What's with all the Anti-Arthur Day campaign ?

guillespe · 28-09-2013 7:09pm

Youre on and im in on that.. Tell me when you have it up..Cheers

crusher000 · 30-09-2013 6:53am

As always in Ireland the way to deal with a problem is to ban it or out law it. How will getting rid of Arthurs Day (if it is to happen) solve the drinking issue in Ireland ? Was in England last week. Opening hours are 24 hour. I was out until 3:00am and every where was calm. No one kicking the crap out of anyone outside the take away or at the taxi rank. People went home when they had enough including myself. I went out at 11:00 and had 5 drinks. If i was back home and the pubs closing at 12:30 I would probably try and have 5-6 pints in the hour and a half. Then of to the take away along with everyone else that had to leave because of our licensing laws. Only some people have a problem with the consumption of alcohol but the majority that don't have to suffer.

C14N · 30-09-2013 3:02pm

crusher000 wrote: »

As always in Ireland the way to deal with a problem is to ban it or out law it. How will getting rid of Arthurs Day (if it is to happen) solve the drinking issue in Ireland ?

It sounds like Diageo are deciding not to run it themselves because they don't want negative publicity, it's not being banned.

Even if it was, it's a fallacy to ask "how will it solve the drinking problem?". No one thing that happens will solve a big problem, it's just a small step. The smoking ban didn't just stop everyone from smoking, but most people still agree that it was a good idea.

conorhal · 30-09-2013 3:10pm

Well, I'm just back from Oktoberfest in Munich, had a great time in the Hakker sponsored tent and the Pauliner tent.
Two things I enjoyed most about the weekend, firstly, the fact that nobody there wasted a moment wringing their hands in anguish that a festival dedicated solely to beer might lead to drunkenness, and secondly, women in a drindel are sexy, but women in Leiderhosen are so smoking hot that I nearly had to dump an entire Mas in my lap to put out the fire!

hatrickpatrick · 30-09-2013 3:11pm

C14N wrote: »

It sounds like Diageo are deciding not to run it themselves because they don't want negative publicity, it's not being banned.

There are a lot of people who want to ban it, which I think is what was being referred to in that post;

Even if it was, it's a fallacy to ask "how will it solve the drinking problem?". No one thing that happens will solve a big problem, it's just a small step. The smoking ban didn't just stop everyone from smoking, but most people still agree that it was a good idea.[/QUOTE]

Slightly different scenario though - passive smoking has a direct, measurable and tangible effect on non smokers in the same pub and employees. There's no such thing as automatic "passive drinking" - any harm done to third parties is as a result of specific individuals and not simply a direct result of alcohol being consumed.

In other words, you can 100% guarantee harm to non-willing participants in a scenario in which someone is smoking and others are not. You can't 100% guarantee harm to non willing participants in a scenario in which someone is drinking and others are not. You can predict it, but you can't guarantee it, hence why I don't approve of sledgehammer legislation.

ScumLord · 30-09-2013 6:36pm

conorhal wrote: »

Well, I'm just back from Oktoberfest in Munich, had a great time in the Hakker sponsored tent and the Pauliner tent.

The thing is though that's a traditional festival and not entirely focused on promoting one product. As you already pointed out it's open to all types of beer manufacturers and while those companies use the event to promote their products it's not the sole focus of the event.

Cavehill Red · 30-09-2013 7:07pm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

If Guinness actually do cancel it for next year, I say we pick a late September Thursday, make a Facebook event for it, and just have Arthur's Day anyway

You could have a facebook day to celebrate Ronald McDonald's birthday too, and then ye could all dress up like clowns.

hatrickpatrick · 30-09-2013 8:22pm

Cavehill Red wrote: »

You could have a facebook day to celebrate Ronald McDonald's birthday too, and then ye could all dress up like clowns.

I'd be up for that, I know a few people who are scared of clowns, a national clown invasion could be lulzy indeed

Cavehill Red · 30-09-2013 9:26pm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I'd be up for that, I know a few people who are scared of clowns, a national clown invasion could be lulzy indeed

And much less likely to result in a 30% increase in A+E attendances or a 100% increase in emergency call-outs.

Princess Evey Hammond · 30-09-2013 9:30pm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I'd be up for that, I know a few people who are scared of clowns, a national clown invasion could be lulzy indeed

I would lock myself in my room shut the curtains and wear a blindfold for the day if that were to happen :eek: :eek: :eek:

Doc Ruby · 30-09-2013 9:41pm

crusher000 wrote: »

Was in England last week. Opening hours are 24 hour. I was out until 3:00am and every where was calm. No one kicking the crap out of anyone outside the take away or at the taxi rank. People went home when they had enough including myself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sr1oH2fIaV4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIFfJDLYtmg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLmJFQLdTuU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZt10KcwYCI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkY6MWxL3xo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stxrOJBxw1E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQKFkxvhG_U

Fucking animals.

C14N · 30-09-2013 11:07pm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Slightly different scenario though - passive smoking has a direct, measurable and tangible effect on non smokers in the same pub and employees. There's no such thing as automatic "passive drinking" - any harm done to third parties is as a result of specific individuals and not simply a direct result of alcohol being consumed.

In other words, you can 100% guarantee harm to non-willing participants in a scenario in which someone is smoking and others are not. You can't 100% guarantee harm to non willing participants in a scenario in which someone is drinking and others are not. You can predict it, but you can't guarantee it, hence why I don't approve of sledgehammer legislation.

I wouldn't say that's true. Passive smoking can be fairly harmless a lot of the time, there's no guarantee of any real harm. In any case, the ban was not just for passive smoking but also to just discourage a culture of smoking and it worked very well in that regard.

All that being said, I'm not in favour of legislation banning stuff like Arthur's Day either. I just think people need to cop on a bit with it.

Archeron · 30-09-2013 11:23pm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I'd be up for that, I know a few people who are scared of clowns, a national clown invasion could be lulzy indeed

Combined with the zombie march? A drunk zombie clown march is just what this country needs. I'm with you on this one.

What's with all the Anti-Arthur Day campaign ?

Comments