Big up the tube drinkers

[lights.out.london]

You're incisive posting doesn't warrant the wear and tear on my keyboard. Thanks for asking, though.

 

[El Jefe]

Well the post I responded to did seem to suggest that we can't care about Issue Z because of issues A-Y. Do you believe that to be the case?

 

[lights.out.london]

No idea who you are. No need to engage with you. See ya.

 

[El Jefe]

What sterling debating skills. So you only engage with people you 'know'?

This gets better and better

 

[Dravinian]

The Pro Ban people would find Berlin vile and intimidating. Drinking is not only permitted on the 24 hour S-Bahn, there are even shops on platforms with fridges full of 'disgusting' alcohol. It's very common for Berliners - who are all so 'desperate' obviously - to have a beer on their journey to their night out.

Vile filthy Berliners, vile filthy Berlin.

Personally I think it's a great, liberal city, but some people here would find it sickening. A hotbed of depravity perhaps. Singapore would be their utopia. Anything questionable is banned.

Why all of a sudden are they vile and filthy? I don't see anyone calling drinkers here vile and filthy, oh but of course, we are back to the ridilcous stretches. That is what happens when you are forced to argue a weak position, you have to stretch everything, take everything to the extreme to make it look silly.

As it isn't silly by its own merits, so now everyone has to be vile and filthy if they drink alcohol, because that is just plain silly so that allows you to continue to argue, despite having absolutely no point to make other then this.

They do it in Germany.

So what. Is this Germany, do we have the German tube system here? no? Do we have a country full of Germans with German societal norms? No?

So why would we think their example had any bearing on our situation?

Oh cause it agrees with you, of course sorry, thats all it ever needed to do.

 

[DotCommunist]

Why all of a sudden are they vile and filthy? I don't see anyone calling drinkers here vile and filthy, oh but of course, we are back to the ridilcous stretches. That is what happens when you are forced to argue a weak position, you have to stretch everything, take everything to the extreme to make it look silly.

As it isn't silly by its own merits, so now everyone has to be vile and filthy if they drink alcohol, because that is just plain silly so that allows you to continue to argue, despite having absolutely no point to make other then this.

They do it in Germany.

So what. Is this Germany, do we have the German tube system here? no? Do we have a country full of Germans with German societal norms? No?

So why would we think their example had any bearing on our situation?

Oh cause it agrees with you, of course sorry, thats all it ever needed to do.

what, like inventing special brew fantasy lands to make all drinkers out to be desperate drunks? as you did scant pages ago?

 

[Dravinian]

what, like inventing special brew fantasy lands to make all drinkers out to be desperate drunks? as you did scant pages ago?

So pointing out that Special Brew has a particular and pungent stench is now making out all drinkers to be desperate drunks?

Interesting sense of logic.

If I point out Grass is Green, does this mean I am suggesting that all Ballet dancers are secret lemonade drinkers? Just wondering if there was any limit to these leaps?

 

[lights.out.london]

^

(((Dravinian)))

You could be here for quite some time, Dravinian.

 

[DotCommunist]

you know well the connotations associated with spesh Drav, but play innocent if you wish

 

[paolo]

I pick Berlin because it shows a different attitude to personal freedoms, one that I do agree with, ad I assume you don't - or at least in terms of whether Londoners should have those freedoms too.

 

[Dravinian]

you know well the connotations associated with spesh Drav, but play innocent if you wish

You also know well that the smell of that stuff is pungent, it stinks.

I never suggested that every drinker on the Tube was drinking Special Brew, merely that some were and the stuff reaks and is a fine example of why drinking alcohol on the Tube should be banned because of the inconvenience it causes for others.

I have always maintained that it is a minor inconvenience, but it is also just a minor inconvenience not to drink.

If someone could explain why it was such a big deal to take a break from drinking for the short journey on teh Tube I might be sympathetic, but all I have heard is that it is nice to have a quiet drink on the way home from work. Sure it is, but it is not the end of the world that you can't.

You can't smoke on the tube, now if you can go without a cigarrette for that long, then you can surely go without a drink without any adverse effects.

So what we are saying is that there are no adverse effects for you, you just want a drink. It pisses you off that you can't have a drink as you don't see how it harms anyone else, but as a drinker you are unlikely to see the harm or be dismissive of it.

For me if there was a more valid reason, something stronger then "I want" then I might have more sympathy and support you against the Ban, but as far as I can see, someone has to be inconvenienced a little and I don't see why it shouldn't be drinkers.

 

[Dravinian]

I pick Berlin because it shows a different attitude to personal freedoms, one that I do agree with, ad I assume you don't - or at least in terms of whether Londoners should have those freedoms too.

It might be a different story if we had a different tube system, and a different societal attitude. Neither of which have I experienced in Berlin. So I don't know how similar they are or how different they are.

 

[lights.out.london]

I pick Berlin because it shows a different attitude to personal freedoms, one that I do agree with, ad I assume you don't - or at least in terms of whether Londoners should have those freedoms too.

I've found the attitude (?) or outlook of Berliners some way removed from the lager culture of this country. Not sure it's as straight forward as mapping their situation on to London's.

 

[DotCommunist]

I'm not going over this whole inconvenience issue again, there are millions of inconveniences far more pressing that others have to put up with.

anyway it really makes no odds because the ban is being quietly flouted as I predicted having observed exactly the same thing happen six months previous when my local transport system put a no alcohol or hot food ban in place.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

Just got the last tube back home from central London and was delighted to see loads of happy drinkers peacefully enjoying cans of beer on their way home.

