Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Drink Driving, Don't Risk It!

'Success' of under-21 alcohol ban is mere SNP spin, says professor

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 12 September 2008
LOCAL underage drinking crackdowns have provided no evidence that a national under-21 alcohol ban in shops and off-licences will reduce youth disorder, according to the country's top public health statistician.
Professor Sheila Bird, vice-president of the Royal Statistical Society, said it was "disappointing" that the Scottish Government's hugely controversial proposal had not been tested in properly controlled trials.

Three Scottish police forces have i
ntroduced off-sales bans for under-21s in Armadale, Stenhousemuir, Larbert and Cupar as part of a wider campaign to stamp out antisocial behaviour by drunk teenagers.

The results have been declared a spectacular success by ministers and government officials keen to introduce a national under-21 drinks ban.

On Monday, Shona Robison, the public health minister visited Stenhousemuir, seizing on police figures showing that in the first three months of the crackdown, from April to June, reports of antisocial behaviour fell 40 per cent, and breaches of the peace by almost as much.

Meanwhile, minor assaults were down 30 per cent and serious assaults down 60 per cent.

A Scottish Government press release issued the same day said similar schemes in Armadale and Cupar had also seen significant cuts in calls to police and antisocial offences.

Ms Robison said: "The dramatic results from Stop the Supply show what can be achieved when communities take bold steps to tackle alcohol misuse among young people."

The press release said the pilot scheme "revealed more evidence that an over-21s off-sales policy could help cut crime and antisocial behaviour if extended nationwide".

The press release failed to mention that in the four towns, police also brought in other measures to limit the supply of alcohol to young people.

They included using voluntary underage "buyers", marking bottles to identify shopkeepers selling alcohol to children, increasing the number of police patrols, and a "ring round" scheme to alert shops to youngsters trying to buy drink.

Prof Bird said the Scottish Government was guilty of spinning the figures, or simply being "naive".

She said the effect of the under-21 drinks ban on antisocial behaviour and crime could only be properly tested if it was introduced on its own in several areas. The results would then have to be compared with other areas without a ban, to make sure other variables – such as bad weather – were not causing any falls in offending.

She told The Scotsman: "It's disappointing that in such a potentially important intervention as this, there are more questions than answers.

"There have been big changes in some outcomes, but the studies do not allow you to attribute them specifically to the underage ban."

Prof Bird said it was "naughty" of the Scottish Government to highlight a "60 per cent" fall in serious assaults when the figures showed a drop from five incidents to two. "That is hugely statistically insignificant," she said. "The way the results are being reported, it may not even be spin, it may be naivety."

She added: "With something as important as this, you need a proper study."

Chief Inspector Bob Beaton, who led the alcohol crackdowns in Stenhousemuir and Larbert, said anecdotal evidence indicated that the campaigns had been effective in reducing youth disorder.

But he acknowledged: "It's difficult to separate the different strands to say which have been most successful.

"It does appear this is working, but there have been a number of initiatives and the under-21 alcohol ban is just one."

The ban on selling alcohol to under-21s has attracted widespread political opposition, while more than 10,000 people have signed a petition against the move.

The Scottish Government will reveal its final plan in a bill expected to be published early next year.

The minister for public health, Ms Robison, said: "Alcohol misuse is costing Scotland £2.25 billion a year across the NHS, police, social services and the wider economy, so doing nothing – or simply doing more of the same – is not an option.

"What has been noticeable in the debate around our proposals for tackling alcohol misuse is the lack of constructive alternatives from our critics."

Producers blast government plan to make drink 'a social taboo'

DRINKS industry chiefs yesterday hit out at plans to "demonise" alcohol as part of a Scottish Government drive to tackle binge drinking.

They claimed Scots drank less than people in other parts of the UK and said moves to restrict availability would be unfair and ineffective.

"Problems of alcohol misuse in Scotland will not be solved by turning alcohol into a social taboo and demonising drink," said David Poley, chief executive of drinks industry body the Portman Group.

"There is a considerable risk that this would actually increase the appeal of alcohol to young people in particular."

The Portman Group yesterday issued its response to the consultation process.

Mr Poley added: "The myth is that levels of drinking and alcohol misuse are worse in Scotland than elsewhere.

"In reality, Scots drink less than people in the rest of Britain and are no more likely to be drinking harmfully.

"Setting a minimum price for alcohol would penalise hard-working Scots."

The Portman Group's member bodies are Bacardi-Martini, Beverage Brands, Brown-Forman, Carlsberg UK, Coors Brewers, Diageo, Inbev UK, Pernod Ricard UK and Scottish & Newcastle.

Together, they manufacture more than 60 per cent of the alcohol sold in the UK.

The group claims current laws should be more robustly applied and called for a programme of enforcement.

Mr Poley points to the success of drink-drive campaigns in changing the culture, adding: "Education can have a similar impact on our harmful drinking culture, provided it is combined with proper enforcement of the law."

A Scottish Government spokesman said its proposals were about tackling alcohol misuse, not "demonising alcohol", and said Scotland's alcohol consumption had "risen dramatically" in the past decade.







Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 12 September 2008 1:58 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Scottish National Party
 
1

Steve,

Bo'ness 12/09/2008 00:05:16
Whatever the issue there will always be some "expert" on hand to rubbish the SNP in everything it does, and their every word will be printed in a full no holes barred fanfare in the Scotsman. The other 2 certainties are death and taxes.
2

S'me,

Edinburgh 12/09/2008 00:09:38
can't you just accept criticism #1, or are the SNP beyond that?
3

Fifi la Bonbon,

12/09/2008 00:22:09
Prof Bird may be right to say that on the evidence of the pilots conducted by local police services it isn't clear that stopping people under 21 from buying booze is reducing crime, but I really don't care.

The cops say that crime and disorder is falling in these areas, and while the senior cop who thought up the idea is not pretending it's the sole cause, it seems to me to be a reasonable enough restriction. If you're under 21, go to the pub. You'll be an old phart like the rest of us soon enough and then you can stay in and get steamin' in front of the telly, but serve your apprenticeship first in a controlled environment. Even if it's some dive bar in Larbert.

Let's stop all the newsagents, greengrocers, and supermarkets flogging booze, anyway. There are far too many off sales all over Scotland and we could easily get by if we cut 90 per cent of them, and only allowed purpose-built vintners with specially trained staff and much greater scrutiny of who is buying the stuff. If it hikes the price up for "hard working Scots", as the man from the Federation of Booze Dealers said, so much the better. I was in Sainsbury's recently, buying my diet Irn Bru and healthy vegetables for my tea, and the desperate, puffy faced woman in front of me was buying a litre of gin and two bottles of tonic. She looked as if she was getting in the evening's refereshments, as she probably did every day. Even if the price went up so she could only afford a half bottle it would do her some good.

