viv1969
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 29,452
- Name
- Bat-Frog
- Edit My Images
- No
Probably, but it's no excuse.
and the site receives a small commission
Minimum alcohol pricing
- Thread starter SFTPhotography
- Start date
- Status
Probably, but it's no excuse.
- Messages
- 20,964
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
OP
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Don't you think there is quite a large minority of people causing issues. When you go into a city at night, or take a late train its not one or two anti social people, but droves of drunken louts and beer swigging people making a lot of noise and a mess.
Plus, there are many cases of the minority of cases making laws for everyone.
OP
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It's not commonly available, I wouldn't know where to go to buy some, nor would I want to into the criminal world - would you?
- Messages
- 7,018
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- Yes
ianp5a
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 4,719
- Name
- Ian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
They may be very visible and noticeable but you want to affect people drinking at home or in quiet villages or those who've taken a taxi home that you don't even know about.
And you still are not even tackling the causes. So the problems won't go away.
And you still are not even tackling the causes. So the problems won't go away.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 20,964
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
OP
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
People drinking copious amounts at home, may drive the next day and be over the DUI. it damages their health.
If anyone opposes a rationed amount of drink in accordance to NHS guidelines, why is that - because they drink an unhealthy amount?
If anyone felt if the police enforced the current legistlation re drunk in public and supplying drink to those already drunk, as draconoan, why is that bad.
Why is minumum pricing a bad thing, it makes it less affordable, alcohol is bad for you, why shouldn't the government make it harder to procure?
OP
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
you could ask one of the many junkie scum that you encounter every day
I'd rather not, I might get knifed.
- Messages
- 20,964
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
or because they are sick of nanny state - I don't generally drink , but if i want to get absolutely plastered what business is it of the government's ? I wouldn't drive over the limit for the same reason that i wouldnt drive massvely over the speedlimit ... course people do both , and if they do they generally get caught
Could we have that again in english please ?
for about the fourth time making alcohol more expensive doesnt stop people buying it and drinking to excess, it just means they spend more on it (and not coincidentally pay more in tax, which is why the govt quite likes the idea) , the reason its a bad idea ids because it doesnt work , see the finnish example posted earlier
Bernie174
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,719
- Name
- Bernie
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Being drunk per sae didn't carry a power to arrest, It may not even be an offence still, not sure on that one.
Drunk & Dis & Drunk and incapable probably still exist, but its a waste of time arresting for it, they just clutter the cells, take up huge amounts of manpower and they tend to die, which means years of pointless investigation into the blindingly obvious, so the IPCC can justify their existence.
As for using the finish example of how high pricing apparently 'doesn't work', its like the Government telling us getting shot of licencing hours would lead to a cafe culture where everyone would drink sensibly.
One one flaw with that plan, it was b*****ks.
Comparing one culture to another never works. If you make alcohol in effect almost unaffordable, then the majority won't buy it.
The minority who will, or who will buy anti freeze in a vodka bottle, well, that's life, it will happen whatever you do, but it would reduce the disorder we currently have. Putting a lid on it is better than it boiling over!
Drunk & Dis & Drunk and incapable probably still exist, but its a waste of time arresting for it, they just clutter the cells, take up huge amounts of manpower and they tend to die, which means years of pointless investigation into the blindingly obvious, so the IPCC can justify their existence.
As for using the finish example of how high pricing apparently 'doesn't work', its like the Government telling us getting shot of licencing hours would lead to a cafe culture where everyone would drink sensibly.
One one flaw with that plan, it was b*****ks.
Comparing one culture to another never works. If you make alcohol in effect almost unaffordable, then the majority won't buy it.
The minority who will, or who will buy anti freeze in a vodka bottle, well, that's life, it will happen whatever you do, but it would reduce the disorder we currently have. Putting a lid on it is better than it boiling over!
Last edited:
OP
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Agree with Bernie. Make it dearer and reduce licencing hours. The significant minority have ruined it for the rest of yous. Thats what up here, where alochol is a big problem, the Scottish government is doing something about it.
OP
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
For about the fourth time, it will help reduce the numbers of heavy drinking, it will price people out of it. As cars are your favourite stick to beat me with, if fuel went up in price 3 fold, people would drive less, they would drive more economically as its much more expensive. You'd therefore get less cases of speeding motorists. It wouldn't stop it, but it would reduce the numbers.
