‘Drunk tank’ to reduce pressure on A&E unit

STREET ANGELS: The crew will give support and assistance to people needing help in the city centr

STREET ANGELS: The crew will give support and assistance to people needing help in the city centr

First published in News
Last updated

A "DRUNK TANK" to treat people on nights out is being trialled in York city centre.

A mobile medical unit will be stationed in St Helen's Square on Friday and Saturday nights from 6pm to 3am and throughout the day during the races to treat people who are unwell through drinking or have suffered minor injuries.

It is hoped the City of York Council and Yorkshire Ambulance Service NHS Trust (YAS) scheme will keep people from unnecessarily being taken by ambulance to A&E and ease pressure on paramedics.

The unit will have a treatment room for one person at a time to see emergency care practitioners and a waiting area for up to six patients suffering minor illnesses or injuries.

Meanwhile, the orange Street Angels night bus will be parked next to the unit on Saturday nights where drunk people can sit down until they have recovered. On Fridays North Yorkshire Police’s mobile policing unit will be located in the square.

Cllr Tracey Simpson-Laing, cabinet member for homes and safer communities, said: “We want everyone to be able to enjoy the best of York but not at the expense of their health – or others’ enjoyment.

"We’ve followed the example of the community medical unit set up by Yorkshire Ambulance Service in Leeds which helped over 700 people last year – mostly with minor injuries as a result of a fall – and prevented unnecessary visits to hospital. The findings will be tracked and a decision made about future support.”

The medical unit will be in contact with the police and the ambulance service should support be needed, via Nightsafe radios, also held by pub and door staff.

The trial will last for about six months.

Inspector Charlotte Bloxham, of North Yorkshire Police, said: “This is a fantastic opportunity to provide a service to those users of the city centre who might otherwise end up in the Emergency Department.

"Minor injuries or the affects of alcohol misuse often don’t require emergency medical attention. This combined service will help to ensure the safety of these vulnerable people. Police officers and hospital staff will therefore be freed up to more effectively carry out their roles.”

North Yorkshire Police and the council have helped to fund the fitting out of the new Street Angels Night Bus and to kit out the medical unit.

Councillors voted to approve the scheme in February despite renewed criticism of the idea.

At the time, David Smith, Director of Development at The Retreat in York, made a last ditch plea for the idea to be scrapped.

He said: "I think this is the wrong solution. You are dealing with the symptoms rather than the problem itself.

"I find it very disappointing that there was nothing in the report about why people are drinking to excess.

"We are looking at how to put a sticking plaster over people going to A&E rather than dealing with the underlying cause."

Comments (56)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:08am Sat 7 Jun 14

notmyrealname says...

well that's ok then ! - do we pay for this so that irresponsible people coming York can get legless in safety . Suggest they split the cost between all the bars in town offering cheap drinks and send the balance to the races.
This move is almost encouraging people to get even more drunk and turning the centre of York into an even bigger zoo. Heaven knows what the genuine tourists will see in this .
When will adults take responsibility for their own actions.
well that's ok then ! - do we pay for this so that irresponsible people coming York can get legless in safety . Suggest they split the cost between all the bars in town offering cheap drinks and send the balance to the races. This move is almost encouraging people to get even more drunk and turning the centre of York into an even bigger zoo. Heaven knows what the genuine tourists will see in this . When will adults take responsibility for their own actions. notmyrealname
  • Score: 37

9:19am Sat 7 Jun 14

Jack Ham says...

What next?

Stop wearing seat belt days with ambulances waiting at the side of the road?
Walk into the road day with an ambulance waiting at the other side?

To try to reduce the harm caused by alcohol by using our money to simply pay for more ambulances is short sighted and doomed to failure.

Can you bet what will be cut when CYC & Labour need some loose change for another vanity project - I'll take bets on it being this!
What next? Stop wearing seat belt days with ambulances waiting at the side of the road? Walk into the road day with an ambulance waiting at the other side? To try to reduce the harm caused by alcohol by using our money to simply pay for more ambulances is short sighted and doomed to failure. Can you bet what will be cut when CYC & Labour need some loose change for another vanity project - I'll take bets on it being this! Jack Ham
  • Score: -27

9:43am Sat 7 Jun 14

imassey says...

From the first two comments anybody would think that alcohol is an illegal drug. People drink, some (a lot, maybe) drink to excess. You're never going to change that. Increasing the price might help a bit. More vigilant door/bar staff might help a bit. Although, by definition, if you are no longer allowed to serve somebody when he/she is drunk, then it is too late.
am
There may be a cost to providing this service but surely that will be recouped by savings elsewhere. People complain about ambulance response times. If this eases the pressure and means ambulances are better used, is it not a good thing?

And once again, we are subjected to the view that York is a "zoo" (previously "no-go area", among other such descriptions). I will say again, I have walked the centre of town many times at night, sometimes with my pre-teen daughter, and I would never describe it as either. I doubt it is any worse than any other UK city or town.
From the first two comments anybody would think that alcohol is an illegal drug. People drink, some (a lot, maybe) drink to excess. You're never going to change that. Increasing the price might help a bit. More vigilant door/bar staff might help a bit. Although, by definition, if you are no longer allowed to serve somebody when he/she is drunk, then it is too late. am There may be a cost to providing this service but surely that will be recouped by savings elsewhere. People complain about ambulance response times. If this eases the pressure and means ambulances are better used, is it not a good thing? And once again, we are subjected to the view that York is a "zoo" (previously "no-go area", among other such descriptions). I will say again, I have walked the centre of town many times at night, sometimes with my pre-teen daughter, and I would never describe it as either. I doubt it is any worse than any other UK city or town. imassey
  • Score: 17

10:47am Sat 7 Jun 14

JYorks says...

I agree that the costs of providing this service will more than likely be made up for by savings made by it. Having one unit in situ in the city centre will free up the precious mobile units to attend the real emergencies. It is possible that several people can receive treatment for minor injuries and/or drunkeness in a fairly short period of time in the city centre unit rather than using up emergency ambulances and/or time and space at A&E.

And whilst it may be true that this is a "sticking plaster", treating the symptoms rather than the cause, I'd rather the symptoms were addressed rather than allowed to fester.

This seems like a very good idea to me and I hope the trial is a success.
I agree that the costs of providing this service will more than likely be made up for by savings made by it. Having one unit in situ in the city centre will free up the precious mobile units to attend the real emergencies. It is possible that several people can receive treatment for minor injuries and/or drunkeness in a fairly short period of time in the city centre unit rather than using up emergency ambulances and/or time and space at A&E. And whilst it may be true that this is a "sticking plaster", treating the symptoms rather than the cause, I'd rather the symptoms were addressed rather than allowed to fester. This seems like a very good idea to me and I hope the trial is a success. JYorks
  • Score: 32

11:05am Sat 7 Jun 14

courier46 says...

I think that once again people are not being held for there own actions and the cost should come from there own pockets. If they have to go to A&E through been that drunk that they could kill themselves they should pay £100 a time to the cost.A&E are not coping for many reasons, but people who go out to get totally wasted only have thereselves to blame.
I think that once again people are not being held for there own actions and the cost should come from there own pockets. If they have to go to A&E through been that drunk that they could kill themselves they should pay £100 a time to the cost.A&E are not coping for many reasons, but people who go out to get totally wasted only have thereselves to blame. courier46
  • Score: 35

11:09am Sat 7 Jun 14

David Smith - The Retreat says...

JYorks wrote:
I agree that the costs of providing this service will more than likely be made up for by savings made by it. Having one unit in situ in the city centre will free up the precious mobile units to attend the real emergencies. It is possible that several people can receive treatment for minor injuries and/or drunkeness in a fairly short period of time in the city centre unit rather than using up emergency ambulances and/or time and space at A&E.

And whilst it may be true that this is a "sticking plaster", treating the symptoms rather than the cause, I'd rather the symptoms were addressed rather than allowed to fester.

This seems like a very good idea to me and I hope the trial is a success.
I was disappointed that the scrutiny review, which had the potential to look at the long term health problems caused by the night time economy chose to focus almost exclusively on A&E admissions that resulted from too much drinking.

Of course, anything that speeds up access to emergency care is a good thing that should be applauded, failing to look at why this emergency care is needed seems to me a significant omission.

As a cross party scrutiny topic it could have looked at how licensing, planning and enforcement within our night time economy impacts on the health of residents. That could have led to long term, sustainable change.

This was a missed opportunity.
[quote][p][bold]JYorks[/bold] wrote: I agree that the costs of providing this service will more than likely be made up for by savings made by it. Having one unit in situ in the city centre will free up the precious mobile units to attend the real emergencies. It is possible that several people can receive treatment for minor injuries and/or drunkeness in a fairly short period of time in the city centre unit rather than using up emergency ambulances and/or time and space at A&E. And whilst it may be true that this is a "sticking plaster", treating the symptoms rather than the cause, I'd rather the symptoms were addressed rather than allowed to fester. This seems like a very good idea to me and I hope the trial is a success.[/p][/quote]I was disappointed that the scrutiny review, which had the potential to look at the long term health problems caused by the night time economy chose to focus almost exclusively on A&E admissions that resulted from too much drinking. Of course, anything that speeds up access to emergency care is a good thing that should be applauded, failing to look at why this emergency care is needed seems to me a significant omission. As a cross party scrutiny topic it could have looked at how licensing, planning and enforcement within our night time economy impacts on the health of residents. That could have led to long term, sustainable change. This was a missed opportunity. David Smith - The Retreat
  • Score: 18

11:16am Sat 7 Jun 14

imassey says...

David Smith - The Retreat wrote:
JYorks wrote:
I agree that the costs of providing this service will more than likely be made up for by savings made by it. Having one unit in situ in the city centre will free up the precious mobile units to attend the real emergencies. It is possible that several people can receive treatment for minor injuries and/or drunkeness in a fairly short period of time in the city centre unit rather than using up emergency ambulances and/or time and space at A&E.

And whilst it may be true that this is a "sticking plaster", treating the symptoms rather than the cause, I'd rather the symptoms were addressed rather than allowed to fester.

This seems like a very good idea to me and I hope the trial is a success.
I was disappointed that the scrutiny review, which had the potential to look at the long term health problems caused by the night time economy chose to focus almost exclusively on A&E admissions that resulted from too much drinking.

Of course, anything that speeds up access to emergency care is a good thing that should be applauded, failing to look at why this emergency care is needed seems to me a significant omission.

As a cross party scrutiny topic it could have looked at how licensing, planning and enforcement within our night time economy impacts on the health of residents. That could have led to long term, sustainable change.

This was a missed opportunity.
David - you are obviously an educated man with experience of the effects you mention. Could you, perhaps, explain to us what you personally think should be done.

