Should Under-18s be aloud in pubs?

ionapaul

chill wrote:

No. There is no higher incidence of alcoholism in Ireland than any other country.

Ethnicity

Overall, there is no difference in alcoholic prevalence among African Americans, Caucasians, and Hispanic people. Some population groups, however, such as Irish and Native Americans, have an increased incidence in alcoholism while others, such as Jewish and Asian Americans, have a lower risk. Although the biological or cultural causes of such different risks are not known, certain people in these population groups may have a genetic susceptibility or invulnerability to alcoholism because of the way they metabolize alcohol. [ See Genetic Factors under What Causes Alcoholism?, above .]

From http://www.reutershealth.com/wellconnected/doc56.html

Just one link out of hundreds I could provide. Again, anything can be proved on the internet, but if you don't think we, as a nation, have more serious and ingrained problems with alcohol than most others, you are either fooling yourself or haven't spent enough time outside Ireland to form a proper comparison. While in college in the States for graduate school my friends would be astonished as I told them what they were warned was 'binge drinking' (drinking 6 pints or more in one night, shock!) was EVERY night out for Irish college students. Maybe college students in Galway drink far more than the rest of the country, who knows

AngelofFire

Your 99.9% statement is complete horseshi*.

if you interviewed 100 people at 3 a.m. of Saturday night you think not even one would be drunk?
I'd say 70-90% of them would be fairly well-on.

Being drunk and being rushed to the emergency room for alcohol poisoning are two completely different things. The 99.9% i quoted include the people who get drunk but dont get violent or rushed to the emergency room. It is our right to get drunk during our free time as long as we dont cause harm to ourself or others. we`re not letting the tabloids or government tell us otherwise.

Duckjob

Sleipnir wrote:

Unfortunately it just isn't enough to leave it to the parents or the publicans. Anyway, you could apply the same criteria to every law if that were the case.
We'll leave the drunk driving thing down to the driver. They should have the cop-on to realise that they could kill someone.

Thats a ridiculous comparison. Lets have a little common sense here.

I was in pubs and bar/restaurants a lot when on holidays as a kid. If there was drunkeness around, my parents would bring us somewhere else. Where's the problem?

Don't compare a parent bringing their child into a bar/restaurant with a drunk getting behind the wheel of a car and killing someone. Thats ludicrous.

AngelofFire

irish1 wrote:

I'm sure Dublin prices are higher in places. .

you`d be right in guessing that. on a saturday night the price of a pint in the city centre is €4.20 and in a nightclub its as high as €4.80 some places even charge over €5.00.

Sleipnir

it's not a 'comparision' as you say (Did I say "let's compare allowing kids in to pubs with drunk driving"?)

My point was, you cannot just leave everything up to the individual because you'll find that some will not have the sense to see when they should or shouldn't do something.
That's why we have laws.

Your parents have the sense to take you somewhere else. Many parents would not. Should the children of those parents just be abandoned because the rest of us want our kids to be with us so we can drink for longer?

AngelofFire

Sleipnir wrote:

.

Your parents have the sense to take you somewhere else. Many parents would not. Should the children of those parents just be abandoned because the rest of us want our kids to be with us so we can drink for longer?

As i already said,the department of social and family affairs already have laws in place to protect children from being dragged around pubs until closing time by alcoholic parents.There is no need to ban all children from pubs.

Duckjob

By that rational, why not just make driving illegal. That will stop road fatalities and the law is needed because not everyone can be trusted to drive sensibly right?

Just because a law achieves an effect, doesnt mean it's not overkill. There's always more than one way to skin a cat....

Sleipnir

No, there is no need to make it easier for parents to drag their children around pubs until closing.
It is also naive to assume that they are all alcoholics. Some are just bad parents who don't see a problem with their kids bringing them home.

When was the last time you say a representative form the Department of Social & family affairs checking the pubs?
Are the publicans calling for the ban to be lifted provided that there are more measures put in place to ensure the safety of children in this respect?
Are they hell.

Sleipnir

Duckjob wrote:

By that rational, why not just make driving illegal. That will stop road fatalities and the law is needed because not everyone can be trusted to drive sensibly right?

Just because a law achieves an effect, doesnt mean it's not overkill. There's always more than one way to skin a cat....

You're missing my point entirely. Try not to take everything that is written so literally.

