How bad or good is alcohol for society

Nobelium

Calltocall wrote: »

In fairness he didn’t say that he said 90% of people he arrested were under the influence of alcohol, I think you’re glossing over how alcohol can be an instigator in an awful lot of crime, remove the alcohol and there’s a good chance the crime/accident wouldn’t take place

diageo rep or publican, aka a drug pusher . . . to be ignored.

odyssey06

odyssey06 wrote: »

People are alive every day due to booze too, that's what the all risks mortality studies tell us - moderate drinkers live longer.

This is, quite simply, factually incorrect. An idea planted in people's minds years ago by alcohol companies - e.g. 'Guinness is good for you' - and outdated science. And this is precisely the sort of far too widespread myth which could be countered by education.

'Even moderate alcohol consumption increases stroke risk' (2019)

'Even one drink a day increases stroke risk' (2019)

'There is even more evidence that there is no safe amount of alcohol consumption' (2019)

Dexter2019

Alcohol is great.

Dexter2019

Alcohol is great.

IAMAMORON

I love drinking and I enjoy the social aspect of it. I love going to the pub and having a laugh. It is a part of my life and I would miss it if things got nanny.

In saying that I have seen people who it doesn't suit, at all.

In vino veritas - I strongly believe this one. All the **** I know are serious **** when they are pissed. All the diamonds I know are serious diamonds when they are pissed. All the randy sluts I have ever known were just as randy sober. Any gas bastards I know are just as funny sober.

Put simply I don't believe it changes anyone. People just drop their guard and their inhibitions when they are pissed.

So that really mild mannered polite work colleague that you know... who turns into a learing sex pest with 4 pints on him...… that's right you guessed it.

I am drinking now btw. Ya fuggin bazzas.

Potential-Monke

Potential-Monke wrote: »

And I'm fully aware than alcohol doesn't have to be the cause, but it's a mitigating factor, especially when in court you hear 'my client is not normally like that, but had consumed excess alcohol at that time', which means that their own defence is saying alcohol was to blame. So which is it? It's a mitigating factor or it's the cause, either way alcohol caused someone to do something they (allegedly) wouldn't normally do. Which reads that alcohol is a major part of the cause of these crimes. No? Let me add to that that crimes are committed due to alcohol, ie: the people robbing drink.

And perhaps it's long past the time that Irish courts stopped allowing intoxication to be used to mitigate crimes? With the exception of perhaps people in their very early days drinking, everybody else knows their limits, knows how alcohol affects them and knows how alcohol could endanger themselves or, much more importantly, make them a danger to other citizens in our society (including their spouses and children).

If they persist in drinking even though they know this about themselves, they need to take responsibility for their choices in life and sentenced accordingly. There are far too many angry and abusive people using alcohol as a cop-out from sorting themselves out - using it to "relax" - even though they know it's going to bring the thug out of them.

Potential-Monke

I agree 100%, but it's not changing and I can't see it changing. I honestly believe that being under the influence of any intoxicant has no right to be used as a defence, unless the person was spiked deliberately (very hard to prove). But no, our overpaid and non-understanding judges don't live in the real world so have no idea how allowing this as an excuse affects those involved.

odyssey06

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Wow, relax. If you read my posts you'll see that I said that 90% of people I arrested had alcohol involved. Nowhere did I say it was 90% of all crime. But I was a frontline Garda, so the crimes I mainly dealt with most likely had alcohol involved (burglaries, assaults, public order, rape, criminal damage, to name a few).

I get that and I respect that but I think the cases that you came across were ones that went with a particular territory and there are some people who would read 90% of all arrests to mean 90% of all crimes so it had to be challenged.
Obviously you can't know this but there must have been a vast number of such crimes which occurred on your 'beat' for which no one was arrested. So there's a distortion going on.

