A minimum price on alcohol???

Gordon Booth · 04-08-2010, 11:47

I enjoy a drink or two at night after a busy day watching the garden grow, looking around Accyweb or some other usefull occupation.I'm not proud or fussy, I'll buy anything beer on special offer at the supermarkets. We can't afford pub prices,we can't smoke there and I don't drink and drive.The suggested minimum of 50 pence per unit will cost me quite a bit more per month which as a pensioner I don't like but would have to pay. And Tesco would make an extea £6 to £8 pounds profit on a 24 pack, so naturally they think it's a good idea.
In the meantime all our town centres will continue to be filled at night with teenagers and 20's who say quite openly that they have gone out specificaly to 'get bladdered'. As they are already paying around £1.50 per unit and quite happy to pay that till 2 or 3 oclock in the morning, I have to ask how will 50 pence per unit minimum alter their behaviour? 'Not a lot' as the comedian said.
And we will continue to fund taxis to get the poor things home and instead of the police having to deal with all the drunks hitting the streets at 11pm they now have a steady feed of them till 4 and 5 in the morning.On overtime pay??
What sort of council(or Sottish government) makes a suggestion which won't work, won't give it or the government any financial benefit, will give the supermarkets a huge profit increase and will mainly hit those least able to afford it?

SPUGGIE J · 04-08-2010, 12:22

Scotlands drinking is out of control and they have no answer. The 50p a unit might make it dearer to drink but if they sell less puts jobs at risk. I dont drink so I wont loose out. Thing is though that if some one is desperate enough for a drink even teenagers they will find a way of getting the money together to get rat arsed when they want. Asda decided to stop cheap booze prom's but will the rest follow. Manchester want to introduce it in the hope it helps. It will end up that the booze run to Euroland will start again for cheap and somewhat toxic booze to keep people happy.

Margaret Pilkington · 04-08-2010, 12:26

And will of course hit those responsible drinkers.

While minimum price for alcohol sounds like a good thing it penalises those who do not have the problems that the young folk have........and that is, an irresponsible approach to alcohol.

I think that some of the blame must go to the previous government who tried to foster a more continental attitude......they called it a 'Cafe Culture' and brought in 24 hour drinking......this was never going to be a good idea....and this has been proved in practical terms.......so my view would be to revert back to the old licensing hours......take alcohol out of supermarkets......bring back the offy if folk want a retail outlet for alcoholic drinks.

cashman · 04-08-2010, 12:33

Its using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut, but its the easiest option, nowt to do wi previous government, its more to do wi my old chestnut- NO DETTERANT,that will make these knobheads reconsider attitude, simple as. so everyone who likes a drink at home must suffer. i would just add that i don't/can't drink, so aint bitching on me own behalf.

Margaret Pilkington · 04-08-2010, 12:49

Well, Cashy, you may feel that it was nothing to do with the previous government, but they certainly did nothing to help what was, already a bad situation.
They were told by eminent respected authorities, that it was madness to bring in 24 hour drinking, but they did it anyway...so in my book that makes them partly to blame.

The problem with many of our young people is that they are irresponsible and care not whether they wreck their health(or anyone else's...thinking of alcohol fuelled fights and stabbings here)...they prefer to live in the moment, thinking not of the future.......and they have the money to spend on anything they want...booze drugs etc.

cashman · 04-08-2010, 13:00

was always 24 hr drinking margaret, it was just called After Time, back then, differance was the penalty fer being a knobhead was a maximum fine or imprisonment if ya were a persistent drunk. yeh there were drunkards but behaviour was nowt compared to today, nowts perfect, but i reckon deterrant of nick is a damn site better n what there is now.

it certainly helped me calm down.

SPUGGIE J · 04-08-2010, 13:30

Young uns think it is macho to have a pickled liver a sore head and a booze addled brain.

Taggy · 04-08-2010, 14:04

Me n Cashy touched roughly on this subject when we had a natter in Accy a few days ago. And i guess there aint a really simple answer to it. Although i certainly think that the 24 hr drinking "experiment" has not helped the situation. As Cashy says, there's always been after hours drinking to some degree, but by and large, when we were younger, it was more controlled. You didn't have some pubs just opening at around 10 in the evening for a few nights a week. You had to be "known" to the landlord and usually a regular at a particular pub in order to get served after time. PLus you mainly had to have been drinking there earlier in the evening...maybe go for a little wander...then go back to your regular pub reasonably before last orders were called!...Obviously it varied a bit...but that was general after time etiquette!

