Drinking License

User45701

The Idea is that once you turn 18 you get a drinking license. Then its like driving, you get penalty points for major **** ups.

What do you all think? when i drink i drink and sometime i might upload a few vids of "Orlagh Way" but in all my drinking i have never once attacked someone for no reason, i dont understand it, or fighting over someone bumping into you in a pub whatever.

Drinking license would stop allot of the bad drinkers from going to pubs, sure they could get there mates who still have lisences to get them beers in the offo or whatever the point is it is allot of hassle for those that do have a drinkng problem.

I think we discussee this about 6 months - 2 years ago but i cant remember when exeatly...did a search but no luck, then i got all confused and started wonderign was it a different forum

Anyway What d you all think? Are drinking licences a good idea?
I think this might actually be a good thing because drink is used as an excuse in court all too often.

The Bollox

I'd say it's like communism. in theory it's a fantastic idea, but in practice it wouldn't work

User45701

The Bollox wrote:

I'd say it's like communism. in theory it's a fantastic idea, but in practice it wouldn't work

Yes it wont work, last time i talked about this everyone more less said it wont work in this country but it is a good idea, since its been so long since its been discussed i am very interested in seing how much peoples views have changed and/or see what all the new boards members are like

aidan_walsh

I imagine the test required would be a bitch for the examiners.

cold_filter

I think its a great idea, but putting something like this into practice would be extremely difficult.

Say for example it was a credit card type thing, it would have to be swiped when you bought your first drink in a pub to see if you were allowed to be served. Not going to happen

User45701

aidan_walsh wrote:

I imagine the test required would be a bitch for the examiners.

no Test.

Everyone gets one when they turn 18. it can be taken away if you do too many wrong things and then you have to wait 5 years before you can legally drink again

spadder

Great Idea,

“L” plate drinkers must display their L plates and be accompanied by a qualified drinker.:D

Would there be an Advanced drinking techniques course?

Reku

As others have said it's great in theory, in reality though you'd:
1. have people starting threads on various forums about the rights of the drinker:p
2. have people getting mates to buy their booze when they themselves have been disqualified.
3. find the gardaí couldn't be bothered enforcing it.

Treating drinking as per drug usage and issuing the harshest sentence possible when the defendent was drunk at the time would probably work better.

I'd say there should just be a harsher sentence when people use alcohol as an excuse

Mossy Monk

bluewolf wrote:

I'd say there should just be a harsher sentence when people use alcohol as an excuse

That is stupid. If it is the same crime then it should be the same sentence for everyone.

maybe
i was kind of agreeing with farohar
and suggesting to the op that dealing with the excuse only instead of a general licence idea might be better

Spud83

I don’t think it would work not just in this country but anywhere for the following reasons. I’m sure there is more.

1) Who is going to enforce it? The traders wont take on the responsibility of checking every single person for there license. The Gardai have enough to do and would complain that this is only adding to their workload without solving anything.

2) We can’t even get a mandatory ID card in never mind a license and penalty point’s scheme.

3) People will always have mates that will obtain alcohol from them.

4) It could make the illegal of trading of alcohol a profitable business for criminals leading to more gangland crime.

5) We could end up having more people drunk and disorderly on the streets, as people are forced from pubs and clubs.

I think we need to stop looking at ways of stopping people drinking and the end of the day is this ever going to happen. We need a culture change so people will drink in a responsible manner, not binge drinking. This isn’t something that is going to happen through the changing of laws. It has to come from peoples attitudes towards drink. I don’t know how we change it; in fact I think it never will change.

Black Swan

aidan_walsh wrote:

I imagine the test required would be a bitch for the examiners.

Line em up! Hickup! Is that a double, or am I see'in double? Hickup!

Alanthroneus

seems a bit stupid... it wouldn't stop the drunken scumbags from being drunken scumbags. ... also if it is introduced surely it would have an affect on tourism seeing as alot of people come as its the "home of the black stuff" etc?

Maximilian

Keep chipping away a people's freedoms and next thing you know, we'll have none left. Stupid idea. I don't want to live in a police state.

JIZZLORD

spadder wrote:

“L” plate drinkers must display their L plates

imagine the confusion a hen party would cause

Alanthroneus

Maximilian wrote:

Keep chipping away a people's freedoms and next thing you know, we'll have none left. Stupid idea. I don't want to live in a police state.

Somehow, i don't think it will get that bad

rubadub

Good idea, but many brought up reasonable problems/flaws. It is already sort of in effect in peoples local, you do not get too pissed or you risk getting barred. A few warnings before a total barring. We have sent a few mates home who got too pissed for fear of them being barred.

Mates could get the drink, the thing is the mates will all be in the pub, not out in the field drinking, unless the majority are eventually barred.

Keep chipping away a people's freedoms and next thing you know, we'll have none left. Stupid idea. I don't want to live in a police state.

Plenty of other recreational drugs already have far stronger deterrents than not being sold personally to you for abusing them. You are already in a police state if you think this idea would make it one.

User45701

Mossy Monk wrote:

That is stupid. If it is the same crime then it should be the same sentence for everyone.

No Sorry, i have to disagree. Some people dont even try to controll themselves when they drink and also anyone who is 19 should get a severe sentence because not counting underage drinking anyone who has been cdrinking for a year will know there tolerance. There fore anyone who gets themselves into that state and then starts a fight over someone bumping into there sholder or whatever = 5 years defo. Itsa pointless random violence because they cant handle there booze

Mossy Monk

User45701 wrote:

Itsa pointless random violence because they cant handle there booze

It is also pointless and random if someone does that when sober.