This has nothing to do with the nationalist party, by the way. There are drunken yobs in all parties.
4

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 12/09/2008 00:27:01
Come on Scotsman. The evidence speaks for itself. Ask the locals.
5

Fifi la Bonbon,

12/09/2008 00:27:50
#1 - Sheila Bird is actually quite an expert, and deserves to be listened to and not disparaged because SNP fans think she's having a go at their team.

For the record, Professor Sheila Bird is Principal Statistician at the Medical Research Council Biostatistics Unit and visiting professor at Strathclyde University's Department of Statistics and Modelling Science. She is Honorary Officer for External Relations and an RSS vice-President. Recipient of the RSS's Guy Medal in Bronze (1989) and Bradford Hill Medal (2000), Sheila was awarded Fellowship by distinction of Faculty of Public Health of the UK Royal Colleges of Physicians (2005). Currently, she serves on Home Office's Scientific Advisory Group, and chairs its subgroup on Surveys, Design and Statistics. She can probably play the tin whistle really well, too.

Anyway, like I said, she's probably right, but I don't think it matters. Crack down on booze for under 21s and hike up the price!
6

walter,

12/09/2008 00:33:27
I wonder if the government will release the figures from the surrounding areas of where these trials took place.
From April to June did antisocial behaviour, breaches of the peace, minor assaults and serious assaults remain the same, increase or decrease in the surrounding areas.
Why not take each of the measures introduced and implement each of them in 3 different areas to see which ones have the biggest effect at the same time observing the surrounding areas instead of hailing one (the one they want to introduce)from many as the only reason there was a drop in crime.
7

Senga Jean,

12/09/2008 00:48:58
Now in many countries there is an under 21 ban on purchase and public place consumption . Do the math. Is it good or bad? Or is any proposal by the SNP bad?...I do not think so!
8

walter,

12/09/2008 00:50:57
#1 Whatever the issue there will always be some "expert" on hand to rubbish the SNP in everything it does, and their every word will be printed in a full no holes barred fanfare in the Scotsman.
The other 2 certainties are death and taxes.

You forgot the 3rd certainty which is "Argumentum ad hominem".
Basically meaning that the argument becomes directed towards the individual as opposed towards the crucial issues being discussed. It is succinctly described as attack the messenger not the message or shoot the messenger.
Its aim is to undermine the position of ones opponent by undermining the opponent personally (in a manner that is actually completely irrelevant to the debate). The hope here is that if one can discredit the individual, this by default, discredits his / her argument.
It is a certainty that the nats on here will do exactly that if any one (no matter what their expertise in a said field) who have the audacity to criticise the SNP.
9

Fifi la Bonbon,

12/09/2008 00:55:11
No, Senga Jean, as I've said I'm happy to see this proposal go through, but I wish the nationalists wouldn't claim credit for the idea.

It was the cops who thought it up and negotiated compliance with the licensed trade.

No politicians of any party were involved in the making of this policy, which is possibly why the cops involved are being cautious about the cause and effect of various initiatives, backed up by Prof Bird.

I think the restrictions on booze should happen anyway but that's cos I'm a thrawn old puritanical git, not a scientist.
10

Fifi la Bonbon,

12/09/2008 00:57:15
Well said, #8. They should stop flinging mud at academics who dare to say what they think on the basis of the evidence.
11

Edward,

12/09/2008 00:59:43
#5
Prof Bird is an expert in which feild exactly??
Oh yes - Statistics!. Useful if your at the roulette table and your thinking of betting the house on Black
but not really qualified to talk about under age drinkrs or measures having to be put in place to get the country sorted out
I would trust the Police trials with the bans on under 21's
At the moment the efforts of the Scottish Government are the only game in town, unless some one some where has a better approach to this unaccetable problem
12

,

12/09/2008 01:00:32
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
13

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 12/09/2008 01:17:30
Put it this way, it is unusual for a Professor to use words like "spin".

I suspect her motivation is political rather than Professorial !
14

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 12/09/2008 01:20:13
#9 Fifi

I'm not sure that "nationalists" have claimed credit for this idea as you state.

In any case, if it works, I don't really see that it matters whose idea it was.
15

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 12/09/2008 01:22:10


NO 'STATS' NEEDED! NO POLITICS NEEDED!

THE Whole Issue of Banning the Under 21s from Alcohol is a,...

BIG FAT WRONG!, AND IT WILL NOT REPEAT NOT! CHANGE ANYTHING, TO DO WITH THE FEW, THAT ABUSE!!!!!

At 20years old, I was married, owned my own home, had a good job, paid taxes, and was a Father to my Baby Daughter!

YES I HAD THE FEW DRINKS, HERE AND THERE ALSO!

IF 'ANYONE' I REPEAT 'ANYONE' SAID I COULD NOT PURCHASE ALCOHOL, AT THIS AGE,...

I WOULD TELL THEM,!!

'STICK IT WHERE THE SUN DONT SHINE'

And I WOULD DO my Damndest, and I WOULD STILL Have A DRINK!!

HOW DARE YOU!! TELL AN ADULT AT 18-21 THEY CANT PURCHASE ALCOHOL!!!

National Service!?

Thats a different story aint it?

Adult enough to 'Kill' for the Country! 'HUH'? at 18!

16

jimboo,

the wemyss 12/09/2008 01:26:43
Google her, the wummins a genius, ma heeds in a spin readin some of the stuff, shes no party hack, ban any one over 57 from drinking ah cannae take the hangovers any mair.
17

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 12/09/2008 01:31:14
#15 Charles

Less capitals would be most welcome.

I support the U-21 offie ban.
18

TommyKaye,

UK 12/09/2008 01:35:07
Lady T to Lunch at Chequers: Reaction From Scottish Labour Awaited


Last month, the Scottish Labour Party made huge capital over a remark Alex Salmond made in an interview about Margaret Thatcher.

They castigated him for uttering a pro Thatcher sentence and said he should be ashamed of himself for associating himself with her in any shape or form.

