tube party on june 1st?

[DotCommunist]

If you think the point is that simple, best you find other people to respond to.

You din't have a point you had a condescending smirk.

 

[scifisam]

I have no problem banning smelly food (ie greasy chicken boxes) on public transport either.

Smelly people isn't such an easy option because of the heat on the tube especially during the summer.

Banning smelly food would be difficult, because you'd have to define what you mean by 'smelly.' For those here who cry at the smell of an open can of lager, a ham sandwich would probably make them faint. Banning food altogether wouldn't be sensible, I think; those adverts aimed at making people more polite are the right way to go.

 

[Guineveretoo]

Be sure to construct a meaningful argument as to why someone quietly having a can of beer makes for a more unpleasant experience than someone, say, quietly drinking from a bottle of water, and why we need legislation for this.

Thanks.

What about coffee? I hate the smell of coffee. Should that be banned, too?

 

[bluestreak]

You aren't demonstrating that as any more than opinion, lightsoutlondon.

I mean, it's no more damaging to society than any drinking. The notion of having acceptable drinking zones is bizarre, except where not doing so puts people at risk.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

*bangs head on desk*

It's a train/bus/tram. Not a bar. Not a pub. Not a club. Not your front room. No need to drink on tubes and buses. No need at all.

That isn't an argument either. It's just you saying the same thing again.

 

[nosos]

*bangs head on desk*

It's a train/bus/tram. Not a bar. Not a pub. Not a club. Not your front room. No need to drink on tubes and buses. No need at all.

You realise that everyone gets you think that? They're waiting for you to offer reasons why they should think that too. It's what we do on a discussion board, see? We d-i-s-c-us-s. We don't just repeat ourselves over and over before getting pissed off when people have the temerity to still not agree with us when we've said the same thing 10 times

 

[quimcunx]

It will affect me because, whenever I go to JAMM for an Offline, I like to have a can of lager on the way there.

Are you seriously suggesting that 99.9% of the population support the ban? You are deluded, if so!

I might have known. It's people like you Guin that make the world a less pleasant place.


I think it's a pointless rule, a waste of time drawing it up, a waste of time trying to enforce it. Personally I don't understand why someone feels the need to drink on the tube and can't just wait until they get to wherever, but i can't see how someone sipping from a beer can on the tube is causing anyone a problem. It's when they are drunk that there can be problems and those people got drunk elsewhere.

 

[nosos]

What about coffee? I hate the smell of coffee. Should that be banned, too?

This is the consistent application of the principle being invoked by ajdowns: something offending him constitutes a de facto case for legislating against it. In their world there's no need to point to any concrete harm done by it but only the psychological distress caused to him & others similarly inclined. You follow this through to its logical conclusions and the results are genuinely scary.

I mean this is just about the principles underlying the ban. In practical terms it's fucking absurd. No harm was being done in the first place by people drinking - I've asked repeatedly for examples and been giving none - so a new offense has been created in the absense of any compelling public interest (fail!) , which will initially be policed by tube staff who should not be forced into this role (fail!), then by BTP who given terrorism & people being drunk and disorderly (as CRUCIALLY opposed to merely drinking) have much better things to do (fail!) and they'll inevitably be forced to do so given what a high profile policy it was by the new mayor.

4 x fail

 

[Minnie_the_Minx]

I might have known. It's people like you Guin that make the world a less pleasant place.


I think it's a pointless rule, a waste of time drawing it up, a waste of time trying to enforce it. Personally I don't understand why someone feels the need to drink on the tube and can't just wait until they get to wherever, but i can't see how someone sipping from a beer can on the tube is causing anyone a problem. It's when they are drunk that there can be problems and those people got drunk elsewhere.

I think they should be sorting out the drug takers on the tube instead

 

[ajdown]

explain why the harm done to you is such that it justifies legislation.

So it's now down to if you are 'personally affected' you can only support something?

Most of the people that are against the war in Iraq/Afghanistan are probably not affected by it in their everyday lives in the slightest, but something in their politics/world view/whatever makes them feel it is wrong, so they speak out against it.