I'm not as au fait with the figures and circumstances as you are but it seems to me that there is little that can be done to stop people drinking if they want to. Like tobacco, alcohol is very unlikely to ever be made illegal, so people will always drink. I'm not sure how planning, licensing and enforcement will change that. If people can't get the alcohol they want in pubs (either because there are fewer or because they are refused service) they will simply get it elsewhere.

That's just my opinion, of course. I'm not trying to be controversial or facetious, but I would like to read what you think could be done.
[quote][p][bold]David Smith - The Retreat[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JYorks[/bold] wrote: I agree that the costs of providing this service will more than likely be made up for by savings made by it. Having one unit in situ in the city centre will free up the precious mobile units to attend the real emergencies. It is possible that several people can receive treatment for minor injuries and/or drunkeness in a fairly short period of time in the city centre unit rather than using up emergency ambulances and/or time and space at A&E. And whilst it may be true that this is a "sticking plaster", treating the symptoms rather than the cause, I'd rather the symptoms were addressed rather than allowed to fester. This seems like a very good idea to me and I hope the trial is a success.[/p][/quote]I was disappointed that the scrutiny review, which had the potential to look at the long term health problems caused by the night time economy chose to focus almost exclusively on A&E admissions that resulted from too much drinking. Of course, anything that speeds up access to emergency care is a good thing that should be applauded, failing to look at why this emergency care is needed seems to me a significant omission. As a cross party scrutiny topic it could have looked at how licensing, planning and enforcement within our night time economy impacts on the health of residents. That could have led to long term, sustainable change. This was a missed opportunity.[/p][/quote]David - you are obviously an educated man with experience of the effects you mention. Could you, perhaps, explain to us what you personally think should be done. I'm not as au fait with the figures and circumstances as you are but it seems to me that there is little that can be done to stop people drinking if they want to. Like tobacco, alcohol is very unlikely to ever be made illegal, so people will always drink. I'm not sure how planning, licensing and enforcement will change that. If people can't get the alcohol they want in pubs (either because there are fewer or because they are refused service) they will simply get it elsewhere. That's just my opinion, of course. I'm not trying to be controversial or facetious, but I would like to read what you think could be done. imassey
  • Score: 5

12:15pm Sat 7 Jun 14

Dave Ruddock says...

Cant we bring back the Cattle Market pens on Walmgate, ex barbican baths site , ladies to one side gents to the other, students to the far end, as it takes a fair few hours for drunken people to to sober up enough to pay for their overnight accommodation, as for who controls this , as stated above , Bars Clubs, Race officials , and the door persons to the overseeing. and pay for a Medical, Samaritans etc time. and just a thought The Fire station practice area.
All sorted, Clears the streets, use of a piece of waste land, and a bloody good deterrent. .
Cant we bring back the Cattle Market pens on Walmgate, ex barbican baths site , ladies to one side gents to the other, students to the far end, as it takes a fair few hours for drunken people to to sober up enough to pay for their overnight accommodation, as for who controls this , as stated above , Bars Clubs, Race officials , and the door persons to the overseeing. and pay for a Medical, Samaritans etc time. and just a thought The Fire station practice area. All sorted, Clears the streets, use of a piece of waste land, and a bloody good deterrent. . Dave Ruddock
  • Score: 6

1:10pm Sat 7 Jun 14

David Smith - The Retreat says...

imassey wrote:
David Smith - The Retreat wrote:
JYorks wrote:
I agree that the costs of providing this service will more than likely be made up for by savings made by it. Having one unit in situ in the city centre will free up the precious mobile units to attend the real emergencies. It is possible that several people can receive treatment for minor injuries and/or drunkeness in a fairly short period of time in the city centre unit rather than using up emergency ambulances and/or time and space at A&E.

And whilst it may be true that this is a "sticking plaster", treating the symptoms rather than the cause, I'd rather the symptoms were addressed rather than allowed to fester.

This seems like a very good idea to me and I hope the trial is a success.
I was disappointed that the scrutiny review, which had the potential to look at the long term health problems caused by the night time economy chose to focus almost exclusively on A&E admissions that resulted from too much drinking.

Of course, anything that speeds up access to emergency care is a good thing that should be applauded, failing to look at why this emergency care is needed seems to me a significant omission.

As a cross party scrutiny topic it could have looked at how licensing, planning and enforcement within our night time economy impacts on the health of residents. That could have led to long term, sustainable change.

This was a missed opportunity.
David - you are obviously an educated man with experience of the effects you mention. Could you, perhaps, explain to us what you personally think should be done.

I'm not as au fait with the figures and circumstances as you are but it seems to me that there is little that can be done to stop people drinking if they want to. Like tobacco, alcohol is very unlikely to ever be made illegal, so people will always drink. I'm not sure how planning, licensing and enforcement will change that. If people can't get the alcohol they want in pubs (either because there are fewer or because they are refused service) they will simply get it elsewhere.

That's just my opinion, of course. I'm not trying to be controversial or facetious, but I would like to read what you think could be done.
Thanks Imassey.

A wet Saturday afternoon is probably not the best time to be writing a strategy but my thoughts on this tend to break down into a couple of areas:

1. Prevention - within this I would look at education within our schools, alternative venues that are available where people can socialise, late opening shops, family events etc. Although this is only part of the solution as much of the problematic drinking occurs much later on the in evening it would be a start and create an environment where excessive drinking isn't the norm.

At present our town centre is dominated by alcohol after 7pm. If we are to change the culture within the town centre we need to change the environment in which people find themselves. We Brits have our quirks that mean we make it highly unlikely we will ever develop a continental café culture but there is still a way we can go. If our planning policy allows for even increasing number of warehouse style pubs we will only exacerbate the problem.

2. Licensing and most definitely enforcement. I think this point has a significant role to play as yes, people will always drink and drink to excess, but at present companies have a commercial incentive to pack in as many people as possible and encourage them to drink (spend) as much as possible. Our current regulatory balance to that, licensing enforcement, is either not present or ineffective. If people are consistently refused service because they are so intoxicated at say midnight then its unlikely there will be anywhere else for them to go as the supermarkets will already be closed.


Just my thoughts. I know this is a challenging problem, and not just here in York, but its one that we must try to address from all angles.
[quote][p][bold]imassey[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]David Smith - The Retreat[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JYorks[/bold] wrote: I agree that the costs of providing this service will more than likely be made up for by savings made by it. Having one unit in situ in the city centre will free up the precious mobile units to attend the real emergencies. It is possible that several people can receive treatment for minor injuries and/or drunkeness in a fairly short period of time in the city centre unit rather than using up emergency ambulances and/or time and space at A&E. And whilst it may be true that this is a "sticking plaster", treating the symptoms rather than the cause, I'd rather the symptoms were addressed rather than allowed to fester. This seems like a very good idea to me and I hope the trial is a success.[/p][/quote]I was disappointed that the scrutiny review, which had the potential to look at the long term health problems caused by the night time economy chose to focus almost exclusively on A&E admissions that resulted from too much drinking. Of course, anything that speeds up access to emergency care is a good thing that should be applauded, failing to look at why this emergency care is needed seems to me a significant omission. As a cross party scrutiny topic it could have looked at how licensing, planning and enforcement within our night time economy impacts on the health of residents. That could have led to long term, sustainable change. This was a missed opportunity.[/p][/quote]David - you are obviously an educated man with experience of the effects you mention. Could you, perhaps, explain to us what you personally think should be done. I'm not as au fait with the figures and circumstances as you are but it seems to me that there is little that can be done to stop people drinking if they want to. Like tobacco, alcohol is very unlikely to ever be made illegal, so people will always drink. I'm not sure how planning, licensing and enforcement will change that. If people can't get the alcohol they want in pubs (either because there are fewer or because they are refused service) they will simply get it elsewhere. That's just my opinion, of course. I'm not trying to be controversial or facetious, but I would like to read what you think could be done.[/p][/quote]Thanks Imassey. A wet Saturday afternoon is probably not the best time to be writing a strategy but my thoughts on this tend to break down into a couple of areas: 1. Prevention - within this I would look at education within our schools, alternative venues that are available where people can socialise, late opening shops, family events etc. Although this is only part of the solution as much of the problematic drinking occurs much later on the in evening it would be a start and create an environment where excessive drinking isn't the norm. At present our town centre is dominated by alcohol after 7pm. If we are to change the culture within the town centre we need to change the environment in which people find themselves. We Brits have our quirks that mean we make it highly unlikely we will ever develop a continental café culture but there is still a way we can go. If our planning policy allows for even increasing number of warehouse style pubs we will only exacerbate the problem. 2. Licensing and most definitely enforcement. I think this point has a significant role to play as yes, people will always drink and drink to excess, but at present companies have a commercial incentive to pack in as many people as possible and encourage them to drink (spend) as much as possible. Our current regulatory balance to that, licensing enforcement, is either not present or ineffective. If people are consistently refused service because they are so intoxicated at say midnight then its unlikely there will be anywhere else for them to go as the supermarkets will already be closed. Just my thoughts. I know this is a challenging problem, and not just here in York, but its one that we must try to address from all angles. David Smith - The Retreat
  • Score: 20

1:16pm Sat 7 Jun 14

Older Sometimes Wiser says...

As usual David Smith's view makes a lot more sense, in that he appreciates the overall problems rather than just excess alcohol related bad behavior.
The provision of an "accessible care facility" in the City center benefits everyone, and reduces the pressures on the Hospital A&E and the Ambulance Service but until the NHS adopts a 24/7 GP service, weekends will always be difficult for residents with medical issues.
The City Council has attempted to address the issues of the so called " night economy" with a number of committees, but I have yet to see any workable conclusions from these discussions.
How does one change the City's night economy so that it becomes a non alcohol based attraction for both visitors and residents?
There needs a joint approach/ attack with Council, local Universities, the Voluntary sector , local tourism providers and the public working together. It requires a different "atmosphere", with a variety of entertainment venues and activities where alcohol intake is secondary rather than the main reason for staying in the City.
The current in-word is " engagement" which requires thinking about rather than just talking about the problems.
As usual David Smith's view makes a lot more sense, in that he appreciates the overall problems rather than just excess alcohol related bad behavior. The provision of an "accessible care facility" in the City center benefits everyone, and reduces the pressures on the Hospital A&E and the Ambulance Service but until the NHS adopts a 24/7 GP service, weekends will always be difficult for residents with medical issues. The City Council has attempted to address the issues of the so called " night economy" with a number of committees, but I have yet to see any workable conclusions from these discussions. How does one change the City's night economy so that it becomes a non alcohol based attraction for both visitors and residents? There needs a joint approach/ attack with Council, local Universities, the Voluntary sector , local tourism providers and the public working together. It requires a different "atmosphere", with a variety of entertainment venues and activities where alcohol intake is secondary rather than the main reason for staying in the City. The current in-word is " engagement" which requires thinking about rather than just talking about the problems. Older Sometimes Wiser
  • Score: 6

2:35pm Sat 7 Jun 14

oi oi savaloy says...

is this because quite a lot of the drunks are students and the labour run council don't want to upset them by chucking them in the cells and fining them for being drunk and disorderly?
is this because quite a lot of the drunks are students and the labour run council don't want to upset them by chucking them in the cells and fining them for being drunk and disorderly? oi oi savaloy
  • Score: -33

3:01pm Sat 7 Jun 14

dctyke says...

And whilst we are at it can we please have a billion pound project to have lock gates fitted either end of the city so we can drain the Ouse every night. Cannot have the party goers getting into danger can we. This city is descending into a no go area for 'normal' folks late at night.
And whilst we are at it can we please have a billion pound project to have lock gates fitted either end of the city so we can drain the Ouse every night. Cannot have the party goers getting into danger can we. This city is descending into a no go area for 'normal' folks late at night. dctyke
  • Score: 10

3:58pm Sat 7 Jun 14

Cheeky face says...

dctyke. Understood. They could jump in the Ouse and drink as much as they like!

Social behavior is not taught enough.Punishable offences are easy to spot when drinkers pass the jolly stage and become a nuisance/crapulent/i
nebriated ; but the Police do not act.

Street angels I believe are worthwhile but have they powers to arrest.

The % of drink establishments in York is quite high, but some other towns/cities are much more pub condensed.

It is the people who like a drink that and find York a nice place to party that increases footfall in the "boozers". I would assume race days/bank holidays are the worst; and no different than many other places.

What will this trial cost?

Will the treated people be given a bill?
d
dctyke. Understood. They could jump in the Ouse and drink as much as they like! Social behavior is not taught enough.Punishable offences are easy to spot when drinkers pass the jolly stage and become a nuisance/crapulent/i nebriated ; but the Police do not act. Street angels I believe are worthwhile but have they powers to arrest. The % of drink establishments in York is quite high, but some other towns/cities are much more pub condensed. It is the people who like a drink that and find York a nice place to party that increases footfall in the "boozers". I would assume race days/bank holidays are the worst; and no different than many other places. What will this trial cost? Will the treated people be given a bill? d Cheeky face
  • Score: -41

4:39pm Sat 7 Jun 14

Maquis says...

Dave, I appreciate that you are coming from this with the best possible intention. However as the saying goes, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions"

I totally agree about the education element, but it needs to be focused on respect and on the consequences of the actions of those who drink too much and cause problems to others.

As for the culture being alcohol dominated, yes it is, but then it is throughout the world, it is human nature, and to force changes against this will lead to a worse alternative. Alcohol is not problem, it is the actions of a minority who abuse it.

As for the unintended consequences:
A couple of decades of demonizing drinking led to bandwagon jumping MP's such as Gordon Brown increasing duty to excessive levels. This simply drove local pubs out of business and people into the willing arms of the supermarkets who are willing to sell alcohol at a loss, allowing people a weeks recommended daily intake for less than £10 (equivalent of about 3 pints in a pub)
This means that people have now become used to having bulk quantities of pocket money priced alcohol at home, and made the binge drinking culture far worse.

Those who go out intending to have a sensible amount of drink and an enjoyable night out are not a problem, leave them alone.

Those intending to get drunk will have a quantity at home before going out, usually far stronger than anything they will buy in a bar. They are the ones who are far more likely to need the help. Further punishing the bars will push more people toward the cheaper pre loading.

Punish those who mis behave, not those who are trying to enjoy their lives.
Dave, I appreciate that you are coming from this with the best possible intention. However as the saying goes, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions" I totally agree about the education element, but it needs to be focused on respect and on the consequences of the actions of those who drink too much and cause problems to others. As for the culture being alcohol dominated, yes it is, but then it is throughout the world, it is human nature, and to force changes against this will lead to a worse alternative. Alcohol is not problem, it is the actions of a minority who abuse it. As for the unintended consequences: A couple of decades of demonizing drinking led to bandwagon jumping MP's such as Gordon Brown increasing duty to excessive levels. This simply drove local pubs out of business and people into the willing arms of the supermarkets who are willing to sell alcohol at a loss, allowing people a weeks recommended daily intake for less than £10 (equivalent of about 3 pints in a pub) This means that people have now become used to having bulk quantities of pocket money priced alcohol at home, and made the binge drinking culture far worse. Those who go out intending to have a sensible amount of drink and an enjoyable night out are not a problem, leave them alone. Those intending to get drunk will have a quantity at home before going out, usually far stronger than anything they will buy in a bar. They are the ones who are far more likely to need the help. Further punishing the bars will push more people toward the cheaper pre loading. Punish those who mis behave, not those who are trying to enjoy their lives. Maquis
  • Score: -5

4:51pm Sat 7 Jun 14

inthesticks says...

The law required for enforcement is there but hardly ever used in York or elsewhere, why not? It is against the licensing laws for an establishment to serve someone who is intoxicated. They can lose their license but don`t.
I heard a very sensible woman on Radio York say a few months ago that in the bars where they are herded in, they are mainly standing space only and the music is so loud that it is impossible to hear the people you are with talk, therefore conversation is impossible, so the only activity you can do is put your glass to your mouth and have another swig, encouraging fast drinking. It`s very true.
The law required for enforcement is there but hardly ever used in York or elsewhere, why not? It is against the licensing laws for an establishment to serve someone who is intoxicated. They can lose their license but don`t. I heard a very sensible woman on Radio York say a few months ago that in the bars where they are herded in, they are mainly standing space only and the music is so loud that it is impossible to hear the people you are with talk, therefore conversation is impossible, so the only activity you can do is put your glass to your mouth and have another swig, encouraging fast drinking. It`s very true. inthesticks
  • Score: 8

5:01pm Sat 7 Jun 14

Maquis says...

"I heard a very sensible woman on Radio York say a few months ago that in the bars where they are herded in, they are mainly standing space only and the music is so loud that it is impossible to hear the people you are with talk, therefore conversation is impossible, so the only activity you can do is put your glass to your mouth and have another swig, encouraging fast drinking. It`s very true."

So what. Thats what many thousands of people do every week with little or no problem.
Do you think that you have some sort of right to stop people enjoying themselves like this just because of the minority of people who go to far?
"I heard a very sensible woman on Radio York say a few months ago that in the bars where they are herded in, they are mainly standing space only and the music is so loud that it is impossible to hear the people you are with talk, therefore conversation is impossible, so the only activity you can do is put your glass to your mouth and have another swig, encouraging fast drinking. It`s very true." So what. Thats what many thousands of people do every week with little or no problem. Do you think that you have some sort of right to stop people enjoying themselves like this just because of the minority of people who go to far? Maquis
  • Score: -3

5:11pm Sat 7 Jun 14

windowlicker says...

A Dutch style coffee shop would be a good idea....
A Dutch style coffee shop would be a good idea.... windowlicker
  • Score: 7

6:22pm Sat 7 Jun 14

alwaysontheball says...

I think this had been incorrectly reported, I was lucky enough to be able to use their services the other Saturday afternoon, I hadn't been drinking and neither had the other people waiting to be seen, in fact one was a child. I was seen by the emergency care practitioner as I couldn't get to see my gp for over a week. I had a chest infection and he gave me antibiotics, if I had not seen this in town I might have resorted to going to accident and emergency but I knew I shouldn't go there. A brilliant service for all not just for drunks. well done.
I think this had been incorrectly reported, I was lucky enough to be able to use their services the other Saturday afternoon, I hadn't been drinking and neither had the other people waiting to be seen, in fact one was a child. I was seen by the emergency care practitioner as I couldn't get to see my gp for over a week. I had a chest infection and he gave me antibiotics, if I had not seen this in town I might have resorted to going to accident and emergency but I knew I shouldn't go there. A brilliant service for all not just for drunks. well done. alwaysontheball
  • Score: 12

6:51pm Sat 7 Jun 14

Jack Ham says...

Seems the CYC/Labour Party vote rigger has been at it again. Any post with a hint of criticism massively marked down.

And they still keep using taxpayers money to try and tell us they want to hear what we think!
Seems the CYC/Labour Party vote rigger has been at it again. Any post with a hint of criticism massively marked down. And they still keep using taxpayers money to try and tell us they want to hear what we think! Jack Ham
  • Score: -42

7:05pm Sat 7 Jun 14

RoseD says...

alwaysontheball wrote:
I think this had been incorrectly reported, I was lucky enough to be able to use their services the other Saturday afternoon, I hadn't been drinking and neither had the other people waiting to be seen, in fact one was a child. I was seen by the emergency care practitioner as I couldn't get to see my gp for over a week. I had a chest infection and he gave me antibiotics, if I had not seen this in town I might have resorted to going to accident and emergency but I knew I shouldn't go there. A brilliant service for all not just for drunks. well done.
Interesting!! Glad the service helped. I agree about 'sticking plasters' etc, and I am ALL for non-booze-focused night time activities. But freeing up emergency services and A&E when most of the Fri/Sat injuries and illness are alcohol-related IS a very good idea.
[quote][p][bold]alwaysontheball[/bold] wrote: I think this had been incorrectly reported, I was lucky enough to be able to use their services the other Saturday afternoon, I hadn't been drinking and neither had the other people waiting to be seen, in fact one was a child. I was seen by the emergency care practitioner as I couldn't get to see my gp for over a week. I had a chest infection and he gave me antibiotics, if I had not seen this in town I might have resorted to going to accident and emergency but I knew I shouldn't go there. A brilliant service for all not just for drunks. well done.[/p][/quote]Interesting!! Glad the service helped. I agree about 'sticking plasters' etc, and I am ALL for non-booze-focused night time activities. But freeing up emergency services and A&E when most of the Fri/Sat injuries and illness are alcohol-related IS a very good idea. RoseD
  • Score: 4

7:13pm Sat 7 Jun 14

malonemalone says...

imassey wrote:
From the first two comments anybody would think that alcohol is an illegal drug. People drink, some (a lot, maybe) drink to excess. You're never going to change that. Increasing the price might help a bit. More vigilant door/bar staff might help a bit. Although, by definition, if you are no longer allowed to serve somebody when he/she is drunk, then it is too late.
am
There may be a cost to providing this service but surely that will be recouped by savings elsewhere. People complain about ambulance response times. If this eases the pressure and means ambulances are better used, is it not a good thing?

