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

[danny la rouge]

I quite liked the fans idea...

To represent the proportion fairly you'd need more licences than smokers because they, of course, would be acompanied by many of their non-smoking friends.

Not by me they wouldn't. As an asthmatic, I long ago learned to avoid smoky atmospheres. Which includes the houses of smokers.

Logically, though, would smokers never accompany non smokers?

 

[ajdown]

We should be honest here. I understand completely why you'd want drinking legal on the tube. The reason is what we here call 'pre-drinking'. You're going out somewhere where you'll be drinking, but it's going to cost a lot of money, or you're going to a party and want to be drunk when you get there.

That's a large part of the problem that nobody wants to address, either in London or nationally.

Why do you have to get drunk to enjoy yourself?

It seems that there is a general feeling of if you can remember any of last night, it wasn't a good night out.

If this is going to make people think "do I really need that drink on the tube that badly", and modify their plans appropriately, then I think that can only be a good thing for all of us?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

That's a large part of the problem that nobody wants to address, either in London or nationally.

Why do you have to get drunk to enjoy yourself?

It seems that there is a general feeling of if you can remember any of last night, it wasn't a good night out.

If this is going to make people think "do I really need that drink on the tube that badly", and modify their plans appropriately, then I think that can only be a good thing for all of us?

I think I'm more in the camp of the predrinkers, having been one myself at an earlier stage of my life.

But having said that, I can see the social utility of separating the likes of me from the average, sober Tube passenger.

 

[citydreams]

Why do you have to get drunk to enjoy yourself?

I don't normally - I prefer to have a drink to unwind. Unless I get stuck sitting next to someone that finds me intimidating

If this is going to make people think "do I really need that drink on the tube that badly", and modify their plans appropriately, then I think that can only be a good thing for all of us?

No. I like seeing hoardes of drinkers heading to Brixton on the tube to a gig. It cheers me up no end. Same goes for people enjoying a drink sitting under a tree. Guess that's going to be banned soon too.

 

[ajdown]

I think I'm more in the camp of the predrinkers, having been one myself at an earlier stage of my life.

But having said that, I can see the social utility of separating the likes of me from the average, sober Tube passenger.

I'm not advocating a total ban on alcohol. Just in inappropriate shared settings where it's not essential.

Alcohol, I am told, is part of a group of wider 'social shared experience' things that are best shared. Isn't sitting on the tube chugging out of a can of special brew kinda sad? Most people's images of the 'lone drinker' are related to the down-and-out slumped in a doorway and generally smelling, and looking, awful ... and you often can't tell how drunk a person is until they start to move. For all you know, the city gent in the Armani suit necking down of a can is not on his first but his 10th, and the next time the train goes over a bump is going to lean over and throw up all over you.

 

[citydreams]

For all you know, the city gent in the Armani suit necking down of a can is not on his first but his 10th, and the next time the train goes over a bump is going to lean over and throw up all over you.

Another ajdown fact!

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Alcohol, I am told, is part of a group of wider 'social shared experience' things that are best shared. Isn't sitting on the tube chugging out of a can of special brew kinda sad? .

What if you're with your buds?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I'm not advocating a total ban on alcohol. Just in inappropriate shared settings where it's not essential.

Alcohol, I am told, is part of a group of wider 'social shared experience' things that are best shared. Isn't sitting on the tube chugging out of a can of special brew kinda sad? Most people's images of the 'lone drinker' are related to the down-and-out slumped in a doorway and generally smelling, and looking, awful ... and you often can't tell how drunk a person is until they start to move. For all you know, the city gent in the Armani suit necking down of a can is not on his first but his 10th, and the next time the train goes over a bump is going to lean over and throw up all over you.

If people want to go to a personal hell via alcohol, I won't be the one to stop them. I just believe that there is a social benefit, minor though it may be, in promoting order via the restriction of alcohol consumption in certain public places.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

For all you know, the city gent in the Armani suit necking down of a can is not on his first but his 10th, and the next time the train goes over a bump is going to lean over and throw up all over you.

