Licence to purchase liquor?

[firefighter]

well then, They can buy $100 worth of groceries, I'll buy a box of piss, and we can swap in the car park.

In all seriousness I wouldn't, I don't do shitbag deals with shitbags, But I have no doubt that some fuckers would give away their only source of food in order to get on the piss.

I hear what you're saying, but it still makes it harder for them so it's a start.

[peasea]

Completely understand your frustration but we are already one of the heaviest imprisonment nations among the OECD. It doesn't seem to make any difference. Crime still happens.

And in amongst those prisoners which ethnicity shows the highest representation?

[Little Miss Trouble]

True. Why do'nt they start looking into giving beneficiaries food vouchers, which absolutely cannot be used for for alcohol or cigarette purchases......

That would lower a few of the stats I bet.

WINZ do give out notices like these, but they aren't very common. I don't know the reason for receiving them, but they do explicitly state no alcohol or tobacco, which I think is a grand idea.

They're the vouchers that they get in addition to their normal benefit, and there are certain things you can't buy with them, they get really grumpy with the wife when she tells them they can't buy a cask of wine and 50g of tobacco with their emergency benefit money.

Emergency food vouchers - I believe every New Zealander is entitled to two a year and they are supposed to be for basic grocery needs.

Sadly, as per usual, there are those out there abusing the system. I did my time on checkouts in a shitsville town where I saw a couple (both on the dole/sickness benefit) purchasing Mussels, Ice cream, lollies along with babies nappies, formula etc with one such voucher and when they went over their set amount? They put the nappies back before they thought about taking the sea food off the list!
Oh, and after their voucher had been processed they then produced a wad of cash to purchase the ciggies & beer - money that was later proven to be the result of the sale of stolen goods...

[Hitcher]

The issue isn't procurement of alcohol. It's the consumption of alcohol. Alcohol is harmless until it is added to humans.

In my lifetime I have consumed a considerable amount of alcoholic beverages that I haven't acquired with my own funds. I am sure the same applies to many other Kiwi Biker contributors.

We also know from the experiences of 80-odd years ago that prohibition doesn't work. Indeed the consumption of spirituous liquors probably goes up compared to beer and wine in those circumstances because it's more concentrated, therefore easier to transport and conceal meaningful quantities.

Regulating the procurement of alcohol also presumes that those legally able to do so will do so with noble intent i.e. for their own personal consumption in the privacy of their own homes, and not shared with those deemed "too young" or irresponsible by The Powers That Be.

The only time I have been privy to Utopia has been whilst under the affluence of incohol. It may be easier to regulate to make consumption of a prescribed daily measure of alcohol mandatory. The Navy called this totting. Perhaps it's time for this noble and historic practice to make a return?

[Mudfart]

With any system their is always going to be some abuse. Is it actually bad enough that we need to do something about it? Is it bad enough to actually require Government intervention? Asking the Government to intervene is a big step. We already have a lot of laws and regulations in the area. How come they are not working?
I don't know.

Could we perhaps get parents to do something about their teens that have drinking issues instead, rather than the Police?

I saw an interview on TV yesterday that said out of 4million people in NZ, 700,000 have a drinking problem.....thats a fairly big problem i reckon. Also, people who smoke for practically all of their lives should not be allowed to take precious hospital care, govt health funding, from those that have been more proactive in society...... the anti smoking education is so hardcaore these days there really IS NO excuse.

[Mudfart]

With any system their is always going to be some abuse. Is it actually bad enough that we need to do something about it? Is it bad enough to actually require Government intervention? Asking the Government to intervene is a big step. We already have a lot of laws and regulations in the area. How come they are not working?
I don't know.

Could we perhaps get parents to do something about their teens that have drinking issues instead, rather than the Police?

I saw an interview on TV yesterday that said out of 4million people in NZ, 700,000 have a drinking problem.....thats a fairly big problem i reckon. Also, people who smoke for practically all of their lives should not be allowed to take precious hospital care, govt health funding, from those that have been more proactive in society...... the anti smoking education is so hardcaore these days there really IS NO excuse.

