(These comments were made to Channel 4 News, as part of a piece on the charging of three teenagers for the murder of a 47 year old).
Mr Fahy called for the legal drinking age to be raised from 18 to 21.
"Alcohol is too cheap and too readily available and is too strong. Young people cannot handle it," he added.Firstly, if someone under age is going drink alcohol, does it matter then what that minimum age is - they are still going to drink. This is about education and respect for the law, just raising the age will increase under age drinking, apart from in those responsible 19 year old's who will follow the law. As with most laws, they are only followed by the responsible. So no, raising the age would not stop the problem, indeed it would only increase it.
Is Alcohol too cheap? Well maybe in the big supermarkets (and one or two smaller ones), plus in certain high street chain pubs (you can I am sure work out who). So yes raise the tax on alcohol, double it's price. But hang on, that would hit the pockets of the responsible drinkers, so they would cut back. Responsible pubs would shut, small breweries/wineries/distilleries etc would lose their outlets and then they would shut. What production that is left would be in the hands of big producers - you know, the ones that can cut their production costs and produce cheap alcohol. Meanwhile, the only drinkers unaffected would be those with a lot of disposable income. Which, funnily enough, includes the idiots Mr Fahy is trying to control. So once again, only the well behaved are affected.
Is alcohol too strong? And can young people handle it? Well I can't speak for wine or spirits, but it is historical fact that beer and cider have reduced in strength over the years, partly through cost saving by producers (less alcohol means more output in very simple terms), but mostly through taxation of beer & cider being based on alcoholic strength (less alcohol = less tax to pay). So historically you would that alcohol related 'crime' would be reducing as well. Over the last 50 years the evidence would suggest otherwise. Indeed over the same 50 years alcohol consumption has fallen dramatically, which would suggest that maybe there are factors alongside alcohol in these crimes. As for young people handling alcohol, well yes they can, if they are used to it. Wine is commonly drunk by young children in France (in small, watered down amounts), and elsewhere in the world. In the UK alcohol is demonised by the media and the authorities, which seems to only increase the enthusiasm of the young to try it asap. When they do, unlike the kids of France, it is behind closed doors, without adult supervision. Could this be a factor here? More importantly, the quantity of alcohol consumed by the irresponsible young would floor anyone. So it's not a question of not handling it, is a question of not drinking so much in the first place - and stopping demonising alcohol may well go some way to reducing it's apparent charm.
Everyday, large numbers of people enjoy alcohol in all its forms without feeling the need to put in windows, murder folk, fight in the street or rob old ladies. Much as they don't have those urges when sober. Why? Because they know it's wrong to do those things, morally first and legally second. These are the folk that suffer from these knee jerk remarks and the resulting actions. The people who know how to behave in the first place. And I bet many of these responsible people also had a drink long before they turned 18.
So Mr Fahy, here are some ideas from the real world:
1. Stop this knee-jerk stuff, it helps no-one but the Daily Mail doom merchants.
2. Arrest people, build bigger cells, and put your efforts into arranging a court system that doesn't let everyone off all the time - punishment should scare people, not pamper them.
3. Ask yourself why a minority of young people feel the need to get drunk all the time. If you just stop them getting drunk, they'll fill that hole with worse substances. Sort out the illness, not the symptoms.
4. Sure, focus your anti-alcohol feelings on those who put out cheap drink - but remember that not all outlets sell cheap drink. So raising tax won't work.
5. Have a look at work these hooligans are drinking. It might surprise you. And you might even realise that in fact, most producers and suppliers of drink don't actually benefit from the hooligan bingers, indeed their antics probably scare away potential trade.
6. No, alcohol is not exactly a healthy option, even in moderation, but for the majority it is nor more a source of harm than fast food - it is treated sensibly. So don't penalise the sensible majority.
7. Don't start to attack the industry. We are not breaking the law - if folk behave irresponsibly it is NOT our fault, anymore that Ford is responsible for killer drivers, or that rope makers are responsible for folk who hang themselves. Or maybe we all should be - indeed why not extend this thought and make the police responsible for all the crimes they don't stop. We all have a social responsibility, but lines have to be drawn. And individuals have to responsible for what they do, not pass it on to others.
I accept that the media may twist your words, and maybe your comments have been shown out of context - but you should be aware of that before your speak. So less knee jerk, and more targeted, well thought action. We all want these incidents stopped, as much we all want to be able to continue our own morally responsible lives without paying for the antics of the minority. Please, drop the soundbites - they help only to promote the speaker, and demonise young people (the majority of whom are decent folk). Also, they needlessly increase fear -unless of course you are suggesting that the streets are now an out of control lawless area...?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment