Boris's ban on alcohol on London Transport (with poll)

[rich!]

Well er true enough! Mind I seem to recall as a youth that practically no public transport journey greater than half an hour could be undertaken without someone having the necessary supplies i.e. 4-8 cans of Hofmeister in a placky bag.

If you ask for a copy of the Conditions of Travel for the railway system, you will find that Clause 42 mandates that there be at least one person on each train sampling a can of "bevvy" before the train is allowed to depart any northern station at any time. Once the sun is over the yard-arm (i.e., about 2 hours after dawn), this requirement extends to the whole UK.

Still, at least it will prevent rail strikes - the trains will simply fail to run...

 

[scott_forester]

Havent read the thread, hope this hasnt been done already:



What does this mean? Will everyone have to queue up to walk through one of those fucking annoying gates that detect your house-keys?

Surely that will take fucking ages? unless some sort of racial/social profiling is used....

Not sure what they'll do here. I don't think it's a bad idea but I have a lot of metal on me; phone, mp3 player and games doohickey. I'd imagine they may use them on fare dogers etc.

 

[Superdupastupor]

This is up to the individual local authority here. Some places have had it banned for years, others not.

Drinking laws are confusing.
In Edinburgh it is fine pretty much to drink where and when you like.
In Glasgow drinking is kosher only in pub/club or private homes..
caused me all kinds of bother this year when I moved to the ouige' last year
.
I think the lesson is that drunk folk aren't the problem.
It is people the start a bother that need a sorting

 

[twistedAM]

I don't really have a problem with it but he'd definitely strike a chord with me if he banned fried foods and music played on shitty little mobile phones.

 

[chainsaw cat]

The cops used to turn a blind eye to public drinking, and the level of public disorder was way higher.

They now have a zero tolerance policy, and the public events etc, go off without a hitch in the vast majority of cases.

lazy policing, lazy politics.

most people don't cause problems through drinking.

I like a pint (god knows) and don't see why i shouldn't drink exactly as much as I want, where and when I want to, as long as I don't put others at risk. That pretty much means only my car is excluded as a drinking experience location (or 'booze - site').

But, 'cos the politicians have a repertioire of only 2 usable responses to any problem, I get to be harassed by my own servants (the cops) for doing something both harmless and enjoyable.


The 2 responses are, btw, ban it or tax it heavily.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

lazy policing, lazy politics.

most people don't cause problems through drinking.
.

But that's how it is with everything. Most people are law abiding, and not wanting to cause trouble. It's the small minority who aren't that way, who cause disproportionate trouble, and who are the motivator behind many of these laws.

 

[chainsaw cat]

So ban driving, rather than catch dangerous drivers.

Ban marriage rather than prosecuting wife beaters.

Ban guns rather than murder, oh hang on, we did that.....

 

[spring-peeper]

That was said with tongue in cheek. As I've said before, I have cousins who live in Montreal, who are the children of my mother's sister, and a French Canadian man.

I realized that a bit later on.

 

[spring-peeper]

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that on long-haul transportation like planes or trains, there's a societal expectation that there will be alcohol, plus, the issues present with short-haul transportation and drinking, aren't there.

Trains and planes are not really public transportation. They are privately owned. I think the issue should be more about what is acceptable on publically funding transportation.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

So ban driving, rather than catch dangerous drivers.

Ban marriage rather than prosecuting wife beaters.

Ban guns rather than murder, oh hang on, we did that.....

There are laws that are irrelevant or inapplicable for everyone, that are applicable for some.

We all must wear seatbelts even though most will never be in an accident. We must all insure our cars, even though the same applies re: accident.

 

[pk]

Knife detectors? That's amazing. I didn't think such a thing existed. At least that means we won't all be randomly stopped and searched for carrying metal items onto the tube.

Pretty straightforward for detectors to differentiate between jewellery or battery operated devices and hardened steel lumps of blade.

Plus the tech is getting cheaper, I'm all for it.

And the other point you raised, regarding mandatory sentences for gun-toters leading to increased likelyhood of guns being drawn and used... I'm not so sure.
Anyone caught with a gun right now would expect a custodial and have their entire life spun for evidence of further crime.
Locking them up for 5 years, and more importantly encouraging people to grass on gun-carriers knowing they'll be out of the picture for that long, can only mean less killings in the long term.

 

[DotCommunist]

There are laws that are irrelevant or inapplicable for everyone, that are applicable for some.

We all must wear seatbelts even though most will never be in an accident. We must all insure our cars, even though the same applies re: accident.

seatbelts and insurance have visible positive effects against respectively loss of life and loss/damage of a valuable machine.

Loss of the right to have a can on the tube has no proven or likely effect on drunken anti-social behaviour on the tube. Tube troublemakers are likely already pissed before they get on.

I don't see how we can allow the very worst elements can be used to justify denial of the majorities harmless pleasure.

