Proposed new Garda drink legislation: too draconian?

matrim

At the moment, most people who are young looking carry an id anyway. I'm 20 and I always bring an id with me. It might not be a passport/drivers licence unless I know I'm going to a club, but the rest of the time I have student/usit which will work alot of the time anyway.

I know I'm not the only one who does this. Most of my friends do this because they don't want to be refused. If they don't have one they'll try to argue about their being over 18. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. But if they are refused they just go somewhere else.

Even at the moment alot of people who are young looking or even with someone young looking (They will generally ask the whole group if only one or two people look young.) carry id so this won't make a major differece. Except to the people who are too stupid too realise - if I don't carry id I might not get in.



Another point on the cameras, who is going to pay for them. The garda won't even pay for speed camera's. Only 4 operate around the country at any one time. How many pub camera's will run.

rubadub

Originally posted by Bard
Unless, of course, the publican has sufficient reason to believe that the ID presented is a forgery.

with the new laws it will be a criminal offence to have a forged id which i think is a great idea. before a bouncer could say it is fake and refuse you on those grounds. in future if they claim it is fake you can ask them to call the gardai as they are alleging that you are commiting a criminal offence, and that you want to turn yourself in.

rubadub

Originally posted by growler
errr i think you actually do have to pay for two seats on some airlines these days if you are likely to "flow" onto the seat(s) beside you , they don't weigh you though !

do you know how they inform people that they need to pay for 2 seats. it would be interesting to see if how they approach the subject and what happens if the passenger disagrees.

Bard

Originally posted by rubadub
with the new laws it will be a criminal offence to have a forged id which i think is a great idea. before a bouncer could say it is fake and refuse you on those grounds. in future if they claim it is fake you can ask them to call the gardai as they are alleging that you are commiting a criminal offence, and that you want to turn yourself in.

ID which must be accepted is state issued ID, such as the National Age Card, your Drivers License or Passport. I'm pretty sure that forging any of those is already highly illegal.

Sparks

rubadub

Originally posted by Bard
ID which must be accepted is state issued ID, such as the National Age Card, your Drivers License or Passport. I'm pretty sure that forging any of those is already highly illegal.

yep youre right there. i cant see having a fake student card as a criminal offence! i think if you loan somebody a passport etc. it will be an offence too, im not sure if it is just the "loanee" who is in the wrong here, as the loaner could claim it was nicked. the real bonus to the government is that the national age card doesnt have to very elaborate, i know i wouldnt risk a criminal record just for a few pints if i was under 18

richindub2

I dont usually post here but I thought Id make a few points for the 'underage drinkers in pubs every weekend' crowd;

I dont think any of the laws will have a major effect on the youth / binge drinking, theyre just going to get a lot of headlines for the current government's 'tough on drink stance'.

Cutting down on drink being sold to already drunk people is pointless - if need be people will just get a soberish mate to go up and order a few rounds at a time for them. Enforcing the carrying of ID is also pointless - nobody I know goes out in town without one as it is. FakeIDs are widespread, if lots of 15/16/17 year olds (id say 60% of my year at any rate) have near perfect fake drivers licenses how are the bouncers supposed to tell?

Children being banned in pubs after 8 will only affect those drinking with their parents in pubs lax enough to not ID them. No 'trendy' pub in Dublin would let a kid without ID in once the bouncers are on the door. The earlier closing times will just make people drink faster / have shots to finish a night off.

In my opinion hugely increased taxes on alcopops / shots / certain drinks and possibly a massive advertising on the dangers of being drunk in town at 2/3am etc would have a real effect.

PHB

The advantage of a mandatory age card is that if you make it so that everyone buying alcohol or cigarettes must have a garda age[which is far from easily faked, almost impossible i hear] then it would completely stop underage people being able to buy drink.
The minor inconveniance of having a 10 gram piece of plastic in your wallet wouldn't matter much to many people, unless of course you had a lot of time on your hands.

