Who is responsible ?
Alcohol Free Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 482
Who is responsible ?
I have heard on the UK news today, that 4000 pubs (public houses) or bars are closing in the UK every year.
A pub used to be a place where people would sit around in a social environment and talk about, ******** really. Everything from Princess Diana & Prince Charles to who will be going to Wembley for the Football final.
It was seen as a place where people met and enjoyed a few drinks. If you were getting drunk, then the landlord, would kick you out.
Up until around 15 years ago, pubs couldnt serve alcohol aft 11pm and neither could off licences. Once you got to that point, you had no choice but to go home and sleep it off.
These days, theres 24 hour supermarkets selling alcohol cheaper than the pubs ever could and now more people are drinking at home, alone at all hours of the day and night.
It is the Government who have changed these rules and sure they can see alcoholism is spreading like an epidemic.
With this information in mind, isnt the Government responsible for the rise in Alcoholics and that leads to me think, this is what they want. State sponsered drug addiction in the form of Alcoholism.
What I cannot figure out, is why they would want to do this to us.
I doubt the UK is the only country in the world, where this is going on, please share your thoughts. Thanx
A pub used to be a place where people would sit around in a social environment and talk about, ******** really. Everything from Princess Diana & Prince Charles to who will be going to Wembley for the Football final.
It was seen as a place where people met and enjoyed a few drinks. If you were getting drunk, then the landlord, would kick you out.
Up until around 15 years ago, pubs couldnt serve alcohol aft 11pm and neither could off licences. Once you got to that point, you had no choice but to go home and sleep it off.
These days, theres 24 hour supermarkets selling alcohol cheaper than the pubs ever could and now more people are drinking at home, alone at all hours of the day and night.
It is the Government who have changed these rules and sure they can see alcoholism is spreading like an epidemic.
With this information in mind, isnt the Government responsible for the rise in Alcoholics and that leads to me think, this is what they want. State sponsered drug addiction in the form of Alcoholism.
What I cannot figure out, is why they would want to do this to us.
I doubt the UK is the only country in the world, where this is going on, please share your thoughts. Thanx
Forum Leader
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 16,945
I did the vast majority of my drinking at home drinking beer I purchased during normal business hours at supermarkets and convenience stores. I personally know that for me, I was 100 percent responsible for my drinking, no one else.
bona fido dog-lover
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: SF Bay area, CA
Posts: 99,781
A normal drinker, or non drinker, walks past the pubs and bars and stores and it doesn't matter if they're open or not. They hold little if any interest. I think it's a matter of one's own responsibility. I don't care how many bars there are in my town cause I don't go there. 
Member
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 6,224
Originally Posted by ScottFromWI 
I did the vast majority of my drinking at home drinking beer I purchased during normal business hours at supermarkets and convenience stores. I personally know that for me, I was 100 percent responsible for my drinking, no one else.
Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Chattanooga TN
Posts: 596
OP is saying in my opinion that with everyone just goingt o pubs to get their alcohol, that there was a peer environment that kept people from drinking too much, I think.
But that is flawed if I read it right. i have been to pubs, bars etc. and that never actually happened, in my experience. Being drunk 20 years ago, or 200 or, 'used to be" doesnt come into play today.
It is what it is, if you get drunk as **** now or then, you have a problem. a YOU problem, doesnt matter where you get it.
Just my opinion tho
But that is flawed if I read it right. i have been to pubs, bars etc. and that never actually happened, in my experience. Being drunk 20 years ago, or 200 or, 'used to be" doesnt come into play today.
It is what it is, if you get drunk as **** now or then, you have a problem. a YOU problem, doesnt matter where you get it.
Just my opinion tho
Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: OZ
Posts: 2,055
I dont think that the pubs are closing at that rate due solely to the government's change in liquor licensing laws.
I am in my 50's, where I grew up, there were pubs everywhere. All different, suiting a different clientele from early openers to family beer gardens.
The pubs here have changed dramatically as well, very few have live bands or great bistros and most are now choc full of poker machines.
Breath testing is everywhere. Cops target side streets close to pubs. It was easier to drink at home.
The environment is totally different now, there are lots of interesting little boutique city style bars and streets full of licenced restaurants.
The alcohol epidemic is interesting.
It has been in the headlines for months here in Australia due largely to innocent young men who have tragically lost their lives because of drunken thugs.
Lots of variables to consider, cheap booze, prefuelling, drinks that taste likes soda sugar water.
It is an ever changing environment. IMO its our responsibility.
I am in my 50's, where I grew up, there were pubs everywhere. All different, suiting a different clientele from early openers to family beer gardens.
The pubs here have changed dramatically as well, very few have live bands or great bistros and most are now choc full of poker machines.
Breath testing is everywhere. Cops target side streets close to pubs. It was easier to drink at home.
The environment is totally different now, there are lots of interesting little boutique city style bars and streets full of licenced restaurants.
The alcohol epidemic is interesting.