And I'm fully aware than alcohol doesn't have to be the cause, but it's a mitigating factor, especially when in court you hear 'my client is not normally like that, but had consumed excess alcohol at that time', which means that their own defence is saying alcohol was to blame. So which is it? It's a mitigating factor or it's the cause, either way alcohol caused someone to do something they (allegedly) wouldn't normally do. Which reads that alcohol is a major part of the cause of these crimes. No? Let me add to that that crimes are committed due to alcohol, ie: the people robbing drink.

It's claimed as a mitigating factor, because it seems to have a succesful effect on judges and sentencing - who also only seem to be looking for an excuse to go easy.
Many defendants claim they are innocent... do we give that any weight?
So I don't see any reason why we should give any weight to such claims as indicating that alcohol was the cause.
If what they normally do is have a few pints on a saturday night and cause mayhem, that's on them not alcohol. I've never seen alcohol turn a saint into a scumbag.

Greyfox

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

On a micro level it can be relatively ok for some people, but for society it definitely is not, because many people will not drink moderately. That is inevitable, it is an addictive drug.

Massive health problems with alcohol, people die due to booze every week. Our district courts are full of assault cases linked to booze, the idea alcohol is doing more good than harm on a macro level is a frankly ridiculous one.

You have to take into consideration the fact that socialising is more enjoyable with a few drinks, also if your new to Ireland having a few drinks is essential to getting to know people. Alcohol makes life more enjoyable for most people. We're never going to stop people from drinking it so saying alcohol is bad is a waste of time as its part of our culture. All we can do is tackle the people who regularly overdo it and what causes this.

Potential-Monke

I'll take that guarantee. What do I get when your guarantee doesn't work though, because that's more sweeping than any previous statement here!

odyssey06 wrote: »

I get that and I respect that but I think the cases that you came across were ones that went with a particular territory and there are some people who would read 90% of all arrests to mean 90% of all crimes so it had to be challenged.
Obviously you can't know this but there must have been a vast number of such crimes which occurred on your 'beat' for which no one was arrested. So there's a distortion going on.

I'm not sure I quite follow, but I take it you're inferring that anyone drunk walking down the street is committing a crime? Technically, yes, but only if they're intoxicated to such an extent as to give reasonable rise to the apprehension that they are a danger to themselves or others. Correct me if I'm wrong on the assumption.

But yes, I did leave off a lot of people who were drunk and causing annoyance, and while it's a criminal offence, the discretion of the Garda come in and it's up to them (albeit very hard to leave people off these days). And yes, lots of crimes go unsolved too, so my figure may be less. I'd imagine if we caught those ones, they'd most likely be the sober criminals. Just a hunch.

odyssey06 wrote: »

It's claimed as a mitigating factor, because it seems to have a succesful effect on judges and sentencing - who also only seem to be looking for an excuse to go easy.
Many defendants claim they are innocent... do we give that any weight?
So I don't see any reason why we should give any weight to such claims as indicating that alcohol was the cause.
If what they normally do is have a few pints on a saturday night and cause mayhem, that's on them not alcohol. I've never seen alcohol turn a saint into a scumbag.

Everyone is given the right to innocent until proven guilty, so yes, we give weight to the claims of innocence. It's up to the Gardaí and the DPP to prove guilt. But I'm sticking with my claim that it's a cause as well as a mitigating factor. It's 100% a cause on those who rob alcohol. You may not have seen a saint being turned into a scumbag, but I have. All you need is the right amount of drink and the right circumstances, and it'll happen. Just because you didn't witness it, doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

And yes, most people are well able to have a few pints and then head home. Some get into arguments but never any further, and then some flip and usually end up getting arrested.

Edgware

Or when out at night have no trouble throwing a few leg openers into some quare one they meet

Sunny Disposition

Moderate drinking is fine, but the thread is about society. Inevitably, giving that alcohol is addictive and freely available, there is a lot of problematic drinking. It’s irrelevant if a person can drink in a way that doesn’t damage them, that’s not possible for a society.

odyssey06

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

Moderate drinking is fine, but the thread is about society. Inevitably, giving that alcohol is addictive and freely available, there is a lot of problematic drinking. It’s irrelevant if a person can drink in a way that doesn’t damage them, that’s not possible for a society.