Duckjob

I thought the whole point of debate is to state things literally. I prefer not to fluff the issue. If I'm missing your point, then, for the record, what IS your point?

My point is that a balanced view is needed, you could pass laws tommorrow which would completely wipe out crime of any sort, but in the process would transform society into a joyless dictatorship. Whats the point in doing that?

There's always middle ground to be found if you look hard enough.

Sleipnir

aye. whatever.

bonkey

gom wrote:

I see that Minister O'Donoghue wants the law reversed so that Children can hang out with their parents in the pub. His reason. Pubs are losing business.

Dear lord what sort of logic is that.

Business is down because people can't afford to drink in pubs as much any more. Allowing them to bring their kids in for the painfully-overpriced-soft-drinks isn't gonna do much to boost business.

jc

AngelofFire

Sleipnir wrote:

When was the last time you say a representative form the Department of Social & family affairs checking the pubs?
Are the publicans calling for the ban to be lifted provided that there are more measures put in place to ensure the safety of children in this respect?
Are they hell.

Most Pubs in Dublin and in large urban areas have regulations that state that all children must be off the premises by a certain time which i agree with. The majority of pubs that have children there till 11:30 are holiday resorts like Salthill or Bundoran, theres no harm in bringing a kid to a pub at night if they are on holiday.

chill

ionapaul wrote:

Ethnicity

Overall, there is no difference in alcoholic prevalence among African Americans, Caucasians, and Hispanic people. Some population groups, however, such as Irish and Native Americans, have an increased incidence in alcoholism while others, such as Jewish and Asian Americans, have a lower risk. Although the biological or cultural causes of such different risks are not known, certain people in these population groups may have a genetic susceptibility or invulnerability to alcoholism because of the way they metabolize alcohol. [ See Genetic Factors under What Causes Alcoholism?, above .]

From http://www.reutershealth.com/wellconnected/doc56.html

Just one link out of hundreds I could provide. Again, anything can be proved on the internet, but if you don't think we, as a nation, have more serious and ingrained problems with alcohol than most others, you are either fooling yourself or haven't spent enough time outside Ireland to form a proper comparison. While in college in the States for graduate school my friends would be astonished as I told them what they were warned was 'binge drinking' (drinking 6 pints or more in one night, shock!) was EVERY night out for Irish college students. Maybe college students in Galway drink far more than the rest of the country, who knows

What a load of b***. I don't accept the validity of that masivley generalised and unscientific statement about Irish people.
Also you saeem to have a serious problem differentiating between alcoholism and high levels of drinking, which are two completely different things.

Fact is the problem we have in Ireland is mainly due to the prohibitive legal structure and if we start to get rid of that, then the social obsession will start to lessen.

chill

Duckjob wrote:

Thats a ridiculous comparison. Lets have a little common sense here.
I was in pubs and bar/restaurants a lot when on holidays as a kid. If there was drunkeness around, my parents would bring us somewhere else. Where's the problem?
Don't compare a parent bringing their child into a bar/restaurant with a drunk getting behind the wheel of a car and killing someone. Thats ludicrous.

Absolutely true.

I have been in dozens of pubs since for example Christmas and I honestly cannot remember coming across more than two people who could have been decribed as 'drunk'. And the times I have been there have mainly been between 10pm and closing time. There has been abs no reason why children could not have happily and comfortably been there with me or other people there.

ionapaul

chill wrote:

What a load of b***. I don't accept the validity of that masivley generalised and unscientific statement about Irish people.
Also you saeem to have a serious problem differentiating between alcoholism and high levels of drinking, which are two completely different things.

Fact is the problem we have in Ireland is mainly due to the prohibitive legal structure and if we start to get rid of that, then the social obsession will start to lessen.

I think we must agree to disagree on this one. If you don't believe in alcoholism/addictive tendencies being genetic in part, fair enough. Some people have also disagreed with the idea that the typical 'Irish' skin, pale and very prone to skin cancer, is genetic. I believe that both are quite definitely genetic, and my years living abroad (rather than a few weeks here and there on holiday) convinces me that we drink too much and are a society obsessed by alcohol.*

I think you need to drop the 'they regulated it and therefore we began to obsess' argument - it is too easy to poke holes through!