So you gotta ask yourself, would you rather carrying a 10 gram piece of plastic or would you rather being scared to walk down a street at night?

bonkey

Originally posted by richindub2
Enforcing the carrying of ID is also pointless - nobody I know goes out in town without one as it is. FakeIDs are widespread, if lots of 15/16/17 year olds (id say 60% of my year at any rate) have near perfect fake drivers licenses how are the bouncers supposed to tell?

And here we go again with the "there's no point in having a law because people can break it" argument. Apply your logic to every law in the book, rich, and you will come to the conclusion that all of them should be thrown out. People can and do break them all the time, and many of those get away with it, and we cant stop them. By the extension of your logic to all laws rather than just "this law", none of them are worth having.

Of course, you'd reply to this, I'm sure, with a rejoinder that this isnt what you're saying that at all. You're only talking about laws that have no effect. Things that wont make a difference at all arent worth having, and this is one of them.

Let me ask you someting though...if a couple of your mates ended up in juvie for (say) 3-6 months apiece for carrying faked drivers licenses, what percentage of your class would still carry and use them every night? Especially if the bouncers had been told exactly what to look for, and had been instructed to detain anyone attempting to use a fake version of a government-issued ID (i.e. drivers, passport, or this new age-card) and to call the police.

You know....just like the publicans themselves have already learned to do with counterfeit banknotes.

And what if the police themselves went and did spot-checks in the pubs, and held the publicans liable for any gross breaches of the rules....after having informed them of what to look for???? (Just so we're not open to the "only works if the publicans/bouncers want it to, which they dont" argument).

No system will ever make the problem go away...there is no real solution to any crime....only ways to minimise or contain the way in which it is carried out.

A new ID, with halfway decent anti-forgery tech can be easily as reliable as a banknote. You can even have many of the same features and tests. Easy to test for authenticity, hard to forge.....

Yes, I know that this doesnt apply to drivers licenses or passports...but why do you think the government wants to introduce a mandatory i]new[/i] id for purchasing alcohol? Its so that they can have a hard-to-counterfeit, easy-to-verify ID to get rid of the excuses like "but what about fake this-that-and-the-other".

I agree with those who say that if these rules are not enforced, it is all useless, but I'm not convinced that theywont be enforced .... or rather I'm convinced that things will be enforced enough to make some difference, but perhaps not as much as it could.

jc

richindub2

My argument about ID wasnt 'theres no point in having a law because people can break it', more so 'theres no point in having a law thats easily broken and never enforced'. Ive never heard of anyone with a fake drivers / passport / etc being even jailed for one night, usually its just taken off them. If this slight inconvenience might only happen once every 6 months(at worst) to people its not much of an incentive is it? 30e and a week later and they have a new ID...

Instructing the bouncers in *exactly* what to look for on drivers / passports wont make much of a difference. If theyre instructed to look for something in particular the people who make IDs will make damn sure its in their fakes. A policy of trying to detain someone who 'might' have a fake ID outside your pub for an indefinate amount of time while you wait for the gardai when theres a que of 50 people behind him and hes with 4 or 5 mates might also not go down too well with bouncers.

A new ID, with halfway decent anti-forgery tech can be easily as reliable as a banknote. You can even have many of the same features and tests. Easy to test for authenticity, hard to forge.....

If the Garda age card got a huge push and pubs were legally forced to only accept it then possibly it might have some effect, however Im sure people will find ways around it. Fake birthcerts & usit cards used to get a card etc.

Basically, I dont know of any other popular weekend pasttimes for my age group other than drinking. I really cant see underage drinking being tackled in any serious way, its a core part of most peoples social lives and if theyre forced from the pubs theyll just move elsewhere (fields houses etc). Trying to curb overdrinking among the underage instead of all drinking whatsoever might be a better, more achievable aim.

SkepticOne

Originally posted by bringitdown
Aye, I remember being in 'Bubbas Off License' in a certain town in a certain country and a lady pushing a zimmer frame was asked for ID. Was she offended? No, Did she have ID? No. Did she get ales? No. Was I asked for ID? Yes. Was I offended? No. Did I get ales? Yes.... WOOO HOOO!

Seems a pretty stupid country, asking the elderly for proof of age to make sure they are over 18. I can see why it might wish to remain anonymous.