You could say that therefore about anything in society for which some people have problems with... peanuts, gluten, football hooligans, love.

Moderate drinkers are part of society too, so of course it is entirely relevant to what's possible for a society.

odyssey06

odyssey06 wrote: »

You could say that therefore about anything in society for which some people have problems with... peanuts, gluten, football hooligans, love.

Moderate drinkers are part of society too, so of course it is entirely relevant to what's possible for a society.

I can see by your messages you will come up with anything to defend alcohol

By your reasoning why cant we drink 4 pints and drive like before, it was only a few who were affected worse by 4 pints and not the moderates who could handle it.
Why ban cigarette advertising cos the ones who overdid it and not the moderate smokers
Why the clampdown on gambling and increase taxes, why should I suffer with my €5 accumulator over Johnny who just keeps gambling
Why is hash illegal cos some can smoke and never go onto harder drugs
I could go on all day

Alcohol definitely affects society worse than it betters it. A night out in town rarely doesn't include a form of binging. People affected by a drunk driver crashing into them, families affected by alcohol abuse which transfers to the next generation a lot of the time, random attacks by drunk people etc etc. You can say clamp.down on the abusers, the abusers of alcohol are hooked/addicted and I am pretty sure they didnt want to end up that way.

Education is key, the drinks industry should be forced to list side effects on its bottles, of all the people that would laugh at it, it would hit home with some people. Absolutely ban advertising and bring in plain clear bottles, plain glasses, standard taps with no advertising, no advertising of alcohol in fancy lights outside the pub, start with this

Strumms

I know loads of folks who can go to the pub, have five or six drinks, have a great laugh, cause zero harm to themselves or others, go home happy. 99.9 % of people are this way.

Though, I know one guy who in addition to this is now compelled to forego the 9 euro taxi fare on the way home (bus brings him door to door on way down) and drives after a skinful. Both his friends and bar staff have tried everything only with moderate success to get keys away from him, such as no last orders until keys handed over etc...but it’s often a loosing battle and they shouldn’t HAVE to. He even started bringing his spare keys..

People make choices surrounding alcohol, they need to take responsibility, personal responsibility. I don’t believe changing labels or making it ‘less glamorous’ will do the trick ultimately. Education, yes...even the likes of this whole conversation is a good thing.

wakka12

Strumms wrote: »

I know loads of folks who can go to the pub, have five or six drinks, have a great laugh, cause zero harm to themselves or others, go home happy. 99.9 % of people are this way.

Though, I know one guy who in addition to this is now compelled to forego the 9 euro taxi fare on the way home (bus brings him door to door on way down) and drives after a skinful. Both his friends and bar staff have tried everything only with moderate success to get keys away from him, such as no last orders until keys handed over etc...but it’s often a loosing battle and they shouldn’t HAVE to. He even started bringing his spare keys..

People make choices surrounding alcohol, they need to take responsibility, personal responsibility. I don’t believe changing labels or making it ‘less glamorous’ will do the trick ultimately. Education, yes...even the likes of this whole conversation is a good thing.

Bit of an exaggeration now. Depends on the age group I suppose but Im in my wenties and any house party with over 30 people theres always 2 or 3 who are vomiting or lose their belogings or start fights or lose friends..so I wouldnt say anywhere close to 99% of young people enjoy alcohol responsibly, maybe 65-75% do

In actual fact Id say the vast majority of people have drank in excess to the point of vomiting and have done at least one thing they really regretted while drinking, at least once in their life

wakka12

wakka12 wrote: »

Bit of an exaggeration now. Depends on the age group I suppose but Im in my wenties and any house party with over 30 people theres always 2 or 3 who are vomiting or lose their belogings or start fights or lose friends..so I wouldnt say anywhere close to 99% of young people enjoy alcohol responsibly, maybe 65-75% do

In actual fact Id say the vast majority of people have drank in excess to the point of vomiting and have done at least one thing they really regretted while drinking, at least once in their life

I would even say lower than 65%

valoren

Agreed on the need to sully the advertising. Habits and addictions rely on psychological cues which trigger a routine and which leads to a reward. From that standpoint, reducing the trigger may lead to reduction in people seeking alcohol. Think of the episode with Homer going 'duffless' and he is driven crazy being surrounded with temptation. "Chuggle it....Chuggle it....Chuggle it". For someone looking to cut down their drinking to have the advertising practically non existent would understandably be easier.

