Under 21's should only be allowed buy alcohol in pubs

cavedave

What is your opinion on banning off license sales to under 21's?

There is a description of some of the problems with the proposal here

My own belief is that the age of being an adult is reasonably set at 18 currently so a 21 age limit is unreasonable.

El Stuntman

if people of any age want to buy something badly enough, they'll find a way to do it

changing the law is a pointless waste of time

changing people's attitudes to alcohol, that would be revolutionary

Zombrex

cavedave wrote: »

What is your opinion on banning off license sales to under 21's?

There is a description of some of the problems with the proposal here

My own belief is that the age of being an adult is reasonably set at 18 currently so a 21 age limit is unreasonable.

Surely the opposite would be more effective.

My experience with me and my mates when we were younger is that you make one trip to the offie, and you don't tend to go back once you have drunk what you buy, which is limited by what you can carry and how much money you have on you then and there, where as in a pub or club you have an unlimited supply right beside you, and probably an ATM around the corner.

The problem with Irish binge drinking is people not knowing when to stop because the night isn't over (and we must keep drink till the night is over, something to do more than anything else) or because we are already so drunk we don't realise.

Having a supply that once its gone its gone seems preferable to having an unlimited supply beside you.

Imposter

I'm a fan of legalising beer and wine at 16, spirits at 18 and opening pubs until 3/4am at least at weekends (say 1 or 2 during the week). That way people at some stage will have to get a grip on alcohol and treat it properly!

Telling someone you can't have something just makes them want it more and causes them to misuse/abuse it once they get it.

The only real effect of this move will be to enrich pub owners. Given FF's track record, this isn't too suprising.

brianthebard

Wicknight wrote: »

Having a supply that once its gone its gone seems preferable to having an unlimited supply beside you.

That makes sense up to a point but it ten to fifteen quid will provide you with enough cheap alcohol to get plastered before its even gone in my experience. And if needs be people will club together and get something bigger between them, say a 700ml bottle of no name paintstripper vodka rather than a 200ml naggin. I think that if people realise that they can't go back for more they are more likely to load up with extra, which ineviteably gets drank.

Boggles

That is one of the most ridiculous proposals I have ever heard of. Basically off license sales have soared and pub sales are down, what can we do to get the publicans back on side?

Tell anyone under 21 that they have to pay 4 or 5 times the amount if they want to have a drink in this country. Plus if you smoke and you want to drink, your really screwed, as not only are you getting robbed you will be soaked and frustrated.

I paid €3.60 for 2 pints of dilluted orange yesterday. I'm Bitter.

sovtek

Why is when the government wants to be seen to "do something" its almost always a way of punishing us sweaty masses.
My experience of countries where alcohol is less restricted people act more responsively than where it is more restricted.
I'm sick of hearing "we need to roll back pub closings or increase taxes to curb drinking". It's a time tested way to fail.
Firstly Ireland is still living in Victorian times in regards to alcohol restrictions (and a few other things )and is probably the most expensive place in the world to drink. That being said the drink problem increases. You would think people would learn instead of parroting whatever the latest minister is blowing out their hole.
Wake up and look at what works. In continental Europe they got it right...UK and Ireland....wrong...do what the Continentals do!
Secondly we have restricted under 21's in America for over 20 years. I still get carded back at home even though I'm bald and we still have underage drinking galore and a serious drunk driving death toll(even though people get put in jail for DWI). Punishing the kiddies DOES NOT WORK!

Zombrex

brianthebard wrote: »

That makes sense up to a point but it ten to fifteen quid will provide you with enough cheap alcohol to get plastered before its even gone in my experience. And if needs be people will club together and get something bigger between them, say a 700ml bottle of no name paintstripper vodka rather than a 200ml naggin. I think that if people realise that they can't go back for more they are more likely to load up with extra, which ineviteably gets drank.

Well true, if someone really really is setting out to get utterly plastered there isn't a whole lot you can do about it.

But I feel (perhaps "hope" would be a more appropriate) that the people who would actually be so brazen that they are going to get sh*t faced that night would be a minority of the people who would let themselves get sh*t faced if the opportunity presents itself.

So I'm dividing up the group into two sets, the people who from 5pm that afternoon decide "Tonight I'm going to get paralytic" (which I've no doubt are people out there), and the ones that wouldn't consider themselves heavy drinkers or a night as an excuse to get plastered (the people who seem genuinely shocked when the doctor tells them they have the liver of an 80 year old), but during the course of the night simply end up drinking and drinking constantly until they have had way too much simply for something to do.

Again I only have my friends to go up, but a number of my friends would buy a few bottles of bear if they go to the offie, where as place them in a pub and they will just drink and drink and drink. They aren't setting out that night to get really drunk, they just do because the opportunity presents itself and they want to keep drinking.

