Page 2 of 2

Re: Scenic on 28 days later

PostPosted: 14 Nov 2013, 02:28
by woody
vince69619 wrote:I thought tresspassing was illegal.


civil matter

Re: Scenic on 28 days later

PostPosted: 14 Nov 2013, 15:50
by smilerbaker
given the state of the ride, and the fact it's not been touched for so long the guy was bordering on mental to climb it. personally I don't see a problem with what 28dayslater do, any publicity is now good publicity, it kinda shows what a hard slog its going to be to save the scenic :(

Re: Scenic on 28 days later

PostPosted: 15 Nov 2013, 00:42
by sparky230
having seen first hand the damage urbexers can cause trying to gain access to sites, You'd have a better understanding of the Mentality of some of them
By all means document and Photograph buildings, Structures, but get Permission
At my friends ww2 bunker, I have seen concrete caping blocks broken, locks prised open, Graffity, all in the name of urbex

Re: Scenic on 28 days later

PostPosted: 15 Nov 2013, 02:48
by davidjohn
I agree with you Sparky. The Grade 11* listed art deco theatre (State Grays) was broken into by 28 days later, including a locked projection room. Then advertising on flickr that they gained entry to a secure building where force was applied.

Re: Scenic on 28 days later

PostPosted: 15 Nov 2013, 09:44
by blue
You read on a lot of their posts (almost bragging) that they managed to avoid the security patrols etc. Why avoid them if its harmless fun?
I agree i like to look at some of the photos that they do, but just get permission to do it, and dont cause damage.