 

[DotCommunist]

Pretty straightforward for detectors to differentiate between jewellery or battery operated devices and hardened steel lumps of blade.

Plus the tech is getting cheaper, I'm all for it.

And the other point you raised, regarding mandatory sentences for gun-toters leading to increased likelyhood of guns being drawn and used... I'm not so sure.
Anyone caught with a gun right now would expect a custodial and have their entire life spun for evidence of further crime.
Locking them up for 5 years, and more importantly encouraging people to grass on gun-carriers knowing they'll be out of the picture for that long, can only mean less killings in the long term.

I think more concentration on stopping the guns getting in in the first place is the sensible move. As for knife crime, given how prevelant a pointy sharp thing is in our society and has been for x amount of years, it might be bettewr to look at the underlying social causes that produce stabby toerags. Cause I'm damn sure the mandatory sentences won't do fuck all

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I don't see how we can allow the very worst elements can be used to justify denial of the majorities harmless pleasure.

For the same reason as with seatbelts and insurance.

A small minority of tube riders[or vehicle drivers] will create a problem [be in a serious accident]. But because we can't identify who those people will be beforehand, the law has to be made of general applicaton.

 

[DotCommunist]

For the same reason as with seatbelts and insurance.

A small minority of tube riders[or vehicle drivers] will create a problem [be in a serious accident]. But because we can't identify who those people will be beforehand, the law has to be made of general applicaton.

Positive effect johnny! this idea of banning tube drinking will have no positive effect!

And when a law penalises or restrticts the majority because its in place to catch a minority of wrongdoers, then it is ill thought.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Positive effect johnny! this idea of banning tube drinking will have no positive effect!.

You assume that to be the case, but you actually have no idea if it's so or not.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

And when a law penalises or restrticts the majority because its in place to catch a minority of wrongdoers, then it is ill thought.

Like firearms restrictions?

 

[DotCommunist]

You assume that to be the case, but you actually have no idea if it's so or not.

Having taken the tube a lot and other forms of public trndport i can say yeah, I do have an idea. People getting on the transport lready blotto are the makers of trouble

 

[DotCommunist]

Like firearms restrictions?

be honest about it johnny, proliferation of small arms into society does no-one any good. It's not so much the minority badguys im on about here. It's the accidental shootings, the arguements gone gun-wrong, the police confrontations that could have ended with out dead perp/cop etc.

Comparing competent gun control to incompetent tube/alcohol rules is silly Johnny

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Having taken the tube a lot and other forms of public trndport i can say yeah, I do have an idea. People getting on the transport lready blotto are the makers of trouble

So your evidence is purely anecdotal. Iirc, millions ride the tube every day. There are many many interactions on the tube, that you are not aware of.

I can drive for weeks without seeing a motor vehicle accident, but I know for a fact that dozens are occurring every day in this city.

 

[pk]

I think more concentration on stopping the guns getting in in the first place is the sensible move.

I don't see there's much hope of stopping them entering the country.
The borders are porous to the point of farce, and given the relatively easy market in firearms from the east, and the euros to be made...

As for knife crime, given how prevelant a pointy sharp thing is in our society and has been for x amount of years, it might be bettewr to look at the underlying social causes that produce stabby toerags. Cause I'm damn sure the mandatory sentences won't do fuck all

Underlying social causes matter fuck all to them or me, if they're stopped from easy travel around London and given a sentence - they will be thinking twice before packing a blade and leaving the house.

The stabby toerags are such because of a lack of moral guidance one way or another, unless you're going to be routinely checking on the parents of kids or dropping in to schools to get lists of truants, it's up to them to realise that their dreams of being the next 50 Cent are doomed to miserable failure.

Of course - the entire prison system is fucked too, there are far more productive and life-changing things you could do with kids who have slipped by the wayside than lock them up with the kind of surplus cunts they actually want to emulate, but that's another thread for another time.

In the meantime - Bozza's mandate is to make the capital more palatable for his Henley constituents (who would happily sip their fucking Pimms on the Tube without any fuss).

A tougher line on offensive weapons is a good start IMO.

A ban on alcohol would be used to rid the tube system of people who are pissed and being cunts, I would hope.

Of course, the acid test will be New Years Eve - everyone jumping on the tube with bags of grog - let's see Bozworth bring his bobbies to bash the boozers then - not forgetting they've already bashed his mates for opposing the foxhunt ban. Interesting times ahead methinks!!

 

[DotCommunist]

So your evidence is purely anecdotal. Iirc, millions ride the tube every day. There are many many interactions on the tube, that you are not aware of.

I can drive for weeks without seeing a motor vehicle accident, but I know for a fact that dozens are occurring every day in this city.

it is of course based also on the experiences of every other tube user I've met.