It has been in the headlines for months here in Australia due largely to innocent young men who have tragically lost their lives because of drunken thugs.
Lots of variables to consider, cheap booze, prefuelling, drinks that taste likes soda sugar water.
It is an ever changing environment. IMO its our responsibility.
Alcohol Free Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 482
I thought Alcoholism was an illness ?
Therefore are not Alcoholics sufferers ?
The Government are aiding the spread of a disease are they not ?
I think a lot of people on here would say they are recovering from an illness, as they have little choice because of an addiction, cause by an inherited and progressive alcoholism.
The Governments (I won't just single out the UK) might be in some people opinions that I am sympathetic with exploiting an existing illness to raise revenue and changing the environment where drinking at home and alone exacerbates the prevalence of this illness, are not doing near enough to protect the vulnerable sufferers of a disease they are getting income from.
Just a thought.
Therefore are not Alcoholics sufferers ?
The Government are aiding the spread of a disease are they not ?
I think a lot of people on here would say they are recovering from an illness, as they have little choice because of an addiction, cause by an inherited and progressive alcoholism.
The Governments (I won't just single out the UK) might be in some people opinions that I am sympathetic with exploiting an existing illness to raise revenue and changing the environment where drinking at home and alone exacerbates the prevalence of this illness, are not doing near enough to protect the vulnerable sufferers of a disease they are getting income from.
Just a thought.
Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Ireland
Posts: 25,826
There's no incentive for a government to curb alcohol, tax revenue and lobbyng from the alcohol industry, including I'm sure cash donations to political parties, all keep alcohol a profitable past time to maintain.
Who's responsible is another question? I definitly think it's easier for smokers in the UK/Ireland
for example having tobacco adverts on TV banned and tobacco sponsorships for sports banned, not seeing the temptation they are trying to quit everywhere can ease the craving, so a government can make a difference and influence things, they are not completely powerless.
However the fight to quit an addiciton must always come from within ourselves.
Who's responsible is another question? I definitly think it's easier for smokers in the UK/Ireland
for example having tobacco adverts on TV banned and tobacco sponsorships for sports banned, not seeing the temptation they are trying to quit everywhere can ease the craving, so a government can make a difference and influence things, they are not completely powerless.
However the fight to quit an addiciton must always come from within ourselves.
Alcohol Free Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 482
Originally Posted by purpleknight
There's no incentive for a government to curb alcohol, tax revenue and lobbyng from the alcohol industry, including I'm sure cash donations to political parties, all keep alcohol a profitable past time to maintain.
Who's responsible is another question? I definitly think it's easier for smokers in the UK/Ireland
for example having tobacco adverts on TV banned and tobacco sponsorships for sports banned, not seeing the temptation they are trying to quit everywhere can ease the craving, so a government can make a difference and influence things, they are not completely powerless.
However the fight to quit an addiciton must always come from within ourselves.
Who's responsible is another question? I definitly think it's easier for smokers in the UK/Ireland
for example having tobacco adverts on TV banned and tobacco sponsorships for sports banned, not seeing the temptation they are trying to quit everywhere can ease the craving, so a government can make a difference and influence things, they are not completely powerless.
However the fight to quit an addiciton must always come from within ourselves.
Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 321
I understand what you're saying, and it's a political question. What is the governments intent in doing as they did, and are they responsible for an increased rate in reported alcoholics?
Tough to answer the first one, easy to answer the second.
The increased rate in reported alcoholics is obviously due to a higher amount of people reaching a point with alcohol where they either reach out for help or are caught by authorities and given the label. Is the government responsible for this? No, not at all. People that do the things they do are responsible for this. They caused it themselves. No one else is to blame. That's one of the first things I learned in recovery. I am responsible 100% for who I am and what I have done. That being said, the government does shoulder some responsibility. The laws that have been passed increase availability. It makes it easier, and more convenient.
I will use an analogy. Scenario: 15 year old son and mom. Son takes keys off counter, gets in moms car and drives away @ 2am, gets in a car accident and is killed. Son has shown before that if the keys are left out, the car will be taken. Just as people have shown that if alcohol is available @ 2am they will buy it. What does mom do? Leaves keys on counter. That is negligence. Not saying she killed her son. He's responsible for that. But as his guardian, just as government is supposed to be our guardian, she enabled him to kill himself by not doing anything preventative.
Now, this may lead to people saying that this analogy is imperfect due to the 15 year old not having his personal freedom yet, therefore the moms responsibility is increased compared to the government as we are free adults.... My answer is nothing is perfect. Don't nitpick :p
My point is that regardless of our own personal freedom and our right of choice, we put government above us, and do not overthrow them and reign into anarchy because they are the glue that holds society together. We allow them power to be a more effective glue. We trust them to use that power wisely. And they do not always. I believe this is a case where that holds true. Corruption and everything aside, the government is responsible of negligence to the people that it is supposed to serve by allowing the keys to alcoholism to be available at all times. They are not responsible for alcoholism or alcoholics.