I await with interest the damning comments of the Scottish Labour Party when they learn of Gordon Brown's invitation to lunch to Lady Thatcher at Chequers this Saturday. Perhaps Mr Salmond would like to formally ask them what they think.
19

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 12/09/2008 01:37:43

connaughtboy ~17,

Fair enough, Personal views must be given on this issue,

Life would be unjust if we were all 'Yes People'

But one cant wonder, if thats what the 'Authorities at be' Want!

BTW! I know stonehaven quite well.
20

Mal,

12/09/2008 01:47:16
It is pretty much impossible to run controlled experiments of this kind of social policy. There are far too many variables. Even if you introducede it on its own in some areas, you would have issues such as differnces in socio-economic demographics, levels of alcohol sales, under 21s may simply travel to the next area that does sell to under 21s resulting in a decrease in anti-social area in the area they have left and more in the area they have travelled to...etc, etc.

The best you can do is introduce something, measure change and draw conclusions. But lets not pretend you can carry out clinical trials of social policy. I do rather suspect Prof. Bird is very aware of this. Perhaps the Scotsman has just spun her views?
21

Mal,

12/09/2008 01:50:48
#15 what is to stop a mature 17 year old making the same argument. Or indeed a 16 year old, 15 year old or 14 year old. What age would you set the right to buy alcohol at? At what age does the fact that some can claim to be up standing members of society, who pay taxes and work, become an invalid justification?
22

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 12/09/2008 02:00:00

Mal @#21,

A 14year old cannot vote, have a mortgage, fight a war, whatever,

If the few, that gets sunburned and gets skin cancer's, would you contemplate,

Blowing-up-the-Sun?
23

Mal,

12/09/2008 02:12:38
So by your argument you would lower the drinking age to 16?
24

livilion,

livingston 12/09/2008 02:17:02
And the dope peddlars are rubbing their hands with glee!

Stopping under 21's(in effect U16/18's) from habitually getting slaughtered on cut price kerry-oots from the offy is targeted at the mostly under-age edjits who think the only point in drinking is to get off-yer-face-puke-in-the-gutter drunk, until they work out the finer points of 'chattin up burds' and 'impressing' the opposite gender.ie Big men can take big drink.
Cheap booze and rampant hormones, always a potent combination.

Aye, stopping them getting their swally will make the streets quieter as they all feed their faces and sleep off the wacky backy.

Next thing you know, you won't be able to leave your house empty because some junkie wants to sell your telly.

As a 14-16 year old, me and my pal made home brew beer from kits bought in Boots or Woolworths and sold it to our classmates in school. Only much later did I discover one of those classmates at the same time was selling drugs.

There but for the grace...

btw Has nobody in government seen a classic Hollywood gangster movie? Prohibition was the biggest boost organised crime and Jimmy Cagney ever had.
Are we doomed to forever keep making those same mistakes?
25

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 12/09/2008 02:33:05

Mal 23,

NO!

It worked fine for 'Donkey Years' Why Change the magic age of 18 now?

One could say! if one drunk gallons of water, and killed themseves on it at 18years old, you would ban water purchases until you thought the persons were,,

'More Adult Like' at 21years old!

It can go on and on!

Is one responsible at 40years old if they abuse drink?

Why not put a ban on the under 40s?

You can only purchase drink, when you collect your,...

'Bus Passes' and are 'zimmer' registered!
26

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 12/09/2008 02:36:17

LOOK AT THESE OAP's ABUSING the Whisky!!!

BAN ALL OAP's FROM DRINKING THE BOOZE!!

'AYE' RIGHT THEN!!!!!!!!!
27

karinxxx,

12/09/2008 03:46:19
if changing the age at which you can buy things doesnt have an effect on consumption then why has the age for buying cigarettes changed over the years?

As a child i used to be able to buy my father cigarretes then i couldnt and you had to be 16 now its 18 thanks to the labour party.

So if that doesnt work then why did the labour party introduce it?
28

karinxxx,

12/09/2008 04:46:52
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMi776jah1w

for anyone that hasnt seen it.
29

,

12/09/2008 06:32:55
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
30

duelay no more,

perth 12/09/2008 06:36:15
I believe that there are a very large number of incidents and crimes that can be laid at the feet of alcohol and its misuse. If there was suddenly no alcohol for sale in the country, I for one could cope, and I suspect most of us could.

The abuse of alcohol is not only carried out by the under 21s, but mostly by their big brothers and sisters and even their parents. It is from this training ground that the social acceptability of reaching the warm mellow tiddly comfort zone, is learned and then copied.

What is needed is, a society wide disapproval of this type of behaviour and a media follow through by not encouraging such actions on film. Politicians, please lead the way. Cut out the booze.
31

subrosa,

12/09/2008 07:03:17
For all her brilliance what has Prof. Bird's intervention proved? That a fall from 5 serious incidents to 2 isn't a drop of 60%? No, as a statistician she can't argue with the maths. Fair enough, the project wasn't a large one but at least it was a serious effort on behalf of the police to do something about the problem and with the full backing of the Scottish government.

I would agree with her a larger study is required before any legislation is set in stone, but I also would have liked to hear some alternative solutions from her and not just criticism of published figures and percentages which are correct.
32

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 12/09/2008 07:23:59
Professor Bird is 100% correct. The SNP are being very naive (again). Do Salmond, Sturgeon, Swinney, MacAskill live in the real world?
33

an interested party,

12/09/2008 07:25:51
increasing the number of police patrols

now there is a clever idea, send the polis to the hot spots

who da thunk that one would work
34

Peter Curran,

12/09/2008 07:27:47
#15
Your CAPS lock key is stuck, Charles. If it isn't, then be aware that over-use of capitals is the equivalent to shouting in online postings. It does nothing for your case - if you have one.
35

Guga II,

Rockall 12/09/2008 07:53:48
People in Scotland can legally marry at sixteen, can be sent to fight in illegal wars, as well as legal ones, and enter into legal contracts when they're eighteen; but now that waste of space, Kenny MacAskill, wants to stop these same people buying booze till they're twenty-one. What a load of utter garbage.

Why doesn't he just enforce exisiting legislation as regards underage drinking and public disorder; and there are more than sufficient laws covering these matters. That way he wouldn't have to dream up yet more Labour Party style control-freak laws.

We know MacAskill was formerly a member of the Labour Party, but their methods and control freakery are something we hoped to get away from under the SNP.

Moreover, MacAskill's desire, for example, not to gaol anyone under the age of eighteen is another area where he should not be considering the age, but the actions of the people concerned. All the wee neds and thugs should be suitably punished, not sent on holidays or kept out of gaol because they are under eighteen.

Again, enforce exisiting legislation, for underage drinking, loutish behaviour and thuggery. Don't bring in unnecessary legislation just for the sake of it, or to make it appear that you are doing something about the problem; and don't be fooled by police spin and garbage either.
36

,

12/09/2008 08:27:02
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
37

thomas ferguson,

glasgow 12/09/2008 08:34:02
this drinking ban is just another flash in the pan thought of baw face salmonds time, if some one said a ban on eating fish and chips in the streets would bring in 10 votes it would be a law as soon as posible
38

The Tin Man,

12/09/2008 08:49:34
In order for people to reach their full potential, they need to be given responsibilities.

This proposal is yet another erosion of personal responsibility, and yet more bolstering of State Power over people's lives.

As an aside, it would appear that the results alluded to in the article may had a lot to do with the police enforcing existing laws (after all, they can't enforce laws that don't exist).

However, I would imagine that the enforcement of lisencing regulations is pretty far down mooyst force's list of priorities, unles it is performed as a short-tetm excercise.

The sale of alchol is hardly the problem. It is our attitude towards alchol that needs to change - a difficult one, as excessive alchol consumption is an inbred trait as deep-set as the unavoidable anti-sassenach twinge.
39

,

12/09/2008 08:49:41
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
40

brownlie,

12/09/2008 08:56:02
40 Dave from Barra

What do you call these big tall plants with green leaves in the Lews Castle Grounds and on the Stornoway Golf Course?

Some people call them elms, oaks etc but there must be a collective name for them.

As far as the article is concerned if these pilot schemes work as they appear to have done is someone seriously suggesting that they should be discontinued?
41

brownlie,

12/09/2008 08:58:06
41 Thomas

You forgot to mention tripe in your contribution but perhaps you don't need to do so.
42

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

12/09/2008 09:12:06
Of course she is correct - it is not statistically significant - the penny numbers make any conclusions worthless.
43

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

12/09/2008 09:16:23
#43 "The sale of alcohol is hardly the problem. It is our attitude towards alchol that needs to change"

Too true.

Our continental cousins have much lower ages for the consumption of alcohol yet don't have the related problems that we have. They have a healthy respect for alcohol - we don't.
44

brownlie,

12/09/2008 09:17:49
48 Barra

He certainly does not live in Rockall, does he? Stornoway is actually in Lewis where you claim there are no trees and that makes me a mutton-head?
45

yockel,

12/09/2008 09:24:31
In the past the police did not target the underage drinkers and never have done, that is why there is a problem. This scheme is the first time anything has ever been done other than target retailers but the alledged use of bent statistics if true would suggest the SNP is a bit too close to Nu labour in its habits.
46

brownlie,

12/09/2008 09:28:52
53 Dave

Did it not occur to you that my remark was also intended to be light-hearted as I assumed that like most Barra folk you could take a joke.

Being a mutton-head does not stop me having fun. I've tried it and like it!

Actually it does not stop there. If you journey from Stornoway to Harris you can see where trees have been planted and are thriving.
47

Mr. Lachie Todd,

12/09/2008 09:37:08
Has the vice-president of the Royal Statistical Society herself carried out research to justify her criticism of ther measures being taken by the Police at the four locations mentioned, or is she just talking off the top of her big head?
48

brownlie,

12/09/2008 09:38:25
57 Dave

Thank you for that. Did you know that if you travel to Scalpay from Tarbert you will see palm trees growing in a garden on your left-hand side in Kyles-Scalpay?
49

MoClana,

12/09/2008 09:41:19
Another day another anti SNP story.

Ok experts , ok Unionists - what is your alternative in the short term to the out of control underage and teenage alcohol problems, anti social behavious and violence on our streets ?

This is a result of a broken society under Thatcher, and 11 years of Labour keeping people in a state of dependancy and despair. This is our Union dividend and the Scottish goverment has to start somehwere.

This is not the answer, but it is the begining of process which needs to reverse 3rd /4th generation of poverty, unemployment, alcohol abuse and breakdown in communities.

This papers constant barage anti Scottish spin to progress, whether it be LIT, SFT or raising the drink age is utterly deplorable and i can only hope that once Independent this rag is resigned to history along with all the other infamous institutions of Brittish Imperialism.

Soar Alba

50

,

12/09/2008 09:42:23
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
51

,

12/09/2008 09:46:34
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
52

brownlie,

12/09/2008 09:47:14
61 Vincent

So sorry, will try to be more serious and pay attention to the subject in hand.
53

Publius,

London 12/09/2008 09:49:26
#58 Mr. Lachie Todd

The Prof made a pefectly valid statistical point. She did not criticise the police or their actions at the four locations. She criticised the conclusion drawn by the Scottish government on the grounds that statistics did not support it.
It's time you and other nationalists stopped attacking the professional competence of distinguished academics.

#37 Guga II has the right approach to the serious question of alcohold abuse and disorder - enforce the existing laws. There are laws against selling alcohol to under 18s, against being drunk and disorderly in public places, laws to protect hospital staff from being abused and assaulted by drunks on Friday and Saturday nights. If the existing laws were being enforced, we would probably see several hundred prosecutions a week.


54

Duncan in Edinburgh /,

12/09/2008 09:50:16
There is so much hypocrisy around this issue - it seems it's ok for a future Scottish Justice minister to be scraped off the pavement drunk as a lord - but if you are under-21 - god forbid . . .
55

LEAL,

12/09/2008 09:52:32
What did the previous unionist administration do to tackle Scotlands drink problem?Nothing!The SNP are at least trying to address Scotlands many problems because they are a Scottish party with Scotlands intrests at heart.
56

,

12/09/2008 09:52:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
57

yockel,

12/09/2008 09:56:36
#66 Publius - No, not really, if they enforced the existing laws there would be a huge rise in the number of prosecutions, which is why they don't. There are no facilities in place to cope with enforcing the ludicrious number of laws and regulations we already have. The easy political trick is to pretend there aren't any existing rules and create a new one. It's called an initiative and usully involves empowerment.
58

The Tin Man,

12/09/2008 10:02:49
#60

That is one of the more idiotic posts in this thread, but at least it gave me a laugh.

The only way that Scotland's prediliction towards alchol abuse will ever be solved is through a several-decades-long media campaign aimed at changing people's attitudes from thinking that it is fine and dandy to get pished, to making drunkeness uncool.

Anyway, I thought that the government are not considering a blanket ban on off-sales to under-21's after all.
59

Duncan in Edinburgh /,

Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer! 12/09/2008 10:03:56
#66 The Cybernats attack anyone who dares to have a go at them or their Fuhrer. They are the Scientologists of the political world.
60

Highland Mighty©,

12/09/2008 10:04:14
The results have been declared a spectacular success by ministers.

Prof Bird said it was "naughty" of the Scottish Government to highlight a "60 per cent" fall in serious assaults when the figures showed a drop from five incidents to two. "That is hugely statistically insignificant," she said. "The way the results are being reported, it may not even be spin, it may be naivety."

********************************

I have nothing to add, just thought I'd repeat two key paragraphs.

Always good to see the SNP cramming in the awesome, groundbreaking and historic superlatives too.
61

Duncan in Edinburgh /,

12/09/2008 10:07:00
"#71 yockel,12/09/2008 09:56:36
#66 Publius - No, not really, if they enforced the existing laws there would be a huge rise in the number of prosecutions"

It's a shame really - the thought of Foulkes and/or MacAskill being prosecuted brings a warm glow to my heart . . .
62

Highland Mighty©,

12/09/2008 10:07:30
As for an alternative - Anyone arrested for being drunk and disorderly should face a lengthy ban from all licenced premises. Get caught again and face a criminal record.

Impossible to police but the offender will think twice about getting out of his/her skin and risk further punishment.

I get very annoyed when the majority are punished by the stupid actions of the minority.
63

BigG the man who knows,

12/09/2008 10:07:52
The U-21 "ban" is like a sticking plaster on a cancer. The sooner the Gov (any Gov - SNP/Labour/Con) starts to look at reasons people want to get off their heads the sooner we'll fine a real answer.

In the meantime this is all about headlines, placating the masses and a 4 year election cycle.....power for power's sake.....
64

,

12/09/2008 10:08:49
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
65

brownlie,

12/09/2008 10:10:38
75 British Pride

It would appear to me that the current Scottish Government are at least trying to tackle the problems which were allowed to flourish under previous administrations and the failure to address the problem timeously is there for all to see.
66

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

12/09/2008 10:14:16
#78 Find myself agreeing - I find the whole approach toi this issue facile and simplistic - it's almost as bad as Blair's marching them to the cashpoint policy.

Prohibition on its own has proven rarely to work - you really have to deal with the underlying causes if you want to make progress.
67

The Tin Man,

12/09/2008 10:16:05
#79 BigKenny

Now, now, at least they are trying to do something, even if some ideas bewilderingly daft (I did find the one about seperate booze queues in larger supermarkets amusing, but indicative of possible brain damage brought on by alchol abuse).

68

Highland Mighty©,

12/09/2008 10:17:01
80. Using clumsy and seriously flawed policies is better is it, just because "at least they are trying"?

How easily pleased you are.

(Still sticking to your obsession that I use other usernames, are we? Just because you children do, doesn't mean us grown-ups do. Try and grow up, there's a good boy.)
69

Calvinist,

12/09/2008 10:19:08
This is what happens when you have politicians who are scientifically illiterate. Any fool could see that these ‘trials’ were fundamentally flawed (no control groups for a start). Perhaps if we had more politicians with a background in science then this sort of idiocy would not occur. Not that professor Brid’s fine analysis will make one jot of difference the SNP will continue to believe what it want to believe even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

70

brownlie,

12/09/2008 10:19:21
77 Highland Mighty

First time for everything, I suppose, but I agree but would go further and do the same with those who buy/sell alcohol for under-age consumption.
71

MoClana,

12/09/2008 10:20:28
# Vincent - Cut the political b*llsh*t please - Scotland has had problems with alcohol for centuries. It's a cultural issue!

Really? i wasnt aware they had alco pops , bucky and discounted booze for centuries?? or that parents would let their kids out to midnight to get drunk, vandalise anything they could, stab each other and then film it on thier mobile phones?? perhaps im missing something here.

'just concentrate of working out the most effective way of reducing alcohol problems while maintaining the freedom of easy access. ' ....I am all ears? you still have not made an alternative to hte problem short term...just the usual SNP = BAD , ANYTHING ELSE = GOOD !

#73 Tin Man - 'The only way that Scotland's prediliction towards alchol abuse will ever be solved is through a several-decades-long media campaign aimed at changing people's attitudes from thinking that it is fine and dandy to get pished, to making drunkeness uncool.'
Would that be the same media which total rubbishes every attmept at addresing the problem? and if im wrong please tell me the last time you seen a posistive repsonse to at least tackling this problem by the media?
They are only interested in representing the views of supermarkets and the drinks industry...oh lets not forget the students who seem to make up 100% of the population in these debates....



72

DeniseX,

12/09/2008 10:21:19
A proposal to put fags under the counter to stop youngsters being tempted to smoke. Smoking banned from inside pubs to be replaced with families going to the pub. Youngsters going with their parents to pubs wont tempt them to drink alcohol, or will it?
73

brownlie,

12/09/2008 10:22:56
84 Highland Mighty

Just as I was extending the hand of conciliation you accuse me of being obsessed.

You will recall that, as Highland Mighty, you claimed that you only posted as British Pride. If, for some reason, you are ashamed of having posted as British Pride who am I to blame you.
74

The Tin Man,

12/09/2008 10:35:50
#87 MoClana

You are unaware of your own cultural stereo-type?

On the media front, for some reason I can still remember the 'I'm Dave "I learned to swim'" ads, despite a lot of grey hairs in the meantime.

I don't see anything similar re. drunkeness. But there should be. You are perfectly correct in saying that such initiatives are not driven by the media. They never have been. They are driven by the government...
75

MoClana,

12/09/2008 10:40:12
#90 Dave - im not suggesting Scotland does not have history with alcohol, and yes it can be relevant what ever time line you want to look at.

However we did not have the aggresive modern cultural change which also feeds into the problem, and whereas in the past the community would serve as a glue to keep anti social behaviour in check, we no longer have communites in the true sense of the word.

Yes we have a problem, this is not in dispute, thats why i am happy to see any attempt at fighting the problem as it has gone unchecked for decades. Of course the current efforts are not a long term fix, but it has to start somewhere.
76

The Tin Man,

12/09/2008 10:40:49
#90 Dave

Was there not a study showing that there is a gene that enables the body to better survive binges, and that the gene was rather more common in the West Highlands, presumably through a 'survival of the fittest' process associated with throwing the bottle cap on the fire after opening?
77

MoClana,

12/09/2008 10:51:11
#91 Tin Man - of course media campaigns have to be driven by Goverment as its not the responsibity of the media. However to suggest that we start producing ads like ' just say no' to drugs...or the recent anti smoking ads and then the problem will be fixed, simply wont work.

It will certainly help, but what is the turn around period for this changing anything? next week, next month, years ? it is totally unquantified.

I dont want change in years, i want change ASAP, and if that means taking a hard line by putting the age limit up (meantime), then im for it. Again it is not a solution, but it has to start somewhere and yes in tandem with other initiatives.

78

Tweedmouth,

Coldstream 12/09/2008 10:55:54
A vast majority of Accident and Emergency admissions from Friday to Monday are associated with alcohol: assaults, collapses, incapable, broken bones, cuts, vomiting, alcoholic poisoning etc. etc. The vast majority of police arrests over the same period are associated with alcohol: fighting, assaults, thefts, break-ins, vandalism, drunka nd disorderlyetc.

This costs a vast amount of time on the part of doctors, nurses, police, courts, probation service - the list is endless.

Possible solution: charge the people who are drunk the REAL COST of all the services they use: e.g. police attendance at an incident (£200 an hour?), ambulance to hospital ( £400 an hour?) doctor's and nurses time (£100 an hour?), dressings and medicines (£50), transport to police station (£50 an hour), cell rental (£100 a day); court time (£1000 an hour) and so on.

Keep them in custody - in very basic conditions - until they or their families pay up - CASH.

Result - you would have a 90% drop in alcohol abuse within a year.

THE PRINCIPLE: The person who causes the problem should pay the costs of solving the problem -rather than the public purse and the taxpayer.

Of course, they will never do it.
79

,

12/09/2008 10:57:50
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
80

The Tin Man,

12/09/2008 11:05:25
#95 MoClana

I beg to differ. It is a cultural problem - that is beyond dispute. Whether the flavour of the day is alcho-pops or barley wine makes little difference.

To make any significant change to a cultural attitude would take a generation, or two, at least.

The quick-fix draconian approach you advocate did not work in, for example, Finland.

#96 Tweedmouth

Unfortunately, I don't think that people consider that if they get pished they will do a break-in, fall down the stairs, and get caught.
81

Mcsnagpile,

12/09/2008 11:36:49
What is really dumb about this proposal is they are putting more social value on alcohol. I think the media is trying to sell more alcohol. Alcohol is a poison that makes a fool of people, aids obesity by adding empty calories, and in the long run ruins the body. Some people think they are relaxing by turning into a monkey and acting childish--- Am I a spoil sport??? well! I think your are a shower of are mugs
82

DaveK,

Edinburgh 12/09/2008 11:41:23
There is no evidence to suggest that everyone in the age range 18-21 are the most anti social, nor for that matter that stopping the sale of booze to this age range will actually work nationally. Why should the majority of decent individuals and dare I say VOTERS suffer for the actions of a few and the inaction of previous administrations. The pilot scheme to stop the sales was also done in partnership with police and other agencies and I hardly think that the national programme would allow for policing figures at the same level in the pilot scheme, particularly seeing as there is a little bit of controversy over the present Governements policing figures. Let's be honest, if we are to change the culture of drinking in Scotland and improve the nations health, it is partly the older generation who have severe drinking problems and domestic violence, but this point seems to have been forgotten. I concede that this is a consultation process, but so far the three key aims of the SNP have met hostility so there needs to be a re think and lets not forget 18 year olds have the power to vote and certainly will on this particular issue. I am no fan of the SNP, quite the contrary, but I have to admit that rather than constantly decrying the notion of stopping offsales to under 21s, come up with some alternative strategies and policies as part of the discussion!
83

walter,

12/09/2008 12:17:39
The SNP want to raise the age that a young adult can purchase alcohol at an off sales to 21 they want to lower the voting age to 16.
How was it Bruce Crawford put it "While 16-year-olds can pay taxes, get married or serve in the armed forces", surely the same apply to 18, 19 and 20 year olds.
84

AndyWalkerSpeaksMince,

Falkirk 12/09/2008 12:47:45
Despite 10,000 people signing a petition the facts are that people in Falkirk were overwhelmingly sympathetic to these proposals in the local consultation. 78% supported raising the minimum age that people can purchase alcohol in off licenses. I would be suprised if that wasn't indicative of people's views across Scotland.
85

morris,

edinburgh 12/09/2008 13:03:26
74

And you dont I suppose?

You said and I quote

"The Cybernats attack anyone who dares to have a go at them or their Fuhrer".

So its okay for Unionists to have a go but not for Nationalists then!

You destroyed your own argument before you had finished making it!
86

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

12/09/2008 13:16:27
#109 Looks like a wind-up merchsnt Morris - note the / after the name - it's a fakey.
87

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 12/09/2008 13:18:28
At last someone is talking sense (the professor).

However, it matters not how must sense is talked, the brain-dead nazis are determined to get their way---as they did with their stupid, pointless smoking ban.

#108:

the only reason for that response---if it it is indeed true---is because people are being brainwashed.
88

morris,

edinburgh 12/09/2008 13:39:16
84 YES Doing something which may not be the perfect answer on its own ,and just attempts to address the problem, is better than what the Labour Lib Dem Alliance did.
THEY ACHIEVED SOD ALL
They failed abysmally and that is a fact!

Any attempt to solve this including controversial ones are worth trying if for no other reason you learn something from any trial . What value it has varies of course.It might be only It does not work well enough to justify using it again,certainly not in isolation anyway.
Even back to the drawing board is progress of sorts although its difficult to see any benefit yet.

Alcohol will always be available purchased by people who are old enough anyway, and part of the answer is use existing legislation instead of just have having it in place.It won't work by itself.It needs to be enforced with checks and fines which hurt!
One policeman even one day per month,whose full time job is to check off-licences in plain clothes and nail them, would soon stop the shopkeepers who have been getting away with this for far too long.He only goes in when he sees potentially under age people of course.
Once a few have been closed down ( or a fine which almost bankrupts them) the rest will soon insisting upon proof of their age.WE still have the older buyers of course,and we need to see the exchange of money and goods to arrest those people.The few who are caught should face a fine so high it takes them ten years to pay it and it relates to their earnings!