What business is it, well, a lot. If you start breaking the law, damaging your health which I suppose you'd be ok for the NHS to pay for, assualting nurses, doctors, drunk people who are otherwise law abiding do these things. Plus it is bad for you. You should think about it.
If this law doesn't effect you, why have you posted on this thread quite so heavily.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 20,964
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
no it wouldnt - , if people are drinking heavily or a regular basis they are probably addicted or at least dependent - if you increase the cost of what people are addicted to it doesnt stop them from buying it, it just costs them more (vis for example junkies and crack heads - the price of heroin and crack hasnt put them off taking it) If they only do it ocasionally then the cost isnt going to matter anyway
As I said look at finland - very high prices for alcohol and yet highest percentage of alcoholics in europe and alcohol related conditions are the number one cause of death in finnish males - ahead of even heart disease
but all those things (apart from damaging your health) are already illegal - and thus can be dealt with under exisisting laws , more legislation isnt whats needed, what we need is to enforce the legislation properly and effectively punish law breakers (I suspect that the overleniency of the justice system is one of the few areas you and I agree on)
The law would effect me, I like to have a drink occasionally, but as someone who doesnt get raucously p***ed and regularly wind up in the cells or A&E why should my enjoyment of a modest ammount of alcohol be curtailed by the state because some other people (who are already breaking the law) don't practice reasonable self control
Last edited:
Bernie174
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,719
- Name
- Bernie
- Edit My Images
- Yes
http://epianalysis.wordpress.com/2012/02/28/alcohol/
Interesting article, which does not support the theories on Finland.
It does seem though that the costs and alcoholism rates are on the whole higher in countries where it's cheaper.
Again, this article doesn't support the theory that consumption is unaffected in Finland. Its actually are lower than the UK.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...t-alcohol-developed-world-figures-reveal.html
Interesting article, which does not support the theories on Finland.
It does seem though that the costs and alcoholism rates are on the whole higher in countries where it's cheaper.
Again, this article doesn't support the theory that consumption is unaffected in Finland. Its actually are lower than the UK.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...t-alcohol-developed-world-figures-reveal.html
Last edited:
- Messages
- 20,964
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
ahh yes the daily mail the indisputiable source of definitive information
personally i'd rather belive the WHO
http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/publications/global_alcohol_report/profiles/fin.pdf
http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/publications/global_alcohol_report/profiles/gbr.pdf?ua=1
which tells us amongst other things that 51.8 % of the adult (over 15) male population regularly drink heavily (69% of the drinking population)
wheras in the UK that figure is 35% and 40.8 for the drinking population
and that the ASDR for Finland (males) is 28.5 per thousand for cirhosis of the liver and 8.7 for alcohol related road deaths, as opposed to 16 and 5.9 in the UK
oddly the percentage of alcoholics and those with alcohol abuse related disorders is higher in the uk (though not by much) which is an interesting statistic , as it shows that we have a greater abuse of alcohol but fewer who arent addicted/dependent who routinely drink to excess , we also have fewer fatalities despite having more alcoholics (which may be because we have a lower overall consumption of both beer and spirits and "other" but a higher consumption of wine which may be isnt as damaging , it may also be because fewer brits drink and drive.
Also Findland has a pronouced problem with people drinking alcohol not meant for human consumption (meths, antifreeze, alcohol fuel etc) which may be driven by the high prices of consumable alcohol and explain the high cirhosis rate
Overall theres nothing here that suggest putting the price up alone will reduce the problems associated with alcohol
Interestingly sweeden who also have high pricing only have 8.7% heavy drinking, which is a weird comparrison to finland and suggests that the difference could be cultural rather than driven by price.
The netherlands who have both a permissive attitude and more low priced alcohol than we do only have a 16.1% heavy drinking pattern (slightly less than half ours)
For those with the time its an interesting report, its recomendations on effective alcohol polices are also interesting, in that it does suggest a minium unit price, but also says that it is essential that this doesnt stand alone , but be accompanied by the ring fencing of tax on alcohol for treatment of related conditions and funding other measures, and that it should be tied to awareness raising of responsible drinking, that kids be encouraged to drink in a family context so as to learn about responsible use. Lastly it notes that propper policing of alcohol related crimes needs to be funded (rom the ring fenced tax) , and that the price of alcohol shouldnt suddenly increase or be driven so high that addicts are driven to 'not for human consumption' alternatives.