And once again, we are subjected to the view that York is a "zoo" (previously "no-go area", among other such descriptions). I will say again, I have walked the centre of town many times at night, sometimes with my pre-teen daughter, and I would never describe it as either. I doubt it is any worse than any other UK city or town.
then you need to open your eyes, clearly not in the right places at the wrong times
[quote][p][bold]imassey[/bold] wrote: From the first two comments anybody would think that alcohol is an illegal drug. People drink, some (a lot, maybe) drink to excess. You're never going to change that. Increasing the price might help a bit. More vigilant door/bar staff might help a bit. Although, by definition, if you are no longer allowed to serve somebody when he/she is drunk, then it is too late. am There may be a cost to providing this service but surely that will be recouped by savings elsewhere. People complain about ambulance response times. If this eases the pressure and means ambulances are better used, is it not a good thing? And once again, we are subjected to the view that York is a "zoo" (previously "no-go area", among other such descriptions). I will say again, I have walked the centre of town many times at night, sometimes with my pre-teen daughter, and I would never describe it as either. I doubt it is any worse than any other UK city or town.[/p][/quote]then you need to open your eyes, clearly not in the right places at the wrong times malonemalone
  • Score: 7

7:32pm Sat 7 Jun 14

imassey says...

malonemalone wrote:
imassey wrote:
From the first two comments anybody would think that alcohol is an illegal drug. People drink, some (a lot, maybe) drink to excess. You're never going to change that. Increasing the price might help a bit. More vigilant door/bar staff might help a bit. Although, by definition, if you are no longer allowed to serve somebody when he/she is drunk, then it is too late.
am
There may be a cost to providing this service but surely that will be recouped by savings elsewhere. People complain about ambulance response times. If this eases the pressure and means ambulances are better used, is it not a good thing?

And once again, we are subjected to the view that York is a "zoo" (previously "no-go area", among other such descriptions). I will say again, I have walked the centre of town many times at night, sometimes with my pre-teen daughter, and I would never describe it as either. I doubt it is any worse than any other UK city or town.
then you need to open your eyes, clearly not in the right places at the wrong times
Yeah, because York's centre is so big that I could easily have missed it on my ventures from Pavement to Bootham and/or the station or GOH to the old Haymarket car park, or even when I spent most of the evening watching live music (with my family) in Parliament street.

York gets busy but it is hardly The Bronx.
[quote][p][bold]malonemalone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]imassey[/bold] wrote: From the first two comments anybody would think that alcohol is an illegal drug. People drink, some (a lot, maybe) drink to excess. You're never going to change that. Increasing the price might help a bit. More vigilant door/bar staff might help a bit. Although, by definition, if you are no longer allowed to serve somebody when he/she is drunk, then it is too late. am There may be a cost to providing this service but surely that will be recouped by savings elsewhere. People complain about ambulance response times. If this eases the pressure and means ambulances are better used, is it not a good thing? And once again, we are subjected to the view that York is a "zoo" (previously "no-go area", among other such descriptions). I will say again, I have walked the centre of town many times at night, sometimes with my pre-teen daughter, and I would never describe it as either. I doubt it is any worse than any other UK city or town.[/p][/quote]then you need to open your eyes, clearly not in the right places at the wrong times[/p][/quote]Yeah, because York's centre is so big that I could easily have missed it on my ventures from Pavement to Bootham and/or the station or GOH to the old Haymarket car park, or even when I spent most of the evening watching live music (with my family) in Parliament street. York gets busy but it is hardly The Bronx. imassey
  • Score: -1

8:04pm Sat 7 Jun 14

Pinza-C55 says...

I've been drunk before but I have never heard it called an "A&E unit" before. There are other ways of relieving the pressure.
I've been drunk before but I have never heard it called an "A&E unit" before. There are other ways of relieving the pressure. Pinza-C55
  • Score: 0

9:30pm Sat 7 Jun 14

expubcrawler says...

Maquis wrote:
"I heard a very sensible woman on Radio York say a few months ago that in the bars where they are herded in, they are mainly standing space only and the music is so loud that it is impossible to hear the people you are with talk, therefore conversation is impossible, so the only activity you can do is put your glass to your mouth and have another swig, encouraging fast drinking. It`s very true."

So what. Thats what many thousands of people do every week with little or no problem.
Do you think that you have some sort of right to stop people enjoying themselves like this just because of the minority of people who go to far?
Sounds just like it was in the 60's when I did the weekend pub crawl. Standing space only with loud music and everybody trying to shout over each other, and the room was thick with cigarette smoke. The difference then was that the pubs stopped serving at 11:00pm. Yes of course there were drunks but they typically had mates who made sure they got home okay. No "bouncers" on the doors either.
[quote][p][bold]Maquis[/bold] wrote: "I heard a very sensible woman on Radio York say a few months ago that in the bars where they are herded in, they are mainly standing space only and the music is so loud that it is impossible to hear the people you are with talk, therefore conversation is impossible, so the only activity you can do is put your glass to your mouth and have another swig, encouraging fast drinking. It`s very true." So what. Thats what many thousands of people do every week with little or no problem. Do you think that you have some sort of right to stop people enjoying themselves like this just because of the minority of people who go to far?[/p][/quote]Sounds just like it was in the 60's when I did the weekend pub crawl. Standing space only with loud music and everybody trying to shout over each other, and the room was thick with cigarette smoke. The difference then was that the pubs stopped serving at 11:00pm. Yes of course there were drunks but they typically had mates who made sure they got home okay. No "bouncers" on the doors either. expubcrawler
  • Score: 9

11:51pm Sat 7 Jun 14

powerwatt says...

Where do these drunks cone from?

Anyone who serves someone who is drunk gets fined and no one in York has been fined. So they can't be coming from any bars or clubs...
Where do these drunks cone from? Anyone who serves someone who is drunk gets fined and no one in York has been fined. So they can't be coming from any bars or clubs... powerwatt
  • Score: 3

2:53am Sun 8 Jun 14

Magicman! says...

I saw that glorified campervan going down Huntington Road a couple of days ago and wondered what it was...

anyway:
He said: "I think this is the wrong solution. You are dealing with the symptoms rather than the problem itself.

"I find it very disappointing that there was nothing in the report about why people are drinking to excess.

"We are looking at how to put a sticking plaster over people going to A&E rather than dealing with the underlying cause."

The problem is a deep-rooted thing embedded into people's (especially the young) psyche whereby to have "a good time" is somehow directly corelated to how quickly they can take down several shots, and how soon it can be for them to see the room spinning around before passing out face-down in a gutter somewhere. The cause of this being what is targeted at such people from irresponsible TV shows, social media, advertising, and the like. The main solution would be to hypnotise every person under 30 so they know that getting drunk does not equal 'fun', whilst at the same time taking control of media outlets so that irresponsible TV shows and/or advertising is blocked...

..... but as such an approach is a logistical nightmare as well as having ethical issues, perhaps instead an advertising capmaign similar to the "don't drink and drive" adverts of the 1990's can be run... where it shows a group of people getting drunk having "a good time" in the bars trying to compete as to how many shots they can have, and then the advert cuts to the scene of one person from this vomiting and then passing out, their head hitting a lamp post as they do so (the camera focuses in on the pool of blood getting larger on this completely deserted street at 3am), then it cuts to a girl from that same group straggling along through a park area, whereby a stranger grabs them and drags them into a bush, and then the scene cuts to a third person from the group who is straggling along and just steps off the road just at the moment a bus comes along... previous studies have shown that only really hard-hitting uncensored short public information films actually have results to kerb dangerous behaviour.
I saw that glorified campervan going down Huntington Road a couple of days ago and wondered what it was... anyway: [quote] He said: "I think this is the wrong solution. You are dealing with the symptoms rather than the problem itself. "I find it very disappointing that there was nothing in the report about why people are drinking to excess. "We are looking at how to put a sticking plaster over people going to A&E rather than dealing with the underlying cause." [/quote] The problem is a deep-rooted thing embedded into people's (especially the young) psyche whereby to have "a good time" is somehow directly corelated to how quickly they can take down several shots, and how soon it can be for them to see the room spinning around before passing out face-down in a gutter somewhere. The cause of this being what is targeted at such people from irresponsible TV shows, social media, advertising, and the like. The main solution would be to hypnotise every person under 30 so they know that getting drunk does not equal 'fun', whilst at the same time taking control of media outlets so that irresponsible TV shows and/or advertising is blocked... ..... but as such an approach is a logistical nightmare as well as having ethical issues, perhaps instead an advertising capmaign similar to the "don't drink and drive" adverts of the 1990's can be run... where it shows a group of people getting drunk having "a good time" in the bars trying to compete as to how many shots they can have, and then the advert cuts to the scene of one person from this vomiting and then passing out, their head hitting a lamp post as they do so (the camera focuses in on the pool of blood getting larger on this completely deserted street at 3am), then it cuts to a girl from that same group straggling along through a park area, whereby a stranger grabs them and drags them into a bush, and then the scene cuts to a third person from the group who is straggling along and just steps off the road just at the moment a bus comes along... previous studies have shown that only really hard-hitting uncensored short public information films actually have results to kerb dangerous behaviour. Magicman!
  • Score: 2

3:01am Sun 8 Jun 14

Cecil'smum says...

Should we give this a chance and then comment. If it saves time and resources in the A & E then this will surely offset the cost.
A & E can also be like a zoo when invaded by drunk people, their friends and accompanying police officers, so let's suck it and see, it might be the best thing ever.
The location surprised me though. Is outside Betty's and the Mansion House a hotspot for drunks?
Should we give this a chance and then comment. If it saves time and resources in the A & E then this will surely offset the cost. A & E can also be like a zoo when invaded by drunk people, their friends and accompanying police officers, so let's suck it and see, it might be the best thing ever. The location surprised me though. Is outside Betty's and the Mansion House a hotspot for drunks? Cecil'smum
  • Score: 5

7:42am Sun 8 Jun 14

RoastChicken says...

No one is happy unless they are moaning about something or other happening in our city, moan, winge, moan.
No one is happy unless they are moaning about something or other happening in our city, moan, winge, moan. RoastChicken
  • Score: -3

8:04am Sun 8 Jun 14

Pinza-C55 says...

expubcrawler wrote:
Maquis wrote:
"I heard a very sensible woman on Radio York say a few months ago that in the bars where they are herded in, they are mainly standing space only and the music is so loud that it is impossible to hear the people you are with talk, therefore conversation is impossible, so the only activity you can do is put your glass to your mouth and have another swig, encouraging fast drinking. It`s very true."

