Opening of "No-Food" pubs pushed out again

SusieBlue · 20-08-2020 12:20AM

smellyoldboot wrote: »

Pretty much anyone poring through restrictions/looking for llopholes at the present time in order to spend an evening however weird or restrictive in the pub likely has a drink problem. Admitting it is the first step to fixing it.

I can only assume you have no experience of dealing with people with addiction whatsoever if you think an alcoholic is going to be spending their time ‘poring through restrictions’ looking for loopholes when they could be drinking at home or elsewhere.
They aren’t relying on two hour seated slots with a €9 substantial meal to fuel their drink problem, I can promise you that much.

And regardless, OP said nothing about flouting restrictions or looking for loopholes, those are all your words.
They said the rules were like being at school but that they would obey them and that they were looking forward to it and planned to enjoy themselves.
Quite a hysterical overreaction on your part to accuse them of ‘likely’ having a drinking problem just based off that to be fair, and your advice to seek help was beyond patronising.
You added arms and legs onto an innocent post to suit your own little agenda.

Tokyo · 20-08-2020 01:35AM

Mod: @smellyoldboot - posts deleted. Another smartarsed response will earn you a threadban.

Quantum Erasure · 20-08-2020 02:54AM

weldoninhio wrote: »

“However, while he is determined to enforce social distancing on his premises to protect staff and customers alike, he does concede one thing - the fence has not been switched on.”

So a strip of metal with a sign.

Is a lightbulb not a lightbulb when its switched off?

20-08-2020 07:18AM

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Given covid attacks more than the lungs then it’s not beyond the bounds of possibility that it accelerated the heart attack.

He didn't have Covid in the end. It was simply a heart attack.

20-08-2020 07:26AM

Kiith wrote: »

Are hotel bars open for guests? Away in a few weeks, and wondering if they'll be open for a few pints (with food of course).

Was away last week and stayed in 2 different hotels.

First hotel allowed us drink what we wanted without food, they had a large garden area and we had to stay out there away from people eating food. It didn't bother me and was quite happy as we could have as many pints as we wanted. Unfortunately the Guinness was dirt.

Second hotel had the following restrictions.
Book a table. Allowed drink in lobby for 1 hour before food, 105 minutes while eating food and another hour in the lobby after food. We had already been drinking and eating in another pub so didnt want more food.

The hotel staff said that was ok and put us in a windowless function room and said they would send a staff member in for orders. Which was fair enough, a few other guests were in the room and we kept our distance but were able to have a bit of craic.

copeyhagen · 20-08-2020 08:08AM

smellyoldboot wrote: »

Pretty much anyone poring through restrictions/looking for llopholes at the present time in order to spend an evening however weird or restrictive in the pub likely has a drink problem. Admitting it is the first step to fixing it.

youre a moron

Justin Credible Darts · 20-08-2020 08:16AM

I doubt there are many people in the country who loved his pint as much as me, yet I am no drinker at home.
for me it was always the social aspect but would get sloshed.

So you either want the pub for drink or socialising, if its drink, then drink at home, there are off licenses open.

If you want to go to a pub to socialize in the middle of a pandemic then there is something wrong and selfish about you.
Work, schools etc are a priority, pubs are not

weldoninhio · 20-08-2020 09:24AM

murpho999 wrote: »

The logic is simple. As you walk by people on the way to your table then you're not spreading the virus to the them.

Remember some pubs are large and you could be walking by a lot of tables and people to get to your table.

It’s farcical. You could be on the first table in the door and the jacks at the back of the “large” pub where you have to walk past a lot of tables. No mention of masking up to use the toilet or to go to the smoking area. Kinda defeats the purpose no?

weldoninhio · 20-08-2020 09:27AM

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

Is a lightbulb not a lightbulb when its switched off?

An electric fence is a fence with an electrical current running through it.

This is just a fence.

The White Wolf · 20-08-2020 11:40AM

I saw someone say on reddit that the rule breaking was rampant in pubs/restaurants that are open and I asked how they knew this; their answer was that they frequented about 20 places since restrictions has been lifted and they were allowed to do whatever they wanted.

I'm at a bit of a loss here, what kind of person continually moans about the "rampant" rule breaking yet happily revels in said rule breaking? I do respect someone's stance once they back it up, but why would such a person as above even deserve one second of anyone's attention. Anyone else come across similar fools?

Tenzor07 · 20-08-2020 11:48AM

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

So you either want the pub for drink or socialising, if its drink, then drink at home, there are off licenses open.
If you want to go to a pub to socialize in the middle of a pandemic then there is something wrong and selfish about you.
Work, schools etc are a priority, pubs are not

That's a false trade-off and a fabrication... the opening of schools doesn't and shouldn't depend on whether a non-food pub opens or not, esp. when you consider that someone can go to the off-licence and purchase a crate of 20 beers for the price of 3 or 4 at the pub and go home and have a house party with as many people as they like...

The idea of closing pubs etc. was to prevent a "Second wave" of deaths... we haven't seen that... the rate of deaths has been flat for months..

The closing of pubs makes no sense now... apart from to the Civil servant who came up with the idea..

bush · 20-08-2020 11:52AM

The White Wolf wrote: »

I saw someone say on reddit that the rule breaking was rampant in pubs/restaurants that are open and I asked how they knew this; their answer was that they frequented about 20 places since restrictions has been lifted and they were allowed to do whatever they wanted.

I'm at a bit of a loss here, what kind of person continually moans about the "rampant" rule breaking yet happily revels in said rule breaking? I do respect someone's stance once they back it up, but why would such a person as above even deserve one second of anyone's attention. Anyone else come across similar fools?

Same people who go to a packed beach and complain its packed

HBC08 · 20-08-2020 11:59AM

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Any hotel I have stayed in over the last few weeks have given me a drink how and when I want it, and rightly so.

I got a bit of crap off a staff member in a place a few Mondays ago, but that was out of sheer laziness as opposed to the staff member giving a hoot over virus prevention or anything like it. I called her out on it too and she backed down fairly sharpish... and rightly so.

You must have felt 10 feet tall after that.
Ledge

rubadub · 20-08-2020 01:54PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

And unless you are going to argue that the ‘substantial meal’ offers any protection from the virus, you don’t really have an argument. The whole point of it is to deter people from making multiple bookings in multiple venues and for the most part it’s working.

The substantial meal law requirement for restaurants has been in place in some form for over 50 years, why do you think it is there?

Also why do you think the following law is in place?

Children (anyone under the age of 18) are only allowed in licensed premises if they are with a parent or guardian, but this provision carries certain restrictions. For example, if accompanied by a parent/guardian, the child may remain on the premises between the hours of 10:30am - 9pm (until 10pm from May to September) unless the licence holder feels this is injurious to the child's health, safety and welfare. Children aged between 15 and 17 years may remain on the premises after 9pm where they are attending a private function at which a substantial meal is served. All licensed premises must display a sign to this effect in a prominent place at all times and failure to do so can result in a fine.

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/criminal_law/criminal_offences/alcohol_and_the_law.html

Richard Hillman · 20-08-2020 02:31PM

Fitz* wrote: »

Premier League games last 105 mins, including half time. Pubs couldn't be turfing lads our before the game finishes.

VAR stoppages, Injury time and for some reason Premier League always seem to have longer HTs. When I'm watching on Soccer Saturday, 3pm games usually end at about 4.55.

And god forbid a cup game going into Extra Time and Penalties :pac:

Suckit · 20-08-2020 02:42PM

weldoninhio wrote: »

It’s farcical. You could be on the first table in the door and the jacks at the back of the “large” pub where you have to walk past a lot of tables. No mention of masking up to use the toilet or to go to the smoking area. Kinda defeats the purpose no?

What purpose is that?

weldoninhio · 20-08-2020 04:33PM

Suckit wrote: »

What purpose is that?

If the purpose of wearing the mask when you enter the pub until you are seated is to stop you infecting other diners.

Then surely the fact that you can then get up and walk from one end of the pub to the other to use the toilet or go for a smoke, without a mask, defeats the purpose of having to wear it until you are seated in the first place.

Suckit · 20-08-2020 04:54PM

weldoninhio wrote: »

If the purpose of wearing the mask when you enter the pub until you are seated is to stop you infecting other diners.

Then surely the fact that you can then get up and walk from one end of the pub to the other to use the toilet or go for a smoke, without a mask, defeats the purpose of having to wear it until you are seated in the first place.

You said "it defeats the purpose" but now are saying "if the purpose is to stop infecting others".

It isn't. As has been mentioned throughout numerous times.
It is to slow the virus down. Combined with other preventative measures (e.g. washing your hands, social distancing), it helps to give everyone a fighting chance by lessening the infection rate and keeping hospital beds free etc.
Allowing time for a vaccine to be created. Also giving a better chance to fight it in winter, by people getting used to these measures.

