Alcohol should be banned

[Phanerothyme]

I think you're right. Kids taking drugs (including alcohol and nicotine) is worth taking bold steps to prevent - any drug taking during adolescence will have a more profound and lasting effect than if it is taken after the age of around 18-21. Thus most children are fully conditioned to drink alcohol by the time they are that age, and most will continue to drink for the rest of their lives.

 

If we banned alcohol, we would be giving up what control we have over it, in terms of children getting hold of booze, tax, consumption figures etc.

 

By liberalising these other substances we:

a) bring them under government control and oversight

b) give our population an alternative to the powerful CNS depressant Alcohol, which (ignoring caffeine and nicotine) is the only state approved high on offer.

[DragonofAna]

Alcohol has been under govenment control for a very long time and things do not seem to be getting any better. If anything they seem to be getting much much worse. I say 'seem to be' because if I say things are getting worse then some nonse is going to ask for proof. It's a reflex action on their part.

When I was a nipper back in the 60's there did not seem to be anywhere near as many drunks wandering the streets puking and brawling after visits to nightclubs. The number of kids drinking alcohol was considerably less. There was still violence, but nothing on the scale of todays.

 

Seems putting things like this under government control does NOT help at all.

[Halibut]

Alcohol has been under govenment control for a very long time and things do not seem to be getting any better. If anything they seem to be getting much much worse. I say 'seem to be' because if I say things are getting worse then some nonse is going to ask for proof. It's a reflex action on their part.

When I was a nipper back in the 60's there did not seem to be anywhere near as many drunks wandering the streets puking and brawling after visits to nightclubs. The number of kids drinking alcohol was considerably less. There was still violence, but nothing on the scale of todays.

 

Seems putting things like this under government control does NOT help at all.

 

So anyone who asks you to back up your highly subjective opinion with facts is a nonce? Nice.

[DragonofAna]

So anyone who asks you to back up your highly subjective opinion with facts is a nonce? Nice.

 

Oh go away and troll somewhere else.

 

I was enjoying a nice debate as I am sure others were, and then you come along and choose one casual remark that was not meant as offensive but you always zone in on those don't you.

 

Have you nothing better to do? Is that all you have to offer on the topic?

[milquetoast1]

Alcohol has been under govenment control for a very long time and things do not seem to be getting any better. If anything they seem to be getting much much worse. I say 'seem to be' because if I say things are getting worse then some nonse is going to ask for proof. It's a reflex action on their part.

When I was a nipper back in the 60's there did not seem to be anywhere near as many drunks wandering the streets puking and brawling after visits to nightclubs. The number of kids drinking alcohol was considerably less. There was still violence, but nothing on the scale of todays.

 

Seems putting things like this under government control does NOT help at all.

 

When we were nippers back then, there was only pubs really. We would first try alcohol in the presence of our parents, and then in the presence of the pub landlord when we were 16/17. There was always some adult supervision.

 

Furthermore, all we had on offer really was 3.8% beer. This is why William Hague's claims of 10 pints are probably not as far fetched as the media claimed.

 

Now the drinks are getting stronger, I don't know any young adults that drink bitter anymore, and pubs are closing thus removing a certain amount of sensible supervision. Most youngsters are drinking greater quantities of alcohol because the drinks are stronger, and for longer in late night clubs.

 

I don't have any answers, but banning alcohol is a stupid one.

[DragonofAna]

When we were nippers back then, there was only pubs really. We would first try alcohol in the presence of our parents, and then in the presence of the pub landlord when we were 16/17. There was always some adult supervision.

 

Furthermore, all we had on offer really was 3.8% beer. This is why William Hague's claims of 10 pints are probably not as far fetched as the media claimed.

 

Now the drinks are getting stronger, I don't know any young adults that drink bitter anymore, and pubs are closing thus removing a certain amount of sensible supervision. Most youngsters are drinking greater quantities of alcohol because the drinks are stronger, and for longer in late night clubs.

 

I don't have any answers, but banning alcohol is a stupid one.

 

I agree that it is stupid, but what else is there? And it would cut down on a lot of underage drinkers regardless of what people say to the contrary. I cannot see people standing on street corners with suitcases laden with 6 packs of beer etc.

[Halibut]

I agree that it is stupid, but what else is there? And it would cut down on a lot of underage drinkers regardless of what people say to the contrary. I cannot see people standing on street corners with suitcases laden with 6 packs of beer etc.

 

Has cannabis being illegal cut down on teenage dopesmokers?

[milquetoast1]

I agree that it is stupid, but what else is there? And it would cut down on a lot of underage drinkers regardless of what people say to the contrary. I cannot see people standing on street corners with suitcases laden with 6 packs of beer etc.

 

Firstly, I don't think it's that bad. My elderly parents, who can only manage about 8 units in a "session" now and drink infrequently, are quick to moan about youngsters drinking. But they forget that I remember what they were like, and the stories they used to tell about themelves, their friends and their parents. Nothing much has changed except those things I mentioned previously.

 

You seem to admit now that banning would be stupid, and then ask what else is there. Well I would do everything to encourage the survival of the pub industry, and encourage youngsters to do their drinking there. I would consider an increased age limit to buy alcohol in shops and drink in clubs after 2:00am, maybe 21, but leave the age limit at 18 in pubs.

[Phanerothyme]

If it were banned, then we'd probably see a lot of home distilled product like Poteen, Moonshine etc appearing on the black market, with the not inconsiderable profits being raked in by those willing to risk the law. There'd be no compunction in selling alcohol to minors, the booze would be potentially dangerous (badly distilled), cross channel smuggling and booze cruises would explode in popularity. We could probably spend billions trying to stem the tide of smuggled booze and still only make an insignificant impact.

 

Alcohol is just one drug but it has to shoulder the burden of being the national recreational drug. I think with more choice, fewer people would choose alcohol.

[DragonofAna]

Has cannabis being illegal cut down on teenage dopesmokers?

 

You're daft you aren't you?

 

I would have to see cannabis after it has been legal for a while in order to compare.