I reckon it's that worrying puritan NA streak showing again that leads you to think anyone drinking on public transport is an anti-social nuisance. That or the right leaning pap you lap up about the UK

 

[DotCommunist]

I don't see there's much hope of stopping them entering the country.
The borders are porous to the point of farce, and given the relatively easy market in firearms from the east, and the euros to be made...

its where we need to start rather than crying when the horse has bolted imo

Underlying social causes matter fuck all to them or me, if they're stopped from easy travel around London and given a sentence - they will be thinking twice before packing a blade and leaving the house.

No they won't. It just adds to the bullshit glamour and danger. They don't give a fuck and nor do you: hence the issue won't see sensible resolution without attitude changes

The stabby toerags are such because of a lack of moral guidance one way or another, unless you're going to be routinely checking on the parents of kids or dropping in to schools to get lists of truants, it's up to them to realise that their dreams of being the next 50 Cent are doomed to miserable failure.

Of course - the entire prison system is fucked too, there are far more productive and life-changing things you could do with kids who have slipped by the wayside than lock them up with the kind of surplus cunts they actually want to emulate, but that's another thread for another time.

I'm sure you know that two out of every three prisoners has at least two diagnosable mental illnesses. Prison is what to do with the genuine cunts and the mass of cunted-by-the-system

In the meantime - Bozza's mandate is to make the capital more palatable for his Henley constituents (who would happily sip their fucking Pimms on the Tube without any fuss).

A tougher line on offensive weapons is a good start IMO.

A ban on alcohol would be used to rid the tube system of people who are pissed and being cunts, I would hope.

Of course, the acid test will be New Years Eve - everyone jumping on the tube with bags of grog - let's see Bozworth bring his bobbies to bash the boozers then - not forgetting they've already bashed his mates for opposing the foxhunt ban. Interesting times ahead methinks!!

BoJo will rape the capital for what its worth and laugh while doing it.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

it is of course based also on the experiences of every other tube user I've met.


I reckon it's that worrying puritan NA streak showing again that leads you to think anyone drinking on public transport is an anti-social nuisance. That or the right leaning pap you lap up about the UK

No one else from any other country, has said that alcohol consumption is allowed on their public transportation. I think UK is an anomaly on this.

I think it springs from the day when most people were proles working in factories and mines, and their lives were so horrible that they couldn't wait the length of a tube ride before beginning their nightly drinking, especially with the bizarre restrictive pub drinking hours that you had until recently.

Explain that one, you were able to drink on the subway, but not in a pub during the afternoon?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

be honest about it johnny, proliferation of small arms into society does no-one any good. It's not so much the minority badguys im on about here. It's the accidental shootings, the arguements gone gun-wrong, the police confrontations that could have ended with out dead perp/cop etc.

The majority of gun owners do so in a law abiding and safe manner. So, the laws restricting their ownership are directed at that small minority who will either use them negligently or criminally.

It's an exact parallel to this anti drinking law, which you call 'ill thought out'.

 

[DotCommunist]

No one else from any other country, has said that alcohol consumption is allowed on their public transportation. I think UK is an anomaly on this.

I think it springs from the day when most people were proles working in factories and mines, and their lives were so horrible that they couldn't wait the length of a tube ride before beginning their nightly drinking, especially with the bizarre restrictive pub drinking hours that you had until recently.

Explain that one, you were able to drink on the subway, but not in a pub during the afternoon?

sod knows, the w fight between christian temperance and the Brit love of booze is bewildering.

And journey-beer is far far older than the tube fella.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

And journey-beer is far far older than the tube fella.

I'm sure it is. It probably goes back to the days when your forebears laboured in coal mines, or the fields.

 

[DotCommunist]

The majority of gun owners do so in a law abiding and safe manner. So, the laws restricting their ownership are directed at that small minority who will either use them negligently or criminally.

It's an exact parallel to this anti drinking law, which you call 'ill thought out'.

It's not though is it?

Ban guns from trains for example. Good idea, a man with no gun on the train cannot shoot anyone


Ban alcohol from trains. Well now what about the fella who gets on the train already fucked out of his tree on hard spirits.

It's not an exact parallel its a lazy attempt to conflate two wildly variant issues

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

It's not though is it?

Ban guns from trains for example. Good idea, a man with no gun on the train cannot shoot anyone


Ban alcohol from trains. Well now what about the fella who gets on the train already fucked out of his tree on hard spirits.

It's not an exact parallel its a lazy attempt to conflate two wildly variant issues

Come on, you're smarter than this.

Most people carry out [x] safely and without incident. Small minority does not.

Govt passes a law of general application, restricting the rights of all to do [x], in order to proscribe the small minority.

 

[DotCommunist]

Come on, you're smarter than this.

Most people carry out [x] safely and without incident. Small minority (z) does not.

Govt passes a law of general application, restricting the rights of all to do [x], in order to proscribe the small minority.

yes and sometimes the activities of Z are of such limited and unproven harm that restricting the rights of X based upon them is stupid.