This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

New licensing laws

well...if your talking about britishness being blending in with the population, your average brit does drink alcohol, statistically :biggrin:

Reply 61

Socrates

17

technik

i dunno how i could be more british really.

it says british citizen on my passport. i was born in the UK and have lived here all my life :biggrin:

:dito:

the only thing you have which i don't is white skin.

Reply 62

Spondrah

Howard

I feel your pain. I was regularly getting blasted at a very young age and still do (though I try to control myself these days)

I'd like to see an increase in the legal age for consumption of alcohol to 21. No ID, no service.

I'd also like to see laws on public intoxication established/strengthened.

The clubs/pubs round my way have trouble keeping the 14 year olds out as it is! So raising the age wouldn't help as they would still be getting drunk, just illegally!

Reply 63

saz_1989

2

It won't affect me really. At home, I go out of a weekend, and there are clubs open til 6am. At uni, if I want to drink after the clubs shut at 2am, then I go back to the tv room and drink wine.

There's no such thing as 24 hour drinking. I started drinking at 2pm on St Paddy's day and was safely tucked up in bed by midnight. You try staying awake for 24 hours while drinking.

Reply 64

saz_1989

2

Howard

I'd like to see an increase in the legal age for consumption of alcohol to 21. No ID, no service.

That would ruin university. If clubs/bars/pubs ID'd everyone, and only accepted driving licences or passports, there'd be less underage drinking in public.

Howard

I'd also like to see laws on public intoxication established/strengthened.

I agree, but how?

Reply 65

Carl

OP

14

Lauren

I agree, but how?

By clubs actually following their legal obligation not to serve anybody who is visibly drunk, and anyone who is drunk facing a night in the cells and a spot fine, along with fines to the club or bar for persistantly serving drunk customers.

Reply 66

saz_1989

2

Carl

By clubs actually following their legal obligation not to serve anybody who is visibly drunk, and anyone who is drunk facing a night in the cells and a spot fine, along with fines to the club or bar for persistantly serving drunk customers.

I thought clubs could serve drunk people. I know as barmaid I can't, but I don't work in a club.

I'm not sure if I'd like my tax money to go to looking after drunk people in cells. Although perhaps fining the clubs would pay for that?

Good ideas anyway :yy:

Reply 67

Carl

OP

14

Lauren

I thought clubs could serve drunk people. I know as barmaid I can't, but I don't work in a club.

It's against the law to be drunk. It's against the law to serve drunk people-regardless of the nature of the premises' license. The problem is that punishing all the drunk people is impossible. However, it's not that difficult to prosecute the clubs that get them that way.

I'm not sure if I'd like my tax money to go to looking after drunk people in cells. Although perhaps fining the clubs would pay for that?

It would be impossible to lock up all the drunk people, but if a few high profile cases came to light, perhaps for repeat offenders, then that would act as a deterrent. For example, I don't steal cars because I know the likely punishment is severe (well actually that's debateable but I digress). The same applies for enforcement of Drunk and Disorderly arrests. The fines against clubs would also serve to stop them getting people paraletic.

Another consequence is that clubs/bars would have to raise prices and profit margins if people could buy less, so that will further discourage people from drinking too much.

Good ideas anyway :yy:

cheers

Reply 68

L i b

19

AT82

Little village pubs are different but then I doubt they would have enough business to stay open past 11:00 anyway.

There are four pubs in my sleepy little village (yes, I know, four pubs, one shop) and because it's in Scotland and we have difference licensing systems I have experienced what it's like. There is quite a demand, the pubs have 1am licenses and will defintely stay open til that time on Friday and Saturday nights - the rest of the time, it's somewhere between 12 and 1, very much depending on how busy the place is and whether or not the bar manager wants to go to bed.

It's quite odd how the licencing system works up here. The village pubs usually have 1am licences, yet in Dundee city centre, a good 4/5ths of the pubs only have 12 o'clock licences. Being the only place to ever elect a prohibitionist MP to Parliament (he ousted Winston Churchill I believe), it's perhaps not the best example.

I support these moves, but I am fundamentally opposed to the licensing system for pubs. The main problem I see with these measures is noise and disruption to people who live near pubs and bars. I don't think this will be a huge problem however - mostly business owners like to keep locals (potential regulars, of course) on their side and will consider them when deciding their hours.

The smoking ban... hmm... it's coming in to force in Scotland next year. I think it's a horrible restriction on the freedom of business owners and just a bloody poor idea. The irony here is that I would support a smoking ban on public streets, parks etc. Some woman came and sat down on a bench next to me today and lit up a cigarette - I was less than impressed, got up, made a complaint that I imagine she heard and left. If that happened in a pub, or in her house, fine. But on land that I partially own, it's not.

Reply 69

bikerx23

1

Considering that though, is it better to have everyone thrown out of the pubs at 11 and filling the streets, or people leaving gradually therefore less noise...
Also, the majority of the places with the large number of people getting chucked out at once will be city centres, so fewer people will be directly influenced.

