Alcohol Ban

Pace2008

Terry wrote: »

As for prohibition of alcohol, GTFO.
I was talking to a friend earlier. He was telling me about the stag weekend he had just been on. Everyone was out of it on coke and most of them can't remember what happened because of that. Woooooooooooooo!!! Awesome and forgotten weekend.

That doesn't sound right at all. I dislike coke not only because it can turn me into a cock, but also because I can remember having been a cock under the influence. Stimulants are usually pretty lucid drugs unless you cain in to the point you end up with psychosis.

When I act the dick on the beer at least I usually have the safety net of a blackout to provide comfort.

At least with alcohol you don't get the craving to get more every five minutes, and can judge the amount you are taking.

Do you mean you know the content of you drink, or you have the presence of min to limit your intake? If it's the latter I couldn't disagree more - I've never encountered a drug that obliterates your sense of judgement to the same extent as alcohol. As for the craving: I know plenty of people, myself included, who will drink continuously until they pass out once they get beyond a certain point.

g5fd6ow0hseima

When will the people of ireland finally recognise that alcohol is just as much a recreational drug as canabis, ecstacy or amphetamines?

Too often I hear heavy drinkers refer to 'drugs' (obviously in a negative manner).

The sooner people realise this, perhaps this country may climb out of its awful drink habit.

TPD

I'm guessing the OP made this thread to highlight the similarities between the current laws on drugs and the prohibition of alcohol? I doubt those people too set in their ways against drugs will take the time to think about the hypocrisy as they defend alcohol though.

PCPhoto

TPD wrote: »

I'm guessing the OP made this thread to highlight the similarities between the current laws on drugs and the prohibition of alcohol? I doubt those people too set in their ways against drugs will take the time to think about the hypocrisy as they defend alcohol though.

to be honest I didnt even think about that ..... it was basically about how drink is so rife in society that people dont see it as a negative influence on their lives.

people use "alcohol" ..... and people abuse "alcohol" .... people blame alcohol and THEIR dependance on THEIR BEHAVIOUR (ie. criminal behaviour and in general for stupid actions)

silly topic

PCPhoto

Davegalway wrote: »

silly topic

thats your opinion .... and you are entitled to it.

quick question: Do you know anyone who doesn't drink ? or goto the pub to socialise ?

ever do something and blame alcohol ? ( oh I was sooooo wasted last night .... did I do anything stupid ? )


my answers to those questions:
- I know some people who dont drink, some of them goto the pub to socialise.
- yes I've blamed alcohol for loads of things, once I was so drunk I walked out of my hotel room and locked myself out ...nekked and because I was still drunk I was convinced the hotel security guy was after me for being nekked and I was gonna get arrested - spent a bit of time running around the hotel avoiding him..... not really blaming alcohol but wanted to share that with ya.

ScumLord

minidazzler wrote: »

I would agree with an alcohol prohibition for one reason.

1920's era speakeasy's were supposedly the shiznit! That would be awesome these days! It would reaffirm gender identities with Men being men and women being dames!

Hell ya, criminalize everything it's more fun that way. Half the fun in having half an ounce of cocaine is sniffing it all before the federales burst through your door.

upandcumming wrote: »

Alcohol was around much longer so is far more accepted than drugs.

I don't think that could be true, as far as I know earliest records go back 9000 years while cannabis and other plants like mushrooms have been used for at least 10000 years. Remember alcohol needs to be processed whereas most other drugs are ready to pick fresh.

Greyfox

TPD wrote: »

I doubt those people too set in their ways against drugs will take the time to think about the hypocrisy as they defend alcohol though.

The difference is most people who drink alcohol don't get into a position where it could ruin their lives, whereas I personally believe if I take drugs like Cocaine it's likely that I could get addicted to it and let it ruin my life

Pace2008

Greyfox wrote: »

The difference is most people who drink alcohol don't get into a position where it could ruin their lives, whereas I personally believe if I take drugs like Cocaine it's likely that I could get addicted to it and let it ruin my life

Cocaine is an addictive drug, but a lot of people take it and very few of them end up addicted. Even with hard drugs, the majority of people have the sense to limit their use and stop the substance controlling their lives. You have this idea that coke would chew you up and spit you back out, but in reality you'd likely see a potentially destructive habit forming from a mile away and nip it in the bud.