An additional aspect is the idea that advertising alcohol normalises it to the point that soda drinks are advertised in much the same way and on a parallel peer like basis as a psychoactive substance e.g. groups of friends sharing Coca Cola, groups of friends all drinking Rockshore.

It's a brilliantly effective drug and my drug of choice. Cutting advertising now will have its impact in time with young people growing up into a society which regards alcohol and it's consumption with greater caution and respect.

Greyfox

Greyfox wrote: »

You have to take into consideration the fact that socialising is more enjoyable with a few drinks, also if your new to Ireland having a few drinks is essential to getting to know people. Alcohol makes life more enjoyable for most people.

I don't think this is a fact at all. Many, many people get off on the buzz of having great chats with friends or acquaintances. These conversations can be stimulated by ideas, by passion for various things or just a simple love for friends and enjoyment of their company. I sometimes attend a traditional singing club, where at least half the people there have tea or a non-alcohol drink and light up the room with their voices. Each and every time I've been there it has been a thoroughly enjoyable night. None of this requires alcohol, or indeed is made more enjoyable by it. Many of us have had our days of tolerating eejits slurring their speech after a few drinks or screaming at televisions while we're trying to have a chat.

Also, regarding your other point, if anything I think the alcohol-is-the-centre-of-society culture here is an impediment to getting to know very many people new to Ireland. Our "drinking culture" is understandably not something most foreigners aspire to be part of.

Greyfox wrote: »

We're never going to stop people from drinking it so saying alcohol is bad is a waste of time as its part of our culture.

First, culture is something which evolves. Rewind to 1970 and see how culturally acceptable smoking was. Rewind to the same time and drink driving was also culturally acceptable. In 1600 very few people in Ireland outside Dublin drank beer, which was largely a foreign drink brought by English armies in the 16th century. Cider, which was grown in orchards across the country, was much more common, and uisce beatha much, much more common. Wine was the standard foreign alcohol in the taverns, with extensive Irish trade with France and Spain. In the 1850s consumption of spirits dramatically decreased in Irish society and people shifted to drinking beer because huge taxes were put on the former. A new culture. Speaking ill of the RCC was not culturally acceptable, and so on and so forth.

Second, I don't believe anybody is saying drinking alcohol will stop in Ireland. Rather, what is being said is that there is an unhealthy relationship with alcohol here and for the greater good of society we need to change this current alcohol-centric culture. There are tons of other parts of society that could be given a more central place for meetings. We could develop a stronger café culture, for instance. We could even develop our own cuisine over time like Spaniards have tapas bars. The centrality bestowed upon, and romanticisation of, pubs and the alcohol industry generally in current Irish culture is particularly unjustified given the massive changes in our working and leisure cultures in the past 50 years. The sooner this ridiculously romanticised drug is sidelined in Irish society the better.

IAMAMORON

Deleted User wrote: »

In 1600 very few people in Ireland outside Dublin drank beer, which was largely a foreign drink brought by English armies in the 16th century. Cider, which was grown in orchards across the country, was much more common, and uisce beatha much, much more common. Wine was the standard foreign alcohol in the taverns, with extensive Irish trade with France and Spain. In the 1850s consumption of spirits dramatically decreased in Irish society and people shifted to drinking beer because huge taxes were put on the former. A new culture. Speaking ill of the RCC was not culturally acceptable, and so on and so forth.

.

I appreciate that you are almost 400 years old, but what is even more remarkable is your elephant-like memory of Irish drinking culture in the 16th and 17th century, especially considering the RCC was banned at the time.