Fuck you Boris.

yeah well it's illegal now get over it to paraphrase some one about some other ban recently...

 

[Crispy]

Not actually illegal though. Just against the Conditions of Carriage so all they can do is tell you to get off the train/bus.

 

[paolo]

I've found the attitude (?) or outlook of Berliners some way removed from the lager culture of this country. Not sure it's as straight forward as mapping their situation on to London's.

Sure - I use Berlin because it's freshest in my mind. But drinking not being banned is the norm in European cities. It's London that is the exception, not Berlin. Are Londoners really so much worse? I'd say they're not.

 

[editor]

Mind you don't trip over your own feet, booze-boy.

"Booze boy." LOL.

 

[editor]

You also know well that the smell of that stuff is pungent, it stinks.

I can't remember the last time I got on a tube train and it "reeked" of alcohol. In fact, I don't recall ever getting on a train that stunk so much of beer that it was uncomfortable for 'normal' passengers.

You're just making this stuff up to try and justify your ridiculously intolerant stance, just like all that nonsense about beer soaked seats.

 

[_angel_]

We managed to get across London without feeling the need to drink on the tube? Surely it's just like most rules on buses, no hot/smelly food or drink or alcohol??

When you've got that many people in close proximity, standing up, it's just purely good manners.

 

[claphamboy]

Not actually illegal though. Just against the Conditions of Carriage so all they can do is tell you to get off the train/bus.

But it is suggested that it will become illegal and no doubt enforced with fixed penalty notices.

The question is will Dravinian support the assumption of guilt under such circumstances without each case being referred to the CPS for consideration?

Sure - I use Berlin because it's freshest in my mind. But drinking not being banned is the norm in European cities. It's London that is the exception, not Berlin. Are Londoners really so much worse? I'd say they're not.

Nor is drinking on commuter trains leaving London banned. Nor did Transport for London campaign for this ban. Why? Because basically it’s not a problem – all this is about is attention seeking headlines for Boris at the cost of another piece of liberty being removed.

 

[editor]

Nor is drinking on commuter trains leaving London banned. Nor did Transport for London campaign for this ban. Why? Because basically it’s not a problem – all this is about is attention seeking headlines for Boris at the cost of another piece of liberty being removed.

Yep. 100% correct.

 

[paolo]

The times I've smelt alcohol, it's been off someone who's had a drink after work. They've rarely had a drink with them.

In fact, casting my mind back to before the ban, I can't remember seeing that many people drinking at all. Lots of very very pissed people, some quite unpleasant, but almost none of them drinking. In my experience, there was no correlation at all between alcohol related anti social behaviour and drinking actually on the tube.

 

[paolo]

Nor is drinking on commuter trains leaving London banned. Nor did Transport for London campaign for this ban. Why? Because basically it’s not a problem – all this is about is attention seeking headlines for Boris at the cost of another piece of liberty being removed.

Quite.

 

[El Jefe]

It's bizarre - fox hunting, the Iraq war, GM foods: all these issues have something to consider on both sides. You might conclude that GM foods are wrong, but it's still wise to consider the counter-arguments in so doing. But the booze ban?

There's NOTHING there. It's hollow electioneering and despite the best (snigger) efforts of Dravinian and LoL, there's yet to be a single coherent point in the ban's favour, it's just hyperbole, dishonesty, prejudice and bleating.

 

[lights.out.london]

at the cost of another piece of liberty being removed.

Oh, puuuuuuurleaze!

**builds barricades, paints placards and posters, prepares molatovs**

 

[_angel_]

But it is suggested that it will become illegal and no doubt enforced with fixed penalty notices.

The question is will Dravinian support the assumption of guilt under such circumstances without each case being referred to the CPS for consideration?



Nor is drinking on commuter trains leaving London banned. Nor did Transport for London campaign for this ban. Why? Because basically it’s not a problem – all this is about is attention seeking headlines for Boris at the cost of another piece of liberty being removed.

Trains that are going cross country are different, people might want to eat and drink on a long journey.

The tube isn't the same, everyone knows how packed it is, lots of people standing up. There are no tables or drinks holders and the potential for lots of spillages/ accidents.

Buses don't let you on with smelly food or alcohol and it's explicitally banned from National Express coaches (drinking that is). The absense of any loos on the tube and the fact there's hardly any air down there are other good reasons not to have smelly foods and drink.

 

[paolo]

It is a liberty. A small one, but a liberty nonetheless. No one here is suggesting that we should put up an armed resistance, merely that it is gesture politics, and has almost no bearing on anti-social behaviour. TFL seemed to agree too.

 

[El Jefe]

Trains that are going cross country are different, people might want to eat and drink on a long journey.

The tube isn't the same, everyone knows how packed it is, lots of people standing up. There are no tables or drinks holders and the potential for lots of spillages/ accidents.

Buses don't let you on with smelly food or alcohol and it's explicitally banned from National Express coaches (drinking that is). The absense of any loos on the tube and the fact there's hardly any air down there are other good reasons not to have smelly foods and drink.

So ban smelly foods and all drinks. Thats a different argument from banning alcohol, so not actually relevant to this thread, really.

I'd rather sit next to someone drinking a can of lager than eating a boxful of KFC, but I'm confronted with KFC all the time.

 

[lights.out.london]

It is a liberty. A small one, but a liberty nonetheless. No one here is suggesting that we should put up an armed resistance, merely that it is gesture politics, and has almost no bearing on anti-social behaviour. TFL seemed to agree too.

I take your point. And no-one...well...me...likes being told what to do. But that liberty needs to be considered within a framework of "society" and society's wider issues.