1. Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Sydney CBDs new Drinking Laws

Discussion in 'Politics' started by JSRF10, Jan 21, 2014.

  1. Bruwheresmycar Nicholas Shehadie (39)

    Likes Received:
    682
    Instead of banning the sale of all drinks and closing up shop early. They should just ban the sale of all liquids bar VB after 12am. That'll get people drinking less (much slower while they're at it). It will also send people home earlier, either sober or feeling like throwing up. It also leaves nightclubs open for those who work enjoy that atmosphere and work during the day/evening every weekend.
  2. Braveheart81 Rocky Elsom (76)

    Likes Received:
    23,861
    One problem with this is that sentences across the board have slowly been increasing in NSW.

    A lot of the frenzy being whipped up by the tabloids and shock jocks about going soft on crime is untrue. They are comparing current sentencing with some sort of ficticious past where sentences were much longer. The public seems to be believe this.

    Research shows that when jurors are polled after a trial regarding what they think an appropriate sentence would be, they generally come up with a more lenient sentence than what is actually handed down by the judge/magistrate (I can't find a source for this right now but I have read it several times in the past).

    There is a massive difference between opinions of the general public who haven't been privy to the whole trial and are taking their cues from the media versus people who have listened through an entire trial and are aware of all the facts.

    I think it is fair to say that until your judiciary approaches that of a fascist regime where people aren't given fair trials and are summarily executed or sent off to the gulags, the public will think that the DPP is soft on crime.

    In recent years there has been a slow decline in the number of non domestic violent assaults in NSW yet we are led to believe that crime is out of control. Meanwhile, there has been a slow but steady rise in the number of domestic assaults and this issue still attracts little attention.
  3. fatprop David Wilson (68)

    Likes Received:
    9,436
    I dislike mandatory sentencing, judges need guidelines like minimums and then some discretion. I have seen no evidence that it does anything to reduce crime, it may improve politicians approval rating though

    Being there by 1.30am? I am not really sure what it will accomplish. Are herds of drunks bar hopping the issue?

    As to bars shutting at 3.00am being the end of civilisation? I don't understand as I grew up with clubs shutting at 2 or 3 and the world didn't become more civilised because the kiddies could drink and dance to dawn.

    To me, the RSA laws should just be enforced by the clubs, pre-loaded drunks don't get access, drunks don't get served.

    Passing on the cost of compliance to the clubs does make sense though, they are facilitating the mayhem.
  4. Runner Nev Cottrell (35)

    Likes Received:
    138
    There is a massive difference between opinions of the general public who haven't been privy to the whole trial and are taking their cues from the media versus people who have listened through an entire trial and are aware of all the facts. Braveheart81

    Can agree with much of the above. However there are numerous cases where it is only revealed later that the person has a length history of crime so was it an informed decision. They jury don't get to see that.
  5. Braveheart81 Rocky Elsom (76)

    Likes Received:
    23,861
    They shouldn't get to see that.

    Past crimes are taken into consideration during sentencing but shouldn't be considered when working out whether someone committed a specific crime.

    You can't use past guilt to dictate future guilt however you can punish someone more severely for committing further crimes based on the fact that they should have learned their lesson.
  6. Train Without a Station Steve Williams (59)

    Likes Received:
    6,029
    As a person who is in the generation which is part of the problem here I don't think the problem is really related to alcohol, or the conditions of sale, licencing laws, etc. This course of action, or something similar is the best course of action available to try and end the problem however.

    It appears to be a societal and generational issue from my point of view. I think it's heavily associated with this current UFC (and all other associations of this in popular culture) culture, though to blame it on that doesn't really consider key element; is society degenerating because of UFC's popularity, or is UFC merely popular due to the degeneration of society and they are just catering to the demand.

    Between this and the change in entertainment towards crime related programming/films there seems to be a real tough guy, anti-social, anti-establishment element to society. Or at least a greater one. There has always been violent films, but even look at the shift, from the 1980's, where the protagonist was always the good guy (Stallone, Norris, Willis, Schwarzenegger) to the current glorifying of gang and outlaw culture (Sons of Anarchy, The Departed, etc.). Once again, is this just meeting what society craves, or is society being influenced by this?