The reason why taxes were bumped up in the 1850's was that there was a five year potato blight which led to the biggest famine this country had endured in over 150 years and the deaths of over a million people. In fairness by all accounts the shift from whiskey to beer might not have been that apparent at the time considering everyone was starving.

But thanks for sharing your memories.

I think the development of a stronger café culture is pie in the sky and resembles the musings of a Puritan. The last time Puritans had power in Ireland they ransacked Drogheda, Wexford and Limerick and almost took over Clonmel, dark times indeed.

IAMAMORON

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I appreciate that you are almost 400 years old, but what is even more remarkable is your elephant-like memory of Irish drinking culture in the 16th and 17th century, especially considering the RCC was banned at the time.

The reason why taxes were bumped up in the 1850's was that there was a five year potato blight which led to the biggest famine this country had endured in over 150 years and the deaths of over a million people. In fairness by all accounts the shift from whiskey to beer might not have been that apparent at the time considering everyone was starving.

But thanks for sharing your memories.

I think the development of a stronger café culture is pie in the sky and resembles the musings of a Puritan. The last time Puritans had power in Ireland they ransacked Drogheda, Wexford and Limerick and almost took over Clonmel, dark times indeed.

Very childish response imo

He made some valid points and if I remember correctly back in the noughties i think it was McDowell (might be wrong) wanted to introduce cafe style bars like in Europe and the vintners and publican TDs shot it down so much it was canned. What possibly were they so afraid of, maybe a shift in culture

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/publicans-warn-proposals-may-be-too-restrictive-94018.html

I'm sure a deeper search would find more

ILoveYourVibes

The good.

It provides a lot of jobs for people.

Light drinking reduces risk of stroke , heart disease and diabetes.

It's used in medicine to disinfect skin before a needle stick and before surgery.

Its used in mouthwash.

It has a lot of medicinal uses.

It's used in industry.

It can be used as fuel.

There is really only ONE bad thing about alcohol. Abusing it. And yes it's detrimental when abused.

I am a non drinker but I am rather glad we have it.

kildare lad

A bit of both I suppose. It's the same as everything else , moderation is the key. I know a good few people that had to give up drink cos it didn't suit them. Most people are fine tho. I don't drink due to a medical condition but sometimes I'd love to have that option of going on the piss with your mates.

IAMAMORON

Deleted User wrote: »

Very childish response imo

He made some valid points and if I remember correctly back in the noughties i think it was McDowell (might be wrong) wanted to introduce cafe style bars like in Europe and the vintners and publican TDs shot it down so much it was canned. What possibly were they so afraid of, maybe a shift in culture

I am not a child.

None of his responses were valid. In particular the waffle about the RCC in the 16th century. Outside of monasteries it didn't exist.

Finally contrasting drinking habits outside of the Pale and whiskey taxes is nonsense. Drink was the last thing on a lot of peoples minds during the 1850's.

Beechwoodspark

When ppl say light drinking is possibly beneficial for health what that means is 1 unit or less per day.

So half a pint of 4% beer. Or a small glass of wine.

And even those minor benefits are disputed.

There’s been a number of studies lately saying no level of alcohol is safe for consumption.

IAMAMORON

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I am not a child.

None of his responses were valid. In particular the waffle about the RCC in the 16th century. Outside of monasteries it didn't exist.

Finally contrasting drinking habits outside of the Pale and whiskey taxes is nonsense. Drink was the last thing on a lot of peoples minds during the 1850's.

The Irish got their reputation from alcohol abuse, it wasnt 99% behaving, it was a considerable amount in America and Britain guzzling pints every night and falling around and fighting.

The whole cultural thing is nonsense, we are known as drunks the world over which some people seem to cling onto with pride and the whole craic thing. People after a few pints (still soberish) are very likely to say what's on their mind rather than being reserved and cautious without it. Those snipey comments and insults are what causes a lot of trouble.

Alcohol does not have health benefits, you get more benefit from an orange than a bottle of wine regarding heart health, it's just a justification to drink.

At funerals, christening, communion, just about every event is an excuse to drink.

Out of all the regular drinkers from their 30s, not many get to their 60s and 70s. It's a degradation of health from the moderate abuse of their bodies. I worked in a bar, lots of regulars didnt see much of their 50s.

You can say non drinkers get sick too or fitness fanatics get sick, yes they do but there is other underlying issues or just being unlucky. The probability of a drinker getting sick is a lot higher and it's time society is honest with themselves on this and stop putting up defence guards because they drink the poison as well

IAMAMORON

Deleted User wrote: »

The Irish got their reputation from alcohol abuse, it wasnt 99% behaving, it was a considerable amount in America and Britain guzzling pints every night and falling around and fighting.

The whole cultural thing is nonsense, we are known as drunks the world over which some people seem to cling onto with pride and the whole craic thing. People after a few pints (still soberish) are very likely to say what's on their mind rather than being reserved and cautious without it. Those snipey comments and insults are what causes a lot of trouble.

Alcohol does not have health benefits, you get more benefit from an orange than a bottle of wine regarding heart health, it's just a justification to drink.

At funerals, christening, communion, just about every event is an excuse to drink.

Out of all the regular drinkers from their 30s, not many get to their 60s and 70s. It's a degradation of health from the moderate abuse of their bodies. I worked in a bar, lots of regulars didnt see much of their 50s.

You can say non drinkers get sick too or fitness fanatics get sick, yes they do but there is other underlying issues or just being unlucky. The probability of a drinker getting sick is a lot higher and it's time society is honest with themselves on this and stop putting up defence guards because they drink the poison as well

Noted.

I take it you won't be attending the vintners' ball this Christmas either.

As I mentioned in a previous post, Puritanism was not the solution in the past, I doubt it will be in the future.

The only people I know who don't drink are **** and assholes who are self centred and terrified of dropping their guard after 4 pints in case the whole world will notice. Outside of money it is the only pastime in the world that thankfully exposes it for what it is.

If you don't like pubs or drinking, congratulations, I am delighted for you. What I don't understand is this default position which non-drinkers bestow on the rest of the drinking public. The tut-tutting does get boring after a while. If you don't like alcohol fine, go knit some jumpers, visit the library and cycle up Sally's Gap.

IAMAMORON

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Noted.

I take it you won't be attending the vintners' ball this Christmas either.

As I mentioned in a previous post, Puritanism was not the solution in the past, I doubt it will be in the future.

The only people I know who don't drink are **** and assholes who are self centred and terrified of dropping their guard after 4 pints in case the whole world will notice. Outside of money it is the only pastime in the world that thankfully exposes it for what it is.

If you don't like pubs or drinking, congratulations, I am delighted for you. What I don't understand is this default position which non-drinkers bestow on the rest of the drinking public. The tut-tutting does get boring after a while. If you don't like alcohol fine, go knit some jumpers, visit the library and cycle up Sally's Gap.

As I said in a previous post I would still go for a few pints so that counters your argument fairly fast

Read the topic of the thread, what I have noticed as I get older it's not the fun past time people try to credit it for. I struggle to see how going in town having 7 or 8 pints, suffering all the next day and not being able to drive for fear of being over the limit is positive for society.

Its grand for young people with no responsibility and don't have children watching their idol and person to look up to having gallons of drink on the weekends. Before you say it, yes it happens, the scurry for drinks on previous holy Thursdays and the quantity of drink being bought at xmas will cement it into children's heads the only way to 'relax' and enjoy events is by consuming alcohol

And I am not saying ban alcohol, it should not be glorified and brainwashed into peoples heads from birth. Advertising is a cunning and sneaky business that isnt there to entertain us, it's there to give triggers and manipulate peoples minds. Would drinking be as attractive if all advertising and glorifying in movies was removed? I don't think it would. It's like election posters, its proven it is effective when people go to the polling stations.

Alcohol will always be there and removing it will make it more appealing, the glorifying and cultural nonsense needs to be removed and then society will treat it differently