[Headbanger]

I saw an interview on TV yesterday that said out of 4million people in NZ, 700,000 have a drinking problem.....thats a fairly big problem i reckon.

Take that with a bucket of salt.

Until your crap starts affecting other people there is no problem, even if you choose to drink yourself to an early death. Most of these twats loose all credibility when they start explaining how they define an alcohol problem.

[spacemonkey]

Just look at how lightly people get let off these days. If people even are unlucky enough to get arrested for a violent offence, and it does make it through the courts, then the courts do fuck all. Just a slap on the wrist usually.

The problem there is not weak laws.... There are ample penaltys under what laws we have already, the problem is how the judiciary apply them.
And under the NZ constitution the government is very severly restricted in how they can give the judges a hurry up or scolding.

[scissorhands]

I drink 2-5 natural beers every night. I have hardly ever been over the limit in years except for new years and the odd function with the boys.

However, its not about being right but doing whats best, and if kiwis are getting drunk and screwing up then an answer should help, more than any thing else.

Ladies and gentlemen I give you cannabis

[Woodman]

I was telling one of my staff the other day that the drinking age was going up to 20.

she is 17 and her reply was and I quote " so being 18 will be like being 16 "

Therein lies the reason the drinking age is going up to 20.

[Winston001]

We also know from the experiences of 80-odd years ago that prohibition doesn't work. Indeed the consumption of spirituous liquors probably goes up compared to beer and wine in those circumstances because it's more concentrated, therefore easier to transport and conceal meaningful quantities.

Regulating the procurement of alcohol also presumes that those legally able to do so will do so with noble intent i.e. for their own personal consumption in the privacy of their own homes, and not shared with those deemed "too young" or irresponsible by The Powers That Be.

Good point. However having a licence to purchase is not prohibition - its an entitlement which not every person holds. Just as not every person holds a drivers licence. Yes there will be unlicensed drinkers just as there are unlicensed drivers but if detected they can be dealt with under the law. At the moment a drunk 16yr old is just an unneeded problem for the police.

Until your crap starts affecting other people there is no problem, even if you choose to drink yourself to an early death.

Trouble is, alcohol abuse usually affects lots of other people. The person's immediate family are usually the worse off.

[Headbanger]

Trouble is, alcohol abuse usually affects lots of other people. The person's immediate family are usually the worse off.

Afraid not, The majority of people who abuse alcohol as defined by the anti-alcohol and health brigade have no negative impact on anybody.

I know dozens of people that always have a beer handy, all of them provide for their family's, none of them abuse or bash them.

What we have here is the thin edge of the wedge, and the fuckers behind the campaign want to taint everyone who likes a beer with the same brush.

And have no doubt, if you go visit a court, its mainly the same small group of shitbags appearing week in and week out, the thin end of the wedge just gets smaller and smaller.

All you need to do is access the police/court records for nuisance drunks and there's the people that need to be sorted.

[imdying]

Indeed the consumption of spirituous liquors probably goes up compared to beer and wine in those circumstances because it's more concentrated, therefore easier to transport and conceal meaningful quantities.

And there is your problem right there... for a massive percentage of the population, the only aim of booze in this country, is to get shit faced.

[Swoop]

The Navy called this totting. Perhaps it's time for this noble and historic practice to make a return?

The lower deck would approve.

Our navy took their time in getting rid of the squirt ration. 1 March 1990 was the last day for the NZ Navy and the Royal Navy was 31 July 1970. A bit of a difference.

[onearmedbandit]

And there is your problem right there... for a massive percentage of the population, the only aim of booze in this country, is to get shit faced.

I'd agree with that. Go into town here in ChCh on any Thursday/Friday/Saturday night and witness it for yourself. And I've been in the same circumstances in other countries, and it definitely isn't the same (no doubt there are those that are the same, and they face the same problems). We are a very imature country in terms of alcohol consumption, a bit like the kid who has just found the keys to his old mans liquor cabinet.