Zombrex

Boggles wrote: »

I paid €3.60 for 2 pints of dilluted orange yesterday. I'm Bitter.

I must say, as someone who has to cut down on alcohol for medical reasons, the price of non-alcoholic drinks is utterly ridiculous to the point of being criminal.

I ordered a 220ml bottle of sparking water (Riverrock) and it was €3.50. A pint was a euro more. My friends looked at me in disgust when they were buying rounds, the feeling being that it was simply not worth the money. And I agree.

To claim we are serious about combating the heavy drinking of young Irish people when we have such an outrageous mark up on soft drinks is just nonsensical.

Boggles

Wicknight wrote: »

I must say, as someone who has to cut down on alcohol for medical reasons, the price of non-alcoholic drinks is utterly ridiculous to the point of being criminal.

I ordered a 220ml bottle of sparking water (Riverrock) and it was €3.50. A pint was a euro more. My friends looked at me in disgust when they were buying rounds, the feeling being that it was simply not worth the money. And I agree.

To claim we are serious about combating the heavy drinking of young Irish people when we have such an outrageous mark up on soft drinks is just nonsensical.

Agree, they should really wear a mask when they hand you the bill.

Colonel Sanders

Boggles wrote: »

That is one of the most ridiculous proposals I have ever heard of. Basically off license sales have soared and pub sales are down, what can we do to get the publicans back on side?

Tell anyone under 21 that they have to pay 4 or 5 times the amount if they want to have a drink in this country. Plus if you smoke and you want to drink, your really screwed, as not only are you getting robbed you will be soaked and frustrated.

I paid €3.60 for 2 pints of dilluted orange yesterday. I'm Bitter.

I agree with you 100% but welcome to Ireland governed by the publican party. Whats needed is education on the effects of alcohol not another revenue raising measure that will have eff all effect on the problem.

PS €3.60 for 2 pints of diluted orange is relatively cheap compared to pubs in Dublin. I was in the leopardstown inn yesterday and it was €2.40 for one pint of blackcurrant :eek:

Tellox

I think it'd be a terrible idea. Go to any nightclub in Ireland and you'll spot plenty of underagers inside, and it's usually one of them that get's inebriated and starts a fight. This type of legislation would only encourage that.

SeanW

Sounds like a stupid idea that's more about pandering to the publicans than anything else.

McDowell, for all his faults, had a good idea with the Cafe Bars. To give people positive choices, and help foster a Continental attitude of alcahol as a part of a meal, or a night out, as opposed to being the sole focus. It might have actually helped. But we know what happened - FF sold out to the publicans!

Does anyone else get the weird feeling of DejaVu?

baztard

This idea of banning under 21's from the offi makes my blood boil. The minister for no fun is trying to justify his stupidly high wages with another stupid proposal. Yet another ridiculous idea from a ridiculous party.

18 year olds are adults, they should enjoy the same rights as every other adult in the country. Who the hell does the minister think he is telling one set of adults they can buy alcohol here, but not allow another set of adults do the same?

Restricting access is such an outdated concept. If people want something badly enough they'll get it.

Education, education, education (something some of these fools in power could do with), is the only way to bring down our level of drinking in general.

CerebralCortex

SeanW wrote: »

Sounds like a stupid idea that's more about pandering to the publicans than anything else.

McDowell, for all his faults, had a good idea with the Cafe Bars. To give people positive choices, and help foster a Continental attitude of alcahol as a part of a meal, or a night out, as opposed to being the sole focus. It might have actually helped. But we know what happened - FF sold out to the publicans!

Does anyone else get the weird feeling of DejaVu?

Cafe Bars and that attitude would have been nice.

infinitejest

baztard wrote: »

This idea of banning under 21's from the offi makes my blood boil. The minister for no fun is trying to justify his stupidly high wages with another stupid proposal. Yet another ridiculous idea from a ridiculous party.

18 year olds are adults, they should enjoy the same rights as every other adult in the country. Who the hell does the minister think he is telling one set of adults they can buy alcohol here, but not allow another set of adults do the same?

Restricting access is such an outdated concept. If people want something badly enough they'll get it.

Education, education, education (something some of these fools in power could do with), is the only way to bring down our level of drinking in general.

I think you are wrong in saying that education will bring down alcohol consumption levels. All the international research indicates that increasing the cost of alcohol and reducing availability are effective means of reducing comsumption. Education, though always a popular option, is not effective.

There is a nice summery table on effective alcohol policies in the Strategic Task Force on Alcohol report from 2002
http://www.dohc.ie/publications/pdf/stfa.pdf?direct=1 See page 17 of the report (or page 19 of the pdf)
It is worth reading the entire report. This isn't about spoiling peoples fun - it is about addressing the fact that Irish people, and young Irish people are drinking far more than they ever have, and are drinking in a very dangerous manner - ie binge drinking.

cavedave

This isn't about spoiling peoples fun

I am not worried about spoiling fun. I am worried about the loss of liberty by adults.

it is about addressing the fact that Irish people, and young Irish people are drinking far more than they ever have, and are drinking in a very dangerous manner - ie binge drinking.