I don't have to be surrounded by people drinking on the bus every day to be in support of the alcohol ban.

Understand now?

 

[Guineveretoo]

I might have known. It's people like you Guin that make the world a less pleasant place.

I do my best. Glad to see my efforts have been duly noted.

I think it's a pointless rule, a waste of time drawing it up, a waste of time trying to enforce it. Personally I don't understand why someone feels the need to drink on the tube and can't just wait until they get to wherever, but i can't see how someone sipping from a beer can on the tube is causing anyone a problem. It's when they are drunk that there can be problems and those people got drunk elsewhere.

I agree.

 

[Orang Utan]

Yeah, cos people are are always necking pills on the tube

 

[Guineveretoo]

So it's now down to if you are 'personally affected' you can only support something?

Most of the people that are against the war in Iraq/Afghanistan are probably not affected by it in their everyday lives in the slightest, but something in their politics/world view/whatever makes them feel it is wrong, so they speak out against it.

I don't have to be surrounded by people drinking on the bus every day to be in support of the alcohol ban.

Understand now?

No, because you haven't explained why, other than that it smells!

 

[quimcunx]

*bangs head on desk*

It's a train/bus/tram. Not a bar. Not a pub. Not a club. Not your front room. No need to drink on tubes and buses. No need at all.

there is no need to drink in any of those places either. Therefore we should also ban it there.

 

[lights.out.london]

You realise that everyone gets you think that? They're waiting for you to offer reasons why they should think that too. It's what we do on a discussion board, see? We d-i-s-c-us-s. We don't just repeat ourselves over and over before getting pissed off when people have the temerity to still not agree with us when we've said the same thing 10 times

Who cares?

Anyway...you can't drink on the tube anymore, cos most people believe it to be inappropriate for the environment in which it would be drunk, and for the comfort and safety of others.

Hooray!

Y'know - the sense of entitlement of some of the posts on this thread is incredible. Go to a pub and have a beer. Jesus.

Civil liberties and beer on tubes? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

 

[nosos]

Who cares?

Anyway...you can't drink on the tube anymore, cos most people believe it to be inappropriate for the environment in which it would be drunk, and for the comfort and safety of others.

Hooray!

Y'know - the sense of entitlement of some of the posts on this thread is incredible. Go to a pub and have a beer. Jesus.

Civil liberties and beer on tubes? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

You are a moron. I give up.

 

[nosos]

Most of the people that are against the war in Iraq/Afghanistan are probably not affected by it in their everyday lives in the slightest, but something in their politics/world view/whatever makes them feel it is wrong, so they speak out against it.

That is so obviously not a meaningful analogy that it's almost painful.

I don't have to be surrounded by people drinking on the bus every day to be in support of the alcohol ban.

Course not. I'd hope that you'd have another intellectual wherewithall to actually give some good reasons in favour of it though.

 

[lights.out.london]

You are a moron. I give up.

And I just remembered why I had you on 'ignore' for so long, pretentious prick.

Pop off and have a pint on the Met line, eh?

 

[Crispy]

Things that many people find distasteful/annoying/don't want to put up with:

Public displays of affection (eg. kisssing 'light petting')
Tapping feet in time to music
Body odour
Political slogans on Tshirts
Jazz
Regional accents
Tipping the crumbs from the bottom of the crisp packet into one's mouth, spilling some and then brushing them off one's lapels.

The list could be endless. Drinking a can of lager is also on the list. This list is not what we should refer to when creating laws.

 

[ajdown]

No, because you haven't explained why, other than that it smells!

Would it even make a difference? Is "I support the ban" not sufficient?

Why do people object to the war in Iraq/Afghanistan? Would you tell them their reasons aren't good enough, or just accept that it's their right to choose to be against it?

I'm not for one moment saying that supporting the alcohol ban is even in the same league as being against the "War on Terror" ... but the principle remains the same.

 

[nosos]

And I just remembered why I had you on 'ignore' for so long, pretentious prick.