In any case, apart from cocaine and heroin (and probably mephedrone), most mainstream drugs are less addictive than drink.

Herbal Deity

Greyfox wrote: »

The difference is most people who drink alcohol don't get into a position where it could ruin their lives, whereas I personally believe if I take drugs like Cocaine it's likely that I could get addicted to it and let it ruin my life

1. Have you verified that the percentage of drinkers who screw up their lives due to alcohol is much less than the percentage of cocaine users who screw up their lives due to cocaine? (I don't know myself, I'm just wondering if you'd checked this out before arriving at your personal belief)

2. What do you mean by "drugs like cocaine"? Drugs with the addiction potential of cocaine? How do you feel about drugs like Marajuana, LSD, MDMA etc. which have much less addiction potential than even alcohol?

mconigol

emmm...alcohol IS a drug isn't it???

gustavo

mconigol wrote: »

emmm...alcohol IS a drug isn't it???

Alcohol isn't a drug it's a drink :pac:

mconigol

gustavo wrote: »

Alcohol isn't a drug it's a drink :pac:

teengrowth.com begs to differ...:rolleyes:

PCPhoto

PCPhoto wrote: »

"While alcohol is not an excuse it is taken into account as a factor"

It should be taken into account as giving more severe a sentence.
If you did something illegal AND you blame the drink, it should be even worse for getting yourself into that state in the first place

Thomas828

Ban alcohol? Forget it. It didn't work in the USA and it's not going to work here. The only way Ireland will ever be alcohol-free is if everybody embraces Islam. And the chances of that happening are as close as dammit to zero.

PCPhoto

bluewolf wrote: »

It should be taken into account as giving more severe a sentence.
If you did something illegal AND you blame the drink, it should be even worse for getting yourself into that state in the first place

unfortunately thats not the case in Irish courts !!

every case I've seen they say while alcohol is not an excuse it will be noted that the defendant was under the "influence" of alcohol - almost saying that alcohol has control over the person....in the same way that someone can/will blame drugs ..."I was off me head , didnt know what I was doin' like" type of situation.

L.Jenkins

http://sizzup.com/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/040_fp0529i-love-beer-posters.jpg

PCPhoto

PCPhoto wrote: »

unfortunately thats not the case in Irish courts !!

Yeah that's why I'm saying that's what I think it should be.

Gigiwagga

I have noticed a couple of instances where people have pasted A3 sized b/w posters on alcohol billboards stating " This LEGAL HIGH kills thousands of Irish people EVERY YEAR" It looks great against the recent Murphys ad.
It sure would be interesting if these posters started showing up across the country. It would be a needle in the side of the current government policy towards cannabis, which does not kill any Irish people each year.
Maybe we should start a campaign.

I'm sure A4 size would do with LEGAL HIGH in a bold type

I'm not advocating a ban on alcohol at all, just to point out the hypocrisy of our society, and a hope of fairness for all.

ScumLord

PCPhoto wrote: »

unfortunately thats not the case in Irish courts !!

every case I've seen they say while alcohol is not an excuse it will be noted that the defendant was under the "influence" of alcohol - almost saying that alcohol has control over the person....in the same way that someone can/will blame drugs ..."I was off me head , didnt know what I was doin' like" type of situation.

It does play a factor and can't simply be ignored by the court. It changes the way your brain works so it is fair to say the defendant wasn't themselves even though they're still responsible for their actions. Your mental state can be influenced by many things including drink and that needs to be noted. As it is the courts already hand out blanket sentences and don't deal with cases on an individual basis.

conorhal

Banning alcohol is just daft, but an alcohol ASBO might be an interesting compromise.
I'd rather that anybody convicted of a crime associated with antisocial behavior should be slapped with an alcohol ASBO, meaning that they must present themselves daily for a breathalyzer or drug test, it would take no more than 5 minutes and failure to appear or a failure during testing would lead to the automatic activation of a fixed penalty, be it their sentence or a fine. If you could keep the chavs sober then I reckon you would see a 50% drop in assaults etc.