    I guess my point is, that 20, 30, 40 and 50 years ago, people didn't seem to take delight in sports and films that featured people mercilessly beating on defenceless opponents (e.g in UFC when you knock a guy to the ground dazed, and mount then pummel him while he is unable to defend himself) nearly as much as they do now. This has bred a culture of cheap shot merchants who seem to walk around with a chip on the shoulder of their tap out T-Shirt with a point to prove about how tough they are who look up to fighters and TV/Film characters who are happy to knock a bloke to the ground and then stop/beat the shit out of him while he's defenceless. Fuck, Chopper Read is remember by half the population as a national hero for fucks sake.

    Changing the fucked up mental state of most of the population in my generation is a bit beyond Barry O'Farrell or any other politician, so I guess they have to do the best they can to ensure that somebody wanting to go out without getting into any trouble can do that. Whilst undesirable, this seems to be it. It may not be a perfect solution but it's got to do a better job than doing nothing will.
    terry j and ChargerWA like this.
  7. JSRF10 Dick Tooth (41)

    Likes Received:
    829
    I don't know why UFC is getting such a bad rap across the media in relation to this. Its a sporting discipline based on highly trained athletes, in a consenting environment with respect for each other and referee to intervene when necessary.

    I agree with TWAS that certain acts of violence are lauded here. Look no further than the SOO last season when the NSW captain unloaded punches on an unsuspecting opponent and the media was outraged he got a ban! The mungo authorizes should have slapped him with a ban for the season.

    The issue for me after several days of reading various opinions about this is that the current laws deal with all these issues and aren't being enforced correctly. Instead of a rational response along these lines the NSW government have listened to the minority shouting loudest and gone for the option that will see them gain in the polls instead of sorting out the problem.

    One thing that I think should have been investigated was a US style 3 strikes system for assault charges. Anyone is susceptible to a rush of blood which in the wrong situation could see you landed with an assault charge, eg defending your home against a burglar, someone hassling your missus/mum/daughter etc. However when you read about these guys with rap sheets as long as your arm you think if on their 3rd offense they went to jail for 25 years with no parole they'd have though twice about some of the crimes they are committing.
    Bullrush likes this.
  8. Braveheart81 Rocky Elsom (76)

    Likes Received:
    23,861
    The problem with three strikes laws such as in California is that the population who end up being sentenced to 25 years in prison are massively overrepresented by poor people and drug addicts. It might send some violent offenders away for a long time but as with any mandatory sentencing options, it has masses of unintended consequences.

    The other problem is that it is prohibitively expensive and a future government will eventually have to repeal laws like it because the state is going broke.
  9. fatprop David Wilson (68)

    Likes Received:
    9,436

    the 3 strikes laws does give you a cheap slave labor population
  10. Bruwheresmycar Nicholas Shehadie (39)

    Likes Received:
    682
    Absolutely, thanks for reminding me. Hypocrisy of the press at it's best. Will all the journalists who ridiculed anyone suggesting Paul Gallen should have been sent off please stand up? Now would be a perfect time.
    Bullrush likes this.
  11. BPC Phil Hardcastle (33)

    Likes Received:
    900
    That would probably put a lot of people off drinking, period. Unless you like the taste of fizzy water with a rusty nail in it.
    Inside Shoulder likes this.
  12. JSRF10 Dick Tooth (41)

    Likes Received:
    829
    It hasn't worked well in California or anywhere in the States come to think of it, I did only say investigate it in fairness. A real deterrent should be in place for people who think its acceptable to lamp someone who isn't remotely interested in any hassle on a night out/beat their partner/other acts of unacceptable violence something which these laws don't really do.
  13. Scoey Tony Shaw (54)

    Likes Received:
    5,482
    I'll weigh in. I don't really go out drinking much and when I do I usually try to find somewhere that you can hear your own voice and the voice of those that you are with. I don't really get the appeal of the overcrowded places that you have to squeeze sideways through countless groups of sweaty people just to walk to the bar/toilets/doors etc.

    Being a bigger bloke, when I do go out, I find that I tend to get confronted a fair deal more than most of my mates. Don't know why, I think it's some kind of alpha instinct or whatever. That being said, I have no problems just walking away and letting the babies have their bottle so to speak.