Pop off and have a pint on the Met line, eh?

I try and have a reasonable discussion with you & it ends by you telling me to kill myself? What a sad pathetic and angry person you really are.

 

[scifisam]

Who cares?

Anyway...you can't drink on the tube anymore, cos most people believe it to be inappropriate for the environment in which it would be drunk, and for the comfort and safety of others.

Hooray!

Y'know - the sense of entitlement of some of the posts on this thread is incredible. Go to a pub and have a beer. Jesus.

Civil liberties and beer on tubes? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

It's not because most people believe that at all. It's because Boris wanted to start his tenure with a big, loud change.

You and ajdown still haven't given a reason for the ban, other than 'I don't like alcohol' and 'it's a tube,' both of which we already know and are irrelevant.

 

[lights.out.london]

I try and have a reasonable discussion with you & it ends by you telling me to kill myself? What a sad pathetic and angry person you really are.

Kill yourself? What are you on about you tosser?

 

[scifisam]

Would it even make a difference? Is "I support the ban" not sufficient?

Why do people object to the war in Iraq/Afghanistan? Would you tell them their reasons aren't good enough, or just accept that it's their right to choose to be against it?

I'm not for one moment saying that supporting the alcohol ban is even in the same league as being against the "War on Terror" ... but the principle remains the same.

It's fairly easy to show demonstrable harm from a war. You don't have to personally experience the harm to show that such harm exists. But you haven't shown any harm to anyone from drinking on the tube.

 

[nosos]

You and ajdown still haven't given a reason for the ban, other than 'I don't like alcohol' and 'it's a tube,' both of which we already know and are irrelevant.

And if "I don't like x" is a reasonable grounds in itself for legislating against something, does ajdown accept the frankly quite scary conclusions of this? Or is alcohol somehow a special case?

 

[nosos]

Kill yourself? What are you on about you tosser?

Misread the met line comment. Terribly sorry old chap.

See how easy it is to be nice?

 

[Guineveretoo]

Would it even make a difference? Is "I support the ban" not sufficient?

Why do people object to the war in Iraq/Afghanistan? Would you tell them their reasons aren't good enough, or just accept that it's their right to choose to be against it?

I'm not for one moment saying that supporting the alcohol ban is even in the same league as being against the "War on Terror" ... but the principle remains the same.

But you do seem to think that you have widespread support for such a ban, despite this not appearing to be demonstrated on this thread, at least.

Let me get it right - you agree with the ban on alcohol on public transport in London because you agree with the ban on alcohol on public transport in London. Oh, and because cans of lager smell. Is that right? That was well worth all the posts to explain, wasn't it!

 

[lights.out.london]

It's not because most people believe that at all. It's because Boris wanted to start his tenure with a big, loud change.

You and ajdown still haven't given a reason for the ban, other than 'I don't like alcohol' and 'it's a tube,' both of which we already know and are irrelevant.

It's self evident - why the need to consume a drug which alters behaviour, perception, co-ordination etc in a non-licenced and non-controlled environment?

Booze? Fill your boots! I'll buy you one. Here...have two! But let's go to an ale house and not hop on a bus.

 

[nosos]

Things that many people find distasteful/annoying/don't want to put up with:

Public displays of affection (eg. kisssing 'light petting')
Tapping feet in time to music
Body odour
Political slogans on Tshirts
Jazz
Regional accents
Tipping the crumbs from the bottom of the crisp packet into one's mouth, spilling some and then brushing them off one's lapels.

The list could be endless. Drinking a can of lager is also on the list. This list is not what we should refer to when creating laws.

Good post.

Seriously: do the people in favour of a alcohol ban on the tube on the basis that they find alcohol on the tube offensive and it impingnes on the pleasure of their journey support banning the other things on the tube? If not, why not?

 

[lights.out.london]

Misread the met line comment. Terribly sorry old chap.

See how easy it is to be nice?

Guess what?

Go fuck yourself.

that was a broadcast from the angry/sad/cunt party.