So what. Thats what many thousands of people do every week with little or no problem.
Do you think that you have some sort of right to stop people enjoying themselves like this just because of the minority of people who go to far?
Sounds just like it was in the 60's when I did the weekend pub crawl. Standing space only with loud music and everybody trying to shout over each other, and the room was thick with cigarette smoke. The difference then was that the pubs stopped serving at 11:00pm. Yes of course there were drunks but they typically had mates who made sure they got home okay. No "bouncers" on the doors either.
That's one difference. Plus of course drugs are easier to get now and it's a simple fact that people rolling out of a bar at 03.00 are more likely to be tired than if they leave at 23.00.
It was interesting to read of the two drownings in Durham; I always thought York must not be unique.
I wonder what the actual figures are for the whole country, compared to the figures before extended opening hours were brought in?
[quote][p][bold]expubcrawler[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maquis[/bold] wrote: "I heard a very sensible woman on Radio York say a few months ago that in the bars where they are herded in, they are mainly standing space only and the music is so loud that it is impossible to hear the people you are with talk, therefore conversation is impossible, so the only activity you can do is put your glass to your mouth and have another swig, encouraging fast drinking. It`s very true." So what. Thats what many thousands of people do every week with little or no problem. Do you think that you have some sort of right to stop people enjoying themselves like this just because of the minority of people who go to far?[/p][/quote]Sounds just like it was in the 60's when I did the weekend pub crawl. Standing space only with loud music and everybody trying to shout over each other, and the room was thick with cigarette smoke. The difference then was that the pubs stopped serving at 11:00pm. Yes of course there were drunks but they typically had mates who made sure they got home okay. No "bouncers" on the doors either.[/p][/quote]That's one difference. Plus of course drugs are easier to get now and it's a simple fact that people rolling out of a bar at 03.00 are more likely to be tired than if they leave at 23.00. It was interesting to read of the two drownings in Durham; I always thought York must not be unique. I wonder what the actual figures are for the whole country, compared to the figures before extended opening hours were brought in? Pinza-C55
  • Score: 3

8:42am Sun 8 Jun 14

browbeaten says...

notmyrealname wrote:
well that's ok then ! - do we pay for this so that irresponsible people coming York can get legless in safety . Suggest they split the cost between all the bars in town offering cheap drinks and send the balance to the races.
This move is almost encouraging people to get even more drunk and turning the centre of York into an even bigger zoo. Heaven knows what the genuine tourists will see in this .
When will adults take responsibility for their own actions.
Welcome to York, the home of excess drinking. Next we will be placing lifeguards every 50 yards along the river judging from the amount of people who unfortunately end up in it.
Perhaps tourism chiefs might like to adopt the slogan " welcome to York the home of the drunk.
It is to Yorks shame that it is having to resort to these measures, and it should have been introduced quietly without a press call wirh loads of cheesy smiles.
[quote][p][bold]notmyrealname[/bold] wrote: well that's ok then ! - do we pay for this so that irresponsible people coming York can get legless in safety . Suggest they split the cost between all the bars in town offering cheap drinks and send the balance to the races. This move is almost encouraging people to get even more drunk and turning the centre of York into an even bigger zoo. Heaven knows what the genuine tourists will see in this . When will adults take responsibility for their own actions.[/p][/quote]Welcome to York, the home of excess drinking. Next we will be placing lifeguards every 50 yards along the river judging from the amount of people who unfortunately end up in it. Perhaps tourism chiefs might like to adopt the slogan " welcome to York the home of the drunk. It is to Yorks shame that it is having to resort to these measures, and it should have been introduced quietly without a press call wirh loads of cheesy smiles. browbeaten
  • Score: 3

9:33am Sun 8 Jun 14

inthesticks says...

Maquis wrote:
"I heard a very sensible woman on Radio York say a few months ago that in the bars where they are herded in, they are mainly standing space only and the music is so loud that it is impossible to hear the people you are with talk, therefore conversation is impossible, so the only activity you can do is put your glass to your mouth and have another swig, encouraging fast drinking. It`s very true."

So what. Thats what many thousands of people do every week with little or no problem.
Do you think that you have some sort of right to stop people enjoying themselves like this just because of the minority of people who go to far?
I`m making a point, it`s called a discussion in the adult world.
[quote][p][bold]Maquis[/bold] wrote: "I heard a very sensible woman on Radio York say a few months ago that in the bars where they are herded in, they are mainly standing space only and the music is so loud that it is impossible to hear the people you are with talk, therefore conversation is impossible, so the only activity you can do is put your glass to your mouth and have another swig, encouraging fast drinking. It`s very true." So what. Thats what many thousands of people do every week with little or no problem. Do you think that you have some sort of right to stop people enjoying themselves like this just because of the minority of people who go to far?[/p][/quote]I`m making a point, it`s called a discussion in the adult world. inthesticks
  • Score: 1

9:59am Sun 8 Jun 14

sniper 9964 says...

notmyrealname wrote:
well that's ok then ! - do we pay for this so that irresponsible people coming York can get legless in safety . Suggest they split the cost between all the bars in town offering cheap drinks and send the balance to the races. This move is almost encouraging people to get even more drunk and turning the centre of York into an even bigger zoo. Heaven knows what the genuine tourists will see in this . When will adults take responsibility for their own actions.
I totally agree should be paid for by all the bars etc. And races days by the race course
[quote][p][bold]notmyrealname[/bold] wrote: well that's ok then ! - do we pay for this so that irresponsible people coming York can get legless in safety . Suggest they split the cost between all the bars in town offering cheap drinks and send the balance to the races. This move is almost encouraging people to get even more drunk and turning the centre of York into an even bigger zoo. Heaven knows what the genuine tourists will see in this . When will adults take responsibility for their own actions.[/p][/quote]I totally agree should be paid for by all the bars etc. And races days by the race course sniper 9964
  • Score: 1

10:03am Sun 8 Jun 14

sniper 9964 says...

imassey wrote:
From the first two comments anybody would think that alcohol is an illegal drug. People drink, some (a lot, maybe) drink to excess. You're never going to change that. Increasing the price might help a bit. More vigilant door/bar staff might help a bit. Although, by definition, if you are no longer allowed to serve somebody when he/she is drunk, then it is too late. am There may be a cost to providing this service but surely that will be recouped by savings elsewhere. People complain about ambulance response times. If this eases the pressure and means ambulances are better used, is it not a good thing? And once again, we are subjected to the view that York is a "zoo" (previously "no-go area", among other such descriptions). I will say again, I have walked the centre of town many times at night, sometimes with my pre-teen daughter, and I would never describe it as either. I doubt it is any worse than any other UK city or town.
York is a zoo on a weekend and night time. Only yesterday there was countless hen and stag parties walking around in day time with inflatable sex objects. Not good for people with kids in town.
then you have fights and aggressive behaviour so yes it is a zoo
[quote][p][bold]imassey[/bold] wrote: From the first two comments anybody would think that alcohol is an illegal drug. People drink, some (a lot, maybe) drink to excess. You're never going to change that. Increasing the price might help a bit. More vigilant door/bar staff might help a bit. Although, by definition, if you are no longer allowed to serve somebody when he/she is drunk, then it is too late. am There may be a cost to providing this service but surely that will be recouped by savings elsewhere. People complain about ambulance response times. If this eases the pressure and means ambulances are better used, is it not a good thing? And once again, we are subjected to the view that York is a "zoo" (previously "no-go area", among other such descriptions). I will say again, I have walked the centre of town many times at night, sometimes with my pre-teen daughter, and I would never describe it as either. I doubt it is any worse than any other UK city or town.[/p][/quote]York is a zoo on a weekend and night time. Only yesterday there was countless hen and stag parties walking around in day time with inflatable sex objects. Not good for people with kids in town. then you have fights and aggressive behaviour so yes it is a zoo sniper 9964
  • Score: 5

10:05am Sun 8 Jun 14

sniper 9964 says...

oi oi savaloy wrote:
is this because quite a lot of the drunks are students and the labour run council don't want to upset them by chucking them in the cells and fining them for being drunk and disorderly?
Ha ha ha I like your thinking
[quote][p][bold]oi oi savaloy[/bold] wrote: is this because quite a lot of the drunks are students and the labour run council don't want to upset them by chucking them in the cells and fining them for being drunk and disorderly?[/p][/quote]Ha ha ha I like your thinking sniper 9964
  • Score: -29

11:01am Sun 8 Jun 14

oi oi savaloy says...

sniper 9964 wrote:
oi oi savaloy wrote:
is this because quite a lot of the drunks are students and the labour run council don't want to upset them by chucking them in the cells and fining them for being drunk and disorderly?
Ha ha ha I like your thinking
i speak the truth! students in york are practically getting away with murder...

http://www.nouse.co.
uk/2005/05/09/former
-su-officer-jailed-f
or-night-club-attack
/

maybe James Alexander could expand on why there was a "gagging policy" on this?
[quote][p][bold]sniper 9964[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]oi oi savaloy[/bold] wrote: is this because quite a lot of the drunks are students and the labour run council don't want to upset them by chucking them in the cells and fining them for being drunk and disorderly?[/p][/quote]Ha ha ha I like your thinking[/p][/quote]i speak the truth! students in york are practically getting away with murder... http://www.nouse.co. uk/2005/05/09/former -su-officer-jailed-f or-night-club-attack / maybe James Alexander could expand on why there was a "gagging policy" on this? oi oi savaloy
  • Score: -37

11:04am Sun 8 Jun 14

courier46 says...

RoastChicken wrote:
No one is happy unless they are moaning about something or other happening in our city, moan, winge, moan.
Are you moaning again!
[quote][p][bold]RoastChicken[/bold] wrote: No one is happy unless they are moaning about something or other happening in our city, moan, winge, moan.[/p][/quote]Are you moaning again! courier46
  • Score: 0

11:48am Sun 8 Jun 14

Maquis says...

malonemalone wrote:
imassey wrote:
From the first two comments anybody would think that alcohol is an illegal drug. People drink, some (a lot, maybe) drink to excess. You're never going to change that. Increasing the price might help a bit. More vigilant door/bar staff might help a bit. Although, by definition, if you are no longer allowed to serve somebody when he/she is drunk, then it is too late.
am
There may be a cost to providing this service but surely that will be recouped by savings elsewhere. People complain about ambulance response times. If this eases the pressure and means ambulances are better used, is it not a good thing?