Seriously this happened. So your point is a valid one, we need to loose the stigma associated with being asked for ID.

What stigma? A passport is a means of identification. I'm not aware of much stigma attached to owning one.

Basically, if the proposed law of under 21s needing to have a valid id is enforced then it will cut down on 16 year olds buying drink. I would argue that it needs to be raised to 25 or so to be more effective but that is a different argument.

Making grannies produce ID will not achieve this.

I challenge anyone to go into a pub in Ireland and tell someone obviously over 40 that you think the law should require them to produce a card to prove they are over 18 and report back the reaction.

I can understand the discriminatory aspect to the argument "why should I carry a card when older people don't have to?". However, you will find that most people don't have much of a problem with discrimination provided they themselves are not being discriminated against.

Basically, I think the discriminatory aspect has been blown out of proportion. It is simply a card that we are talking about here and it has already been argued that it is not a great inconvenience.

kaimera

If the Garda age card got a huge push and pubs were legally forced to only accept it

only problem with the Age Card the closer you get to 20, the chances of you getting one are very very slim. [told so by a Garda when applying for meh passport]

Pubs ARE only required to accept state issued ID's.

I dont know any place that will accept a college ID

Gorgeous George

I'm a nightclub doorman aka a bouncer and the premises I work in has a simple rule. If you look young you produce an ID and the only acceptable ID is a Garda age card, passport or drivers licence. If you doubt the veracity of the ID refuse entry. If the punter has no ID refuse entry. No arguments, no negotiation, shag off and find another pub. Hey presto it works fine and as it's a popular watering hole 99% of people produce the ID, even 23 and 24 year olds. The owner would rather lose half a dozen customers than lose his licence.

QBall

Originally posted by Gorgeous George
The owner would rather lose half a dozen customers than lose his licence.

... and that's where it's all wrong in the first place. Pub owners are not our parents, guardians, protectors or health advisors. Why should they lose their license for serving under age drinkers?

It's the drinkers themselves that should be targeted. There is no real tangible threat to underage drinkers. I certainly wouldn't have drank in public when underage if I was likely to be fined for doing so.

Instead of being stupid about it, the people responsible for the problem should be targeted: the drinkers themselves (and their parents since they are minors).

Of course, this would require some actual enforcement work but IMHO would do a lot more to dent the amount of underage drinking in this country than playing silly buggers with publicans doing what is essentially parenting and police work.

SkepticOne

Originally posted by QBall
Instead of being stupid about it, the people responsible for the problem should be targeted: the drinkers themselves (and their parents since they are minors).

I'm sure some pubs and offlicences would welcome this since it would mean extra business for them and take the pressure off.

I doubt if they would have the audacity to suggest it though.

Seriously, though, if this were the case and the cops spent their time running around after kids with cider in fields, would people say, "Why don't the cops go after the bastards that sold them the stuff? How can we allow publicans and offlicences to exploit our youth in this way?"

bonkey

Originally posted by QBall
It's the drinkers themselves that should be targeted.
...
Instead of being stupid about it, the people responsible for the problem should be targeted: the drinkers themselves (and their parents since they are minors).

That would be analagous with saying that it is drug users, and not dealers, who the police should be going after.

In both cases, it is illegal to sell as well as illegal to purchase, and yet you claim that only one group should be held liable - those "stupid enough" to try buying what they arent allowed to have.

What next? Being in receipt of stolen goods is only the purchaser's fault, and the seller should also be blameless? After all - its again stupidity on the part of the person doing the buying.

No - both sides are responsible, and both sides have to live up to their responsibility. If it is illegal for a publican to sell to an under-age person, than the publican is just as "stupid" for selling, as you are alleging that the client is for buying, and is - at best - jointly liable.

Or maybe it should be OK to (say) sell cigarettes and alcohol to a 5-year old if they ask for it. After all, you're saying the seller isn't at fault in an underage case, only the purchaser and their parent(s) / guardian(s).

jc

DaithiSurfer

Forget the idea of a national id card.
All people should get a drivers licence to prove their age.Not a hard thing to do.
No drivers license, no entry into pub
Simple as that.
Even an expired license should be accepted.
Problem solved without the cost of a national id scheme.

bringitdown

Originally posted by SkepticOne
What stigma? A passport is a means of identification. I'm not aware of much stigma attached to owning one.