I believe we need to reduce the amount of alcohol we consume and particularly binge drink. If the government made some sort of falsifiable test, for example "This ban will reduce binge drinking of 18,19,20 year olds by 30%, and if it does not in one year we will remove the ban", that would be something. But asking for laws to be based on evidence is a larger question about government accountability

Colonel Sanders

IMO there was absolutely nothing wrong with McDowells Cafe Bar proposal (apart from angering Publican Party backbenchers). It would definately have been a step in the right direction, introducing young adults to alcohol in a somewhat controlled environment where the objective isn't to drink as many pints as possible before closing time. Yet this seemingly great idea was rejected by the FF led government. Seems that reducing overall consumption is only agood thing as long as the vintners continue to get their maximum slice too.

prendy

maybe they should restrict the sale in the Dail aswell coz their all abviously off their trolly.
this wont work.
talk about helping the pubs instead of encouraging the greedy so an so's to reduce prices.
its peoples attitudes that needs to be changed not the law.
its affecting students the most...the vast majority of whom are under 21.

baztard

infinitejest wrote: »

I think you are wrong in saying that education will bring down alcohol consumption levels. All the international research indicates that increasing the cost of alcohol and reducing availability are effective means of reducing comsumption. Education, though always a popular option, is not effective.

There is a nice summery table on effective alcohol policies in the Strategic Task Force on Alcohol report from 2002
http://www.dohc.ie/publications/pdf/stfa.pdf?direct=1 See page 17 of the report (or page 19 of the pdf)
It is worth reading the entire report. This isn't about spoiling peoples fun - it is about addressing the fact that Irish people, and young Irish people are drinking far more than they ever have, and are drinking in a very dangerous manner - ie binge drinking.

I read the full report and it makes an interesting read, especially the effective policies summary table you pointed out.

According to the report restricting access is the most effective approach to reducing drink consumption. However it doesn't talk about the other effects of such an approach. The biggest of which is reducing peoples liberties. I don't want to live in a nanny state, and stopping 21 year olds from being served in an offi is a big step in that direction.

France, Germany, Italy etc don't restrict access and they are largely in a better off situation regarding consumption than we are. If they can make things work there I dont see why we can't do the same.

It also says that education is a non effective way of reducing drink consumption. I have to ask the question though, has any country ever put serious amounts of effort into education, or is this report based on a sticking a poster up on a doctors wall approach to educating people.

Akrasia

baztard wrote: »

According to the report restricting access is the most effective approach to reducing drink consumption.

Yeah, I don't believe that conclusion for a second. I think this is a case of researchers imposing their own bias onto the subject matter.
I can't believe they have looked at the best international practise and came to that conclusion.

I lived in Holland for 4 months last year in a town full of young people from all over the world. There were no closing hours and you could legally buy alcohol in any shop or on the street if you wanted. I didn't see any anti social behaviour of any kind while I was there.

In the U.K. they introduced 24 hour drinking licenses 2 years ago and since then, there has been a very minor increase in arrests for public disorder, but with the caveat that it is now easier for the police to operate in conditions where there aren't so many thousands of people thrown out onto the street at the same time.

cornbb

Its lunacy. It shows how out of touch our ministers are with logic and with reality. It will do absolutely nothing to curb the problems that excessive drinking cause, its just another steady erosion of the liberties of reponsible Irish people.

They need to change people's attitudes and make people who do stupid/damaging things while drunk face the consequences of their actions, stupid little legal tweaks like this won't do a thing to change drinkers' behaviour.

IRLConor

Akrasia wrote: »

In the U.K. they introduced 24 hour drinking licenses 2 years ago and since then, there has been a very minor increase in arrests for public disorder, but with the caveat that it is now easier for the police to operate in conditions where there aren't so many thousands of people thrown out onto the street at the same time.

I've believed for quite some time now that removing mandatory closing times would be a good thing.

• There would be a more gradual outflow of people onto the street/into the fast food joint. Reducing crowds makes the policing easier.
• There would be a more steady demand for taxis reducing taxi queues and thereby reducing potential for arguments and fights. Even after a sober and enjoyable night a 50 metre taxi queue in winter gets my blood boiling (it's the only thing that keeps me warm! ).
• People would (eventually) get used to not staying until the bitter end and hopefully start making sensible decisions on when to call it a night and go home.

As for the original topic:

Changing off-license age restrictions won't do a damn thing. Providing opportunity and motivation for 18-21 year olds to drink in a sensible fashion (or not drink at all :eek::)) will actually fix things.