And once again, we are subjected to the view that York is a "zoo" (previously "no-go area", among other such descriptions). I will say again, I have walked the centre of town many times at night, sometimes with my pre-teen daughter, and I would never describe it as either. I doubt it is any worse than any other UK city or town.
then you need to open your eyes, clearly not in the right places at the wrong times
Look hard enough and Im sure you will see anything you really want to.
I agree with malonemalone, York is NOT a no go area and having lived around the country, it is very calm and respectable on a night with very little trouble.
[quote][p][bold]malonemalone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]imassey[/bold] wrote: From the first two comments anybody would think that alcohol is an illegal drug. People drink, some (a lot, maybe) drink to excess. You're never going to change that. Increasing the price might help a bit. More vigilant door/bar staff might help a bit. Although, by definition, if you are no longer allowed to serve somebody when he/she is drunk, then it is too late. am There may be a cost to providing this service but surely that will be recouped by savings elsewhere. People complain about ambulance response times. If this eases the pressure and means ambulances are better used, is it not a good thing? And once again, we are subjected to the view that York is a "zoo" (previously "no-go area", among other such descriptions). I will say again, I have walked the centre of town many times at night, sometimes with my pre-teen daughter, and I would never describe it as either. I doubt it is any worse than any other UK city or town.[/p][/quote]then you need to open your eyes, clearly not in the right places at the wrong times[/p][/quote]Look hard enough and Im sure you will see anything you really want to. I agree with malonemalone, York is NOT a no go area and having lived around the country, it is very calm and respectable on a night with very little trouble. Maquis
  • Score: 2

11:56am Sun 8 Jun 14

Maquis says...

inthesticks wrote:
Maquis wrote:
"I heard a very sensible woman on Radio York say a few months ago that in the bars where they are herded in, they are mainly standing space only and the music is so loud that it is impossible to hear the people you are with talk, therefore conversation is impossible, so the only activity you can do is put your glass to your mouth and have another swig, encouraging fast drinking. It`s very true."

So what. Thats what many thousands of people do every week with little or no problem.
Do you think that you have some sort of right to stop people enjoying themselves like this just because of the minority of people who go to far?
I`m making a point, it`s called a discussion in the adult world.
So what is your point? That you might not find it appealing, so phrase it in a way as to make it sound like hell on earth?

As for your earlier point, yes it is illegal for an establishment to serve someone who is drunk, but what is the level that you would choose? after two and a half pints you are too "drunk" to drive. Half a bottle of wine would make some girls stagger with heels on. Some bigger blokes can have 8 pints of beer and still be fine. Often students down a sizable quantity of alcohol immediately before arriving at the pub which takes effect 20 mins later while drinking a soft drink. Try prosecuting on that basis. It will not happen.
[quote][p][bold]inthesticks[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maquis[/bold] wrote: "I heard a very sensible woman on Radio York say a few months ago that in the bars where they are herded in, they are mainly standing space only and the music is so loud that it is impossible to hear the people you are with talk, therefore conversation is impossible, so the only activity you can do is put your glass to your mouth and have another swig, encouraging fast drinking. It`s very true." So what. Thats what many thousands of people do every week with little or no problem. Do you think that you have some sort of right to stop people enjoying themselves like this just because of the minority of people who go to far?[/p][/quote]I`m making a point, it`s called a discussion in the adult world.[/p][/quote]So what is your point? That you might not find it appealing, so phrase it in a way as to make it sound like hell on earth? As for your earlier point, yes it is illegal for an establishment to serve someone who is drunk, but what is the level that you would choose? after two and a half pints you are too "drunk" to drive. Half a bottle of wine would make some girls stagger with heels on. Some bigger blokes can have 8 pints of beer and still be fine. Often students down a sizable quantity of alcohol immediately before arriving at the pub which takes effect 20 mins later while drinking a soft drink. Try prosecuting on that basis. It will not happen. Maquis
  • Score: 1

11:56am Sun 8 Jun 14

Maquis says...

inthesticks wrote:
Maquis wrote:
"I heard a very sensible woman on Radio York say a few months ago that in the bars where they are herded in, they are mainly standing space only and the music is so loud that it is impossible to hear the people you are with talk, therefore conversation is impossible, so the only activity you can do is put your glass to your mouth and have another swig, encouraging fast drinking. It`s very true."

So what. Thats what many thousands of people do every week with little or no problem.
Do you think that you have some sort of right to stop people enjoying themselves like this just because of the minority of people who go to far?
I`m making a point, it`s called a discussion in the adult world.
So what is your point? That you might not find it appealing, so phrase it in a way as to make it sound like hell on earth?

As for your earlier point, yes it is illegal for an establishment to serve someone who is drunk, but what is the level that you would choose? after two and a half pints you are too "drunk" to drive. Half a bottle of wine would make some girls stagger with heels on. Some bigger blokes can have 8 pints of beer and still be fine. Often students down a sizable quantity of alcohol immediately before arriving at the pub which takes effect 20 mins later while drinking a soft drink. Try prosecuting on that basis. It will not happen.
[quote][p][bold]inthesticks[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maquis[/bold] wrote: "I heard a very sensible woman on Radio York say a few months ago that in the bars where they are herded in, they are mainly standing space only and the music is so loud that it is impossible to hear the people you are with talk, therefore conversation is impossible, so the only activity you can do is put your glass to your mouth and have another swig, encouraging fast drinking. It`s very true." So what. Thats what many thousands of people do every week with little or no problem. Do you think that you have some sort of right to stop people enjoying themselves like this just because of the minority of people who go to far?[/p][/quote]I`m making a point, it`s called a discussion in the adult world.[/p][/quote]So what is your point? That you might not find it appealing, so phrase it in a way as to make it sound like hell on earth? As for your earlier point, yes it is illegal for an establishment to serve someone who is drunk, but what is the level that you would choose? after two and a half pints you are too "drunk" to drive. Half a bottle of wine would make some girls stagger with heels on. Some bigger blokes can have 8 pints of beer and still be fine. Often students down a sizable quantity of alcohol immediately before arriving at the pub which takes effect 20 mins later while drinking a soft drink. Try prosecuting on that basis. It will not happen. Maquis
  • Score: 1

12:04pm Sun 8 Jun 14

Maquis says...

sniper 9964 wrote:
notmyrealname wrote:
well that's ok then ! - do we pay for this so that irresponsible people coming York can get legless in safety . Suggest they split the cost between all the bars in town offering cheap drinks and send the balance to the races. This move is almost encouraging people to get even more drunk and turning the centre of York into an even bigger zoo. Heaven knows what the genuine tourists will see in this . When will adults take responsibility for their own actions.
I totally agree should be paid for by all the bars etc. And races days by the race course
But not the supermarkets?

If you really want to see where they are getting the drink from, spend a few minutes in any of the many supermarkets that are open until late in the city center and you will see 2 in every 3 shoppers are people clearly on a night out, topping up at considerably cheaper prices than the lowest price bars that surround the shop.
These drinks are to be drank in the street or smuggled into the pubs.
Just last night I saw a couple of young girls knocked back from a bar because one had a bottle of vodka in her bad and the doorman caught a glimpse as she got her id out.

My point is that, not all bars and pubs are perfect but they always seem to be the ones punished whereas the main culprit for serving problem drinkers get off scott free.
[quote][p][bold]sniper 9964[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]notmyrealname[/bold] wrote: well that's ok then ! - do we pay for this so that irresponsible people coming York can get legless in safety . Suggest they split the cost between all the bars in town offering cheap drinks and send the balance to the races. This move is almost encouraging people to get even more drunk and turning the centre of York into an even bigger zoo. Heaven knows what the genuine tourists will see in this . When will adults take responsibility for their own actions.[/p][/quote]I totally agree should be paid for by all the bars etc. And races days by the race course[/p][/quote]But not the supermarkets? If you really want to see where they are getting the drink from, spend a few minutes in any of the many supermarkets that are open until late in the city center and you will see 2 in every 3 shoppers are people clearly on a night out, topping up at considerably cheaper prices than the lowest price bars that surround the shop. These drinks are to be drank in the street or smuggled into the pubs. Just last night I saw a couple of young girls knocked back from a bar because one had a bottle of vodka in her bad and the doorman caught a glimpse as she got her id out. My point is that, not all bars and pubs are perfect but they always seem to be the ones punished whereas the main culprit for serving problem drinkers get off scott free. Maquis
  • Score: 4

2:52pm Sun 8 Jun 14

asd says...

The trouble with some of these comments like, people being responsible for own actions is all well and good BUT, what if someones drinks have been spiked is that their fault? The real cause is a cultral thing, lets get wasted attitute compaired to rest of europe. People it seems get cheap booze from supermarkets then go into town later, rather than go into town earlier and have couple. I would rather have people kept away from hospital and treated in mobile units if its down to intoxication and let the A+E treat more serious conditions.
The trouble with some of these comments like, people being responsible for own actions is all well and good BUT, what if someones drinks have been spiked is that their fault? The real cause is a cultral thing, lets get wasted attitute compaired to rest of europe. People it seems get cheap booze from supermarkets then go into town later, rather than go into town earlier and have couple. I would rather have people kept away from hospital and treated in mobile units if its down to intoxication and let the A+E treat more serious conditions. asd
  • Score: 1

3:31pm Sun 8 Jun 14

Jack Ham says...

Who licences and enforces the pubs? CYC
Who licences and enforces the supermarkets? CYC
Who reaps the benefit of business rates? CYC
Who takes the credit when more part time/low paid job are created? CYC
Who has a short term view driven by election cycles? CYC
Who has yet to take any action of recent tragedies following drinking? CYC

What is the response from CYC?

Silence
Blame others
Blame government
Who licences and enforces the pubs? CYC Who licences and enforces the supermarkets? CYC Who reaps the benefit of business rates? CYC Who takes the credit when more part time/low paid job are created? CYC Who has a short term view driven by election cycles? CYC Who has yet to take any action of recent tragedies following drinking? CYC What is the response from CYC? Silence Blame others Blame government Jack Ham
  • Score: -137

4:54pm Sun 8 Jun 14

anistasia says...

Treatment of one person at a time not really helping the drink problem in york do the drunks just get treatment and released or are they given advice about about safe drinking. education is the best policy.but anything better than taking drunks to hospital. but any treatment should be paid for and at quite a cost make it hit the pocket of the drunk may stop them getting drunk again and anyone who attacks any NHS staff through drink should be sent to prison and fined hopefully making them think next time.how are people getting so drunk its illegal to serve someone drunk so are bars serving drunks(profit)and if you've gone out with friends you should be responsible for each other and not get into such a state.
Treatment of one person at a time not really helping the drink problem in york do the drunks just get treatment and released or are they given advice about about safe drinking. education is the best policy.but anything better than taking drunks to hospital. but any treatment should be paid for and at quite a cost make it hit the pocket of the drunk may stop them getting drunk again and anyone who attacks any NHS staff through drink should be sent to prison and fined hopefully making them think next time.how are people getting so drunk its illegal to serve someone drunk so are bars serving drunks(profit)and if you've gone out with friends you should be responsible for each other and not get into such a state. anistasia
  • Score: -58

5:44pm Sun 8 Jun 14

Jack Ham says...

-92 votes in a couple of hours. Raw nerve?
-92 votes in a couple of hours. Raw nerve? Jack Ham
  • Score: -61

6:02pm Sun 8 Jun 14

anistasia says...