Making grannies produce ID will not achieve this.

No-one minds owning a form of ID but it is my experience that getting asked for ID is a source of embarrassment in Ireland.

Okay maybe my point was lost in the flippant tone of my post.

This country, Country X has a law, you must produce a valid ID saying you are over 21 to purchase alchohol, and it is enforced whether you are 18 or 80. There are SFA ways of getting around it.

If you get an older person to purchase alcohol that person is liable for a hefty fine or prison sentence, and there is a real risk they might be caught so very few people do this.

Additionally the culture is such that excessive drinking is just not the done thing .... so we have 3 things to do:

legislate, enforce and bring about culture change.... the latter being the most difficult to do as noted in many previous posts but with good legislation and enforcement the easier this becomes blah blah blah...

bonkey

Originally posted by DaithiSurfer
Forget the idea of a national id card.
All people should get a drivers licence to prove their age.Not a hard thing to do.
...
Problem solved without the cost of a national id scheme.

Errr....exactly what do you call everyone having a drivers license, if not "national id" ????? Its state-issued (i.e. national) and its a form of identification (i.e. id).

And what about people who are not eligible for one? You know...the blind, the visually impaired, those otherwise unable to legally drive a vehicle? Keep them out of pubs too?

Sorry sir...you can't have a pint....you're too blind.

Yes....great plan.

jc

QBall

Originally posted by bonkey
That would be analagous with saying that it is drug users, and not dealers, who the police should be going after.

To use your analogy to describe what's happening now:

The drug users are effectively being told that it's OK to use drugs cos the Gardai won't ever prosecute them, they only care about going after the dealers.

Apart from that, your analogy is misleading due to the fact that the drugs you presumably refer to are illegal and alcohol isn't.

I am not saying that pub and off license owners are blameless. I'm saying that it's completely stupid that they should have to shoulder the burden of proving that the customer is legally allowed to buy alcohol. Obviously if someone serves a minor alcohol without checking ID they should be punished, but punishing bar/club/off-license owners for not being able to tell the difference between real and fake ID is bizarre.

If a 16 year old comes in with a "good" fake driver's license and buys alcohol, the server is acting in good faith while the servee isn't. Yet the one who gets punished is the server. In the last couple of years I have never even heard of someone being punished for using fake ID (even faked state-issued ID) to buy alcohol yet every time a publican gets caught it's all over the papers. Given the sheer volume of fake IDs in circulation this seems a little odd don't you think?

The barman's job is to provide tasty refreshing beverages, not to be our parent or law enforcement official. If they act in good faith, they should not be punished for it.

rubadub

Originally posted by QBall

The drug users are effectively being told that it's OK to use drugs cos the Gardai won't ever prosecute them, they only care about going after the dealers.

Apart from that, your analogy is misleading due to the fact that the drugs you presumably refer to are illegal and alcohol isn't.

In the last couple of years I have never even heard of someone being punished for using fake ID (even faked state-issued ID) to buy alcohol yet every time a publican gets caught it's all over the papers. Given the sheer volume of fake IDs in circulation this seems a little odd don't you think?

the analogy with publicans/dealers is similar to a pharmacist supplying controlled drugs to somebody with a fake prescription.

it is up to the pharmacist to examine the prescription. if it appears valid then they can legally supply them with drugs.

it is up to the publican to examine the id. if it appears valid then they can legally supply them with drugs.

if the police then catch the illegal drug user with drugs and an obviously false prescription the pharmacist will get in trouble with the law.

if the police then catch the illegal alcohol user with alcohol and an obviously false id the publican will get in trouble with the law.

if it is a "good fake" id/prescription, the pub/pharmacist will be informed to be careful in future and only the user will/should be prosecuted

common sense really.

the new laws will make having fake national id a criminal offence so expect to hear more soon. if they bother to enfore the law at all that is....

dod

So the Minister for Justice is to introduce a series of punitive penalties for public houses where it is considered that by serving him drink, the bar staff are responsible for being the cause of a customers inebriation. It would appear to me that the enforceability of these laws, and the consequences of their being enacted have not quite been thought through.

