Alcohol, Clubs, Bars, and Violence...


Off-Topic Discussions

Liberty's Edge

...AKA, no-one rapes and pummels at 2 PM in the Dairy aisle of your local Safeway.

So here's a topic of controversy, read on, with caveats.

Let me preface by saying I occasionally enjoy a good Guinness or pub ale with fish or steak, and I cook with wine almost every day--so I'm not a prohibitionist.

Now, on to controversy--

Without getting into specifics, I have recently reviewed the quarterly statistics of crimes perpetrated by and against members of my immediately local professional organization (the people like me who work in my area), and every single act of indiscipline concomitant with violence by or to has one common denominator: alcohol. For example, out of 178 individual reports, 4 were petty theft, and all the rest ran the gamut (assault, battery, sexual misconduct, etc.) and the investigation revealed that the individual(s) had been drinking heavily, and clubbing for several hours. My clever aside is that there are no criminal reports for the hours of 7 am to 9 pm!

If the common denominator were cocaine or aerosol cans and paper bags, what do you think we would do?

Comments?


Well, we've already tried prohibition, and we all know how that turned out.

Alcohol abuse is a symptom, not a disease. The question is, what causes people to drink heavily? Boredom? Stress? Escapism? There's a larger problem lurking somewhere in the background. It's like the argument about gun control. There are many people that own guns that don't use them to commit crimes. Likewise, there are many people who drink who don't commit crimes under the influence of alcohol.


Move to Singapore. There are lots of violent, anti-social people here too, and lots of alcohol, but the government absolutely smashes any anti-social behaviour.

Sometimes it is good to live in a LN country with a LE government! ;)

Liberty's Edge

Shadowborn wrote:

Well, we've already tried prohibition, and we all know how that turned out.

Alcohol abuse is a symptom, not a disease. The question is, what causes people to drink heavily? Boredom? Stress? Escapism? There's a larger problem lurking somewhere in the background. It's like the argument about gun control. There are many people that own guns that don't use them to commit crimes. Likewise, there are many people who drink who don't commit crimes under the influence of alcohol.

You're right; and I'm an example of the gun-owning, beer-drinking lot who don't run afoul of the cops. In my smaller sampling of the population, where 99% (literally) of violent offenses are alcohol-related, what do we do that we're not already doing? Education and prevention via preventive counseling arguably isn't working on the 18-26 age group (in my unique population; and also the perpetrators). :-(

The Exchange

My fear is that you are looking for a "shut down the bars and stop liquor sales" type of answer. Not to belittle the crimes or anything because the numbers (most of the 178 crimes involved alcohol) look bad. But, out of the thousands, or tens of thousands of club/bar goers there were only 178 crimes. Now that doesn't sound so bad.
Data can be used to make a bad thing look worse, a good thing look better but rarely is it used in a truly neutral and objective manner to see something for what it is. Everyone wants the data to proof their point.
Make the town dry and I would bet there would be an increase in crime because people wouldn't have a venue to let off steam and have a couple social drinks to ease a hard week. To punish several thousand people for the actions of a very small minority of that population would be a bad thing.
My 2.

The Exchange

Shadowborn wrote:

Well, we've already tried prohibition, and we all know how that turned out.

Alcohol abuse is a symptom, not a disease. The question is, what causes people to drink heavily? Boredom? Stress? Escapism? There's a larger problem lurking somewhere in the background. It's like the argument about gun control. There are many people that own guns that don't use them to commit crimes. Likewise, there are many people who drink who don't commit crimes under the influence of alcohol.

You havn't tried Prohibition...you tried to overcome corruption in your own ranks and failed. Prohibition includes a willingness to drag Drunks from their home and shoot them dead in the street even if they are the President.

Can you immagine a Government prepared to shoot dead children for drinking alcohol?


yellowdingo wrote:


You haven't tried Prohibition...you tried to overcome corruption in your own ranks and failed. Prohibition includes a willingness to drag Drunks from their home and shoot them dead in the street even if they are the President.

Can you immagine a Government prepared to shoot dead children for drinking alcohol?

Umm...yes, I can imagine it. However, we have a government in place that doesn't allow for that sort of atrocity to occur without consequences.

And yes, we tried Prohibition. It was that period in American history from 1920 to 1933 when there was a constitutional amendment banning the manufacture, sale, and transportation of alcohol. I don't see what that has to do with overcoming corruption in our own ranks and failing. What failed was the intent of a certain group to force its moral code on others. All they succeeded in doing was strengthening organized crime and inadvertently giving rise to mixed drinks.

Here in my state, certain lawmakers want to do the same thing with cigarettes, banning them statewide. That's just what we need...then we'll have criminals smuggling cigarettes in from the Idaho reservation just over the border and selling them to fund their meth labs.

Dark Archive

Andrew - you're in the military, right? That adds a somewhat unique layer of factors on the issues with your particular "professional group," as there likely are some stress/psychological issues at play, as well as heavy binge-drinking (since most military folks are restricted from just grabbing "a" beer on a regular basis, it may encourage real benders when they do have that option). My GF's brother just got back in the states from the Middle East, and we had a hell of a time keeping him out of jail as he sampled the bars for the first time in 15 months ...


i say we find a way to limit aerosols and maybe ban the others

Grand Lodge

Andrew Turner wrote:
Shadowborn wrote:

Well, we've already tried prohibition, and we all know how that turned out.

Alcohol abuse is a symptom, not a disease. The question is, what causes people to drink heavily? Boredom? Stress? Escapism? There's a larger problem lurking somewhere in the background. It's like the argument about gun control. There are many people that own guns that don't use them to commit crimes. Likewise, there are many people who drink who don't commit crimes under the influence of alcohol.