Well worth a read for those with the time and the desire to understand more about this complex subject
personally i'd rather belive the WHO
http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/publications/global_alcohol_report/profiles/fin.pdf
http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/publications/global_alcohol_report/profiles/gbr.pdf?ua=1
which tells us amongst other things that 51.8 % of the adult (over 15) male population regularly drink heavily (69% of the drinking population)
wheras in the UK that figure is 35% and 40.8 for the drinking population
and that the ASDR for Finland (males) is 28.5 per thousand for cirhosis of the liver and 8.7 for alcohol related road deaths, as opposed to 16 and 5.9 in the UK
oddly the percentage of alcoholics and those with alcohol abuse related disorders is higher in the uk (though not by much) which is an interesting statistic , as it shows that we have a greater abuse of alcohol but fewer who arent addicted/dependent who routinely drink to excess , we also have fewer fatalities despite having more alcoholics (which may be because we have a lower overall consumption of both beer and spirits and "other" but a higher consumption of wine which may be isnt as damaging , it may also be because fewer brits drink and drive.
Also Findland has a pronouced problem with people drinking alcohol not meant for human consumption (meths, antifreeze, alcohol fuel etc) which may be driven by the high prices of consumable alcohol and explain the high cirhosis rate
Overall theres nothing here that suggest putting the price up alone will reduce the problems associated with alcohol
Interestingly sweeden who also have high pricing only have 8.7% heavy drinking, which is a weird comparrison to finland and suggests that the difference could be cultural rather than driven by price.
The netherlands who have both a permissive attitude and more low priced alcohol than we do only have a 16.1% heavy drinking pattern (slightly less than half ours)
For those with the time its an interesting report, its recomendations on effective alcohol polices are also interesting, in that it does suggest a minium unit price, but also says that it is essential that this doesnt stand alone , but be accompanied by the ring fencing of tax on alcohol for treatment of related conditions and funding other measures, and that it should be tied to awareness raising of responsible drinking, that kids be encouraged to drink in a family context so as to learn about responsible use. Lastly it notes that propper policing of alcohol related crimes needs to be funded (rom the ring fenced tax) , and that the price of alcohol shouldnt suddenly increase or be driven so high that addicts are driven to 'not for human consumption' alternatives.
Well worth a read for those with the time and the desire to understand more about this complex subject
OP
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Those that are damned are already damned but the new legislation might stop the next generation of people from drinking quite so heavily. How is that a bad thing?
- Messages
- 7,018
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Oh I think it is at times. Usually when its during anti social hours. i.e. when most people are trying to sleep.
Bernie174
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,719
- Name
- Bernie
- Edit My Images
- Yes
What it shows is that there is widespread disagreement.
My concern is that being selective and using Finland as an example of high pricing not solving the problem isn't really evidence. Using a range of Countries with high prices would be more accurate.
The issue might well be cultural, but in any case, I wouldn't class the majority of those who cause aggro when drunk as alcoholics, so drawing that as a comparison is flawed, and if we assume culture, the addiction is irrelevant.
I also thought it interesting to look at the cost of drinking, albeit those are estimated, approximate and in some cases a guess, but broadly it does show that it does cost a substantial amount.
But none of this actually answers the points raised, how does the UK reduce the anti social affects of drinking to excess? For causal drinkers it really is higher prices, but that wont stop the hard core. Then again, nothing will.
If the opportunities to cause mayhem on a Friday and Saturday night are reduced, then by definition the problem is reduced. Re introduction of licencing hours would address that. More caution the part of suppliers, ie clubs & bars would also help, but of course they want to sell, and being discretionary in who they sell too would reduce profits, so that's unlikely to float. In any case, you would have to define to bar staff what drunk means, and I doubt if anyone here would give a definitive definition.
Enforcing law as it stands? As I said, Drunk may well be still an offence but has no power of arrest, that doesn't help matters. Drunk & dis? You could use it, but it'll take a lot of police off the streets, and only remove a small part of the problem. It's not really much of a deterrent anyway, the CPS wouldn't proceed with it, and last time I watched one of their solicitors deal with a guilty plea of Drunk & Dis, it took him 30 minutes of waffle and he messed that up! (It used to take on average about 20 seconds for police to deal with a drunk at court!)