I don’t think that a reasonable person will have a difficulty with the an effort being made to tackle the problem of people stumbling around the streets completely out of control after the clubs and late night pubs close at two or three in the morning. Clamping down on drink-fuelled random violence that visits itself upon unsuspecting members of the public is of course a good idea. I don’t see any problem in principle with an effort being made to reduce the accessibility of drink to underage would-be drinkers. Placing a publican in a position where he must consider that there may be consequences to his serving drink irresponsibly and with regard only to his bottom line is good in principle. That we have always done it is not a good enough reason to argue that we should be allowed to continue to drink ourselves into oblivion should the desire take us.

However I am not sure that the particular approach taken by the minister is going to resolve the problem. I don’t see how it could be enforced in a measured and consistent way across public houses, nightclubs, licensed restaurants, hotel bars and private clubs. Are we to return to the situation that the doormen at their discretion can refuse somebody entry, ostensibly on the basis that he considers that it may compromise the bar staff under these new laws? The potential to abuse this discretion is obvious, and the concept of the perfidious doorman is not without precedent. If I am at dinner for two in a restaurant, are we to be refused a second bottle of wine on the grounds that we have already had gins and tonic as an aperitif? When I get back to my hotel room and order a nightcap from the night porter to be delivered to my room, am I to be refused on the basis that if might place him in a compromising position? The wine tasting courses with which we occupy ourselves during the summer months, are they to become a fond memory, or will we get a dispensation from the adult learning section of the Department of Education?

Even if these implementation problems were surmountable, can any two of us agree where the fine line between ‘enough’ and ‘too much’ is? Some are so fervently anti-drink that any amount of alcohol is too much, whereas some people are so consumed by the idea of civil liberties that under no circumstances should anyone have the right to say stop. I don’t know what Michael McDowells personal attitude to drink is, but I know that I would feel quite uncomfortable sitting down for a few pints with him on a Saturday night and risking his opprobrium by suggesting a quick brandy to finish up when the order for last drinks comes. On the other hand, I think I’d feel quite happy ordering doubles were it to be Brian Cowen or (I wish) Olwyn Enright that I was drinking with.

If these new rules are passed into law, there will likely be some quite interesting side effects. Maybe it won’t just be couples that will hook up for Saturday night dinner parties, perhaps the idea of sitting in and having a couple of bottles of wine and a good conversation with friends will begin to appeal to the singletons also. I am sure that some loophole will be found where these rules cannot be enforced in private members clubs, so golf club and gentlemens clubs memberships will soar. Perhaps Eamonn O’Cuiv will get a dispensation from the laws for Achill and the Blaskets and tourism in the area will boom. Jackie Healy-Rae may declare Kerry an independent state where overdrinking is not just legal, but compulsory. If Boris Yeltsin ever revisits Ireland, he could have the most almighty vodka party in the sovereign soil of the Russian Embassy in Rathgar and the Gardai would be powerless to intervene.

Ultimately, I do believe that the resolution of this issue lies in personal responsibility and a more consistent enforcement of the existing laws. More laws are not going to be helpful if they are bad laws. From what I understand of his proposals, I wonder would Minister McDowells new statutes stand up to scrutiny in the European Courts. Sure, action needs to be taken on this problem, but let’s not add to the existing difficulties by doing the wrong thing just for the sake of doing something.

rubadub

Originally posted by dod

Even if these implementation problems were surmountable, can any two of us agree where the fine line between ‘enough’ and ‘too much’ is?

the only possible way i can think of is breathalyzers in pubs. as you, and many point out anybody can just claim somebody is drunk and refuse them, we need a definition of "drunk" just like drunk drivers. the only problem with this is that i know people who get as drunk on 3 pints as others on 9, therefore the limit will be set very low and therefore some people wont even be able to get tipsy without breaking the law, however if they are only tipsy it is unlikely that the barman will ask them to take the test.