yes someone who can't do without alcohol for 30 minutes has a problem, what's yr point?
tube party on june 1st?
- Thread starter bluestreak
- Start date
yes someone who can't do without alcohol for 30 minutes has a problem, what's yr point?
Yeah in the two years since I left London this has got so notacbly and continually worse. Last tiem I was down the central line at night was fucking disgusting. Muddy papers strewn everywhere & a labour government that loves to legislate in ways that infringe on people's liberties but must never do so in a way that restricts a corporation's freedomI wonder if the Mail/Standard will be kicking up a fuss about the fucking mess made by their own shitty free newspapers that are dumped all over trains every single day?
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Isn't it just?
Isn't it sad that people are so attached to their "right to annoy", that's all it is!
Nobody in their right mind can possibly suggest that booze on the tube is a good idea. It's just not, and tube drinkers do annoy some people.
All this really boils down to is that big bad Tory, Boris has nicked their cans and this is obviously an erosion of civil liberties.
Drinking on the tube is as ill mannered as farting or eating stinky food.
Realistically the ban on alcohol can have only one concrete effect: stopping people drinking on the tube. It's impossible to stop people being drunk on the tube as the possible knock-on increase in drink-driving incidents renders the suggestions obviously absurd. So the issue at hand is: how much trouble do people drinking on the tube actually cause in virtue of their drinking rather than their perhaps being drunk? The ban isn't going to stop them being drunk, it's just going to stop them drinking.
editor
hiraethified
Just because you don't feel the need for the occasional quiet can on the tube, why do you want to stop others enjoying such a harmless pleasure?
It's just unpleasant, spiteful intolerance, plain and simple.
ajdown
Posting in this thread
A 'civil liberty' that, it appears, most people weren't aware of one they actually had before the ban appeared.
ajdown
Posting in this thread
Rubbish. Sorry.
Aren't the drinkers being intolerant of the rights of those who do not wish to be surrounded by alcohol?
lights.out.london
Black Flag
But it's not the post-work quiet beer which causes the problems. It's people wankered and behaving badly...on a tube...save it for the pub/bar/club etc, etc.
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
Drinking on the tube kills!
lights.out.london
Black Flag
lol
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
The point is that public transport policy isn't going to be decided according to the difficulties experienced by piss heads or junkies.
It's the basic cornerstone of liberalism that in the absense of any concrete harm being done by one party to another, there's no basis for infringing the first party's freedoms. I've seen no evidence of harm being done by people drinking (as opposed to being drunk) on the tube.ajdown said:
Guineveretoo
Mostly bewildered
I believe I am in my "right mind", and I suggest that allowing booze on the tube is a good idea. There - I have said it.
Drunks on the tube are not nice, though, and will continue to happen despite the ban.
You keep going on about farting and eating curries. Do you have a problem we should know about, or are you just being boringly repetitive?
lights.out.london
Black Flag
Try the tube just before (tube) closing time from just about anywhere in Zone 1/2.
Can I have £10 on "None" please ...
ajdown
Posting in this thread
Define 'concrete harm'? Everyone has their limits of what is and isn't acceptable.
What about an ex-alcoholic who has managed to break the addiction, who can get around life by not going into pubs/clubs, having to sit next to someone on a bus with the smell of alcohol wafting up their nose.
"Harm" as you define it includes mental and psychological damage as well as 'physical harm'. You can't just claim unless someone is getting bottled, it must be harmless.
lights.out.london
Black Flag
My point is that it's easy to find aggressive drunks on the tube most nights who seem to think their carriage is a lounge-on-wheels.
It's a tube! Inappropriate or what? Go to the pub!
Guineveretoo
Mostly bewildered
It's not about needing alcohol, at least in my case. It's just that I want the journey to my gig to be part of the evening out, rather than a boring chore, and it can be a nice, civilised beginning to the evening, to have a can of lager on the bus.
If someone really is that desperate for a drink, do you think they will pay any attention to the ban? Alcohol is banned in open spaces in most of the USA, but I have seen plenty of people flouting that.
Also, I believe it ignores the real issue of anti social behaviour on the tube, which has very little to do with whether or not one is allowed to drink on there!
lights.out.london
Black Flag
Oh, come on!
Civilised drinking is drinking on public transport? That's too funny.
Civilised drinking is drinking on public transport? That's too funny.
This really is very good ... but I fear it may be wasted here ...
London_Calling
Pleasant and unpatronising
In very broad terms, like almost every society - except the USA which does things in the opposite manner - your rights are defined by what you can't do i.e. if the law doesn't say you can't do something, then you can do it.
So this does represent an erosion of civil liberty.
Could probably have said that more simply but you'll get the drift.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Simply asking Ed if he supports my right to do so on public transport. No different to what he wants to do but it's fucking bad manners.
Guineveretoo
Mostly bewildered
ajdown
Posting in this thread
To many people , drinking alcohol on public transport is antisocial, as much as the twat in the hoodie with tinny rap blaring out on a mobile phone.
I can claim that if the "harm" being caused is a function of, shall we say, someone's own idoysincracies (less chariably: someone's unreasonable hang ups) then it's not concrete harm. By your logic, gays kissing in public should be banned because it hurts & offends homophobes. Do you think this is reasonable? Or should we maybe think a bit more carefully about how we conceptualise "harm"? You may be happy with this piece of legislation - in my view: you getting your hang-ups imposed on everyone else - but would you be happy when others start imposing their hang-ups on you?ajdown said:
scifisam
feck! arse! girls! drink!
I think you've missed the key part of that paragraph: how many of those problems have been caused by people drinking on the tube, not by people being drunk?
Though I have to say that I haven't actually seen any problems caused by people being drunk. Such problems certainly do exist - fights and people falling down escalators, for example - so they do need addressing (usually by taking the drunk person away somewhere they won't get into trouble), but what I've mostly seen is merry people singing away, talking to strangers and having loud conversations. I think this is what bothers certain people on here, and I think they're being a little oversensitive.
Similar threads
