Alcohol related violence in Canberra

Like many others here I do not think that alcohol is the problem, but d*heads are. What the people in that show confused is correlation and causality: just because the dickheads prefer to strike when they drink, doesn’t mean it was the alcohol that made them do it. Other countries such as Germany have an even greater alcohol consumption than Australia, yet no problem with drunken street violence. We need to clamp down on antisocial behaviour, and not on pubs.

poetix said :

But I don’t pick fights, and I swear that there is a level of excessive alcohol that is good for generating initial ideas for writing.

A positive effect of inhibitions being reduced? You must write them down quickly or you will soon forget.

(Drunkenness is not good for finishing poems and sending them off to places though, that is, anything requiring finer judgement.)

What about really sad songs about being heartbroken and drinking bottles of liquor out of brown paper bags? That’s my muse right there!

Battlecat said :

As someone mentioned before, a huge factor in Civic is the lack of taxis. Forcing a bunch of drunk (or even just tired) people to form an orderly queue for up to an hours is a sure fire way to ensure violence. If you could walk straight out of a club or bar into a cab I reckon it would reduce the violence overnight.

Well they could always start selling taxi plates at ACT government shopfronts for $1000 a pop, it’d solve the lack of cabs quick-smart. It’d also increase the earnings of drivers by eliminating the need to pay economic rents to a middle man.
Of course those who’ve bought into the present crooked system would scream blue murder, so nothing will ever really get fixed.

bundah said :

Matt_Watts said :

bundah said :

@ Matt Watts

My understanding of the HHH is that they are a disciplined mature bunch who are generally responsible and well behaved and share a comaraderie.That is a far cry from the young undisciplined swill that one encounters at nightclubs in the early hours.The dynamic is of course totally different given there is much rivalry and contempt for others. So using the HHH as an example of how one can behave while admirable is far removed from the ugly picture that many are subjected to in the nightclub scene.

Geez- I’m guessing that’s a compliment…? Honestly, we’re just a bunch of people who are young at heart- but it goes to my comment about how the violence isn’t created by alcohol per se.

A compliment? Yep i’ve got no issue with drinkers who are friendly,jovial and haven’t any desire to bash the crap out of someone simply due to the fact they can’t control their behaviour under the influence of alcohol.I’ve met many people who are really quite sociable until they’ve had a few too many which is the trigger for the emergence of the arsehole.Having said that they will always be those who cannot control their behaviour even when totally straight.

The link between alcohol and violence is well documented and incontrovertible.Almost half of those who commit violent crimes and about 40% of the victims were drunk prior to the event.That is clearly significant and a problem which impacts on the health budget.So to say that violence isn’t created by alcohol per se is somewhat misleading given it triggers almost half of the reported violence.

Incontrovertible is a bit strong, perhaps, but clearly you have your own views.

DrKoresh said :

Matt_Watts said :

I believe any socially poor behaviour should have consequences for the individuals responsible, but drinking in itself should not be seen as a crime.

Hear, hear! As for what you said about the demise of the local, I would really like to be able to go to a nice quiet little pub within walking distance of my house, unfortunately I’m too young to have experienced such a time. Centralising alcohol service to Civic not only makes it a nightmare to navigate after 9pm of a Thursday, Friday or Saturday night, but seems to encourage a culture of drinking as much as you possibly can whenever you go out.

This is why it is quite nice in O’Connor as there are a number of places to have a drink within walking or cycling distance. Which is not to say I drink moderately at them, though.

But I don’t pick fights, and I swear that there is a level of excessive alcohol that is good for generating initial ideas for writing. A positive effect of inhibitions being reduced? You must write them down quickly or you will soon forget.

(Drunkenness is not good for finishing poems and sending them off to places though, that is, anything requiring finer judgement.)

Matt_Watts said :

bundah said :

@ Matt Watts

My understanding of the HHH is that they are a disciplined mature bunch who are generally responsible and well behaved and share a comaraderie.That is a far cry from the young undisciplined swill that one encounters at nightclubs in the early hours.The dynamic is of course totally different given there is much rivalry and contempt for others. So using the HHH as an example of how one can behave while admirable is far removed from the ugly picture that many are subjected to in the nightclub scene.

Geez- I’m guessing that’s a compliment…? Honestly, we’re just a bunch of people who are young at heart- but it goes to my comment about how the violence isn’t created by alcohol per se.

A compliment? Yep i’ve got no issue with drinkers who are friendly,jovial and haven’t any desire to bash the crap out of someone simply due to the fact they can’t control their behaviour under the influence of alcohol.I’ve met many people who are really quite sociable until they’ve had a few too many which is the trigger for the emergence of the arsehole.Having said that they will always be those who cannot control their behaviour even when totally straight.

The link between alcohol and violence is well documented and incontrovertible.Almost half of those who commit violent crimes and about 40% of the victims were drunk prior to the event.That is clearly significant and a problem which impacts on the health budget.So to say that violence isn’t created by alcohol per se is somewhat misleading given it triggers almost half of the reported violence.

Battlecat it was that mental cripple Paul Osborne who brought in that wonderful law that all the clubs closed at the same time. It was the most cretinous decision in the ACT until Far-Carnell killed Katy Bender.

DrKoresh said :

Matt_Watts said :

Holden Caulfield said :

Matt_Watts said :

…So it’s probably fair to say society accepts there are risks and/or problems with alcohol…

See post #14: “For so many people getting black out drunk is just what you do on a Friday and Saturday night. Sure there are events you can attend on those night, but their really just interesting places to be while working towards the goal of getting trashed. The idea of not drinking is completely alien to some people.”

It appears as though society clearly has some work to do in coming to a general consensus.

There’s no conflict in views there; I deliberately kept my comment at a high level. I still suggest there’s a consensus within society that risks and problems exist with alcohol. It’s an issue of convincing certain people they’re in fact the problem and, once that’s done, the challenge is working out what to do about it.

