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

[Poi E]

Anyway, what is the harm that is being done with drinking on the tube? Eating smelly stuff is smelly, noisy iPods are noisy, large papers invade the personal space of others. Drinking a can of beer um....er....some people don't like the way it looks? Is that it?

 

[ajdown]

As has been said, get rid of the KFC - that would make me happier!

I've already emailed Boris, offering my support, suggesting making the ban wider to include food and drink generally, which will also reduce the litter problem.

I also said that, as I work not far from City Hall, I'd be happy to meet up and chat any time if I could be of help. Not that I expect a reply but you never know

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I've already emailed Boris, offering my support, suggesting making the ban wider to include food and drink generally, which will also reduce the litter problem.

That's right, ban drink from the tube - have you EVER USED THE TUBE IN SUMMER? Everyone travelling on the tube in the summer should carry a drink.

 

[ajdown]

Anyway, what is the harm that is being done with drinking on the tube? Eating smelly stuff is smelly, noisy iPods are noisy, large papers invade the personal space of others. Drinking a can of beer um....er....some people don't like the way it looks? Is that it?

For most people, it's not their "first" can of beer, it's another one along the row - which in the stressful, hot, oppressive environment of the tube can cause problems.

It's a known fact that anyone drinking alcohol "changes" - either shorter temper and angers easier, or becomes laid back and drowsy... neither of which are nice to be next to.

 

[Crispy]

Now, banning all food and drink on the tube to cut down on litter and dirt is something I could agree with, or at least logically follow from argument to policy.

By singling out booze, Boris makes this about public morality and is on far shakier ground.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

For most people, it's not their "first" can of beer, it's another one along the row - which in the stressful, hot, oppressive environment of the tube can cause problems.

It's a known fact that anyone drinking alcohol "changes" - either shorter temper and angers easier, or becomes laid back and drowsy... neither of which are nice to be next to.

I have an alcoholic friend who is extremely irritable before his first drink of the day. Believe me, you'd ratherr he had a can to hand if you were sat next to him and the train got stuck in the tunnel for any length of time.

 

[8ball]

These damn laid back, drowsy people!!

 

[ajdown]

I have an alcoholic friend who is extremely irritable before his first drink of the day. Believe me, you'd ratherr he had a can to hand if you were sat next to him and the train got stuck in the tunnel for any length of time.

Medical help and counselling is what he needs if he's that bad then ... not a can on the tube.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Now, banning all food and drink on the tube to cut down on litter and dirt is something I could agree with, or at least logically follow from argument to policy.

The longest tube journeys can take up to 2 hours - not allowing for delays. I don't think it is reasonable to ban food for this long, and you could probably take a ban on any drink to the court of law.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Medical help and counselling is what he needs if he's that bad then ... not a can on the tube.

Fuck you, you judgemental cunt.

 

[ymu]

Some people consider talking loudly on a mobile phone on a bus/tube to be annoying and antisocial, others (especially those that do it) don't care.

Some people consider eating smelly food on a bus/tube to be annoying and antisocial, others (especially those that do it) don't care.

Some people consider reading big newspapers on a bus/tube to be annoying and antisocial, others (especially those that do it) don't care.

Some people consider playing music out loud on a bus/tube to be annoying and antisocial, others (especially those that do it) don't care.

Some people consider taking up more than one seat with bags etc on a bus/tube to be annoying and antisocial, others (especially those that do it) don't care.

Some people consider dropping litter on a bus/tube to be annoying and antisocial, others (especially those that do it) don't care.

Some people consider drinking alcohol on a bus/tube to be annoying and antisocial, others (especially those that do it) don't care.

What makes you choose some things to be acceptable, and others not to be? The most compelling facts, figures, statistics, whatever in the world probably wouldn't make you change your mind if you really cannot see how something might affect or upset other people.

Are you going to ban all of these things? If not, why single any of them out? If yes,

 

[Oswaldtwistle]

Banning non-alcoholic drink on the tube in summer would be very dangerous,Crispy

 

[ymu]

That's right, ban drink from the tube - have you EVER USED THE TUBE IN SUMMER? Everyone travelling on the tube in the summer should carry a drink.

They even have notices on the trains telling people to do so.

 

[Poi E]

For most people, it's not their "first" can of beer, it's another one along the row - which in the stressful, hot, oppressive environment of the tube can cause problems.

It's a known fact that anyone drinking alcohol "changes" - either shorter temper and angers easier, or becomes laid back and drowsy... neither of which are nice to be next to.

In 9 years I've not noticed this, though. Pissed people, yes.

 

[ajdown]

The longest tube journeys can take up to 2 hours - not allowing for delays. I don't think it is reasonable to ban food for this long, and you could probably take a ban on any drink to the court of law.

A generally accepted fact is that when you drink (anything), your body needs to let some of it out a little while later.

If people need a pee, then they have to get off the train and possibly up to surface level to try and find a toilet if the station doesn't have facilities.

So they'd have to break their journey, and could easily have another drink at street level before getting back down to continue their journey.

I'm not sure how a court of law could do anything ... after all, nobody is forcing you to spend all that time without a drink, you aren't being forced to travel either. You're entirely free to get off and take whatever refreshments you desire at your convenience.

 

[spring-peeper]

I have an alcoholic friend who is extremely irritable before his first drink of the day. Believe me, you'd ratherr he had a can to hand if you were sat next to him and the train got stuck in the tunnel for any length of time.

and he can't have a drink at home before leaving because......