You're right; and I'm an example of the gun-owning, beer-drinking lot who don't run afoul of the cops. In my smaller sampling of the population, where 99% (literally) of violent offenses are alcohol-related, what do we do that we're not already doing? Education and prevention via preventive counseling arguably isn't working on the 18-26 age group (in my unique population; and also the perpetrators). :-(

Here is the kicker. 99%, as you said, are just fine people. You cannot achieve 100% non violence.

People want to ban guns because they are used in 99% of violent crimes. Does that mean that before guns there was no violent crime? No, it just means the people who commit the violent crimes will use other weapons to do so.

The people who are going to commit the crimes will find an excuse, a reason, a means to do so regardless of all prevention.

Don't want to be involved in a random violent crime? Don't hang out or associate with people or locations that lend themselves to that behavior. Does that mean people at those locations who are victimized deserve it? No, of course not.

And I seriously doubt that 100% of all violent crimes involve alcohol. The armed home invasion intent to rob the people inside are not ALWAYS going to be drunk. I have a funny feeling the numbers are skewed and chosen specifically to present such a number.

Ultimately, societal prevention only goes so far and eventually it is up to the individual to be responsible for their own actions and choices.

Grand Lodge

Shadowborn wrote:
yellowdingo wrote:


You haven't tried Prohibition...you tried to overcome corruption in your own ranks and failed. Prohibition includes a willingness to drag Drunks from their home and shoot them dead in the street even if they are the President.

Can you immagine a Government prepared to shoot dead children for drinking alcohol?

Umm...yes, I can imagine it. However, we have a government in place that doesn't allow for that sort of atrocity to occur without consequences.

And yes, we tried Prohibition. It was that period in American history from 1920 to 1933 when there was a constitutional amendment banning the manufacture, sale, and transportation of alcohol. I don't see what that has to do with overcoming corruption in our own ranks and failing. What failed was the intent of a certain group to force its moral code on others. All they succeeded in doing was strengthening organized crime and inadvertently giving rise to mixed drinks.

Here in my state, certain lawmakers want to do the same thing with cigarettes, banning them statewide. That's just what we need...then we'll have criminals smuggling cigarettes in from the Idaho reservation just over the border and selling them to fund their meth labs.

heheh the way to deal with unwanted moral behavior is to make it legal. That encourages all aspects of the business to eventually become legitimate. Then you increase taxes until the common user/buyer can afford it but with pain. Then you place a hurdle of legal restrictions all around the industry and sick the IRS on them all and soon all of the unwanted immoral people are behind bars and the moral people can think how wonderful they are for imprisoning people with different views. It's a nice legal way to stick all the miscreants in prison and forget about them and feel good about oneself and not have to question one's views.

BUT, I think we should ban politicians statewide and then just smuggle them in across the borders!


Andrew Turner wrote:

...AKA, no-one rapes and pummels at 2 PM in the Dairy aisle of your local Safeway.

So here's a topic of controversy, read on, with caveats.

Let me preface by saying I occasionally enjoy a good Guinness or pub ale with fish or steak, and I cook with wine almost every day--so I'm not a prohibitionist.

Now, on to controversy--

Without getting into specifics, I have recently reviewed the quarterly statistics of crimes perpetrated by and against members of my immediately local professional organization (the people like me who work in my area), and every single act of indiscipline concomitant with violence by or to has one common denominator: alcohol. For example, out of 178 individual reports, 4 were petty theft, and all the rest ran the gamut (assault, battery, sexual misconduct, etc.) and the investigation revealed that the individual(s) had been drinking heavily, and clubbing for several hours. My clever aside is that there are no criminal reports for the hours of 7 am to 9 pm!

If the common denominator were cocaine or aerosol cans and paper bags, what do you think we would do?

Comments?

It's not the alcohol. Alcohol isn't evil, its a thing. Admittedly causation and correlation are a little blurred here. But its people that feel the need to get that drunk are the problem. It brings out more basic parts of their nature, and many people just want to be a jerk, and use alcohol as an excuse. I'm Irish, a student, and living in a college town. I've seen people off-the-wall plastered. People have died falling into the canal drunk. But ultimately, why did they need to drink THAT much? What drove them to wander near the canal, the people in question were founded to have attempted suicide, once, and twice before, respectively.

Answers are never as easy as prohibition, I'll agree that alcohol can bring out the worst in people, and people really need to be better educated about it, especially in alcohol cultures like College.

I'm 20 years old, in college, and I like a good drink. I've never gotten blind drunk. Fairly drunk, but never blind drunk, but the only voilence I've seen at the time was perpetrated by thugs, people who are already violent jerks, chavs, and thats a social issue. I've been attacked for having long hair, or being tall, yes, actually attacked for being tall walking through a park.

It just so happens that violent dick, have alot to drink for, and often nothing to lose.

/rant, sorry!

The Exchange

"BAN THE SELLING OF ALCOHOL!"

Freedoms are preserved by allowing you to brew your own, and by shooting those enslaving others by selling Alcohol.

Profiting from the destruction of civilization is an act of Treason.


yellowdingo wrote:

"BAN THE SELLING OF ALCOHOL!"

Freedoms are preserved by allowing you to brew your own, and by shooting those enslaving others by selling Alcohol.

Profiting from the destruction of civilization is an act of Treason.

But it's a HOOT!

The Exchange

kanin wrote:
i say we find a way to limit aerosols and maybe ban the others

Pressurize your own spray pack.

Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / Alcohol, Clubs, Bars, and Violence... All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Off-Topic Discussions