Reply 70

Person

13

It's against the law to be drunk

Is it not drunk and disorderly?

Reply 71

Carl

OP

14

Northumbrian

Is it not drunk and disorderly?

Surely if you are really sh*tfaced then you are by nature disorderly. I know I certainly am!

My boss told me that if you don't think a customer can get home safely as a result of drink then the best thing to do is to refuse to serve them. It's for their own protection, as well as that of the pub license, at the end of the day.

Reply 72

L i b

19

Carl

It's against the law to be drunk.

I believe you have to be 'drunk and incapable' (the full name of the offence, I knew a fellow student who was lifted and cautioned for it last year) - that means unable to look after yourself. Therefore it's not illegal to be rat-arsed when you're in private and not 'incapable'. NB: I'm dealing with the law of Scotland here.

It would be impossible to lock up all the drunk people, but if a few high profile cases came to light, perhaps for repeat offenders, then that would act as a deterrent. For example, I don't steal cars because I know the likely punishment is severe (well actually that's debateable but I digress). The same applies for enforcement of Drunk and Disorderly arrests. The fines against clubs would also serve to stop them getting people paraletic.

Another consequence is that clubs/bars would have to raise prices and profit margins if people could buy less, so that will further discourage people from drinking too much.

You seem to be assuming that drinking is somehow wrong. Usually this is the result of some sort of childhood thing like an alcoholic relative. It's certainly not how most people see it.

Yes, I was drunk last night. I staggered home via the city centre and had to make a few stops on benches just to get my head together. I wasn't doing anything wrong, I was able to get home, I didn't bother anyone. There's nothing wrong in that.

I don't like the 'up the prices and we'll discourage it' idea. The fact is, you won't within a good few generations: you'll just hurt the poor as the cigarette taxes have shown. Plus you also give rights to the wealthy you seek to deny to the poor.

Lauren

That would ruin university. If clubs/bars/pubs ID'd everyone, and only accepted driving licences or passports, there'd be less underage drinking in public.

A lot of people (students particularly) don't have driving licences. And I don't think anyone with half a grain of common sense would carry their passport around on a night out.

Bouncers know fake ID when they see it. It's not a problem compared to people being let in without showing anything at all.

I quite like the idea of charging drunks to be accomodated in the cells for the night. Not a bad idea really. But in theory, you can be fined for being Drunk and Incapable (the vast majority aren't, I believe) so it kinda happens anyway.

Reply 73

Carl

OP

14

LibertineNorth

I believe you have to be 'drunk and incapable' (the full name of the offence, I knew a fellow student who was lifted and cautioned for it last year) - that means unable to look after yourself. Therefore it's not illegal to be rat-arsed when you're in private and not 'incapable'. NB: I'm dealing with the law of Scotland here.Its called drunk and disorderly in England and Wales but what you've written is a correct precision

You seem to be assuming that drinking is somehow wrong.

I can see why you'd say that but I think that drinking to excess is wrong. That is the point where, as you say, they are incapable of controlling their behaviour. Where they endanger their own safety because they can't get home; where they are susceptible to being attacked or to attacking others. Surely you can see that by taking measures to prevent this violent and disorderly crime can halt this?

I don't like the 'up the prices and we'll discourage it' idea.

How do you propose we stop drinking so much? As I said, if bars and clubs sell a lower product volume (as a result of police pressure to stop getting their customers trashed), they will have to raise prices and profit margins accordingly. As a result people will drink less anyway.

The fact is, you won't within a good few generations: you'll just hurt the poor as the cigarette taxes have shown. Plus you also give rights to the wealthy you seek to deny to the poor.

I believe even at lower prices the wealthy can still afford to drink more than the poor.

A lot of people (students particularly) don't have driving licences. And I don't think anyone with half a grain of common sense would carry their passport around on a night out.

I tend to carry my passport about with me to get served because I don't have a driving license. I find the vast majority of people I ID have driving licenses anyway, and the law states that if I doubt someone is 18, and they can't produce appropriate ID, I should refuse to serve them. The law doesn't get any clearer. If you are over 18 but think you will get ID'd, buy a driving license. £40 is a lot less hassle than the embarrasment of being turned away from the bar.

Bouncers know fake ID when they see it. It's not a problem compared to people being let in without showing anything at all.

So what if they don't produce appropriate ID. What is appropriate ID? Why do you think most bars only accept passport and driving licenses? Is it not because alternative schemes simply do not work?

Reply 74

Chrism

1

LibertineNorth

A lot of people (students particularly) don't have driving licences. And I don't think anyone with half a grain of common sense would carry their passport around on a night out.

I do. It's the only form of photo ID I have other than my NUS card which isn't acceptable usually in a bar, and I don't look my 20 years.

Reply 75

Spondrah

A lot of my friends have applied for a provisional driving licence simply to use as i.d

New licensing laws

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you