PDA

View Full Version : Drink = Anti-social behaviour?


Sabre100%
08-18-2007, 09:07 AM
Ok, in England now whenever i turn on the BBC news now there's a story about someone who has been killed because he stood up to "Yobs". And it seems to be a growing problem over here according to the "news". Now the Government seems to be blaming Alcohol. They are thinking up lots of measures for consideration raising the drinking age to 21, education classes...e.t.c

I just wondered what u guys and gals thought on the idea of them blaming the drink, i don't agree i drink and i don't go bricking peoples cars and windows.

Totenkopf
08-18-2007, 09:47 AM
Well, they only need look at the US to know that raising the LEGAL drinking age doesn't make much difference. The drink itself is much like a gun/bullet, harmless till put in someone's hand. The emphasis probably should be put on the behavior rather than the substance. If you only drink a pint or two (or whatever is w/in your limit), you're unlikely to be the problem. If you get rip snorting drunk and act like an ass or worse, there probably ought to be some kind of penalty. Simply saying that you were drunk doesn't cut it.

PoiuyWired
08-18-2007, 12:24 PM
Trust me, raising the drinking age won't do anything. I mean, I am sure any non-tards would be drinking under 21 here in the states regardless or regulations.

Blame the alcohol not, but the jerks that are going ape shiit using it as an excuse.

John Galt
08-18-2007, 03:01 PM
I think there is a real accountability problem here in the US, but I can't speak for other countries.

It seems like whenever someone commits a crime they can blame it on something, be it drugs, alcohol, social pressure, or even video games, and magically go from being "defendents" and "criminals" to "victims."

Raising the drinking age will do absolutely nothing, especially in a country with a well-established drinking culture.

Achilles
08-18-2007, 03:06 PM
^^^^

QFE.

Fredi
08-18-2007, 03:20 PM
Once again, itís all the fault of capitalism.

Jae Onasi
08-18-2007, 05:52 PM
Once again, itís all the fault of capitalism.

So if we get rid of capitalism we'll get rid of anti-social drinking behavior? I don't think Soviet Russia was free of alcohol-related crimes.

Fredi
08-18-2007, 05:57 PM
meaby:D

Weave
08-18-2007, 06:05 PM
Hahaha... except soviet russia was state capitalism and america is burgeoius capitalism.
Soviets weren't communists... just extreamly messed up socialists.
Either way... Stalinism and Marxism aren't the same thing.

Anywho... Highering the drinking age won't do a thing. It's just going to be cooler for my generation X to drink even younger. Sadly, my generation is screwed.

Pavlos
08-18-2007, 08:23 PM
So if we get rid of capitalism we'll get rid of anti-social drinking behavior? I don't think Soviet Russia was free of alcohol-related crimes.

Nope, they didn't have any issues at all... but that's only because it was a totalitarian police state :xp:.

Anyway, raising the drinking age to 21 is madness and will do nothing - it may, indeed, have the opposite effect to what was intended. There has been a shift, however, in British drinking culture over the past decade.

Britons have always been boozers - it's wonderfully recorded in colourful texts, usually written by Frenchmen. What's the stereotype for a Glaswegian? Drunk. It's probably inaccurate - like all stereotypes - but the mere fact that such a stereotype exists is enough to turn heads. Accounts - again, usually written by the French... England and France did so hate each other - from the seventeenth century contain details of drunken Englishmen roaming the streets. It wasn't until the Great War (I think) that the drinking culture ended. In an effort to make sure that factory workers could stay awake at their posts, helping with the war effort, the government imposed the drinking laws that have been lifted recently (i.e. bars close at time y).

The "situation" we have is simply a return to form for Britain, to be honest. I don't think getting drunk is immoral - I'm loathe to branding many things as such - but people don't get drunk by accident anymore. The intention, when going out of a Friday night, is to get drunk; to drink as much as you can. Being teetotal, it's amusing to watch, more than anything but it's a health risk to the people involved and I think on issues like this you have to maintain the liberalism but fight on the battle ground for hearts and minds; through education. Education allows us to cut through the childish and brutal proclivity of man, and that is why it is so terribly important.

Forgive my somewhat aimless rambling but I'm reading Crime and Punishment at the moment and it's only natural after such things...

Nancy Allen``
08-18-2007, 08:32 PM
Alcohol takes away the self control and responsibility people have, if any. To blame what people do on alcohol however is to shift responsibility away from the criminal. Leave that to defense lawyers, yobbos hoons and the like need every piece of accontability we can lay on them, they certainly need it.

Jae Onasi
08-19-2007, 02:11 AM
The rationale for raising the drinking age from 18 to 21 in the US was three-fold.

First, it gives the impulse control center of the brain a couple more years to mature, so people theoretically would exercise more control in their drinking, or at least not damage that part of the brain quite so much when they get totally plastered.

Second, it decreased access to alcohol for high school aged kids and decreased alcohol consumption at school. Of course, with parents now buying kegs for their teens' parties, who knows anymore.

Third, it decreased accidents related to teen drunk driving. This Guide to Community Preventive Services (http://www.thecommunityguide.org/mvoi/mvoi-table-alc-legal-age.pdf) shows data from a number of studies showing the fatal crash rate after the drinking age was lowered from 21 to 18 in the early 70's and when it was raised again in the early 80's.

The American Medical Association published a brief piece on the minimum legal drinking age (http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/13246.html) including links to many different studies.

Raising the drinking age, while many won't like it, will decrease alcohol related teen deaths, particularly from motor vehicle accidents. If the UK has a similar experience to the US, the fall in the death rate will be dramatic.

damian622
08-19-2007, 04:18 AM
Raising the drinking age won't change anything as long as it will be normal in community to see drinking kids. What will give rising drinking age when age when kids start drinking is going lower, even to 10-11 years old?

Pho3nix
08-19-2007, 03:10 PM
I think there is a real accountability problem here in the US, but I can't speak for other countries.

It seems like whenever someone commits a crime they can blame it on something, be it drugs, alcohol, social pressure, or even video games, and magically go from being "defendents" and "criminals" to "victims."

Raising the drinking age will do absolutely nothing, especially in a country with a well-established drinking culture.

Good post. I fully agree with you.

Especially here in Finland where there's a well-established drinking culture it wouldn't change a thing. It would only p*** people off.

PoiuyWired
08-19-2007, 04:11 PM
So if we get rid of capitalism we'll get rid of anti-social drinking behavior? I don't think Soviet Russia was free of alcohol-related crimes.

In Soviet Russia Vodka Drinks You!!

Well, drinking anti-freeze and other things aside I think other than possable medical problems most so-called "drinking-related crimes" can be translated as "crimes BLAMED on drinking"

The only thing that is really alcohol related would be things like DUI, but raising the drinking age or not would probably have little impact on that either.

Fredi
08-19-2007, 05:22 PM
Right, I am 15 and I can get alcohol when ever I want. I can ask friends or go to a store near my house where they sell it to me with out asking my name or ID ..... haha I love my country and far more america!

Samuel Dravis
08-19-2007, 05:25 PM
If kids getting drunk and then driving is the problem, it's just as easy to raise the driving age as to prohibit drinking. After all, if they aren't in cars then they aren't in accidents. It's not like the kids have a vote anyway.

I expect people to be responsible, so even if they do hurt themselves while drinking, that's their choice, their fault, their responsibility and no one else's. Drinking is less of a problem to other people than stupid kids in cars, so I'd rather they ban that first.

John Galt
08-19-2007, 08:14 PM
Personally, I'd rather they lower the drinking age here to about 18, and completely revoke drivers licenses for being under the influence while driving.

Jae Onasi
08-19-2007, 10:36 PM
Personally, I'd rather they lower the drinking age here to about 18, and completely revoke drivers licenses for being under the influence while driving.

It doesn't stop people from driving--they just drive without a license.

mimartin
08-19-2007, 10:45 PM
It doesn't stop people from driving--they just drive without a license.
QFE!!! It also makes them uninsurable, so too bad for the next person or the next personís family the unlicensed, drunk driver hits.

Ray Jones
08-20-2007, 07:42 AM
Right, I am 15 and I can get alcohol when ever I want. I can ask friends or go to a store near my house where they sell it to me with out asking my name or IDBut that's not an issue of your country or rising the legal drinking age to 21.

It is an issue of the "friends" you have mentioned breaking the law and thus performing a crime.

mimartin
08-20-2007, 03:49 PM
I just wondered what u guys and gals thought on the idea of them blaming the drink, i don't agree i drink and i don't go bricking peoples cars and windows.
I agree with you. Saying that societies problems should be blamed on alcohol, drugs or anything else is just an excuse and does not address the underlining problems of today society. Alcohol abuse is a symptom and not the cause of our problems.

I hope my experiences were atypical, but I was in high school when Texas raised the legal drinking age from 18 to 19 and then finally to 21. I first started drinking at age 15 and pretty much drank every weekend until it lost it appeal at age 21 (when it became legal for me to drink). The thrill/high I got from finding and buying alcohol was gone when it became legal to do so.

Much like society I used alcohol as away to avoid my problems, a way to forget them for a brief moment. When I sobered up the problems were still there only multiplied do to my abuse of alcohol. It was childish and immature, but then again that is what youth is for. Luckily I survived my mistakes long enough to learn from them.

Samuel Dravis
08-20-2007, 04:26 PM
It doesn't stop people from driving--they just drive without a license.Of course it doesn't stop them. Few things stop people from doing whatever they want if they want it bad enough. Even capital punishment doesn't deter some people from murdering. So what? There's less people willing to drive without a license than with one. People who are so insanely reckless as to be driving under the influence deserve no license from the state to endanger people. People don't 'deserve' to be treated as responsible simply because they want something, or are 'old enough,' or any other similar reason. If they aren't going to be responsible then they should not be given responsibility.

The problem is that people are unwilling to think before they act. Alcohol, drugs, guns - they're objects, nothing more, and can hold no more blame or responsibility than any other inanimate object: none.

John Galt
08-20-2007, 08:34 PM
The problem is that people are unwilling to think before they act. Alcohol, drugs, guns - they're objects, nothing more, and can hold no more blame or responsibility than any other inanimate object: none.

^QFE


Something needs to be done, probably in elementary/middle school, to try and teach people the value of thinking before you act. It might be futile to try and beat responsibility into some peoples' heads, but it is a proven fact that learning is easiest in the childhood years.

I sometimes wonder if the hard/fast ages that the government uses to arbitrarily grant or deny rights to the average citizen is really a prudent way to do so. I mean, I was more mature at 12 or 13 than some are at 16 or 17, it all really depends on the individual in question.

Ray Jones
08-22-2007, 04:15 AM
Something needs to be done, probably in elementary/middle school, to try and teach people the value of thinking before you act. It might be futile to try and beat responsibility into some peoples' heads, but it is a proven fact that learning is easiest in the childhood years.Exactly. And do you know what it is that needs to be done? -- The grown ups must stop just preaching their darn stuff and start acting what they say.

80% percent of what younglings do and how they behave is imitation/mimicking of adult behaviour (and not just that of the parents). 90% when we include what other kids do too.

So, when we have teens drinking, driving, killing it's not the bad youth and the stupid young generation, it's a consolidated reflection of our own behaviour from today and right now.

PoiuyWired
08-22-2007, 01:45 PM
The problem is that people are unwilling to think before they act. Alcohol, drugs, guns - they're objects, nothing more, and can hold no more blame or responsibility than any other inanimate object: none.

QFE.

Granted, a really young child should not be held responsable for many of the things done simplyc ause they don't have the required mental capacity to make such judgement, same cannot be said about a HEALTHY 18 year old.

Personally I don't think (illegal)drinking is the source of the problem, but people who would like to cause trouble under the big neon sign of "under influence"

Same thing can be said about alcohol, gun-control, violent videogames, non-highly-addictive recreational drugs, television, pr0n, religion, twinkies.