 

[8ball]

(((facepalm smiley)))

 

[littlebabyjesus]

and he can't have a drink at home before leaving because......

If he goes more than a couple of hours without a drink, he gets twitchy. Why does anybody consider it their place to pass judgement on him for this, knowing nothing about him, his history or his reasons to drink?

 

[ajdown]

If he goes more than a couple of hours without a drink, he gets twitchy. Why does anybody consider it their place to pass judgement on him for this, knowing nothing about him, his history or his reasons to drink?

Because it's all irrelevant. If someone has an alcohol problem, there are plenty of ways that he can receive help with it. If he chooses not to seek help, then in all honesty he only has himself to blame.

Sorry if that comes across as harsh, but nobody *needs* alcohol in order to survive.

 

[STFC]

Now, banning all food and drink on the tube to cut down on litter and dirt is something I could agree with, or at least logically follow from argument to policy.

By singling out booze, Boris makes this about public morality and is on far shakier ground.

It's about reducing anti-social behaviour on the transport network, so I suppose it is about public morality in a way. If it reduces drunken behaviour and makes people feel safer on the tube/bus/tram then it's a good thing. If it inconveniences a few people who like to sip peacefully from a can on their way home then so be it.

I like a drink, as anyone who has met me will know, but I can (usually) wait until I get where I'm going without feeling the need to crack open a beer on the way. I genuinely believe that more people will support the ban - as part of a wider drive to reduce anti-social behaviour - than be against it. I haven't see a huge public outcry since the news was announced.

 

[Crispy]

Banning non-alcoholic drink on the tube in summer would be very dangerous,Crispy

Oh I know, it's just that a ban on the basis of litter has more logical strength than one based on puritanism.

 

[spring-peeper]

If he goes more than a couple of hours without a drink, he gets twitchy. Why does anybody consider it their place to pass judgement on him for this, knowing nothing about him, his history or his reasons to drink?

I was more concerned about your friend than taking the time to pass judgement.

So it is not the "first drink in the morning" thing that is a problem. Good - I was wondering how he could get up, dress, get to the tube, etc without taking that first drink.

Me, I get not only twitchy but down right obnoxious if I don't have a cigarette every hour or so. Long trips are a nightmare, especially when there are delays. I hate flying.

I think I should get special treatment as well.

eta - smoking ban should not apply to me

 

[spring-peeper]

Oh I know, it's just that a ban on the basis of litter has more logical strength than one based on puritanism.

I don't understand why people just don't carry reusable water bottles or cups. Cuts down on the litter, saves the enviroment and you can put whatever you want in it.

 

[Crispy]

I always reuse water bottles myself. Can't remember when I bought this one. February sometime?

 

[ymu]

Because it's all irrelevant. If someone has an alcohol problem, there are plenty of ways that he can receive help with it. If he chooses not to seek help, then in all honesty he only has himself to blame.

Sorry if that comes across as harsh, but nobody *needs* alcohol in order to survive.

Alcohol withdrawal can kill. It's not up to you to tell people how to live their lives and it definitely isn't up to you to dictate when and how they break their addictions, especially from a position of utter ignorance.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I was more concerned about your friend than taking the time to pass judgement.

So it is not the "first drink in the morning" thing that is a problem. Good - I was wondering how he could get up, dress, get to the tube, etc without taking that first drink.

Me, I get not only twitchy but down right obnoxious if I don't have a cigarette every hour or so. Long trips are a nightmare, especially when there are delays. I hate flying.

I think I should get special treatment as well.

eta - smoking ban should not apply to me

It's not comparable - I can sit next to you drinking a bottle of beer and it in no way inconveniences you nor damages your health.

In any case, you can always chew nicotine gum.

 

[ajdown]

Alcohol withdrawal can kill. It's not up to you to tell people how to live their lives and it definitely isn't up to you to dictate when and how they break their addictions, especially from a position of utter ignorance.

Perhaps, but the point still remains that there are a myriad of qualified professionals and agencies out there that can offer help if he chooses that he wants it.

What sort of friend would you be to just sit back and watch him destroying himself from the inside out, without trying to help?

But this is off the subject so I'm happy to drop it.

 

[spring-peeper]

It's not comparable - I can sit next to you drinking a bottle of beer and it in no way inconveniences you nor damages your health.

In any case, you can always chew nicotine gum.

How about I'm a herion addict? Am I allowed to shoot up on your tubes? I'm not harming anyone else that way.

Suggesting that the ban should be repelled on the basis of it infridges on the rights of an addict is absurd.

 

[chainsaw cat]

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.

No, those laws are about collective benefit - your seatbelt means I don't pay hospital bills etc. when some drunk hits you.

Stopping me drinking in public has no benefit at all to the community.

Indeed, it may mean that Mr Khan at the off license has to get a second job.

 

[ymu]

How about I'm a herion addict? Am I allowed to shoot up on your tubes? I'm not harming anyone else that way.

Suggesting that the ban should be repelled on the basis of it infridges on the rights of an addict is absurd.

Silly comparison.

a) heroin is proibited, so it's a crime to shoot up anywhere
b) you couldn't shoot up safely on the tube
c) one hit lasts for hours - more or less the opposite of alcohol, where one sip is more or less pointless