    What worries me more and more is, turning my back to these pre-loaded roid freaks with their tapout shirts is tending to get far more risky than standing my ground as they are likely to king hit me from behind if I do walk away.

    To be honest, ignoring all of the sustainability issues of mandatory sentencing etc and thinking about how these laws might affect me (if they were in place in QLD) as an average bloke, I can't see a problem with them. I have never king hit anyone and I'm not likely to. I have never got smashed and instigated a fight. I've been in a few, usually coming to the aid of mates but even then it usually involved me being hit whilst trying to pull blokes off each other. My sister lost a friend who was king hit on a night out. To this date no one knows what set the aggressor off. He belted my sisters mate from behind and he fell to the ground. The guy was evicted from the pub, my sisters mate was picked up off the ground and he said he was all right but wanted to go home so he did. He died in his sleep from bleeding on the brain. I'd be fine with the guy getting locked up for 8 years for that.

    The laws wouldn't negatively affect my social habits and might act as a deterrent to incidents that kill innocent people.
    ChargerWA likes this.
  14. Bullrush Jim Lenehan (48)

    Likes Received:
    2,361
    Are we for real?! UFC is to blame?!

    Boxing has been around and televised for decades but the rise in popularity in UFC is the cause for this?

    Sweep the leg I say...
  15. Braveheart81 Rocky Elsom (76)

    Likes Received:
    23,861
    It's clearly the fault of rap music and video games.
    Slim 293 and boyo like this.
  16. Train Without a Station Steve Williams (59)

    Likes Received:
    6,029
    Bullrush, what I was getting at though is there is a difference. In boxing you don't continue to attack a defenceless and dazed opponent who is on the ground. You wait for them to get up and be able to defend themselves.

    Also, as I mentioned, I'm not specifically saying UFC and associates are the issue, but potentially filling a demand for it in society which has gone that way. Could be that UFC has fuelled societies bloodlust, or it also could be that it fills societies existing bloodlust.
    ChargerWA likes this.
  17. Scoey Tony Shaw (54)

    Likes Received:
    5,482
    I don't mind watching UFC at all but to compare it to boxing is clutching at straws. In boxing, knocking a guy out is simply an outcome of skill and accuracy etc. Rendering a guy unconscious in UFC is the goal. The more innovative you can do it the better. And don't just knock him out, bludgeon him until someone steps in to stop you. I would never discount the skill of the UFC fighters, that's why I like watching it. But there is a growing legion of fans whose teeny tiny little peanut brains think that a guy falling to the ground unconscious is where the entertainment is at not the skill of the contest that led to that point. The more brutal the knockout, the better it is celebrated.

    Whether it is a cause or a result of growing thuggish violence in society is the big question though.
  18. Runner Nev Cottrell (35)

    Likes Received:
    138
    To add a bit of levity the TV show Robin Hood which was show here for many years was written by writers who couldn't get work in the USA (McCarthyism) and the show had lots of trouble as it was seen as socialist collectivization as was going in USSR at the time.

    Doubt if UFC effects us all but it is that minority who in the end causes these types of laws.
    Scoey likes this.
  19. Bullrush Jim Lenehan (48)

    Likes Received:
    2,361
    In UFC you are no more able to attack a defenceless and dazed opponent than you are in boxing. And you can find examples in both sports where this hasn't been adhered to properly or misjudged by the ref.

    Part of the UFC sport is knowing how to defend and attack from the ground - it's a grappling and wrestling sport.

    Just because a man is still standing in boxing doesn't mean he is able to defend himself and just because another is on the ground in UFC doesn't mean he can't.
  20. Train Without a Station Steve Williams (59)

    Likes Received:
    6,029
    In UFC you knock a guy to the ground and then proceed to mount him before he is able to get up, and continue to pummel him with punches until you are stopped by a referee. In boxing you knock a guy to the ground and are prevented from approaching him by a referee until your opponent is able to get up and stay up by his own accord.

    You cannot possibly say UFC is not more brutal and encouraging of attacking defenceless opponents. Beyond the mixture of fighting styles, that's the only difference between the two.
    ChargerWA and Scoey like this.

Share This Page