PCPhoto

conorhal wrote: »

Banning alcohol is just daft, but an alcohol ASBO might be an interesting compromise.
I'd rather that anybody convicted of a crime associated with antisocial behavior should be slapped with an alcohol ASBO,

I'd rather repeat/career criminals are sterilised so they stop reproducing - less little scrotes means less trainees and less crime - but thats just in an ideal situation

If you could keep the chavs sober then I reckon you would see a 50% drop in assaults etc.

this is where the problem lies .... keeping them sober...where do they get money for drink .... crime/social welfare (including childrens allowance)

maybe I'm being narrowminded tarring them all with the one brush - but to me a criminal generally breeds other criminals.

but back to the topic at hand .... the alcohol ASBO in theory sounds good but its down to the attitude of the criminal - accepting responsibility for their actions....cant/wont happen until we give criminals proper jail sentences and make jail something that they dont simply accept.

the old adage .... "crime doesn't pay" ...obviously hasnt seen the fine print (unless yer in Ireland - then its the government that'll pay...for everything)

PCPhoto

ScumLord wrote: »

It does play a factor and can't simply be ignored by the court. It changes the way your brain works so it is fair to say the defendant wasn't themselves even though they're still responsible for their actions. Your mental state can be influenced by many things including drink and that needs to be noted. As it is the courts already hand out blanket sentences and don't deal with cases on an individual basis.

yes it does play a factor - but people need to take responsibilty...they choose to drink alcohol ....they knew they were drinking excessively.....why not stop !!

a crime is committed - the person goes to court and says I didnt know what I was doing ...I was drunk (obviously in court they exaggerate it claiming they were addicted to alcohol) .... judge is lenient on criminal 'cos he/she has had to suffer at the hands of this "addiction"

its used in court as an excuse to get a leaner sentence - if you read ANY court report on a serious assault drink/drugs are ALWAYS a factor (with 1 or 2 exceptions where mental illness is behind it - although thats loosely linked to drugs)

ScumLord

PCPhoto wrote: »

yes it does play a factor - but people need to take responsibilty...they choose to drink alcohol ....they knew they were drinking excessively.....why not stop !!

a crime is committed - the person goes to court and says I didnt know what I was doing ...I was drunk (obviously in court they exaggerate it claiming they were addicted to alcohol) .... judge is lenient on criminal 'cos he/she has had to suffer at the hands of this "addiction"

its used in court as an excuse to get a leaner sentence - if you read ANY court report on a serious assault drink/drugs are ALWAYS a factor (with 1 or 2 exceptions where mental illness is behind it - although thats loosely linked to drugs)

I kind of agree with what your saying I just think it's something the courts simply couldn't overlook under any circumstances so it's pointless arguing it, on a first offense at the very least.

I do drugs and never get in trouble, when I'm drunk I don't start fights and don't understand how it can affect others in that way but some people really are night and day with drink. They turn into a completely different person, of course at the end of the day they've only themselves to blame if they know that and still drink.

L.Jenkins

I say lets just buy a boardsy bus and have a booze cruise! Even though I don't drink, I'll drive!

conorhal

PCPhoto wrote: »

this is where the problem lies .... keeping them sober...where do they get money for drink .... crime/social welfare (including childrens allowance)


but back to the topic at hand .... the alcohol ASBO in theory sounds good but its down to the attitude of the criminal - accepting responsibility for their actions....cant/wont happen until we give criminals proper jail sentences and make jail something that they dont simply accept.

They would have little choice but to remain sober, failing a breath test would result in jail time or a fine.
You would in effect be using a behavioural training technique, negative reinforcement. They would have to present for testing every morning between 9 and 10 which get them out of bed early to do something that they don't want to (and thus get a taste of what it's like to work for a living ;-) and anything more then a couple of beers and then going home at a sensible hour would result in their failing a breath test. A few infractions and they would not be able to even look at a can of Dutch Gold without shivering.

topper75

Terry wrote: »

Vodka messes me up, so I don't drink it any more.
If your friends can't handle it, then give them a slap or a talking to or something. Then introduce them to beer.
Beer is awesome.