DrKoresh said :

Matt_Watts said :

I believe any socially poor behaviour should have consequences for the individuals responsible, but drinking in itself should not be seen as a crime.

Hear, hear! As for what you said about the demise of the local, I would really like to be able to go to a nice quiet little pub within walking distance of my house, unfortunately I’m too young to have experienced such a time. Centralising alcohol service to Civic not only makes it a nightmare to navigate after 9pm of a Thursday, Friday or Saturday night, but seems to encourage a culture of drinking as much as you possibly can whenever you go out.

There are still a few out there, but it’s not the same as it used to be.

Yeah, I did think of Edgar’s at Ainslie which I do like a lot if I’ve got somewhere to crash on the northside, but I don’t know how late that stays open ’til. Unfortunately where I live now the closest places are seedy sports bars and the like. It’s Wanniassa, I know Charny cops it a lot on RA but Wanniassa is nasty as Hell. I don’t think I’d want to risk walking home pissed ’round here.

In Kaleen we’re spoiled for locals really. Sure, two out of three of them have pokies, but I play on occasion so I don’t really mind. At my particular one everyone’s usually nice and there’s good chats to be had. The other two seem like a bit of fun as well and I’ve drank at both on occasion.

I’ve rarely felt scared walking home but maybe that’s because it’s a short walk and I’m drunk.

I’m all for the resurgence of the local now that I’ve been able to properly experience it here in Kaleen. From my glance at it I suspect Matt Watts has the right idea.

I think there’s a lot of people that don’t seem to realise the consequences of their actions. Perhaps it’s either the consequences not being there, or not being visible enough?

Lock outs aren’t too bad an idea, but I can remember when they brought in the early close in Canberra back in the 90s, and it was a disaster. All the clubs emptied drunks into the streets at the same time to just mill around the empty taxi rank and fight each other.

As someone mentioned before, a huge factor in Civic is the lack of taxis. Forcing a bunch of drunk (or even just tired) people to form an orderly queue for up to an hours is a sure fire way to ensure violence. If you could walk straight out of a club or bar into a cab I reckon it would reduce the violence overnight.

bundah said :

@ Matt Watts

My understanding of the HHH is that they are a disciplined mature bunch who are generally responsible and well behaved and share a comaraderie.That is a far cry from the young undisciplined swill that one encounters at nightclubs in the early hours.The dynamic is of course totally different given there is much rivalry and contempt for others. So using the HHH as an example of how one can behave while admirable is far removed from the ugly picture that many are subjected to in the nightclub scene.

Geez- I’m guessing that’s a compliment…? Honestly, we’re just a bunch of people who are young at heart- but it goes to my comment about how the violence isn’t created by alcohol per se.

DrKoresh said :

I’m not a violent person myself, but I still derive this visceral sense of satisfaction from violence. Like, on an intellectual level, I know that guns are pretty much just a bad idea and I think that banning private firearm ownership was one of the few good things to come from the Howard government. But there’s still a part of me that thinks guns are really, really cool. Because let’s face it, they are. They’re a compact, hand-held instrument of death, and that is awesome in the most literal sense of the word.

I hate to be a party pooper, but the Howard Government thankfully did not ban private firearm ownership. I have a collection of firearms that would probably make your eyes pop out, and I use them legally and responsibly, just as I use alcohol legally and responsibly. I’ve got a new rifle on the way too…can’t wait…:-)

Anyway, back on topic, Matt Watts generally seems like a sensible bloke, but I have to kinda sorta disagree with him.

I reckon the problem is not just d***heads, it’s specifically pissed d***heads. People do things while intoxicated that they wouldn’t dream of doing if they were sober. They fornicate with people other than their partners, they dance horribly – spare me bloody days I wish they wouldn’t do that, and they engage in ridiculous acts of violence.

I decided many years ago that Civic after about 11 am turned into a sewer, and I don’t go there any more. I reckon that if the level of intoxication among many people there was reduced, then the level of stupid violence and self harm would be reduced.

Civic, indeed Canberra is a small enough market that a UK pubwatch type system would work well here. Identify the repeat offenders and ban them from all venues. Once the muppets realise they’ve got nowhere to go, they might grow a brain and sort themselves out.

I find it interesting, after spending a lot of time in Belgium where the beer is twice as strong and the legal drinking age for children is 16 (for light beer only; 5%), that their youth is far less violent. Cardiff, as said, is the exact opposite. It’s carnage but good fun!!

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

To add another point, is this a new problem or something that just gets reported more now days. The old boys were far heavier drinkers than my buds. Fighting was a normal occurance. Whenever my dad drank rum he would bash somebody and see it as acceptable, nay, something to boast about, yet the few fights I have been in when driunk, would have still happened if I was sober due to other d head pos’s.

I guess my point is was it more acceptable to get drunk and punch on back in the day and it did not get reported on or does the newer generations be more violent?

Agreed. Back in the old days we used to go out to civic until the sun came up and there was plenty of drunken violence. I remember seeing an all in brawl at the Private Bin, people king hit out in the bus interchange and police breaking up fights using the dog squad.

With the internet these days it’s much easier for police to issue a press release and have it picked up on here, twitter, facebook and other online news sites. Back then you had to rely on the paper to catch up on this kind of thing and if it made it in it might have been buried in a small para on page 5.

Having said that, I think the high caffeine ‘energy’ drinks they mix with alcohol these days may send these violent d***heads over the top. Worse even than the OP rum in the old days.

I’ve generally maintained that nothing good happens in Civic after 1am.

I have in previous years had a good time up to around 5am in Civic. I barely ever go out drinking in Civic anymore, but if I were to do so, I’d want to have the option of staying out well into the early hours.