Tough to answer the first one, easy to answer the second.
The increased rate in reported alcoholics is obviously due to a higher amount of people reaching a point with alcohol where they either reach out for help or are caught by authorities and given the label. Is the government responsible for this? No, not at all. People that do the things they do are responsible for this. They caused it themselves. No one else is to blame. That's one of the first things I learned in recovery. I am responsible 100% for who I am and what I have done. That being said, the government does shoulder some responsibility. The laws that have been passed increase availability. It makes it easier, and more convenient.
I will use an analogy. Scenario: 15 year old son and mom. Son takes keys off counter, gets in moms car and drives away @ 2am, gets in a car accident and is killed. Son has shown before that if the keys are left out, the car will be taken. Just as people have shown that if alcohol is available @ 2am they will buy it. What does mom do? Leaves keys on counter. That is negligence. Not saying she killed her son. He's responsible for that. But as his guardian, just as government is supposed to be our guardian, she enabled him to kill himself by not doing anything preventative.
Now, this may lead to people saying that this analogy is imperfect due to the 15 year old not having his personal freedom yet, therefore the moms responsibility is increased compared to the government as we are free adults.... My answer is nothing is perfect. Don't nitpick :p
My point is that regardless of our own personal freedom and our right of choice, we put government above us, and do not overthrow them and reign into anarchy because they are the glue that holds society together. We allow them power to be a more effective glue. We trust them to use that power wisely. And they do not always. I believe this is a case where that holds true. Corruption and everything aside, the government is responsible of negligence to the people that it is supposed to serve by allowing the keys to alcoholism to be available at all times. They are not responsible for alcoholism or alcoholics.
Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 321
The first one I won't even get into.... Their intent. I don't want to get into a political debate. I'll simply say there's a good chance that their intent is self-centered, and not in consideration of the betterment of society.
Alcohol Free Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 482
There will be a lot of people that read this thread asking why they are having a hard time staying sober.
Inevitably it is down the choice. You can either drink and or you can have nothing more to do with alcohol and abstain. I prefer the latter.
I am fully responsible for that choice and it is mine to make freely.
The questions I am probing in this thread are
1. If government policies can change drinking behaviour, shouldn't more support be offered to those seeking a way to stop drinking altogether, like purpleknight said, like the stop smoking campaigns.
2. Shouldnt more warning be placed on alcohol, to make it unattractive. A lot of drinking starts at a very young age in the UK, some figures suggest 13 years old, is the time when most teenagers drink alcohol for the first time and usually with a parent. **SHOCKING**
3. There should be more responsibility on the drinks industry to put more money into websites like this one and programs like AA, where people can access genuine help. They only go as far as I am aware, as saying "Drink Responsibly". Is that enough if you are prone to alcoholism or profits once again being put before peoples health.
This thread was started because a lot of people will have frustration and ask "why me", I know I did when I started, so if we can explore who we think is responsible (The overwhelming majority, which I agree with, say "You" are responsible) then we can dispell the myth that it is in some way someone else to blame and look inward for solutions.
Yes, governments and the drink industry can do more, once you realise their not, you need to understand the agenda is profit based. They are making a profit and taxing the profits from a choice your making.
Now the real title of the thread, should be, "Is that ok with you ?".
Surely, that is just added ammunition to stop drinking and stay sober.
Inevitably it is down the choice. You can either drink and or you can have nothing more to do with alcohol and abstain. I prefer the latter.
I am fully responsible for that choice and it is mine to make freely.
The questions I am probing in this thread are
1. If government policies can change drinking behaviour, shouldn't more support be offered to those seeking a way to stop drinking altogether, like purpleknight said, like the stop smoking campaigns.
2. Shouldnt more warning be placed on alcohol, to make it unattractive. A lot of drinking starts at a very young age in the UK, some figures suggest 13 years old, is the time when most teenagers drink alcohol for the first time and usually with a parent. **SHOCKING**
3. There should be more responsibility on the drinks industry to put more money into websites like this one and programs like AA, where people can access genuine help. They only go as far as I am aware, as saying "Drink Responsibly". Is that enough if you are prone to alcoholism or profits once again being put before peoples health.
This thread was started because a lot of people will have frustration and ask "why me", I know I did when I started, so if we can explore who we think is responsible (The overwhelming majority, which I agree with, say "You" are responsible) then we can dispell the myth that it is in some way someone else to blame and look inward for solutions.
Yes, governments and the drink industry can do more, once you realise their not, you need to understand the agenda is profit based. They are making a profit and taxing the profits from a choice your making.
Now the real title of the thread, should be, "Is that ok with you ?".
Surely, that is just added ammunition to stop drinking and stay sober.
Kaleidoscope eyes
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: London
Posts: 5,243
I did most of my drinking at home anyway. If I was in a pub, I would mostly pretend to be a lady and sip my drinks. Then go home at 11 and throw it down my neck in a most unladylike fashion. xxxx
Currently Active Users Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