All we can hope is that some of the vomitus ends up on the Armani, and he must pay the penitence of a high dry cleaning bill.

My clothes, will just go in the wash at home.

 

[King Biscuit Time]

Series of time-wasting emails duly dispatched to the Mayor's office, the makers of Shandy Bass, and the makers of traditional fermented Ginger Beer to clairy the exact rules on tube Shandy Drinking.

 

[ajdown]

I like seeing hoardes of drinkers heading to Brixton on the tube to a gig. It cheers me up no end.

See, you've identified the problem again but can't see it.

You're probably right, one lone person sitting in the end of a carriage with a can of special brew isn't likely to be much of an issue ... but when you get 50, 100 or more people all drinking - and drinking lots before a gig such as you suggest because of the cost of alcohol at the venue, they are going to get rowdy. Many of the gigs in Brixton also attract younger people, who either haven't learnt, or choose to ignore, their limits.

It all brings us back to the social problem of the need to drink alcohol in large quantities to the point of being unable to remember it or control yourself, to enable you to feel you have had a 'good night out'.

 

[ajdown]

What if you're with your buds?

Is it really that hard to find somewhere else to have a drink before getting on the tube, or waiting half an hour till you get off it and have one there instead?

If you can't enjoy yourself with your friends without alcohol ... then there is a problem.

 

[jæd]

See, you've identified the problem again but can't see it.

You're probably right, one lone person sitting in the end of a carriage with a can of special brew isn't likely to be much of an issue ... but when you get 50, 100 or more people all drinking - and drinking lots before a gig such as you suggest because of the cost of alcohol at the venue, they are going to get rowdy. Many of the gigs in Brixton also attract younger people, who either haven't learnt, or choose to ignore, their limits.

And how many times does this happen then, Tobes...? I'm trying to remember the last time I saw one person with a can, let alone 50.

Oh, and you haven't responded about how everyone sobers up as soon as they get on public transport...

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Is it really that hard to find somewhere else to have a drink before getting on the tube, or waiting half an hour till you get off it and have one there instead?

If you can't enjoy yourself with your friends without alcohol ... then there is a problem.

I agree that it doesn't hurt to wait just a little bit to do your drinking, but some people aren't that way.

Similarly, people should be able to enjoy one another without alcohol, but some aren't that way. I have no desire to moralize as to whether or not this is wrong or right.

What I'm saying, is that it promotes the public good, to restrict drinking on public transportation.

 

[ajdown]

And how many times does this happen then, Tobes...? I'm trying to remember the last time I saw one person with a can, let alone 50.

Oh, and you haven't responded about how everyone sobers up as soon as they get on public transport...

I don't use the tube at night because of the fact there are more likely to be more drunk people about than during the day. I'd rather spend an hour on a bus going home than 20 minutes on the tube, then having to hang around outside Brixton tube station waiting for a bus for the last stage of my journey - there you haven't only got the alcoholics to deal with but the drug pushers as well.

I like to feel safe when I'm out and about. If groups of hoodies, drug pushers and drunk people make me feel not safe, then that is not my fault. Maybe I'm more sensitive to these things because I don't drink is not my fault either - because it's well known and accepted that even just one can of something alcoholic lowers your boundaries and adjusts your judgement.


If people are drunk already, then as has already been pointed out, there are existing laws that cover that, or they're too drunk to be able to figure out how to put their ticket in the machine and can't get on the tube in the first place.

It's all down to personal responsibility and consideration for others. The fact that this seems to be no longer thought about by so many is why such laws, unpopular as they may be to a small but sadly vocal group, become necessary.

 

[citydreams]

If people want to go to a personal hell via alcohol, I won't be the one to stop them. I just believe that there is a social benefit, minor though it may be, in promoting order via the restriction of alcohol consumption in certain public places.

I agree that there may be a social benefit. But it is totally outweighed by the social disbenefit of encroaching on people's freedom.

 

[citydreams]

If you can't enjoy yourself with your friends without alcohol ... then there is a problem.