A mask is not expected to stop you infecting others. I don't see how this is so difficult.
It can help prevent you from infecting so many others, particularly when used with the other measures. So instead of seeing thousands infected, we may see hundreds, or hopefully tens..

weldoninhio · 20-08-2020 05:41PM

Suckit wrote: »

You said "it defeats the purpose" but now are saying "if the purpose is to stop infecting others".

It isn't. As has been mentioned throughout numerous times.
It is to slow the virus down. Combined with other preventative measures (e.g. washing your hands, social distancing), it helps to give everyone a fighting chance by lessening the infection rate and keeping hospital beds free etc.
Allowing time for a vaccine to be created. Also giving a better chance to fight it in winter, by people getting used to these measures.

A mask is not expected to stop you infecting others. I don't see how this is so difficult.
It can help prevent you from infecting so many others, particularly when used with the other measures. So instead of seeing thousands infected, we may see hundreds, or hopefully tens..

If you’d bother reading the thread, the purpose I was referring to was put forward by another poster, who I was pointing out the cognitive dissonance to.

Suckit · 20-08-2020 05:43PM

weldoninhio wrote: »

If you’d bother reading the thread, the purpose I was referring to was put forward by another poster, who I was pointing out the cognitive dissonance to.

I have read most of the thread, and specifically asked you what purpose you were referring to.
My point stays the same in any case.
The masks are not to stop the virus.

weldoninhio · 20-08-2020 05:49PM

Suckit wrote: »

I have read most of the thread, and specifically asked you what prupose you were referring to.
My point stays the same in any case.
The masks are not to stop the virus.

It’s literally 8 posts up from where you butt in. You read feck all.

Suckit · 20-08-2020 05:52PM

weldoninhio wrote: »

It’s literally 8 posts up from where you butt in. You read feck all.

"Butt in" on a discussion forum :rolleyes:
Also, that post, 8 posts up is the one I was quoting.

I had also quoted you a page or two before where you were commenting about keeping the mask on between bites.

PTH2009 · 20-08-2020 06:25PM

Those frozen pizza's are ****e but drink is good though ha

regulators · 20-08-2020 07:49PM

A million people returning to primary and secondary in the country.
250,000 returning to college.

Yet non food pubs have to be remained closed. Joke

Justin Credible Darts · 20-08-2020 08:07PM

Tenzor07 wrote: »

That's a false trade-off and a fabrication... the opening of schools doesn't and shouldn't depend on whether a non-food pub opens or not, esp. when you consider that someone can go to the off-licence and purchase a crate of 20 beers for the price of 3 or 4 at the pub and go home and have a house party with as many people as they like...

The idea of closing pubs etc. was to prevent a "Second wave" of deaths... we haven't seen that... the rate of deaths has been flat for months..

The closing of pubs makes no sense now... apart from to the Civil servant who came up with the idea..

it does not invalidate the initial point I made you ignored.

Why would you want to group socialize during a pandemic.

if its drink you want drink at home.

Pubs are NOT a priority.

Dickie10 · 20-08-2020 09:03PM

im fascinated to see what christmas will look like with pubs shut.

Dickie10 · 20-08-2020 09:05PM

an old lady next to my local called the gardai and HSE to complain about it being open there 2 weeks ago.
dont know what she actually acused them of. gardai and HSE landed out two different evenings and found nothing amiss, told owner carry on.

Richard Hillman · 20-08-2020 09:16PM

If we get another increase in cases for the schools reopening, they'll keep the pubs shut for another couple of months. Then when they open pubs, we'll get another increase and that will be during Xmas and during the regular flu season.

This ****e has to end. Open the pubs now. Open the schools in September and let's get on with things.

ShooterSF · 20-08-2020 10:07PM

regulators wrote: »

A million people returning to primary and secondary in the country.
250,000 returning to college.

Yet non food pubs have to be remained closed. Joke

Yep I'm back in college next month and as much as I hated long distance learning last semester there is no way we should all be going back during a freaking pandemic.
I was even forced to travel up this week using public transport that we are supposed to be avoiding to empty a stupid locker because we couldn't empty it at the end of "last year".

freak scence · 20-08-2020 10:17PM

https://www.axios.com/covid-19-children-community-spread-study-75e7787f-cea6-4a23-87c9-90683e1b5192.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=organic&utm_content=1100

Opening of "No-Food" pubs pushed out again

Comments