The police seem to think that a uniform presence prevents/reduces crime.Not necessarily true, it delays crime. They wait till PLOD has plodded off and do it,or go somewhere else.A police presence OUT of uniform does not deter criminals on the face of it, but it does catch them red handed!
If you know that the POLICE are possibly any one of the two hundred people around you but not which ones that deterrent exists everywhere!
Its a bit like speed cameras reduce speed .Yes until they are out
89

morris,

edinburgh 12/09/2008 13:53:06
110 Cheers Thank You Federalist

I had not noticed that,of course, and now I think on it, I should have realised something was amiss.
I rarely agree with Duncan much, but he has always been above this level, and I have to acknowledge that so................................................... The real Duncan I apologise without reservation on this one.
I do wish these people would use one identity and/or its their own.
At least those I disagree with,I at least acknowledge that when they cause me to think,(and that is no mean achievement),that they are worthy of debating with,and you cannot disrespect someone who can cause you problems.

Duncan is certainly capable of that, and you have caused me to waken up a few times yourself I seem to recall.

Again Thank You
90

morris,

edinburgh 12/09/2008 13:57:22
109 cont
Its a bit like speed cameras reduce speed .Yes until they are out of range,Measure the time taken from Camera a to camera B and you find they averaged 45mph in a 30 zone!

The criminals/law breakers do not have to be very bright to defeat the system when we co operate with them as much as we do!
91

The Former Mr. Angry,

Perth 12/09/2008 14:21:31
"reports of antisocial behaviour fell 40 per cent, and breaches of the peace by almost as much.

Meanwhile, minor assaults were down 30 per cent and serious assaults down 60 per cent."

Now whereas the experiment was not the stuff of properly controlled trials, what the Professor has missed is that the above superb results came out of what they DID do as opposed to what they should have done from a purely academic point of view. So while we set up more experiments properly this time to assess which action taken was most statistically significant why not implement PRECISELY what was done in the three towns elsewhere?

So although the government may not be able to claim that u-21 drinking bans solved the problem SOMETHING DID! And in the great tradition of engineering principles if not precisely scientific ones, what you do is to repeat the successful actions. So before the experiment is reassembled into a statistically-correct one, why not roll out the successful things elsewhere and experience what was wanted by police and citizens in these towns - drastic reductions in various anti-social behaviours.


92

wally banana,

12/09/2008 14:38:30
Apart from the question of whether someone who advocates randomised controlled trials on hepatitis c interventions (effectively condemning most of the control group to hep C), I think the most scary thing from this article is the re-calculation the portman group does with statistics on drinking levels. Have they got THEIR head up their a£$" or are they doing the usual, we will lie as it suits us and actually Scottish people drink less than everyone else, you're all OK, have a can of super mate. A telling story is the CEO of Scottish and Newcastle (before it's takeover) saying the week after it was found that life expectancy for Russian males was under 60 due to alcohol, that they saw |"opportunities" in Russia.
93

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

12/09/2008 14:54:00
#115 It wasn't just the fact that these were not properly controlled trials but also the reality that the numbers involved were statistically insignificant. A fall of 60% sounds great until you realise that it was obtained from penny numbers - 5 reported assauults down to 2 could be as much due to youngsters staying in because of the inclement weather we've had as to a change in policy.

That's not to say that the policy should not be followed - just that we should not be saying it is a "success" on the back of seriously flawed analysis.

Lies, damned lies and statistics.
94

morris,

edinburgh 12/09/2008 15:00:34
115

Maybe you should be angry more often!

I cannot see anything other than infinite sense in what you say!Something changed for sure.What exactly and what next are the questions we should be asking.

Instead of them bleating out "Its not the answer to everything",(when nobody claimed that it was),which is disingenuous at best,(there never will be an answer to everything), Labour and Lib Dem are attacking everything the SNP say or do, irrespective of what level of success they have shown.This has achieved something (but what exactly is debatable),and the figures show that something happened,but I agree its not a complete solution,and needs more .Lets try it nationally and see what happens.I cannot see any reason to dismiss it as a futile excerise.Clearly some figures DID improve.

The public have noticed this dismissal and attack of absolutely everything,invariably accompanied by meaningless drivel, and rightly a gap now exists in the opinion polls.
Labour have not only surrendered a lead but reversed it into an SNP lead, which continues to widen daily .Labour call that good governance? I call it gross stupidity.No wonder they were defeated at Holyrood !

That's nothing to the near wipeout that awaits them in England.

Scotland needs an opposition and so far only Aunty Belle is providing one, and she has the hardest job of them all,selling a message that Scotland rejected years ago,but she still holds her support steady.She may even gain a seat or two, who knows!Labour are a disaster and that's being kind to them.

They need to sharpen their tools and start earning their salaries at both Westminster and Holyrood.
Criticism for the sake of it is playing into the SNP's hands.Instead of inferring they are incapable, show us what you would do which is better,(and explain why you never did it before).The attacks on the SNP are costing Labour votes and that's not just my opinion.The polls say its everybody almost!
95

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

12/09/2008 15:06:18
#118 Like Labour before though the SNP have been caught telling porkies about the succes of a policy. Surely it would have been more sensible to trumpet the anecdotal evidence rather than inflate the importance of a change in penny numbers.

96

Boggle fey the Bog,

12/09/2008 15:06:32
As a SNP member I find it very disheartening that this SNP government, are falling into the same 'trap' as Nu Labour/Owld Torie.
This proposed legislation, just like the 'Smoking Ban' has been totally ill thought out, and based on some very dubious 'facts' and downright lies.
It is time wee Eck wised up and threw the hale lot out.

Also as an ex-serviceman I find it appalling that a young person of between 18 years and 20 years 364 days can be asked to put their life 'on the line' for their country, but will be unable to by alcohol at an off sales if this legislation goes through. Just another case of Politico's not giving a Ferkin thought for our courageous service personnel.

Of course we also have a complete rooster up, with the SNP's and Nu Labours proposal to extend the universal franchise to everyone over 16 years of age.

How can either of them justify that action, when they are about to prevent the same people from buying alcohol in 'off sales', because they are not 'mature enough' but on the other hand claim that they ARE 'mature enough' to take a full part in 'running the country' i.e. giving them the vote!!!!

There is absolutely no logic to any of these pieces of legislation and proposed legislation.

There is no need for new legislation, but only proper enforcement of existing legislation.
For example it is an offence to sell alcohol to under 18's, so if licensee's are caught doing this, fine them, but more importantly remove their license, and don't allow them to hold another one for at least 5 years, a few sentences like that and the 'corner shops' will sit up and take notice!!!

