public order offence, although that would be difficult to pin too. The police might be a lot of things but they aint that stupid and if they were it wouldn't get further than the magistrates court.

I think the meaning/message behind this is fairly clear and comes from a few angles, drugs are all pervasive in today's society, they are so cheap and readily available they may as well be sweets from a vending machine, in addition the use of sweets and a vending machine also points out the modern evil that said drugs are peddled to children to create future addicts and maintain demand.

Imbue should be applauded for trying to focus attention on an issue that is a major problem in our society, it should cause raised eyebrows, shock even, generate debate and discussion, that is the idea otherwise its message would be impotent. As mentioned above placement is crucial to generate the most impact, outside an arcade on a pier etc.

I think the message and irony would not be lost on most people who take more than a nanosecond to think about it, as long as he remembers to use only sherbert and pepper and glues up the coin slots no one can complain about losing their money. If they really thought they were buying drugs from a vending machine on the street they'd deserve to lose their money anyway.

Nice work imbue, has anything come of it yet?

DM&P... I totally appreciate where you come from and agree that intent, from a legal position, is (and should be) at the basis of this and, to us here, that Imbue's intent is based purely in art and politics and therefore should be covered by "freedom of expression"... however, as also has been demonstrated here: the actual intent, artistic, political or otherwise is not that clear, and as far as I know we also do not have a "freedom of expression" clause in "our constitution".

This is the part of the CPS document that I was referring to...
"In addition to the supply of a controlled drug, Section 4(3) of the Act creates offences of offering to supply, being concerned in the supply and being concerned in the making of an offer to supply. An offence of offering to supply can be prosecuted simply by proving the existence of an offer. The prosecution does not have to prove either that the defendant intended to produce the drugs or that the drugs were in his/her possession." Much like attempting to shoot someone with a table leg... this is why intent is the be all and end all... it is arguable, intent is always arguable and with the wrong guy on the wrong day - who knows?
Also, the precedent (which I have tried to find more out about but have not been successful... I could sign up to some legal group at a cost, but anyway...) "(R v Dhillon 2000 CLR 760) The fact that the drug is different/not controlled/bogus is irrelevant as is the fact that there is/was no intention to supply." - this for me, shows that in the past something fairly similar, actual intent aside, has occurred and been successfully prosecuted... whereby it was clearly evident and accepted that no actual drug was involved and it was also accepted that no actual intention to supply, even though it was not an actual drug, was evident either. BUT even so the prosecution was, clearly from the angle of the text, successful. This document, I believe is used by the CPS in understanding whether they should bring forward a prosecution... this is not the first line involved and involves a level of judgement and reasonability not available in earlier stages.

Like I said from the get go... I like the pieces and do applaud him, but the potentials that do exist, imho, far outweigh any real message that could be conveyed (conveighed? sp??) - essentially if you like, preaching to the converted. And furthermore, to potentially limit one's own future travel, education or employment, which I feel would be the worst of any punishment, but also potential fines or community service (or worse, dear god, I really would hope not!!) just don't make it worthwhile... second guessing jobsworths is a very tricky thing to do - we've all met them, god only knows how they tick, but they do and too often they find their way into authority.

Even if my post, only, acts as a position to allow Imbue to climb down or go into his venture better armed with the law then good... I'd love to know how it went if, as and when they are placed and I'd hate to think anyone would take away any message in a negative manner, but really, don't imbue (sorry!) the authorities with a sensitivity that at times they clearly do not demonstrate, I've not witnessed it too often - all it takes is the wrong guy on the wrong day.

You're totally not wrong about the message not being lost on MOST people, its the others that usually cause the trouble, though, aint it!? It certainly raises discussion, I dunno... maybe I'm just too cynical? Heck, maybe this is a reason why I'm not an artist? Maybe its my age? Maybe I'm just not rock n roll enough any more or ever was? Maybe I have more to lose now than I did in my youth? Maybe I just don't have the courage of my convictions? Maybe I'm just chicken-s**t? But personally, and as with most people I have had friends ruined and worse by drug use, I still don't think any message from these would be worth the potential personal penalty - not as a public guerilla installation anyway.

[dmandpenfold]

good points sir and well argued, however i put it to you......blah blah

You are right to point out the potential dangers, however i am convinced the law would protect in this case, judgements like the one you mentioned (although i must admit like you to having not read it) are meant to clear up technical escapes and loopholes that clever lawyers use to get the otherwise obviously guilty off and also to set precedent for instances where the spirit of the law clearly applies. That's why case law is such a magical thing, we dont need to legislate for evey eventuality.

To clarify i'm no lawyer either, although i did 'A' Level law and failed comprehensively if that counts Pez is the expert on these sort of things though, maybe he'll drop a note on it.

[bennyhedgehog]

Sept 27, 2008 4:12:29 GMT 1 dmandpenfold said:

good points sir and well argued, however i put it to you......blah blah

You are right to point out the potential dangers, however i am convinced the law would protect in this case, judgements like the one you mentioned (although i must admit like you to having not read it) are meant to clear up technical escapes and loopholes that clever lawyers use to get the otherwise obviously guilty off and also to set precedent for instances where the spirit of the law clearly applies. That's why case law is such a magical thing, we dont need to legislate for evey eventuality.

To clarify i'm no lawyer either, although i did 'A' Level law and failed comprehensively if that counts Pez is the expert on these sort of things though, maybe he'll drop a note on it.

I'd really just hate to think something bad would happen, especially when initially we were all, like, yeah - cool... do it! do it!

Felt a bit of balance, for Imbue's sake, was called for - graffiti's one thing - you generally know what law(s) you're breaking, getting filled in by some irate scum-reader (or even worse, the Mail or Express - we are talking Brighton, and think of the humilation) or the authoritahs is a totally different thing... especially on such an inflammatory area.

[cutty]

Sept 23, 2008 7:04:34 GMT 1 stickee said:

Sept 23, 2008 6:22:01 GMT 1 @bostonlongstroke said:

Sounds like he chose his own fate. This may sound insensitive and opinionated, which puts it right on par with every 1 of your posts, alsbarbed-ballz!

thats not even funny..........no matter how you look at it, so you think alsab is a d!ck ? thats your opinion.

But using someones death as a way of trying to get a cheap rise from someone is just not fair game from where I am from

Well said.....

[jmcy9999]

Whether this piece is good or bad, is irrelevant, it has made many people stop, think (use the term loosely) and comment, therefore as a piece of art is had obviously achieved it's objective.

Or to put it more succinctly....liking it is subjective, but as a piece of art it achieves it's objective.

[sonnysides]

Sept 22, 2008 22:00:51 GMT 1 @alsbabar said:

Sept 22, 2008 21:58:23 GMT 1 nacional said:

Alsbabar...keep your crap comments to yourself and stop trying to spoil peoples enjoyment...

meow

i will keep my crap comments to myself if artist keep their crap art to themselves!!!!

Don't be such a kunt...

Did a photo shoot and a bit of filming today. Went well and no arrests were made Provoked a strong reaction and more people than I thought noticed the machine!



My photographer is sending over some photo's later I will put them up when I get them.

imbue

[discoduster]

I'm no lawyer but surely if you stuck a tiny disclaimer sticker somewhere on it you couldn't be done for f#$% all.