Something does need to be done to stop drunks and drug users taking up needed hospital beds how many times do the same people week after week sometimes maybe more than once putting other needy patients at risk and NHS staff at risk of assault. but one place in town to help one person isn't really going to help.and people say after the deaths in the rivers if we raise the price of drink this would help stop drinkers getting drunk the only thing this does is makes the sensible drinkers pay more for their drinks this is unfair. if you get drunk it should be you to pay the penalty you pay for the ambulance the medical treatment plus a fine on top.you've only got yourself to blame you pay.could raising the age limit of buying drink in shops be a solution. or sold by strength of the drink to age super strength alcohol not to be sold to under 25s.I've seen it all drinkers in town causing problems and drinkers down by the river jumping off bridges or drunk jumping in for a swim.and the police have better things to do and I for one prefer my taxes to be spent on something more worthy.they have the money to buy the drink or drugs and expect the tax payer to pick up the bill.all wrong.
Something does need to be done to stop drunks and drug users taking up needed hospital beds how many times do the same people week after week sometimes maybe more than once putting other needy patients at risk and NHS staff at risk of assault. but one place in town to help one person isn't really going to help.and people say after the deaths in the rivers if we raise the price of drink this would help stop drinkers getting drunk the only thing this does is makes the sensible drinkers pay more for their drinks this is unfair. if you get drunk it should be you to pay the penalty you pay for the ambulance the medical treatment plus a fine on top.you've only got yourself to blame you pay.could raising the age limit of buying drink in shops be a solution. or sold by strength of the drink to age super strength alcohol not to be sold to under 25s.I've seen it all drinkers in town causing problems and drinkers down by the river jumping off bridges or drunk jumping in for a swim.and the police have better things to do and I for one prefer my taxes to be spent on something more worthy.they have the money to buy the drink or drugs and expect the tax payer to pick up the bill.all wrong. anistasia
  • Score: -47

7:44pm Sun 8 Jun 14

anistasia says...

See my comments have got minus points so the sensible drinkers dont mind paying their taxes to have drunks treated in hospital and pay more for drinks because all governments seem to think just by raising the prices this will reduce drinking problems how many years as this been said.
See my comments have got minus points so the sensible drinkers dont mind paying their taxes to have drunks treated in hospital and pay more for drinks because all governments seem to think just by raising the prices this will reduce drinking problems how many years as this been said. anistasia
  • Score: 0

11:51pm Sun 8 Jun 14

sniper 9964 says...

I totally agree should be paid for by all the bars etc. And races days by the race course
I totally agree should be paid for by all the bars etc. And races days by the race course sniper 9964
  • Score: 0

12:36am Mon 9 Jun 14

Maquis says...

sniper 9964 wrote:
I totally agree should be paid for by all the bars etc. And races days by the race course
La la la, put your fingers in your ears and ignore the main culprits.

Why do you find it so hard to understand that the people who cause the problems have almost always pre loaded before hitting the town.

Why do you think they do this? - because of the cost of drinking in the pubs!
Result - drink at home before you go into town.
The problem with this - People at home drink stronger drinks and at a faster rate intending to get drunk.

Your solution - make drinking in town more expensive by charging the bars.
Result - even more drinking of stronger drinks at a faster rate before people go out.

Those who do not cause the problems, i.e. the vast majority, don't pre load as the aim of their night is not to get trollied but to have a good sociable night out in town, so they are content to pay the price in the bars as they are not intending to have so many, yet these are the people who will be hit in the pocket by charging the bars.

As I said earlier - the road to hell is paved with good intentions!
[quote][p][bold]sniper 9964[/bold] wrote: I totally agree should be paid for by all the bars etc. And races days by the race course[/p][/quote]La la la, put your fingers in your ears and ignore the main culprits. Why do you find it so hard to understand that the people who cause the problems have almost always pre loaded before hitting the town. Why do you think they do this? - because of the cost of drinking in the pubs! Result - drink at home before you go into town. The problem with this - People at home drink stronger drinks and at a faster rate intending to get drunk. Your solution - make drinking in town more expensive by charging the bars. Result - even more drinking of stronger drinks at a faster rate before people go out. Those who do not cause the problems, i.e. the vast majority, don't pre load as the aim of their night is not to get trollied but to have a good sociable night out in town, so they are content to pay the price in the bars as they are not intending to have so many, yet these are the people who will be hit in the pocket by charging the bars. As I said earlier - the road to hell is paved with good intentions! Maquis
  • Score: 2

8:01am Mon 9 Jun 14

imassey says...

sniper 9964 wrote:
imassey wrote:
From the first two comments anybody would think that alcohol is an illegal drug. People drink, some (a lot, maybe) drink to excess. You're never going to change that. Increasing the price might help a bit. More vigilant door/bar staff might help a bit. Although, by definition, if you are no longer allowed to serve somebody when he/she is drunk, then it is too late. am There may be a cost to providing this service but surely that will be recouped by savings elsewhere. People complain about ambulance response times. If this eases the pressure and means ambulances are better used, is it not a good thing? And once again, we are subjected to the view that York is a "zoo" (previously "no-go area", among other such descriptions). I will say again, I have walked the centre of town many times at night, sometimes with my pre-teen daughter, and I would never describe it as either. I doubt it is any worse than any other UK city or town.
York is a zoo on a weekend and night time. Only yesterday there was countless hen and stag parties walking around in day time with inflatable sex objects. Not good for people with kids in town.
then you have fights and aggressive behaviour so yes it is a zoo
A zoo is where people, usually families, go to see animals caged in controlled conditions.

Whether I agree with your sentiment or not (which I don't) it can't possibly be called a zoo.
[quote][p][bold]sniper 9964[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]imassey[/bold] wrote: From the first two comments anybody would think that alcohol is an illegal drug. People drink, some (a lot, maybe) drink to excess. You're never going to change that. Increasing the price might help a bit. More vigilant door/bar staff might help a bit. Although, by definition, if you are no longer allowed to serve somebody when he/she is drunk, then it is too late. am There may be a cost to providing this service but surely that will be recouped by savings elsewhere. People complain about ambulance response times. If this eases the pressure and means ambulances are better used, is it not a good thing? And once again, we are subjected to the view that York is a "zoo" (previously "no-go area", among other such descriptions). I will say again, I have walked the centre of town many times at night, sometimes with my pre-teen daughter, and I would never describe it as either. I doubt it is any worse than any other UK city or town.[/p][/quote]York is a zoo on a weekend and night time. Only yesterday there was countless hen and stag parties walking around in day time with inflatable sex objects. Not good for people with kids in town. then you have fights and aggressive behaviour so yes it is a zoo[/p][/quote]A zoo is where people, usually families, go to see animals caged in controlled conditions. Whether I agree with your sentiment or not (which I don't) it can't possibly be called a zoo. imassey
  • Score: 0

1:42pm Mon 9 Jun 14

Stevie D says...

imassey wrote:
I'm not sure how planning, licensing and enforcement will change that. If people can't get the alcohol they want in pubs (either because there are fewer or because they are refused service) they will simply get it elsewhere.
If they can't get served alcohol in pubs because they are too drunk, then they are less likely to be staggering around barely able to stand in the city centre. Because they won't be able to get into that state in licensed premises.

Sure, they could pre-load even more, and come into town already totally plastered, but then what? They won't be able to get in anywhere, or get served, so what's the point in coming into town? Or they come into town for a few drinks, and then at the point where they can't get served any more, they go home and post-load. So what? If they get themselves so paralytic they fall down their stairs at home and crack their head open, why should we give a stuff? We just don't want them doing it where they are a nuisance to public order. Which they won't be.

We need politicians who are prepared to risk the wrath of profiteering licensees, the people who keep selling alcohol to drunks even when it's way past legal. And the racecourse is one of the worst offenders. Until those pubs get hit where it hurts, nothing is going to change.
[quote][bold]imassey[/bold] wrote: I'm not sure how planning, licensing and enforcement will change that. If people can't get the alcohol they want in pubs (either because there are fewer or because they are refused service) they will simply get it elsewhere.[/quote]If they can't get served alcohol in pubs because they are too drunk, then they are less likely to be staggering around barely able to stand [italic]in the city centre[/italic]. Because they won't be able to [italic]get[/italic] into that state in licensed premises. Sure, they could pre-load even more, and come into town already totally plastered, but then what? They won't be able to get in anywhere, or get served, so what's the point in coming into town? Or they come into town for a few drinks, and then at the point where they can't get served any more, they go home and post-load. So what? If they get themselves so paralytic they fall down their stairs at home and crack their head open, why should we give a stuff? We just don't want them doing it where they are a nuisance to public order. Which they won't be. We need politicians who are prepared to risk the wrath of profiteering licensees, the people who keep selling alcohol to drunks even when it's way past legal. And the racecourse is one of the worst offenders. Until those pubs get hit where it hurts, nothing is going to change. Stevie D
  • Score: 1

9:37pm Mon 9 Jun 14

Jack Ham says...

Stevie D wrote:
imassey wrote:
I'm not sure how planning, licensing and enforcement will change that. If people can't get the alcohol they want in pubs (either because there are fewer or because they are refused service) they will simply get it elsewhere.
If they can't get served alcohol in pubs because they are too drunk, then they are less likely to be staggering around barely able to stand in the city centre. Because they won't be able to get into that state in licensed premises.

Sure, they could pre-load even more, and come into town already totally plastered, but then what? They won't be able to get in anywhere, or get served, so what's the point in coming into town? Or they come into town for a few drinks, and then at the point where they can't get served any more, they go home and post-load. So what? If they get themselves so paralytic they fall down their stairs at home and crack their head open, why should we give a stuff? We just don't want them doing it where they are a nuisance to public order. Which they won't be.

We need politicians who are prepared to risk the wrath of profiteering licensees, the people who keep selling alcohol to drunks even when it's way past legal. And the racecourse is one of the worst offenders. Until those pubs get hit where it hurts, nothing is going to change.
Agree 100%.

Sadly there is no hope of our council taking on the pro-pub lobby groups. They're too busy looking at how to fine or bill residents.
[quote][p][bold]Stevie D[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]imassey[/bold] wrote: I'm not sure how planning, licensing and enforcement will change that. If people can't get the alcohol they want in pubs (either because there are fewer or because they are refused service) they will simply get it elsewhere.[/quote]If they can't get served alcohol in pubs because they are too drunk, then they are less likely to be staggering around barely able to stand [italic]in the city centre[/italic]. Because they won't be able to [italic]get[/italic] into that state in licensed premises. Sure, they could pre-load even more, and come into town already totally plastered, but then what? They won't be able to get in anywhere, or get served, so what's the point in coming into town? Or they come into town for a few drinks, and then at the point where they can't get served any more, they go home and post-load. So what? If they get themselves so paralytic they fall down their stairs at home and crack their head open, why should we give a stuff? We just don't want them doing it where they are a nuisance to public order. Which they won't be. We need politicians who are prepared to risk the wrath of profiteering licensees, the people who keep selling alcohol to drunks even when it's way past legal. And the racecourse is one of the worst offenders. Until those pubs get hit where it hurts, nothing is going to change.[/p][/quote]Agree 100%. Sadly there is no hope of our council taking on the pro-pub lobby groups. They're too busy looking at how to fine or bill residents. Jack Ham
  • Score: -46

9:49pm Mon 9 Jun 14

imassey says...