There will always be d***heads out there doing stupid stuff, but there’s also plenty of young people having this crazy thing called fun which, for some, involves drinking. Believe it or not, there are people who can look after themselves who aren’t tucked in bed by midnight. They shouldn’t have the option taken away from them just because there are some wankers out there.

But, seeing as the notions of individual liberty and personal responsibility aren’t really a thing for most people anymore, it’s worth having a think about what happens if the option of staying out late is taken away. I’d expect to see house parties where anything can happen, and responsible service of alcohol doesn’t exist, popping up all over the suburbs. People are going to find a way to get drunk either way, and when they pop down to the shop for some spirits before their night starts, I’m gonna be the one opening the cabinet for them and saying “Have a good night, guys!”.

Also, on every discussion of alcohol I hear or see, there’s a reference to the vested interests of the industry. What goes unmentioned, is the vested interests of the new puritans involved in anti-alcohol campaigning. Until they get their alcohol-free utopia, moves like these aren’t going to solve much…

obamabinladen said :

Solution… Christmas island deal, for every violent drunk d***head send them to christmas island and swap for a refugee

If the mainland isn’t big enough, how is Chrismas Island going to cope?

@ Matt Watts

My understanding of the HHH is that they are a disciplined mature bunch who are generally responsible and well behaved and share a comaraderie.That is a far cry from the young undisciplined swill that one encounters at nightclubs in the early hours.The dynamic is of course totally different given there is much rivalry and contempt for others. So using the HHH as an example of how one can behave while admirable is far removed from the ugly picture that many are subjected to in the nightclub scene.

To add another point, is this a new problem or something that just gets reported more now days. The old boys were far heavier drinkers than my buds. Fighting was a normal occurance. Whenever my dad drank rum he would bash somebody and see it as acceptable, nay, something to boast about, yet the few fights I have been in when driunk, would have still happened if I was sober due to other d head pos’s.

I guess my point is was it more acceptable to get drunk and punch on back in the day and it did not get reported on or does the newer generations be more violent?

Special G said :

Matt – seems you are all for a bit of binge drinking.

Hash house harriers – a drinking club with a running problem. A large group of them get together and binge drink. I doubt they are they type to
a: drink so much they are paralytic in the gutter in a pool of their own vomit.
b: the type who get in fights.

If they are a then they are the types who this article relates to – people who drink so much they tie up limited emergency services resources.

I hardly think your one friend in Maitland is representative of a four year trial. 30% reductions in alcohol related assaults is fairly significant.

You mention drugs and energy drinks are plenty to blame as well. Drugs are regulated, energy drinks aren’t. Are you suggesting we regulate the sale of energy drinks when combined with alcohol?

As for the d&*khead factor please share your thoughts.

Harsher penalties – there is the reverse side which says this doesn’t work. I would suggest in a small town like Canberra that once you know a few people who have had a massive fine/restrictions/gaol time the behaviour will start to change.

Public drunkeness fines etc. At the moment its a free pass. Send people the bill for all the emergency services time they tie up due to their own inability to regulate their alcohol/drug/energy drink intake.

You’re quite right – Hashers don’t cause any problems, which is precisely why I’m trying to get people to think differently to the claim that alcohol-related violence is actually alcohol-caused violence.

Statistically, any assault where a person has been drinking is linked to alcohol, yet there are a lot of problems which exist without the existence of alcohol. We should try to examine the issue of violence responsibly rather than blindly continue to tighten the regulatory grip of alcohol; that hasn’t been working, and something needs to change because violence is a problem.

Newcastle is cited, yet we know the presence of police at venues increases the likelihood that crime or anti-social behaviour will be observed. I don’t believe the police around Newcastle were able to observe a decrease in problems within Newcastle whilst at the same time monitoring the region for any change. Of course the police would claim the initiative as a success and, as I’ve said, in Newcastle it has been. It’s a bit of a Schrödinger’s cat upfront issue because, due to limited resources, there’s no way of accurately and broadly monitoring the impact.

By all means, if you believe shutting pubs early will lead yoof to take up oragami or midnight shuttlecock, fill your boots. I’m afraid the reality is that people will generally drink somewhere else. Alcohol in Australia is an inelastic product (although brands and types are elastic, based on cost, availability, etc).

Jim Jones said :

bundah said :

Jim Jones said :

bundah said :

Yes of course we could all crap on with intellectual drivel and many have done so for years with absolutely no change in the attitude or culture of binge drinking.If society was serious about tackling this ugly practice,immediately,then i’m afraid a heavy handed,zero tolerance approach is the only thing that is likely to get the message across to the imbeciles.

So, intelligence and research is useless and heavy-handed non-thinkingness is your preferred method of addressing problems.

Colour me unsurprised.

Of course the intellectual limp wristed approach has worked a treat up until now hasn’t it? Perhaps you can provide all of us with statistics that confirm the approach has been a success?

Nice one – yeah, the intellectuals are all ‘limp wristed’. They’re probably all gay (amiright!!!) and everyone knows how useless the gheys are at everything.

For real results you really need some bloke who knows feck all about anything but isn’t afraid to be a real man and just do random stuff, with no thought involved whatsoever.

Heaps better!

For comparison, I’d suggest you look at the regulations introduced by Newcastle (henceforth known as ‘those smartarse poofta bastards’) as opposed to, I dunno, the unthinking masculine zero tolerance approach of Saudi Arabia (henceforth known as ‘big manly man man picking heavy things up and dunnit do any of that poofy thinking stuff’).

You’re so melodramatic.Like i said zero tolerance to violent anti-social behaviour brought about by binge drinking is one of the few things that will make a stupid person reconsider their actions.I’ll say it again,some humans are little more that neanderthals, who under the influence of copious quantities of alcohol are unable to control their violent tendencies.No one minding their own business deserves to be attacked and afflicted with a brain injury or death from that type of animal who cannot control themselves.

Zero tolerance is an approach that i favour and who knows it might even convince the stupid person to develop some self control or discipline which is clearly lacking!

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

And the percentage of d heads in this country is absolutely huge. Give them a few drinks and bad stuff happens.

No drinks for anyone with a popped collar.

Problem solved.

Solution… Christmas island deal, for every violent drunk d***head send them to christmas island and swap for a refugee

Matt_Watts said :

Not this again.

Alcohol *itself* is not a cause for concern. A perfect example is the Hash House Harrier’s national get-together in 2011 in Hobart: there were around 1200 Hashers drinking heavily in a venue at Salamaca Place on a Saturday night. Then our private venue closed and we went into the street and the last of the few pubs that were open, mingling with the normal people. It would have been the greatest concentration of drinkers in Australia that night (which is saying something), and yet there was no violence.

So in my opinion it’s not the alcohol which causes violence; rather, it’s a mixture of d***heads and circumstance.

Unfortunately, people who think they can change human behaviour with the stroke of a pen keep creating laws that create further problems.

There are unintended consequences of any major policy change. For example, when the Newcastle laws were brought in, people from the surrounding regions (eg Maitland) complained their trouble increased.

A factor with the ACT is the lack of public transport getting people home, after the liquor laws are designed to get people into Civic (ie suburban pubs can rarely afford the license fees to stay open very late). You end up with a concentration of people who want to get drunk stranded in Civic.

There’s also the issue of illegal drugs and energy drinks compounding the situation.

And the percentage of d heads in this country is absolutely huge. Give them a few drinks and bad stuff happens.

bundah said :

Jim Jones said :

bundah said :

Yes of course we could all crap on with intellectual drivel and many have done so for years with absolutely no change in the attitude or culture of binge drinking.If society was serious about tackling this ugly practice,immediately,then i’m afraid a heavy handed,zero tolerance approach is the only thing that is likely to get the message across to the imbeciles.

So, intelligence and research is useless and heavy-handed non-thinkingness is your preferred method of addressing problems.

Colour me unsurprised.

Of course the intellectual limp wristed approach has worked a treat up until now hasn’t it? Perhaps you can provide all of us with statistics that confirm the approach has been a success?

Nice one – yeah, the intellectuals are all ‘limp wristed’. They’re probably all gay (amiright!!!) and everyone knows how useless the gheys are at everything.

For real results you really need some bloke who knows feck all about anything but isn’t afraid to be a real man and just do random stuff, with no thought involved whatsoever.

Heaps better!

For comparison, I’d suggest you look at the regulations introduced by Newcastle (henceforth known as ‘those smartarse poofta bastards’) as opposed to, I dunno, the unthinking masculine zero tolerance approach of Saudi Arabia (henceforth known as ‘big manly man man picking heavy things up and dunnit do any of that poofy thinking stuff’).

Novel solution, and one that I must say is driven by my personal preference, but if we legalised marijuana I reckon you’d see a drop in violence in Civic. Plus, you can bet the Macca’s and the IGA at the interchange would see a massive economic return.

Jim Jones said :

bundah said :

Yes of course we could all crap on with intellectual drivel and many have done so for years with absolutely no change in the attitude or culture of binge drinking.If society was serious about tackling this ugly practice,immediately,then i’m afraid a heavy handed,zero tolerance approach is the only thing that is likely to get the message across to the imbeciles.

So, intelligence and research is useless and heavy-handed non-thinkingness is your preferred method of addressing problems.

Colour me unsurprised.

Of course the intellectual limp wristed approach has worked a treat up until now hasn’t it? Perhaps you can provide all of us with statistics that confirm the approach has been a success?

bundah said :

Yes of course we could all crap on with intellectual drivel and many have done so for years with absolutely no change in the attitude or culture of binge drinking.If society was serious about tackling this ugly practice,immediately,then i’m afraid a heavy handed,zero tolerance approach is the only thing that is likely to get the message across to the imbeciles.

So, intelligence and research is useless and heavy-handed non-thinkingness is your preferred method of addressing problems.

Colour me unsurprised.

Matt – seems you are all for a bit of binge drinking.

Hash house harriers – a drinking club with a running problem. A large group of them get together and binge drink. I doubt they are they type to
a: drink so much they are paralytic in the gutter in a pool of their own vomit.
b: the type who get in fights.

If they are a then they are the types who this article relates to – people who drink so much they tie up limited emergency services resources.

I hardly think your one friend in Maitland is representative of a four year trial. 30% reductions in alcohol related assaults is fairly significant.

You mention drugs and energy drinks are plenty to blame as well. Drugs are regulated, energy drinks aren’t. Are you suggesting we regulate the sale of energy drinks when combined with alcohol?

As for the d&*khead factor please share your thoughts.

Harsher penalties – there is the reverse side which says this doesn’t work. I would suggest in a small town like Canberra that once you know a few people who have had a massive fine/restrictions/gaol time the behaviour will start to change.

Public drunkeness fines etc. At the moment its a free pass. Send people the bill for all the emergency services time they tie up due to their own inability to regulate their alcohol/drug/energy drink intake.

Yes of course we could all crap on with intellectual drivel and many have done so for years with absolutely no change in the attitude or culture of binge drinking.If society was serious about tackling this ugly practice,immediately,then i’m afraid a heavy handed,zero tolerance approach is the only thing that is likely to get the message across to the imbeciles.

Alcohol related sexual harassment isn’t really mentioned but it is the main reason I have stopped going to any bars in the city. It happens every, single time. Whether you are with people, a partner, alone. Constantly having to deal with drunk men touching you or just harassing you is not worth the “fun night out”.

We are taught how to do, a lot, all the time, we must do all the things, but not really taught how to relax, or made to feel it is an important part of life. Maybe a “chill out sober” campaign would help. Tell people how to get the same release from stress/their mind/their day without being drunk.

No longer drinking has totally killed my social life and it was hard to find that relaxed feeling for awhile.

You need better friends (or more mature friends). I rarely drink and I have an active social life with non-drinkers and others who rarely drink. You don’t need alcohol to have fun. And your comment says more about you than your friends. Surely you could organise stuff that doesn’t involve drinking… movies, picnics, road trips, board game nights, movie nights, sports?

It’s also an age thing… most people go through a phase of binge drinking and then get over it, generally starts at 18 and goes to 24-25. People older than that who binge drink(to get drunk) every weekend are probably people most adults wouldn’t want to hang out with anyway.

DrKoresh said :

I reckon it’s mostly biologically driven.
I don’t reckon booze is to blame, I blame human nature.

I agree with this theory.

In fact I’d go as far as to say violent streak in a culture was necessary for some in order to survive.

Whether it be fending off the Roman invasion, or going over the top during WW1, or fending the Japs off in WW2, unless they had a streak of violent madness they may just not have achieved it (whatever IT may be, such as the prosperity we enjoy today, minus some whales).

So is violence really a ‘problem’ in a culture, or perhaps a necessary evil?

I have two options I think would help with the problems outlines in the OP:

1) As people have stated, use the Licensing laws, not just to ensure security and opening hours but to actively try some social engineering. [a] Make venue licencing fees increase exponentially with the capacity of the venue. As Matt said, smaller venues, more personal staff/customer relationship. [b] Make licencing fees also more expensive the more venues there are closer together. My aim here is to spread people out. I believe people are right on the money when they suggest that the problem isn’t drink per se, but rather dï¢kheads drinking. Since, in my experience the problem of drunk dï¢khead is made vastly worse the more there are, spreading them out will lessen the problems.

2) Build a big fence around Civic, and at 2am Saturday morning pull out all the cops/ambos and lock the gates.

Chop71 said :

Try tougher penalties for d#$%head behavior.
That would be a start.

…and from experience, avoid d#$heads when you’re out. You’ll have more fun

Nail on the head. There are plenty of people who can drink ’til they drop, and do no more harm than making people laugh at them, but others get a few drinks in their belly and they’re chuck norris with an attitude problem.

Until we deal with our d#$%head problem, and send a clear message that such behaviour will not be tolerated, nothing will change.

Matt_Watts said :

Holden Caulfield said :

Matt_Watts said :

…So it’s probably fair to say society accepts there are risks and/or problems with alcohol…

See post #14: “For so many people getting black out drunk is just what you do on a Friday and Saturday night. Sure there are events you can attend on those night, but their really just interesting places to be while working towards the goal of getting trashed. The idea of not drinking is completely alien to some people.”

It appears as though society clearly has some work to do in coming to a general consensus.

There’s no conflict in views there; I deliberately kept my comment at a high level. I still suggest there’s a consensus within society that risks and problems exist with alcohol. It’s an issue of convincing certain people they’re in fact the problem and, once that’s done, the challenge is working out what to do about it.

DrKoresh said :

Matt_Watts said :

I believe any socially poor behaviour should have consequences for the individuals responsible, but drinking in itself should not be seen as a crime.

Hear, hear! As for what you said about the demise of the local, I would really like to be able to go to a nice quiet little pub within walking distance of my house, unfortunately I’m too young to have experienced such a time. Centralising alcohol service to Civic not only makes it a nightmare to navigate after 9pm of a Thursday, Friday or Saturday night, but seems to encourage a culture of drinking as much as you possibly can whenever you go out.

There are still a few out there, but it’s not the same as it used to be.

Yeah, I did think of Edgar’s at Ainslie which I do like a lot if I’ve got somewhere to crash on the northside, but I don’t know how late that stays open ’til. Unfortunately where I live now the closest places are seedy sports bars and the like. It’s Wanniassa, I know Charny cops it a lot on RA but Wanniassa is nasty as Hell. I don’t think I’d want to risk walking home pissed ’round here.

Some people here need to go spend some time in a real city, one with a real binge drinking culture, before spouting off how bad things are in quiet little civilised middle-class Canberra.

May I suggest Cardiff?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2040260/Maciej-Dakowicz-Cardiff-After-Dark-binge-drinking-images-turned-Britain-laughing-stock.html

Barcham said :

I think one of the biggest problems is finding an alternative to drinking culture, and making it attractive to people. For so many people getting black out drunk is just what you do on a Friday and Saturday night. Sure there are events you can attend on those night, but their really just interesting places to be while working towards the goal of getting trashed. The idea of not drinking is completely alien to some people.

Still (like some people have said) alcohol isn’t the whole problem. Any efforts to fix the problem of violence by making it harder for people to get drunk aren’t really dealing with the root of the problem. Alcohol simply lowers inhibitions, making you more likely to do what you want, despite factors that usually dissuade you like social etiquette or fear of reprisal.

So I guess the real question is why do some people desire violence?

Oh wow, that is deeply philosophical. I don’t think that’s a question that can be answered simply by having the opinionated denizens of RA (myself included) pontificate on it.

But here’s my two cents anyway! 😀
I reckon it’s mostly biologically driven. I’m not a violent person myself, but I still derive this visceral sense of satisfaction from violence. Like, on an intellectual level, I know that guns are pretty much just a bad idea and I think that banning private firearm ownership was one of the few good things to come from the Howard government. But there’s still a part of me that thinks guns are really, really cool. Because let’s face it, they are. They’re a compact, hand-held instrument of death, and that is awesome in the most literal sense of the word.

I don’t reckon booze is to blame, I blame human nature.

Holden Caulfield said :

Matt_Watts said :

…So it’s probably fair to say society accepts there are risks and/or problems with alcohol…

See post #14: “For so many people getting black out drunk is just what you do on a Friday and Saturday night. Sure there are events you can attend on those night, but their really just interesting places to be while working towards the goal of getting trashed. The idea of not drinking is completely alien to some people.”

It appears as though society clearly has some work to do in coming to a general consensus.

There’s no conflict in views there; I deliberately kept my comment at a high level. I still suggest there’s a consensus within society that risks and problems exist with alcohol. It’s an issue of convincing certain people they’re in fact the problem and, once that’s done, the challenge is working out what to do about it.

DrKoresh said :

Matt_Watts said :

I believe any socially poor behaviour should have consequences for the individuals responsible, but drinking in itself should not be seen as a crime.

Hear, hear! As for what you said about the demise of the local, I would really like to be able to go to a nice quiet little pub within walking distance of my house, unfortunately I’m too young to have experienced such a time. Centralising alcohol service to Civic not only makes it a nightmare to navigate after 9pm of a Thursday, Friday or Saturday night, but seems to encourage a culture of drinking as much as you possibly can whenever you go out.

There are still a few out there, but it’s not the same as it used to be.

Matt_Watts said :

I believe any socially poor behaviour should have consequences for the individuals responsible, but drinking in itself should not be seen as a crime.

Hear, hear! As for what you said about the demise of the local, I would really like to be able to go to a nice quiet little pub within walking distance of my house, unfortunately I’m too young to have experienced such a time. Centralising alcohol service to Civic not only makes it a nightmare to navigate after 9pm of a Thursday, Friday or Saturday night, but seems to encourage a culture of drinking as much as you possibly can whenever you go out.

Matt_Watts said :

…So it’s probably fair to say society accepts there are risks and/or problems with alcohol…

See post #14: “For so many people getting black out drunk is just what you do on a Friday and Saturday night. Sure there are events you can attend on those night, but their really just interesting places to be while working towards the goal of getting trashed. The idea of not drinking is completely alien to some people.”

It appears as though society clearly has some work to do in coming to a general consensus.

Jim Jones said :

Matt_Watts said :

Holden Caulfield said :

Matt_Watts said :

Madam Cholet said :

Matt_Watts said :

Felix the Cat said :

I have to agree with Special G. You don’t see sober people punching on, glassing each other or vomiting all over themselves at 1pm in the afternoon

The recent article regarding the Quangers church didn’t mention alcohol, did it?

It’s not just the violence that comes out of alcohol ridden environments that our emergency services have to deal with, it’s the police having to waste their time sorting out girls and boys who can’t stand up and keep vomiting, the ambulance officers who have to deal with these people who fall down and bang their heads (watch any emergency department reality show), and the hospitals who have to sew these eejits back up and send them off into the night.

Well who is meant to be regulating the responsible service of alcohol? It’s not the AHA – they don’t speak for every venue, and I’m sick of them muddying the waters.

Two things here:

a) the current laws are clearly faulty; and
b) pushing up prices (as a flow-on from higher liquor licenses) will only encourage people to “pre-load” ie drink too much before they arrive at a venue so they aren’t even drinking within the scope of RSA.

Society needs to accept there’s an issue and deal with it, with or without government support. Until that happens we can probably look forward to more ad hoc and unsuccessful legislation.

I don’t know too many people who are calling for an end to all regulation… In fact, I can’t think of any off the top of my head.

So it’s probably fair to say society accepts there are risks and/or problems with alcohol. From my perspective, we need to look at the effectiveness of measures and not just take a “we’ll regulate it more” approach.

By all reports the regulatory measures taken in Newcastle were extremely effective. Yet your first post on the subject seems to downplay this success in favour of the usual libertarian argument: ‘people should be able to do whatever they want and any negative consequences should be ignored because … you know … personal responsibility’.

All reports say it was effective in Newcastle, and I’m not doubting that. Only report from the greater region I’ve heard is from my mate in Maitland.

I believe any socially poor behaviour should have consequences for the individuals responsible, but drinking in itself should not be seen as a crime.

Matt_Watts said :

Holden Caulfield said :

Matt_Watts said :

Madam Cholet said :

Matt_Watts said :

Felix the Cat said :

I have to agree with Special G. You don’t see sober people punching on, glassing each other or vomiting all over themselves at 1pm in the afternoon

The recent article regarding the Quangers church didn’t mention alcohol, did it?

It’s not just the violence that comes out of alcohol ridden environments that our emergency services have to deal with, it’s the police having to waste their time sorting out girls and boys who can’t stand up and keep vomiting, the ambulance officers who have to deal with these people who fall down and bang their heads (watch any emergency department reality show), and the hospitals who have to sew these eejits back up and send them off into the night.

Well who is meant to be regulating the responsible service of alcohol? It’s not the AHA – they don’t speak for every venue, and I’m sick of them muddying the waters.

Two things here:

a) the current laws are clearly faulty; and
b) pushing up prices (as a flow-on from higher liquor licenses) will only encourage people to “pre-load” ie drink too much before they arrive at a venue so they aren’t even drinking within the scope of RSA.

Society needs to accept there’s an issue and deal with it, with or without government support. Until that happens we can probably look forward to more ad hoc and unsuccessful legislation.

I don’t know too many people who are calling for an end to all regulation… In fact, I can’t think of any off the top of my head.

So it’s probably fair to say society accepts there are risks and/or problems with alcohol. From my perspective, we need to look at the effectiveness of measures and not just take a “we’ll regulate it more” approach.

By all reports the regulatory measures taken in Newcastle were extremely effective. Yet your first post on the subject seems to downplay this success in favour of the usual libertarian argument: ‘people should be able to do whatever they want and any negative consequences should be ignored because … you know … personal responsibility’.

Holden Caulfield said :

Matt_Watts said :

Madam Cholet said :

Matt_Watts said :

Felix the Cat said :

I have to agree with Special G. You don’t see sober people punching on, glassing each other or vomiting all over themselves at 1pm in the afternoon

The recent article regarding the Quangers church didn’t mention alcohol, did it?

It’s not just the violence that comes out of alcohol ridden environments that our emergency services have to deal with, it’s the police having to waste their time sorting out girls and boys who can’t stand up and keep vomiting, the ambulance officers who have to deal with these people who fall down and bang their heads (watch any emergency department reality show), and the hospitals who have to sew these eejits back up and send them off into the night.

Well who is meant to be regulating the responsible service of alcohol? It’s not the AHA – they don’t speak for every venue, and I’m sick of them muddying the waters.

Two things here:

a) the current laws are clearly faulty; and
b) pushing up prices (as a flow-on from higher liquor licenses) will only encourage people to “pre-load” ie drink too much before they arrive at a venue so they aren’t even drinking within the scope of RSA.

Society needs to accept there’s an issue and deal with it, with or without government support. Until that happens we can probably look forward to more ad hoc and unsuccessful legislation.

I don’t know too many people who are calling for an end to all regulation… In fact, I can’t think of any off the top of my head.

So it’s probably fair to say society accepts there are risks and/or problems with alcohol. From my perspective, we need to look at the effectiveness of measures and not just take a “we’ll regulate it more” approach.

I think one of the biggest problems is finding an alternative to drinking culture, and making it attractive to people. For so many people getting black out drunk is just what you do on a Friday and Saturday night. Sure there are events you can attend on those night, but their really just interesting places to be while working towards the goal of getting trashed. The idea of not drinking is completely alien to some people.

Still (like some people have said) alcohol isn’t the whole problem. Any efforts to fix the problem of violence by making it harder for people to get drunk aren’t really dealing with the root of the problem. Alcohol simply lowers inhibitions, making you more likely to do what you want, despite factors that usually dissuade you like social etiquette or fear of reprisal.

So I guess the real question is why do some people desire violence?

Try tougher penalties for d#$%head behavior.
That would be a start.

…and from experience, avoid d#$heads when you’re out. You’ll have more fun

Matt_Watts said :

Madam Cholet said :

Matt_Watts said :

Felix the Cat said :

I have to agree with Special G. You don’t see sober people punching on, glassing each other or vomiting all over themselves at 1pm in the afternoon

The recent article regarding the Quangers church didn’t mention alcohol, did it?

It’s not just the violence that comes out of alcohol ridden environments that our emergency services have to deal with, it’s the police having to waste their time sorting out girls and boys who can’t stand up and keep vomiting, the ambulance officers who have to deal with these people who fall down and bang their heads (watch any emergency department reality show), and the hospitals who have to sew these eejits back up and send them off into the night.

Well who is meant to be regulating the responsible service of alcohol? It’s not the AHA – they don’t speak for every venue, and I’m sick of them muddying the waters.

Two things here:

a) the current laws are clearly faulty; and
b) pushing up prices (as a flow-on from higher liquor licenses) will only encourage people to “pre-load” ie drink too much before they arrive at a venue so they aren’t even drinking within the scope of RSA.

Society needs to accept there’s an issue and deal with it, with or without government support. Until that happens we can probably look forward to more ad hoc and unsuccessful legislation.

Madam Cholet said :

Matt_Watts said :

Felix the Cat said :

I have to agree with Special G. You don’t see sober people punching on, glassing each other or vomiting all over themselves at 1pm in the afternoon

The recent article regarding the Quangers church didn’t mention alcohol, did it?

It’s not just the violence that comes out of alcohol ridden environments that our emergency services have to deal with, it’s the police having to waste their time sorting out girls and boys who can’t stand up and keep vomiting, the ambulance officers who have to deal with these people who fall down and bang their heads (watch any emergency department reality show), and the hospitals who have to sew these eejits back up and send them off into the night.

Well who is meant to be regulating the responsible service of alcohol? It’s not the AHA – they don’t speak for every venue, and I’m sick of them muddying the waters.

Two things here:

a) the current laws are clearly faulty; and
b) pushing up prices (as a flow-on from higher liquor licenses) will only encourage people to “pre-load” ie drink too much before they arrive at a venue so they aren’t even drinking within the scope of RSA.

Holden Caulfield said :

Matt_Watts said :

I wouldn’t call it a binge drinking problem. I’d say we have a d***head problem, sure. But not all “binge” drinkers cause problems, so those particular people should be allowed to take responsibility for their own lifestyles.

At the risk of making a foolhardy and clichéd analogy, not all guns kill people either.

Your point is accurate, to a degree, but alcohol just makes d***heads bigger d***heads. I’m not sure what the answer is, but something needs to be done to address the problem of our binge drinking culture.

That’s why I support a licensing regime where local pubs are more profitable than at present. Presently, the money is in the big venues however, unfortunately, there is no possible way a big venue can manage their patrons on an individual basis the way a small venue can.

Small venues are able to say, “No, you’re not having any rum,” or “Yep, one more beer but you can collect your car keys tomorrow.”

Regular attendees at particular venues are also more likely to respect the venue and other patrons.

The quiet local is slowly becoming a thing of the past, and a huge factor is the law that encourages small venues to close early – all about cost.

Matt_Watts said :

Felix the Cat said :

I have to agree with Special G. You don’t see sober people punching on, glassing each other or vomiting all over themselves at 1pm in the afternoon

The recent article regarding the Quangers church didn’t mention alcohol, did it?

It’s not just the violence that comes out of alcohol ridden environments that our emergency services have to deal with, it’s the police having to waste their time sorting out girls and boys who can’t stand up and keep vomiting, the ambulance officers who have to deal with these people who fall down and bang their heads (watch any emergency department reality show), and the hospitals who have to sew these eejits back up and send them off into the night.

Any violence anywhere is a waste of police time, but the alcohol fuelled shenanigans should not have to be top of their agenda. It’s the AHA that needs to get their act together and acknowledge that the sheer availability of alcohol at any time is now way over the top, the government who needs to acknowledge that taxing one type of drink, just pushes people to other types of drinks and that allowing too much flexibility to pubs and clubs to open at all hours may be profitable in terms of licensing revenues, but not in terms of what we spend on our emergency services.