Also there was very much a mixed age group in pubs then, which doesn't happen much now. You used to find lads and lassies, going into pubs with their parents and grandparents, thats how we used to learn how to drink relatively responsibily, otherwise ya got a clip of yer dad or granddad. Now we have older people in some pubs and the younger element coming out much later, and going into different pubs, usually after they've met up in someones house and drunk some cheap supermarket booze first! 24 hour drinking has allowed this to happen, and is responsible for quite an element of binge drinking.

If we agree thats its also mainly, but not exclusively, young people who are the problem in terms of binge drinking, then perhaps it would be fairer to raise the legal drinking age to 21, as they have in USA, rather than target everyone. When i mentioned this, Cashy raised the valid point that if someone is old enough to be sent to War to fight for us, then they are old enough to drink, and its hard to argue with that, other than to say that whenever a law is brougt in, there will always be some that suffer in order to make things better, so i still feel this would overall be a more appropriate measure than charging everone more for alcohol!

I also agree that we need tougher sentencing for drunken/violent behaviour...but can anyone see that happening?

Needs a lot of thought...and as ever, punishing everyone, and increasing profits for breweries/supermarkets and revenue for the government, will usually win the day!

Best Regards - Taggy

Margaret Pilkington · 04-08-2010, 14:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

was always 24 hr drinking margaret, it was just called After Time, back then, differance was the penalty fer being a knobhead was a maximum fine or imprisonment if ya were a persistent drunk. yeh there were drunkards but behaviour was nowt compared to today, nowts perfect, but i reckon deterrant of nick is a damn site better n what there is now.

it certainly helped me calm down.

I am aware that there were 'lock ins' but I was told by publicans that they risked their licence to participate in this pusuit......and way back then there were always bobbies on the beat......yes some of them would turn a blind eye, some would even join in(allegedly) but 24 hour drinking, while availabe to some was not widely available...and I am sure most publicans chose who they wanted to take part in such lock ins....loose lipped youngsters probably would not be the clientele of choice.

Margaret Pilkington · 04-08-2010, 14:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taggy

Me n Cashy touched roughly on this subject when we had a natter in Accy a few days ago. And i guess there aint a really simple answer to it. Although i certainly think that the 24 hr drinking "experiment" has not helped the situation. As Cashy says, there's always been after hours drinking to some degree, but by and large, when we were younger, it was more controlled. You didn't have some pubs just opening at around 10 in the evening for a few nights a week. You had to be "known" to the landlord and usually a regular at a particular pub in order to get served after time. PLus you mainly had to have been drinking there earlier in the evening...maybe go for a little wander...then go back to your regular pub reasonably before last orders were called!...Obviously it varied a bit...but that was general after time etiquette!

Also there was very much a mixed age group in pubs then, which doesn't happen much now. You used to find lads and lassies, going into pubs with their parents and grandparents, thats how we used to learn how to drink relatively responsibily, otherwise ya got a clip of yer dad or granddad. Now we have older people in some pubs and the younger element coming out much later, and going into different pubs, usually after they've met up in someones house and drunk some cheap supermarket booze first! 24 hour drinking has allowed this to happen, and is responsible for quite an element of binge drinking.

If we agree thats its also mainly, but not exclusively, young people who are the problem in terms of binge drinking, then perhaps it would be fairer to raise the legal drinking age to 21, as they have in USA, rather than target everyone. When i mentioned this, Cashy raised the valid point that if someone is old enough to be sent to War to fight for us, then they are old enough to drink, and its hard to argue with that, other than to say that whenever a law is brougt in, there will always be some that suffer in order to make things better, so i still feel this would overall be a more appropriate measure than charging everone more for alcohol!

I also agree that we need tougher sentencing for drunken/violent behaviour...but can anyone see that happening?

Needs a lot of thought...and as ever, punishing everyone, and increasing profits for breweries/supermarkets and revenue for the government, will usually win the day!

Best Regards - Taggy

Tagy, that is how I remember lock ins working....you had to be known and be a regular......although sometimes if you were with a regular you might be permitted to stay.

I can't see the judiciary accepting tougher sentencing on drunken behaviour as a means of tackling this thorny problem.

In America that age that you can legally drink alcohol is 21, and while they have young men going to war over there too, to fight for their country, they do not challenge the alcohol laws.......just because you can fight doesn't mean that you can handle alcohol....and many Barracks towns will prove this.

21 should be the age at which you can purchase alcohol......as for deterrants....I think the only thing that will happen is that drunkards will be sent on education courses, much the way that speeders are.

The folk who abuse alcohol should be sent to work as volunteers on the units which treat those with Liver failure.

cashman · 04-08-2010, 14:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

Tagy, that is how I remember lock ins working....you had to be known and be a regular......although sometimes if you were with a regular you might be permitted to stay.