*
we have many fine qualities as a society as well, I don't want to sound like I think Irish society is fatally flawed or anything

chill

AngelofFire wrote:

Most Pubs in Dublin and in large urban areas have regulations that state that all children must be off the premises by a certain time which i agree with. The majority of pubs that have children there till 11:30 are holiday resorts like Salthill or Bundoran, theres no harm in bringing a kid to a pub at night if they are on holiday.

I agree - but why do they have to be holiday ?

When my kids were 6 or 7 I wanted to go out to meet friends for for a drink with the other half and couldn't... or else pay a bloody fortune for a babysitter !

And there are thousands of people like that in Ireland, hundreds of thousands in fact.

ionapaul

chill wrote:

Absolutely true.

I have been in dozens of pubs since for example Christmas and I honestly cannot remember coming across more than two people who could have been decribed as 'drunk'.

Funny. I walked home from work (off Thomas St., Dublin) to Ringsend Rd. today - began my journey at 5:50pm and was home at 6:30pm. It was a bright sunny day. I saw at least three drunks during the journey (all up around Thomas St.) - either drunk or having taken drugs that closely mimic the effects of being drunk.

Point is the examples you or I see in any given day, month or year don't mean much - any amount of unscientific theories could be based on any individual's limited life experiences. I was probably unlucky enough to see the only three drunks hanging around Thomas St. today, while you could have been very lucky in visiting the only pubs without any drunken people!

chill

ionapaul wrote:

I think we must agree to disagree on this one. If you don't believe in alcoholism/addictive tendencies being genetic in part, fair enough.

No I don't. And even if it were true.... only a tiny marginal difference.

Some people have also disagreed with the idea that the typical 'Irish' skin, pale and very prone to skin cancer, is genetic. I believe that both are quite definitely genetic, and my years living abroad (rather than a few weeks here and there on holiday) convinces me that we drink too much and are a society obsessed by alcohol.

Apples and oranges, and I still believe you confuse the concept of volume drinking with alcoholism.

I think you need to drop the 'they regulated it and therefore we began to obsess' argument - it is too easy to poke holes through!

Yeah right. I see no one making any valid points to the contrary. Most people know it is true.

chill

ionapaul wrote:

Point is the examples you or I see in any given day, month or year don't mean much - any amount of unscientific theories could be based on any individual's limited life experiences. I was probably unlucky enough to see the only three drunks hanging around Thomas St. today, while you could have been very lucky in visiting the only pubs without any drunken people!

I accept what you say.
But what does it mean ? That there will be drunk people around from time to time ? yes there will.
Do we have to stop all children from being in pubs because they 'might' encounter a drunk person ? WHY ? It is part of life and not something that we need to be so obssessed with.

Victor

Interesting. Pubs don't want 19 years olds on the premises, but they do want 9 year olds. :rolleyes:

ionapaul

chill wrote:

Do we have to stop all children from being in pubs because they 'might' encounter a drunk person ? WHY ? It is part of life and not something that we need to be so obssessed with.

Alright, once more I will attempt to counter the 'if you regulate it, they will come' argument...cigarette smoking is much MUCH more regulated now than 10, 20, 30 years ago (just like another well-known addictive substance regulated by the government). It is much harder NOW for under-16 year olds to buy cigarettes than 10, 20, 30 years ago (just like it is harder for under-18 year olds to buy another well-known addictive substance regulated by the government). Since it is much more regulated now (one could even say that our society has become obsessed with regulating it, being one of the only countries to actually ban it from our workspaces!), following your logic we should be much more obsessed by cigarettes and smoking, particularly the teenagers amoung us. Is this the case in 2004?

No. Teenagers and in fact people in general smoke less in 2004 than 10, 20, 30 years ago. Despite the impressive increase in governmental regulation.

Regulation = obsession is a non-starter with regards to alcohol, IMO. Again, I think we'll just agree to disagree on almost every aspect covered in this debate

Flukey

Education is the thing and I am not necessarily talking academically. Children learn by example. Parents and society have to assist in that. In the normal course of events pubs are not the right place for children late at night. You rarely see them anyway, even before this regulation. If you are in Dublin on a Friday or Saturday night, you won't see many if any children in pubs. Where you do see them are in holiday resorts or in places where there may be a function on, involving the family or friends of the children.

