Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by United1892)
    Thats not a lot though. Like wow.
    Yeah, it really isn't much. Does mean I don't have to wait long before family events start getting amusing though :lol:
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by James Milibanter)
    That's not a Father Ted quote though.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    That's not a Father Ted quote though.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I know it's not. Otherwise it would just say "DRINK!"
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Unown Uzer)
    It may act as a deterrent from getting to drunk. The limit is set to a level where many people may start to act unreasonably if they exceed that limit.
    And why do you, as a Libertarian, oppose someone's right to get drunk when it is not endangering other people?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by James Milibanter)
    I know it's not. Otherwise it would just say "DRINK!"
    This was donated by our Finnish sponsors, FeckArse incorporated.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    "except during freshers' week".
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    How about nay? What an absolutely ridiculous start to this Parliament and an offence not only to our civil liberties but to great British traditions. I think you'll find I'm currently able to debate perfectly coherently despite currently contravening this law...
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Nay.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    And why do you, as a Libertarian, oppose someone's right to get drunk when it is not endangering other people?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    First of all, when did I say that I am a libertarian? Secondly, I do not oppose someone's right to get drunk if it is done privately, so it does not cause a nuisance to the general public. My bill also allows for people to have a few drinks and still be allowed to be in public. Under my bill, it is only illegal to be publicly intoxicated over a certain level (as stated in the bill). The level is set, since many people will start acting irrationally over that level, so my bill helps protect people from irrational drunks.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Unown Uzer)
    First of all, when did I say that I am a libertarian? Secondly, I do not oppose someone's right to get drunk if it is done privately, so it does not cause a nuisance to the general public. My bill also allows for people to have a few drinks and still be allowed to be in public. Under my bill, it is only illegal to be publicly intoxicated over a certain level (as stated in the bill). The level is set, since many people will start acting irrationally over that level, so my bill helps protect people from irrational drunks.
    And it kills pubs and clubs, hardly a small part of the economy

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    And it kills pubs and clubs, hardly a small part of the economy

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    This bill would encourage people to stay in pubs and clubs for a longer period of time, as they are not allowed to leave until there alcohol level drops below the limit. This means the bars and clubs can increase their revenue by selling more things and offering more services, since the patrons stay longer.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Unown Uzer)
    This bill would encourage people to stay in pubs and clubs for a longer period of time, as they are not allowed to leave until there alcohol level drops below the limit. This means the bars and clubs can increase their revenue by selling more things and offering more services, since the patrons stay longer.
    That makes no sense. They stay in longer to sober up, past closing, and spend not a penny more.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    . Well done to Unown Uzer for finding something that pretty much the whole House is genuinely against
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    . Well done to Unown Uzer for finding something that pretty much the whole House is genuinely against
    You should see my first ever bill.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    . Well done to Unown Uzer for finding something that pretty much the whole House is genuinely against
    You have yet to see what I will come up with...
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    You should see my first ever bill.
    What is your first bill?
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by Unown Uzer)
    What is your first bill?
    My first ever bill of my MHoC career was a bill that abolished the UK and handed our entire sovereignty to teh EU. it wasn't well liked.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Nay, I think the only way you could salvage this bill is to substantially increase the limit, and a better defined drug limit. That being said, it still won't have my support, because illegal drug consumption already has its own laws. Legal drugs would be hard to determine if someone has to take them, because of illness, or voluntarily takes them because they're addicted. Then it comes to alcohol. With this bill the only businesses benefiting, would be bottle stores, but that won't make up for the amount of lost revenue and jobs from pubs and night clubs. Plus the increase in house parties would have a negative effect on neighbourhoods. Because the same people 'disturbing' the public in public areas, would now be disturbing people near their homes. Not only would you need more police on the streets, you would need more police doing house calls to break up house parties.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Nay , Nay , Nay Aboulutely ludicrous. A massive curb on individual liberty that this country prides it on
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Nay
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: November 3, 2015

1,228

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.