There is no simple answer here, the obvious ones would have an affect, they wouldn't stop it. Culture change was the idea behind all day drinking, it hasn't worked either. Education on the subject has been going since I were a lad, and doesn't work.
So, put a lid on it, sit on the lid and hope!
My concern is that being selective and using Finland as an example of high pricing not solving the problem isn't really evidence. Using a range of Countries with high prices would be more accurate.
The issue might well be cultural, but in any case, I wouldn't class the majority of those who cause aggro when drunk as alcoholics, so drawing that as a comparison is flawed, and if we assume culture, the addiction is irrelevant.
I also thought it interesting to look at the cost of drinking, albeit those are estimated, approximate and in some cases a guess, but broadly it does show that it does cost a substantial amount.
But none of this actually answers the points raised, how does the UK reduce the anti social affects of drinking to excess? For causal drinkers it really is higher prices, but that wont stop the hard core. Then again, nothing will.
If the opportunities to cause mayhem on a Friday and Saturday night are reduced, then by definition the problem is reduced. Re introduction of licencing hours would address that. More caution the part of suppliers, ie clubs & bars would also help, but of course they want to sell, and being discretionary in who they sell too would reduce profits, so that's unlikely to float. In any case, you would have to define to bar staff what drunk means, and I doubt if anyone here would give a definitive definition.
Enforcing law as it stands? As I said, Drunk may well be still an offence but has no power of arrest, that doesn't help matters. Drunk & dis? You could use it, but it'll take a lot of police off the streets, and only remove a small part of the problem. It's not really much of a deterrent anyway, the CPS wouldn't proceed with it, and last time I watched one of their solicitors deal with a guilty plea of Drunk & Dis, it took him 30 minutes of waffle and he messed that up! (It used to take on average about 20 seconds for police to deal with a drunk at court!)
There is no simple answer here, the obvious ones would have an affect, they wouldn't stop it. Culture change was the idea behind all day drinking, it hasn't worked either. Education on the subject has been going since I were a lad, and doesn't work.
So, put a lid on it, sit on the lid and hope!
OP
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
When it's to the detriment of others then it is.
cambsno
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 20,999
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Best put a stop to fireworks displays, kids parties, school playtime, football/rugby matches for that matter then, the list is endless
And add light aircraft, lawnmowers, kids playing outside...
Reminds me of summer time when a woman at the bowling green (who backs onto park) was complaining about kids making too much noise!
POAH
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 7,882
- Edit My Images
- No
not on he last train or a night bus it's not
OP
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
What if you finish late at work, or work a late shift. I'm sorry but when I've got people coming to tell me they have to drive in to do a late shift as their scared/put off/can't face the drunken rowdiness and noise on the late buses/trains we know there's a problem. Unless you want to dismiss hard working people having to work late as pussies as they cannot tolerate the bad and anti social behaviour of others.
I've frequently taken the 9pm train Edinburg to Glasgow on a Saturday. It's a nightmare. For a peaceful non drunken yob quiet journey you have to go 1st class to avoid it.
- Messages
- 20,964
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
At 9pm surely all the drunken yobs are just gearing up for there 9th pint of special brew, they've got the 11pm to 2am club , the 2am to 3pm curry house, the inevitable fight outside, and the subsequent trip to A&E or the local police station still to come.
I can believe that drunken rowdyness is an issue on the last night bus , or at a taxi rank in the early hours , but 9pm ??? - unless the scots have turned into a bunch of lightweights and beer faries lately I strongly doubt it
Course , if your colleages follow the model of believing that all poor people are scum and anyone in a hoody is a potential mugger then I can see why they might be afraid... but there are other solutions ... like getting a bloody grip
OP
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You'd be surprised. On that train a lot of the "day" drinkers who started in the morning are on it. A nasty fight nearly broke out.
It's not pleasant. A real problem these days
It's not pleasant. A real problem these days
Bernie174
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,719
- Name
- Bernie
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Oh if only! Quite apart from the fact them are that by pint 9, 90% of them are flat out, playtime starts around 8pm. It can go on until 3 or 4 in the morning in the streets, but much later in A&E and when dad gets home and slaps mum about for whatever reason comes to his tiny mind.