It is not a bad thing for a child to be brought into a pub occasionally, but it is best done during the day. It can be helpful to a child to learn about these things, in a controlled situation. I wasn't often in a pub as a child, except at holiday times and I grew up knowing what a pub was. It was done in a responsible way. It is only when parents are away from home, such as on holidays that it becomes an issue for the majority of people. The law is effecting that part of the market, while it was really aimed at getting unaccompanied teenagers out of pubs. Children need to be educated about drink and. like in many countries, acclimatised to it in a responsible manner.

The intitial question was as to whether children and young people should be allowed into pubs late at night. The answer to that is yes, but only when accompanied. We have however moved to a much broader area, looking at drink in general. That is a topic for another thread.

Duckjob

The problem with the law is that it applies across the board and so removes any element of parent (and indeed publican) discretion from the equation.

No-one in their right mind would say that a disco bar in temple bar is a good environment for a child at 10:30 on a Saturday night, and a publican would not want a child there anyway. There's a whole world of difference between that and a quite rural pub on a sunny evening beside a hoiday site, where the publican would be glad to provide food and drink and get a families business.

Mighty_Mouse

There's a whole world of difference between that and a quite rural pub on a sunny evening beside a hoiday site, where the publican would be glad to provide food and drink and get a families business.

So you have a problem with the time of the ban? I take it you consider 9pm as evening time in the summer?

Would you object if the ban came in at 10pm instead?

gobby

Duckjob wrote:

The problem with the law is that it applies across the board and so removes any element of parent (and indeed publican) discretion from the equation.

No-one in their right mind would say that a disco bar in temple bar is a good environment for a child at 10:30 on a Saturday night, and a publican would not want a child there anyway. There's a whole world of difference between that and a quite rural pub on a sunny evening beside a hoiday site, where the publican would be glad to provide food and drink and get a families business.

Very true. So does this mean that it should be left to the publican to ultimately decide who to let into his/her pub?

Duckjob

The 'sunny evening' was just one example to illustrate why a blanket ban does not make sense. There would be other situations whereby the environment is such that there is no harm to a child being there.

The time is irrelevent, I've seen drunks in bars in mid-afternoon when children can be legally there perfectly legally. There is no one time before which the government can stipulate that a pub is a suitable environment for a child, and after which is unsuitable. The whole notion is ridiculous...

Common sense has to come into play somewhere.

ionapaul

If we are still talking about children in pubs after 9pm I think most people will agree, they should not be there, supervised or otherwise. Of course everyone can point out exceptions (the trad night in Doolin on a sunny July evening!) but by-and-large Irish pubs at night are NOT suitable for children, whether their parents are there or not (once the parents start drinking, the element of responsibility people hope for may disappear). Maybe I don't have the perspective angry parents who want to visit the pub have, but certainly have been in enough pubs (particularly in the oft-mentioned Salthill, where I grew up) after 9pm to know that kids are better off elsewhere and leaving it to parental discretion is not enough (like in a lot of things regulated by the government, such as compulsory schooling, etc...)

Mighty_Mouse

The time is irrelevent, I've seen drunks in bars in mid-afternoon when children can be legally there perfectly legally

Time is irrelevant!!!! Come on!

The whole notion is ridiculous...

What I find nonsense is the reasons offered by publicans for smoking and/or children bans.

If they just had the balls to come out and admit that the reason they don't give a **** about kids in pubs(all night long if necessary) is because at least they're not dragging parents home.

Stupid "nonsense" arguments are used to argue that there's "no point" bringing in a law that "won't work". The question for me simply comes down to whether or not a pub is a good environment for a child after nine o'clock. yes or no: I think a pub is tha last place a responsible parent should bring a child after 9/10 o'clock .

If you agree with me : lets regulate for it. If the odd country hall has a drinks licence and is putting on a kiddies show, then lets regulate for that situation also instead of "nonsensical" it wont work arguments.

Until the day I see the first pub going out of business or pub licence's falling below astronomical prices - I'm not gonna have any sympathy for "rip off" greedy publicans.

Sure if they kids stop going can't they just add another 50c to the pint!!!!

my 2c

chill

gobby wrote:

Very true. So does this mean that it should be left to the publican to ultimately decide who to let into his/her pub?

I would say yes.

The publican should decide what style of premises he wants to maintain and what kind of clientele he wishes to attract, NOT the government.