I'd like to see a bigger distinction made in law between the beer and spirits e.g. with regard to off licence hours, age limits, pub hours etc. People getting aggressive/messed up purely on beer is rare.

I'd also like to see a much greater availability of low-alcohol beers. This would facilitate our social pub culture and reduce ill effects. I'd even grant anyone over 15 the right to be served the low-alc stuff until they are 18. Currently society pisses (no pun intended) all over the 12 -18 age group. It provides nothing for them. Cue uncontrolled bushdrinking mayhem. They have a right to socialise with the community. Too radical?

ScumLord

topper75 wrote: »

I'd like to see a bigger distinction made in law between the beer and spirits e.g. with regard to off licence hours, age limits, pub hours etc. People getting aggressive/messed up purely on beer is rare.

Mixing drinks is bad but drinking just beer isn't a guarantee you'll be good. Drinking just whiskey on it's own is supposedly better than beer as beer is full of sugar and easily digested whereas spirits cause some sort of gastric shock that limits the amount of alcohol you intake. If you drink beer and then spirits that gastric shock effect doesn't happen and you end up completely hammered.


That could be very wrong though I saw it on manswers.

topper75

ScumLord wrote: »

Mixing drinks is bad but drinking just beer isn't a guarantee you'll be good. Drinking just whiskey on it's own is supposedly better than beer as beer is full of sugar and easily digested whereas spirits cause some sort of gastric shock that limits the amount of alcohol you intake. If you drink beer and then spirits that gastric shock effect doesn't happen and you end up completely hammered.


That could be very wrong though I saw it on manswers.

Yeah that all makes sense (from my own empirical research!).

I coulndn't promise a more beer-orientated drinking culture will eliminate problems. People need to wee etc and inhibitions will drop. But I think much of the mindless aggression we see on streets and read about in papers is more spirit-fueled.

I sip whiskey myself and like it (just before bed at home usually), but would kiss it goodbye if i though no one else was getting it!

TPD

Greyfox wrote: »

The difference is most people who drink alcohol don't get into a position where it could ruin their lives, whereas I personally believe if I take drugs like Cocaine it's likely that I could get addicted to it and let it ruin my life

I don't think that my personal freedoms should be limited because of another person's beliefs, once I'm not harming anybody else.

PK2008

I think the sentiment is right, if alcohol didnt exist there would be a huge drop in crime (at least in Ireland) but banning it would be pretty ineffective. People would still find ways around it but yess I defintely agree with the link to crime, also general accidents/injuries (not necessarily crime related).

I think the hospitals would be delighted if alcohol was never invented, but it was so not much we can do about it now, an alcohol ban is about as useful a drum kit for Anne Frank

genericguy

PCPhoto wrote: »

oh ...alcohol is also "blamed" for the break up of many families.

Alcoholism is a disease ...but to stop alcoholism you need to stop the alcohol.


(look at me ...all preachy and stuff)

alcoholism is not a fcuking disease.

bnt

As far as I can tell, the addiction problem only affects some people, and not others. I mean, I consider it quite normal to go out, have 1-2 drinks, go home, and not touch alcohol for months afterwards, but there are also people for whom that is an impossibility. They simply can not have one or two, ever, something I find hard to imagine.

So I'm not going to try to tell people what to think, or tell them they're imagining alcoholism. The problem, and what alcoholics need to do to manage it, is not a mystery. On the other hand, I object to anyone trying to keep me "safe" from something that does not harm me. Compare that with smoking - which can harm me even if I don't do it myself. (Don't get me started on the wider philosophical issues this raises, such as self-awareness and self-reliance.)

DazMarz

It worked so well back in America in the 1920's... I mean, it didn't lead to the rise of the Mafia or organised crime as we now know it... oh wait.......

Shanotheslayer

Meh, I like it. But don't drink it much.

Ban it? Bit extreme, then again, so is banning head shops.