Well it looks like Wee Eck, gets my vote only until Scotland takes it's rightful place among the great family of Free Nations, after that I will resign from the SNP, unless they change their attitude drastically.
97

cataibh,

Over the Struie 12/09/2008 15:07:31
Any policy being in the interest of the vast majority of Scottish people you will find is always opposed by the unionists.
98

livilion,

livingston 12/09/2008 15:15:34
118 morris
For my two bob's worth; I agree with you and would add that my relations in Shettleston voted SNP for the first time at the Glasgow East By-election, as did many of their neighbours, because as they said, the labour candidate put them in mind of Margaret Thatcher the way she patronised them, and just because they don't all live in £600,000 houses didn't make them as slow witted as it would appear the locals were viewed by some in the Labour movement.

None so blind as those who refuse to listen...

btw where do teenagers looking for mind altering substances go if they can't buy cheap booze?
99

morris,

edinburgh 12/09/2008 15:56:25
119 I agree in part that the SNPs interpretation is predictably optimistic,and we need to run this on a larger scale to realistically be sure of anything.I am neither convinced one way or the other if I am honest.

I am also of the opinion that where you set the age limit is irrelevant if its not then enforced,(and it has certainly not been in my experience) and we need to be legislating less and enforcing more probably.
That's why I say expand it and lets see if these claims are what we interpret only,or really are of any benefit. I am not convinced that increasing to 21 was neccessary.
Enforcing this at 18 (with the emphasis on ENFORCING it rather than just legislation), may have produced similar results.
I do not know.
They will still be able to buy it through 21 year olds ,and its not the age which is the problem in isolation necessarily. Its our failure to understand the problem, and most unruly behaviour was after they had legally purchased fire water at the local Sorry Heid rather than the "carry oot" ,in my experience.
We assume three years older means three years wiser.
In some cases yes! In others No!
The problem with the claim that One should not drink on an empty heid is, it evidently does not register inside the empty heids!If wee Johnny and his mates are dumb to start with,alcohol is not going to help
much, and I doubt that any legislation ,without a zero tolerance enforcement which nails the few hides we do catch to the nearest wall, seems to be pointless to me.
We need to establish what works. That's for sure.

I accept that any claims must be seen to be more than just claims. If it works then fair enough,but if it does not,clearly it needs looking at again.

Claiming success is no substitute for proving it.

So lets run it again on a bigger scale.This would seem to be the ideal proof of both claim and counter claim.
100

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

12/09/2008 16:18:45
#123 "So lets run it again on a bigger scale.This would seem to be the ideal proof of both claim and counter claim."

I'd go along with - before expanding the scheme to the rest of Scotland it would make sense to try it out in one of our larger urban areas instead of wee towns like Cupar.

Dundee would not be a bad place to pilot a larger-scale scheme.
101

morris,

edinburgh 12/09/2008 16:20:10
124

Sounds sensible Yes

Either it works or it does not,lets find out!
102

morris,

edinburgh 12/09/2008 16:48:37
122

Yes Livi I can believe this and that's every syllable.
People who live in the lesser Des Res schemes are not stupid.Many people I know have a degree, and live in council type housing,in the community they feel comfortable in since birth, and their income would easily allow them to buy a house.They choose not to do so for a number of reasons, and John Mason was a classic example of the excellence that exists everywhere!
Where do teenagers looking for mind altering substances go if they can't buy cheap booze?
Ive been thinking about that!


They could join the Labour Party !
That appears to be mind altering on a grand scale!Or maybe they just never had one of their own, and offered minimal resistance of course?
Do we know who the Labour leader is yet?
I'm really hoping that Ian Gray emerges as the leader.I think all three Muppeteers are a liability,but I'm sure Ian will gain the SNP even more votes than the other two!
103

Team Scotland,

Hic! 12/09/2008 17:01:52
Professor Sheila Bird is, I think, correct but has herself been a little ‘naughty’. Many comparable studies that are seen as definitive are based on similarly small samples, mainly due to cost. I had occasion, when involved in sport, to look into sport related head injury and was dismayed to find that there had, at that time, only been 5 or so ‘definitive’ studies and all bar one were on small samples with little if any follow up. Nonetheless sport safety was then based on this rather small body of work.

In this case it may be worth a larger study or a national trial period but it not reasonable to target this particular study when it merely emulating countless others. I do not think it is fair of Professor Bird to target a specific case to address a wider problem. We need to spend more money on individual scientific research projects across the board. You get what you pay for.
104

TM,

LA, USA 13/09/2008 03:57:57
If underage drinkers are engaging in antisocial behavior, shouldn't the police be arresting them, and shouldn't that solve the problem?
105

radge dug,

13/09/2008 09:33:53
Of course, Sheila Bird of the Royal Statisics knows better than the cops on the ground who have to deal with ned behaviour.
106

OCB,

Oot n aboot 14/09/2008 15:56:12
Said Prof makes some very valid points, but most detractors are too wound up in their own agendas – or are too uneducated - to see that framing laws that affects millions based on very dodgy grounds is what drives people *away* from politics, and attempting to live within the law.

Imagine if the Scots Govt decided to increase the age of sexual consent to 21 backed by “evidence” based on a 3 week study done in Applecross, Inveranan and Plockton. The mythical study “proves” that there is less street crime, violence and teenagers hanging around the village lamp-post – “proving” obviously it was “underage sex” that was causing all the problems. Proponents of the move could probably point to similar “relevant” studies done in the Deep South USA.

Punishing the law abiding many (in this case 18-20 yr olds) for the sins of a few miscreants is pure playground politicking. Britain as a whole is becoming an authoritarian nightmare. Scotland should be proving she has more respect for her law abiding adults, not less.

We all know there are sh1tes – young and old – who have zero respect for anyone but themselves. They are the ones chucking buckie bottles at grannies and knifing clubbers waiting in taxi ranks. It doesn’t magically stop on their 21st. Drink is *not* the problem. Deal with the violent and disruptive minority *hard* and *often*, then your problem becomes a lot less.

Lets just fast forward 5 years after such a ban. A warm summer’s night. The streets are deserted except for grannies out playing hopscotch in the moonlight. The police cells are empty. A&E have laid off half their staff. Get real.

If anyone honestly thinks adding more laws to stop criminals will reduce crime, then they really are bampots, even if it’s First Minister Bampot.

107

EdinburghTim,

12/10/2008 03:39:53
They're complaining because other measures were used too and THEY might ALSO be responsible for cutting the figures so sharply? Why? Why not just introduce all those measures nationwide? They obviously work.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.