Matt_Watts said :

I wouldn’t call it a binge drinking problem. I’d say we have a d***head problem, sure. But not all “binge” drinkers cause problems, so those particular people should be allowed to take responsibility for their own lifestyles.

At the risk of making a foolhardy and clichéd analogy, not all guns kill people either.

Your point is accurate, to a degree, but alcohol just makes d***heads bigger d***heads. I’m not sure what the answer is, but something needs to be done to address the problem of our binge drinking culture.

Alderney said :

I liked how the AHA guy spouted on about increases in violence being about drug usage but when pressed explicitely stated that he didn’t have evidence, yet when the police commissioner said that it’s about RSA and how long pubs/clubs/bars are open he said, ‘I’d like to see the stats on that’.

Wanker!

And Matt, the police commissioner stated in the program there is no evidence to point to an increase in trouble moving to surrounding areas in the period of the Newcastle trial. He was quite emphatic to the contrary.

Got to be careful of industry propaganda. Remember, industry has a veted interest, the police and the doctors don’t.

All I can ask in relation to that is, what has changed in the last thirty years? Why are we being told things are worse? If things are worse, what has changed?

There are multiple factors. Police have vested interests, too; we all do!

Holden Caulfield said :

Matt_Watts said :

Not this again.

Alcohol *itself* is not a cause for concern. A perfect example is the Hash House Harrier’s national get-together in 2011 in Hobart: there were around 1200 Hashers drinking heavily in a venue at Salamaca Place on a Saturday night. Then our private venue closed and we went into the street and the last of the few pubs that were open, mingling with the normal people. It would have been the greatest concentration of drinkers in Australia that night (which is saying something), and yet there was no violence.

So in my opinion it’s not the alcohol which causes violence; rather, it’s a mixture of d***heads and circumstance.

Unfortunately, people who think they can change human behaviour with the stroke of a pen keep creating laws that create further problems.

There are unintended consequences of any major policy change. For example, when the Newcastle laws were brought in, people from the surrounding regions (eg Maitland) complained their trouble increased.

A factor with the ACT is the lack of public transport getting people home, after the liquor laws are designed to get people into Civic (ie suburban pubs can rarely afford the license fees to stay open very late). You end up with a concentration of people who want to get drunk stranded in Civic.

There’s also the issue of illegal drugs and energy drinks compounding the situation.

So you’re denying, in a roundabout way, that Australia has a problem with binge drinking culture?

Wow!

I wouldn’t call it a binge drinking problem. I’d say we have a d***head problem, sure. But not all “binge” drinkers cause problems, so those particular people should be allowed to take responsibility for their own lifestyles.

I liked how the AHA guy spouted on about increases in violence being about drug usage but when pressed explicitely stated that he didn’t have evidence, yet when the police commissioner said that it’s about RSA and how long pubs/clubs/bars are open he said, ‘I’d like to see the stats on that’.

Wanker!

And Matt, the police commissioner stated in the program there is no evidence to point to an increase in trouble moving to surrounding areas in the period of the Newcastle trial. He was quite emphatic to the contrary.

Got to be careful of industry propaganda. Remember, industry has a veted interest, the police and the doctors don’t.

Felix the Cat said :

I have to agree with Special G. You don’t see sober people punching on, glassing each other or vomiting all over themselves at 1pm in the afternoon

The recent article regarding the Quangers church didn’t mention alcohol, did it?

Matt_Watts said :

Not this again.

Alcohol *itself* is not a cause for concern. A perfect example is the Hash House Harrier’s national get-together in 2011 in Hobart: there were around 1200 Hashers drinking heavily in a venue at Salamaca Place on a Saturday night. Then our private venue closed and we went into the street and the last of the few pubs that were open, mingling with the normal people. It would have been the greatest concentration of drinkers in Australia that night (which is saying something), and yet there was no violence.

So in my opinion it’s not the alcohol which causes violence; rather, it’s a mixture of d***heads and circumstance.

Unfortunately, people who think they can change human behaviour with the stroke of a pen keep creating laws that create further problems.

There are unintended consequences of any major policy change. For example, when the Newcastle laws were brought in, people from the surrounding regions (eg Maitland) complained their trouble increased.

A factor with the ACT is the lack of public transport getting people home, after the liquor laws are designed to get people into Civic (ie suburban pubs can rarely afford the license fees to stay open very late). You end up with a concentration of people who want to get drunk stranded in Civic.

There’s also the issue of illegal drugs and energy drinks compounding the situation.

So you’re denying, in a roundabout way, that Australia has a problem with binge drinking culture?

Wow!

I have to agree with Special G. You don’t see sober people punching on, glassing each other or vomiting all over themselves at 1pm in the afternoon

Not this again.

Alcohol *itself* is not a cause for concern. A perfect example is the Hash House Harrier’s national get-together in 2011 in Hobart: there were around 1200 Hashers drinking heavily in a venue at Salamaca Place on a Saturday night. Then our private venue closed and we went into the street and the last of the few pubs that were open, mingling with the normal people. It would have been the greatest concentration of drinkers in Australia that night (which is saying something), and yet there was no violence.

So in my opinion it’s not the alcohol which causes violence; rather, it’s a mixture of d***heads and circumstance.

Unfortunately, people who think they can change human behaviour with the stroke of a pen keep creating laws that create further problems.

There are unintended consequences of any major policy change. For example, when the Newcastle laws were brought in, people from the surrounding regions (eg Maitland) complained their trouble increased.

A factor with the ACT is the lack of public transport getting people home, after the liquor laws are designed to get people into Civic (ie suburban pubs can rarely afford the license fees to stay open very late). You end up with a concentration of people who want to get drunk stranded in Civic.

There’s also the issue of illegal drugs and energy drinks compounding the situation.