I can't see the judiciary accepting tougher sentencing on drunken behaviour as a means of tackling this thorny problem.

In America that age that you can legally drink alcohol is 21, and while they have young men going to war over there too, to fight for their country, they do not challenge the alcohol laws.......just because you can fight doesn't mean that you can handle alcohol....and many Barracks towns will prove this.

21 should be the age at which you can purchase alcohol......as for deterrants....I think the only thing that will happen is that drunkards will be sent on education courses, much the way that speeders are.

The folk who abuse alcohol should be sent to work as volunteers on the units which treat those with Liver failure.

thing is though i'm sure the judiciary do not set the setencing tariffs? could be wrong, but thats how i understand it, is it not down to whomever is in power to do this? i am against raising the age n america i do not think is a good yardstick, given what happens oer yon,

as well as all the knobheads there are many responsible young uns, its the knobheads that get all the publicity.

Margaret Pilkington · 04-08-2010, 14:41

Cashy, again you are right, the judiciary do not set the sentencing, but I am not sure that they have no influence.

I also agree that not all young people have an irresponsible attitude towards citizenship, but I think making 21 the age at which alcohol could be purchased would be a better solution, though it would have to be adequately and reliably enforced to have any effect.

In essence I think the problem lies in the laws being made and then there isn't enough enforcement to make them do the job they were passed to do.

I do not think it is reasonable to penalise the vast majority of responsible drinkers for the ones who show no desire to be responsible....and in the end, the government are going to lose out on revenue, which will have to be garnered from some other source.

I think I should point out here that I am only a very occasional drinker so have no real axe to grind on my own behalf.

cashman · 04-08-2010, 14:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

I also agree that not all young people have an irresponsible attitude towards citizenship, but I think making 21 the age at which alcohol could be purchased would be a better solution, though it would have to be adequately and reliably enforced to have any effect.

In essence I think the problem lies in the laws being made and then there isn't enough enforcement to make them do the job they were passed to do.

I do not think it is reasonable to penalise the vast majority of responsible drinkers for the ones who show no desire to be responsible....and in the end, the government are going to lose out on revenue, which will have to be garnered from some other source.

I think I should point out here that I am only a very occasional drinker so have no real axe to grind on my own behalf.

thats exactly where i stand margaret, there isn't enough enforcement, nor are the sentences severe enough these days to make em consider behaving, also it is not reasonable to penalise the vast majority, but its the easy way out fer any government.

Gordon Booth · 04-08-2010, 15:07

How about building, at great expense,pairs of 'holding cells',beautifully lined with tiles,drains in the floors,benches at the sides.Fully airconditioned and lit, of course. One for the young ladies, one for the young gentlemen.Drunk on the streets? You're put in there and released at 12 oclock the next day to make your own way home. You get free accomodation and a chance to vomit all over your friends instead of the pavements.
Ah, you say, but what about their 'HUMAN RIGHTS'? Well surely they have a human right to get drunk,vomit, relieve themselves on street corners and knife each other, it's their free choice?Fair enough, then lets leave them to it and stop worrying about them
I'd even volunteer for the job of jet-spraying the cells out each afternoon if it would help.

SamF · 04-08-2010, 15:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gordon Booth

How about building, at great expense,pairs of 'holding cells',beautifully lined with tiles,drains in the floors,benches at the sides.Fully airconditioned and lit, of course. One for the young ladies, one for the young gentlemen.Drunk on the streets? You're put in there and released at 12 oclock the next day to make your own way home. You get free accomodation and a chance to vomit all over your friends instead of the pavements.
Ah, you say, but what about their 'HUMAN RIGHTS'? Well surely they have a human right to get drunk,vomit, relieve themselves on street corners and knife each other, it's their free choice?Fair enough, then lets leave them to it and stop worrying about them
I'd even volunteer for the job of jet-spraying the cells out each afternoon if it would help.

Get a grip it's that sort of nonsense which discredits the efforts of those who are trying to come up with a real solution.

In my opinion 24 hour drinking will work, but eventually - it will take decades to change an entire culture not a few years.

I believe there are a lot of rose tinted spectacles being worn here, it is a case where a fair comparison cannot be made, I, at 20 years old can account for the current state of affairs but not that before my time, and vice versa, it would be foolish for me to claim it is better or worse now or then, going purely off second hand accounts.

A minimum price on alcohol would do absolutely nothing to help. It is already the case that illegal drugs are considerably cheaper than booze, pushing up the price would just make more jump across. It's the binge culture that needs to change and to be honest there it's ingrained into British history for so long I doubt it ever will.