DemocAnarchis

User45701 wrote:

No Sorry, i have to disagree. Some people dont even try to controll themselves when they drink and also anyone who is 19 should get a severe sentence because not counting underage drinking anyone who has been cdrinking for a year will know there tolerance. There fore anyone who gets themselves into that state and then starts a fight over someone bumping into there sholder or whatever = 5 years defo. Itsa pointless random violence because they cant handle there booze

Glad you arent running the criminal justice system. Sure to hell with trials, lets set fixed arbitrary lengths to imprison people. Someone who starts a fight while under the influence (not that I would consider that any way a mitigating circumstance) should have their sentence determined by what age they are and their tolerance levels? Bollocks.

aequinoctium

who would willingly apply for it if you knew what would happen?

MementoMori

Em What about the sizable international tourist contigent?

This is a daft Idea.

I voted for AtariJaguar cos that makes more sense.

Collie D

When I was in Chester a couple of years ago they had a system which was kind of along the lines of the OP's idea. If you're barred from one pub,there was a group of about fifty pubs (the local version of the Vintners' Federation I assume) that you were also banned from. Not sure how they enforce it but thought it was a pretty good idea.

Reku

Perhaps force people prone to drunken misbehaviour to attend AA as part of their parole requirements?

User45701

DemocAnarchis wrote:

Glad you arent running the criminal justice system. Sure to hell with trials, lets set fixed arbitrary lengths to imprison people. Someone who starts a fight while under the influence (not that I would consider that any way a mitigating circumstance) should have their sentence determined by what age they are and their tolerance levels? Bollocks.

They should know what they can handle before they lose the plot, they should know how much drink makes them agro or just drunk enough to fight and not drink that much when they do they should be punished.

cooperguy

No. It would set a ridiculous precedent and you can be gauranteed that you would start getting points for lesser and lesser 'offences' until it reaches the stage that you trip over your shoe lace and end up with 2 points.

Every time some 'tard does something stupid the "sombody think of the children" brigade would be out in full force to say points should be brought in for more and more. And everybody knows that politicans love doing what the people on the Joe Duffy show say.

Themainman

Collie D wrote:

When I was in Chester a couple of years ago they had a system which was kind of along the lines of the OP's idea. If you're barred from one pub,there was a group of about fifty pubs (the local version of the Vintners' Federation I assume) that you were also banned from. Not sure how they enforce it but thought it was a pretty good idea.

To get into a pub you must have a certain ID issued by the VFI or equivalent, do somthing wrong the ID is taken off you and the photo is distributed to other bars. Thus no ID and its probably been confiscated (look for a new one and the name will flag up of course false names could probably be used with a bit of thought) Surprisingly enough there are not that many barred as the consequences are percieved to have a greater impact than a fine or an appearance in court. This system would work particularly well in provincial towns where there are only a couple of clubs and limited 'trendy' bars. Co-operation is the key and buddyism(ie knowing the doorman/owner etc) is a big no no! If a club/pub opts out then they get all trouble makers on their premises and the reputation with it.............

Common sense has to be used though, like there is no point in barring somone for every little misdemeanour, barring should be reserved for fighting, really exessive and persistant drunkeness, use of drugs and so on. This is the system i worked under in Dorset UK and worked a treat!

cooperguy

Themainman wrote:

To get into a pub you must have a certain ID issued by the VFI or equivalent, do somthing wrong the ID is taken off you and the photo is distributed to other bars. Thus no ID and its probably been confiscated (look for a new one and the name will flag up of course false names could probably be used with a bit of thought) Surprisingly enough there are not that many barred as the consequences are percieved to have a greater impact than a fine or an appearance in court. This system would work particularly well in provincial towns where there are only a couple of clubs and limited 'trendy' bars. Co-operation is the key and buddyism(ie knowing the doorman/owner etc) is a big no no! If a club/pub opts out then they get all trouble makers on their premises and the reputation with it.............

Common sense has to be used though, like there is no point in barring somone for every little misdemeanour, barring should be reserved for fighting, really exessive and persistant drunkeness, use of drugs and so on. This is the system i worked under in Dorset UK and worked a treat!

Now that would be something that could work if implemented correctly. As you say though common sense should be used and a bouncer on a power trip could ruin the system.

Alanthroneus

User45701 wrote:

They should know what they can handle before they lose the plot, they should know how much drink makes them agro or just drunk enough to fight and not drink that much when they do they should be punished.

so we get a whatever 5 year sentence for being drunk...........kinda makes things go in reverse really dosent it. back to the days were you were thrown in jail for supporten somethen that the government didn't agree with....... why should so many people suffer bollox rules when they just want a good time?
Are you sayen to me you have never been drunk enough to fall over? .... so how about the one night you drunkenly fall over ,accidently hit someone and they fall( its been done before) do you deserve a penalty for that?

i dont think so.....

User45701

Alanthroneus wrote:

so we get a whatever 5 year sentence for being drunk...........kinda makes things go in reverse really dosent it. back to the days were you were thrown in jail for supporten somethen that the government didn't agree with....... why should so many people suffer bollox rules when they just want a good time?
Are you sayen to me you have never been drunk enough to fall over? .... so how about the one night you drunkenly fall over ,accidently hit someone and they fall( its been done before) do you deserve a penalty for that?

i dont think so.....

No sorry my mistake i do this allot when i am in work. i didnt explain right.

Im saying 5 years for being drunk and agro, if someone robs someones phone or attacks someone and is cought should be 5 years for drunken assault because they got themselves into that state. if that was the case there would be allot less problem with attacks and assault ect in our city