Stevie D wrote:
imassey wrote:
I'm not sure how planning, licensing and enforcement will change that. If people can't get the alcohol they want in pubs (either because there are fewer or because they are refused service) they will simply get it elsewhere.
If they can't get served alcohol in pubs because they are too drunk, then they are less likely to be staggering around barely able to stand in the city centre. Because they won't be able to get into that state in licensed premises.

Sure, they could pre-load even more, and come into town already totally plastered, but then what? They won't be able to get in anywhere, or get served, so what's the point in coming into town? Or they come into town for a few drinks, and then at the point where they can't get served any more, they go home and post-load. So what? If they get themselves so paralytic they fall down their stairs at home and crack their head open, why should we give a stuff? We just don't want them doing it where they are a nuisance to public order. Which they won't be.

We need politicians who are prepared to risk the wrath of profiteering licensees, the people who keep selling alcohol to drunks even when it's way past legal. And the racecourse is one of the worst offenders. Until those pubs get hit where it hurts, nothing is going to change.
Very simplistic view.

So, somebody can't get any more alcohol in a pub because they are "too drunk"- in that case they are already too drunk. So, should they have been stopped from buying alcohol before they got "too drunk"? How does that work?

Define "too drunk".
[quote][p][bold]Stevie D[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]imassey[/bold] wrote: I'm not sure how planning, licensing and enforcement will change that. If people can't get the alcohol they want in pubs (either because there are fewer or because they are refused service) they will simply get it elsewhere.[/quote]If they can't get served alcohol in pubs because they are too drunk, then they are less likely to be staggering around barely able to stand [italic]in the city centre[/italic]. Because they won't be able to [italic]get[/italic] into that state in licensed premises. Sure, they could pre-load even more, and come into town already totally plastered, but then what? They won't be able to get in anywhere, or get served, so what's the point in coming into town? Or they come into town for a few drinks, and then at the point where they can't get served any more, they go home and post-load. So what? If they get themselves so paralytic they fall down their stairs at home and crack their head open, why should we give a stuff? We just don't want them doing it where they are a nuisance to public order. Which they won't be. We need politicians who are prepared to risk the wrath of profiteering licensees, the people who keep selling alcohol to drunks even when it's way past legal. And the racecourse is one of the worst offenders. Until those pubs get hit where it hurts, nothing is going to change.[/p][/quote]Very simplistic view. So, somebody can't get any more alcohol in a pub because they are "too drunk"- in that case they are already too drunk. So, should they have been stopped from buying alcohol before they got "too drunk"? How does that work? Define "too drunk". imassey
  • Score: -4

2:12pm Tue 10 Jun 14

rking1977 says...

This is not a "drunk tank", as described in the headline. It's a drain on public finances.

Drunk tanks are cells that the police use to detain people who are so drunk they cause a nuisance to others. Anyone who spends a night in one pays for the privilege out of their own pocket.

They are used in the US and many countries in Europe. Their cities don't seem to get over-run with drunk, obnoxious idiots every Friday and Saturday night, presumably because there is some deterrent. And because people are deterred from doing it, it doesn't become the norm and tolerated.

I'm not in favour of paying taxes that fund services for people who have made irresponsible decisions.

I am in favour of drunk tanks in York where people are taken out of harm's way, given the treatment they need... and charged £200 quid the morning after for the resources they have unnecessarily tied up.
This is not a "drunk tank", as described in the headline. It's a drain on public finances. Drunk tanks are cells that the police use to detain people who are so drunk they cause a nuisance to others. Anyone who spends a night in one pays for the privilege out of their own pocket. They are used in the US and many countries in Europe. Their cities don't seem to get over-run with drunk, obnoxious idiots every Friday and Saturday night, presumably because there is some deterrent. And because people are deterred from doing it, it doesn't become the norm and tolerated. I'm not in favour of paying taxes that fund services for people who have made irresponsible decisions. I am in favour of drunk tanks in York where people are taken out of harm's way, given the treatment they need... and charged £200 quid the morning after for the resources they have unnecessarily tied up. rking1977
  • Score: 1

5:03pm Tue 10 Jun 14

Digeorge says...

It is odd that this is open only until 3 a.m... Shouldn't it be 4 a.m. or 5 a.m. when the clubs turn out?

Good idea but the hours are not!
It is odd that this is open only until 3 a.m... Shouldn't it be 4 a.m. or 5 a.m. when the clubs turn out? Good idea but the hours are not! Digeorge
  • Score: 0

6:21pm Tue 10 Jun 14

Maquis says...

Stevie D wrote:
imassey wrote:
I'm not sure how planning, licensing and enforcement will change that. If people can't get the alcohol they want in pubs (either because there are fewer or because they are refused service) they will simply get it elsewhere.
If they can't get served alcohol in pubs because they are too drunk, then they are less likely to be staggering around barely able to stand in the city centre. Because they won't be able to get into that state in licensed premises.

Sure, they could pre-load even more, and come into town already totally plastered, but then what? They won't be able to get in anywhere, or get served, so what's the point in coming into town? Or they come into town for a few drinks, and then at the point where they can't get served any more, they go home and post-load. So what? If they get themselves so paralytic they fall down their stairs at home and crack their head open, why should we give a stuff? We just don't want them doing it where they are a nuisance to public order. Which they won't be.

We need politicians who are prepared to risk the wrath of profiteering licensees, the people who keep selling alcohol to drunks even when it's way past legal. And the racecourse is one of the worst offenders. Until those pubs get hit where it hurts, nothing is going to change.
What an intolerant ignorant post.
There is no "profiteering" by the pub licensees as you say, simply people trying to make a living whilst raising huge amounts of tax and being blamed for all of the ills of society and punished buy these politicians that you mention for decades.

People seriously hurting themselves at home is far more expensive than it happening in town as it takes more people to deal with it, with more paperwork, more travel and takes the emergency services away from the center for other calls, also increased call out time leads to delays in treatment, causing more harm and more expense in the long term.

Drinking to get drunk at home is far more dangerous as the measures are bigger, it is drank quicker and there is nobody to tell you to stop.
[quote][p][bold]Stevie D[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]imassey[/bold] wrote: I'm not sure how planning, licensing and enforcement will change that. If people can't get the alcohol they want in pubs (either because there are fewer or because they are refused service) they will simply get it elsewhere.[/quote]If they can't get served alcohol in pubs because they are too drunk, then they are less likely to be staggering around barely able to stand [italic]in the city centre[/italic]. Because they won't be able to [italic]get[/italic] into that state in licensed premises. Sure, they could pre-load even more, and come into town already totally plastered, but then what? They won't be able to get in anywhere, or get served, so what's the point in coming into town? Or they come into town for a few drinks, and then at the point where they can't get served any more, they go home and post-load. So what? If they get themselves so paralytic they fall down their stairs at home and crack their head open, why should we give a stuff? We just don't want them doing it where they are a nuisance to public order. Which they won't be. We need politicians who are prepared to risk the wrath of profiteering licensees, the people who keep selling alcohol to drunks even when it's way past legal. And the racecourse is one of the worst offenders. Until those pubs get hit where it hurts, nothing is going to change.[/p][/quote]What an intolerant ignorant post. There is no "profiteering" by the pub licensees as you say, simply people trying to make a living whilst raising huge amounts of tax and being blamed for all of the ills of society and punished buy these politicians that you mention for decades. People seriously hurting themselves at home is far more expensive than it happening in town as it takes more people to deal with it, with more paperwork, more travel and takes the emergency services away from the center for other calls, also increased call out time leads to delays in treatment, causing more harm and more expense in the long term. Drinking to get drunk at home is far more dangerous as the measures are bigger, it is drank quicker and there is nobody to tell you to stop. Maquis
  • Score: 0

1:24pm Wed 11 Jun 14

andycoops says...

alwaysontheball wrote:
I think this had been incorrectly reported, I was lucky enough to be able to use their services the other Saturday afternoon, I hadn't been drinking and neither had the other people waiting to be seen, in fact one was a child. I was seen by the emergency care practitioner as I couldn't get to see my gp for over a week. I had a chest infection and he gave me antibiotics, if I had not seen this in town I might have resorted to going to accident and emergency but I knew I shouldn't go there. A brilliant service for all not just for drunks. well done.
Having been involved in a pilot of this a couple of years ago, via a voluntary organisation, its definitely been mis-reported. The majority of people using this will be minor injuries e.g. cuts, grazes, blisters, etc that whilst happen more often with alcholol involved can happen any time - its not big enough for people to sleep their drink/drugs off. Off course you will get people who are a bit drunk and need a bit of time to sobber up e.g. water, etc - which is where the Street Angels coming in. Anything serious will still end up in A&E, but it keeps those minor injuries away when A&E is under pressure on Friday & Saturday nights. In other cities these units can treat easily 20-50 people in one night, at a few hundred pound per A&E visit it pays for itself.
[quote][p][bold]alwaysontheball[/bold] wrote: I think this had been incorrectly reported, I was lucky enough to be able to use their services the other Saturday afternoon, I hadn't been drinking and neither had the other people waiting to be seen, in fact one was a child. I was seen by the emergency care practitioner as I couldn't get to see my gp for over a week. I had a chest infection and he gave me antibiotics, if I had not seen this in town I might have resorted to going to accident and emergency but I knew I shouldn't go there. A brilliant service for all not just for drunks. well done.[/p][/quote]Having been involved in a pilot of this a couple of years ago, via a voluntary organisation, its definitely been mis-reported. The majority of people using this will be minor injuries e.g. cuts, grazes, blisters, etc that whilst happen more often with alcholol involved can happen any time - its not big enough for people to sleep their drink/drugs off. Off course you will get people who are a bit drunk and need a bit of time to sobber up e.g. water, etc - which is where the Street Angels coming in. Anything serious will still end up in A&E, but it keeps those minor injuries away when A&E is under pressure on Friday & Saturday nights. In other cities these units can treat easily 20-50 people in one night, at a few hundred pound per A&E visit it pays for itself. andycoops
  • Score: 3

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree