674 Is drunkenness an issue?
As an introduction, here is a video from Unity Gym's 30 Day Trial program
my boys Rad & Yani talk about the effects of excessive alcohol consumption
Letter to the SMH:
"It is mystifying that, as per your
editorial today, the lock-out laws are considered a success, in view of a 45%
reduction of violence at Kings Cross. Isn’t it true that the reduction of
attendance at The Cross is 80%? By that account the lock-out laws are a
failure ..."
Alcohol lockout laws in central Sydney have split the city. We are seeing young versus old, pub versus casino, pokies versus coffee, grassroots versus stadium rock, tourists versus residents, libertarians versus doctors, vested interests versus do-gooders, and Town Hall versus Macquarie Street.
It is time to step back and recall why the laws were introduced: to make everyone safer when they go out at night. To a large extent that goal has been achieved.
Assaults have fallen 45 per cent in Kings Cross and 20 per cent in the central business district since the laws were introduced in February 2014.
Letter to the Sun Herald (published: "Target Problem Drinkers") following an article about AUS's drinking culture
(excerpts of the article below) I've addressed the issue before
"The RACP have suggested a host of recommendations to a Senate inquiry aimed at “bringing about a shift in Australian drinking culture” and reduce the “undeniable and substantial” harms caused by alcohol. However, the recommendations do not address the problem at its source and will not have the desired effect. The drinking culture indeed is changing: Total consumption of alcohol is going down.
"But the problem is mis-diagnosed. The problem is not that people want to have a drink at whatever time or place that suits them - which may be at 4:00 in the morning at Kings Cross - the problem is that a small percentage of people who go out to have a drink get blind drunk. Alcohol related violence is caused by members of that group. And it is that group that needs attention, not the wider public. Concentrated action in regard to drunkenness is required, not blanket bans against the entire population.
"It is mooted to decrease the blood-alcohol limit for drivers from 0.05 to 0.02 and then to zero. That is a good start. The next step is to introduce a general blood-alcohol limit in public; in beer-barns, clubs, bars and in the streets. You want to get drunk? Fine … $150. The second time it’s $300; then $600 etc. Soon drunkards will have no more money to spend on getting drunk. Problem solved.
"It is tragic that two or three youths have died in cases of alcohol related, one-punch violence. But even more compelling are the yearly 5,000 deaths attributed to alcohol misuse, along with 150,000 hospitalisations, costing the economy billions.
"One word to David Leyonhjelm, who thinks Australians are sick of people telling them how to live their lives. Tell me, Mr. Leyonhjelm, what does your well developed sense of personal choice and libertarianism compel you to do at a red traffic light?"
Doctors urge radical reduction in blood-alcohol limits
National political reporter
Access to alcohol would be drastically reduced under a radical rethink of liquor laws, taxes and sales being urged by one of the country's most influential groups of doctors.
The blood-alcohol limit for all drivers would decrease from .05 to .02 and then to zero, while the legal drinking age would rise and governments would further restrict the trading hours of licensed premises and bottle shops.
The dramatic crackdown is being proposed by the Royal Australasian College of Physicians, which has submitted a string of recommendations to a Senate inquiry on drunken violence.
RACP president Nicholas Talley said it was imperative the government adopt the recommendations in full to "bring about a shift in the Australian drinking culture" and reduce the "undeniable and substantial" harms caused by alcohol.
"Australians have a culture of alcohol – that's fine, but we also have a problem with alcohol," he told Fairfax Media.
The proposed regime recommends:
The legal age for buying takeaway alcohol should be raised immediately, ahead of a public debate about lifting the drinking age
State governments should ramp up last drinks and early closing laws such as those implemented in NSW, including shorter trading hours for bottle shops and bars
Local councils should be given the power to reduce the number of licensed premises in their communities by challenging existing liquor licences and implementing caps on the number of bars
Sports sponsorship by alcohol companies should be banned, as a precursor to a total ban on advertising alcohol to young people
Alcohol packaging should carry warning labels, akin to cigarettes, under the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code
The push comes despite risky alcohol use and risky drinking being in decline in Australia. Apparent alcohol consumption last year fell to a 50-year low of 9.7 litres, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics.
Meanwhile, the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare's authoritative survey on drug use found that from 2010 to 2013, the number of drinkers aged 14 and over who exceeded the lifetime guidelines for alcohol consumption fell to 18.2 per cent from 20 per cent. Those engaging in binge drinking at least once a month dropped to 26 per cent from 29 per cent.
The number of people who reported being a victim of an alcohol-related incident, including verbal abuse or being put in fear, also fell to 26 per cent from 29 per cent.
... The RACP paper cited studies estimating the social cost of alcohol misuse in Australia was between $15 billion and $36 billion, accruing largely from healthcare costs, road accidents and lost productivity. Each year, 5000 deaths were attributable to alcohol misuse, along with 150,000 hospitalisations, Dr Talley said.
Liberal Democrat senator David Leyonhjelm, a self-described libertarian who is conducting an inquiry into matters around personal choice, labelled the proposed regime "nanny state central".
"I think Australians are sick of people who consider themselves their superiors telling them how to live their lives," he said. "In a free society, harm is an inevitable consequence of adults making choices. You can't ever get zero harm."