Sometimes you can set your watch by trouble, 11pm was Dun Cow, Old Kent Road, a fight bottles being used for example. 8pm, fridays was the yuppie stockbroker wannabes showing everyone they were Alpha males, and around 8.30pm the hen nights kicked off, which were the nastiest fights known to man.
Saturday afternoons, always a giggle when the wedding party kicks off, and of course the football specials, too much beer followed by man to man chat action about who's best Highbury United or South Norwood Town!
Followed by a quite time when the Final Scores are on TV, after which it was game on till early morning.
And that was before they removed licencing hours!
POAH
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 7,882
- Edit My Images
- No
why would you be scared because people are loud - loud doesn't mean aggressive. I used to regularly get late pubic transport home when I was a phd student and I never once felt scared or thought there was an issue. you could argue that early morning trains are worse as there people are actually rude, ignorant and unhappy. that makes for a worse journey than being on the late train/bus. I know which one I don't like getting. how do these people cope in bars and clubs if they are scared by loud drunk people having fun.
the mods should change your name to victor
OP
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
why would you be scared because people are loud - loud doesn't mean aggressive. I used to regularly get late pubic transport home when I was a phd student and I never once felt scared or thought there was an issue. you could argue that early morning trains are worse as there people are actually rude, ignorant and unhappy. that makes for a worse journey than being on the late train/bus. I know which one I don't like getting. how do these people cope in bars and clubs if they are scared by loud drunk people having fun.
the mods should change your name to victor
I don't want to speak to others on the train or bus. Just sit there quietly in safety and enjoy the journey.
Noisy, agressive drunken people are not pleasant, the foul language they speak, the things they say and do is not pleasant and IMHO the transport companies should refuse them carriage.
- Messages
- 7,018
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- Yes
PaulF
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,863
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Steve, I'd agree that noisy aggressive drunks are not pleasant but I don't agree that all drunken people are aggressive in fact I would take the opposite view that the majority of drunken people are far from aggressive, they maybe noisy at times but certainly non threatening and quite often entertaining, or asleep!
Don't they have quite zones on trains in Scotland (Edinburgh - Glasgow), just go in one of those if you want peace and quiet.
The late bus may be harder to get some quiet on but hey ho, that's life in a big city for you and not just down to drunks, try taking a bus ride when the kids have just come out of school if you want noise
How many times have you, or anyone else here, been in fear for your physical safety from some one who is drunk? Genuine question by the way, personally I have never felt physically threatened, sometimes I have had people want to have a chat but they soon move on.
Don't they have quite zones on trains in Scotland (Edinburgh - Glasgow), just go in one of those if you want peace and quiet.
The late bus may be harder to get some quiet on but hey ho, that's life in a big city for you and not just down to drunks, try taking a bus ride when the kids have just come out of school if you want noise
How many times have you, or anyone else here, been in fear for your physical safety from some one who is drunk? Genuine question by the way, personally I have never felt physically threatened, sometimes I have had people want to have a chat but they soon move on.
- Messages
- 7,018
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I dont mind quiet peaceful drunks at all. Only the PITA ones.
OP
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Steve, I'd agree that noisy aggressive drunks are not pleasant but I don't agree that all drunken people are aggressive in fact I would take the opposite view that the majority of drunken people are far from aggressive, they maybe noisy at times but certainly non threatening and quite often entertaining, or asleep!
Don't they have quite zones on trains in Scotland (Edinburgh - Glasgow), just go in one of those if you want peace and quiet.
The late bus may be harder to get some quiet on but hey ho, that's life in a big city for you and not just down to drunks, try taking a bus ride when the kids have just come out of school if you want noise
How many times have you, or anyone else here, been in fear for your physical safety from some one who is drunk? Genuine question by the way, personally I have never felt physically threatened, sometimes I have had people want to have a chat but they soon move on.
A few times, and the drunks go onto the quiet zones.
viv1969
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 29,452
- Name
- Bat-Frog
- Edit My Images
- No
try taking a bus ride when the kids have just come out of school if you want noise
Or a train...which I had the pleasure of doing on Monday. Jesus Christ!
POAH
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 7,882
- Edit My Images
- No
- Status