No-one is saying that they can't. People are saying that they shouldn't be forced to go without. The majority of us are able to act responsibly. There is no reason why we should change our habits because you feel uncomfortable.

As said before, there are already regulations in place to deal with unsociable individuals.

 

[jæd]

I like to feel safe when I'm out and about. If groups of hoodies, drug pushers and drunk people make me feel not safe, then that is not my fault. Maybe I'm more sensitive to these things because I don't drink is not my fault either - because it's well known and accepted that even just one can of something alcoholic lowers your boundaries and adjusts your judgement.

Ooh...! The Demon Drink, out to get you...!

Um, quick hint. You might want to find another website to post on since this one has people who like a drink or two, and even like those nasty drug things. (And you can't be too careful if you go on the tube at 6.45 pm, there might be someone high on drrrruuugggsss).

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I agree that there may be a social benefit. But it is totally outweighed by the social disbenefit of encroaching on people's freedom.

How great of an encroachment is it, really?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

No-one is saying that they can't. People are saying that they shouldn't be forced to go without. The majority of us are able to act responsibly. There is no reason why we should change our habits because you feel uncomfortable. .

You're being forced to change your habits because a minority aren't able to act respoonsibly.

 

[ymu]

When I'm that broke, I don't go out to restaurants.

I have to have money to spend time with my mates now?

 

[Poi E]

Both do, however, infringe on the imagined 'rights' of an individual to partake in that activity in public.

You've got things topsy-turvy.

I think you can do pretty much whatever the helll you want. That is the starting point. And then the state has to come up with some pretty fucking decent reasons to stop you doing something. Harming other people's health is a good reason. Having a beer on the tube harms no-one.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I have to have money to spend time with my mates now?

They'd probably prefer it.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I think you can do pretty much whatever the helll you want.

I think you're describing a more north american approach to politics, not a british one.

 

[jæd]

...or they're too drunk to be able to figure out how to put their ticket in the machine and can't get on the tube in the first place.

When was the last time you were on the tube...? Everyone uses Oyster cards now...

 

[citydreams]

You're being forced to change your habits because a minority aren't able to act respoonsibly.

No, I'm being told to change my habits because a minority aren't fit for political office.

 

[ymu]

We should be honest here. I understand completely why you'd want drinking legal on the tube. The reason is what we here call 'pre-drinking'. You're going out somewhere where you'll be drinking, but it's going to cost a lot of money, or you're going to a party and want to be drunk when you get there.

So, better to get drunk as fast as possible, as cheaply as possible. Because it's illegal to drink while driving or taking public transit here, we do/did our predrinking at home or at a friend's house.

But if it was legal to drink on public transit, we'd have done it there also, to extend the predrinking as long as possible. [Except for the diff that here, everyone had a motorcycle or car from age 14 on, and public transit was for losers.]

Problem is that if you admit to this truth, you'd be admitting that Boris has a point, because let's face it, some people aren't that good at their predrinking, and they'd become loud drunk nuisances on the tube or bus.

That's about the long and short of it, as I see it.

What are pre-drinkers likely to do if they can't drink in transit?

AFAICT this law will only create more problem drinkers on public transport because:

- Those who were drinking to get drunk before probably won't decide to head out more sober than usual.
- The kinds of problem drinkers we have now won't give a crap (hell, if they can drink a can of beer "aggressively", do we expect them to politely stop when asked ).

So all this law does is penalise people who aren't drinking to get drunk. It'll help reinforce the weird English attitude to alcohol, but that won't do any more good in the future than it has in the past.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

No, I'm being told to change my habits because a minority aren't fit for political office.

What sort of rejoinder could I have for a zinger like that?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

- Those who were drinking to get drunk before probably won't decide to head out more sober than usual. .

No,they'll probably sit around at home drinking, then head out. The only difference is, they won't still be drinking on the Tube.

 

[citydreams]

How great of an encroachment is it, really?

What does it matter how much of an encroachment it is, as if these things are measurable anyway?

Just because you can't hold your drink in Canada doesn't mean we should bear the brunt of your jealousy.