Punish all drinkers for crimes of drunks, say health chiefs

To view the original article Click Here

Title – Punish all drinkers for crimes of drunks, say health chiefs
Source – The Metro
Date – 17th April 2008

That alcohol is harmful is hardly in doubt, but only in the hands of people that abuse it; the question is do we give up our fundamental democratic freedoms because a minority (all be it a very evident and disruptive minority) abuse it and consume to excess? At its core democracy is about the will of the majority prevailing. Ok we can accept that this is an argument that has flaws, but compared with the argument that passive drinking is the same as passive smoking the flaws are in perspective.

I think it does the campaign to curb excessive drinking and the negative effects of alcohol no favours to compare it to passive smoking and in turn it does no favours to the smoking ban for this comparison to be made either. With the exception on the financial cost of the smoking ban on the licensed retail sector there were few coherent or reasonable arguments against the ban. The formula was a relatively simple one. It is generally accepted that smoking is bad for your health. It is the smoke itself that is bad for you, therefore if you inhale someone else’s smoke it is also detrimental to your health. Therefore the activity of smoking was bad for the individual smoking and as a consequence those working in environments where people smoked. The same can not be said for alcohol.

One of the consequences of drinking excessive alcohol is the damage to the liver, but there is no such health risk to other people sharing the room who choose not to drink. This is a very simplistic argument and out thinking a study published in the most respected ‘New Scientist’ would take a lot of money time and data, neither of which I have access to at this time. My concern is that introduction of arguments and policies like the one (suggested by the well respected WHO) is dangerous for our basic freedoms. Punishing everyone for the sins of the minority is a fundamentally floored concept.

That alcohol is a factor in domestic violence, unprotected sexual activity and a danger to unborn children is a tragedy of that there is no question. Is my consumption of alcohol in a social and responsible manner a factor in that in any way? The answer is a resounding no. Should I be punished because of irresponsible people, aggressive people and those who simply choose to be ignorant? Again a resounding NO!

For another crass and simple argument we could look at other products that cause harm. Speeding in cars causes thousands of deaths every year, on top of that it causes tens of thousands of injuries some very serious. Should we all be punished for persistent offenders who are ultimately much more likely to cause accidents injuring or killing innocent people driving according to the rules? I think you will find it difficult to find anyone who blames BMW for building a car that can drive at 100mph in a 30mph zone, rather than the driver driving. Should that person face the full sanction of the law to protect the innocent? Absolutely; just as the person committing the appalling act of domestic violence should face the full sanction of the law, if alcohol is involved or not and maybe that law in itself should be strengthened and the sanctions increased. We are ultimately all accountable for our own actions and the consequence of those actions. If I decided to buy a BMW, should I be taxed to the hilt to compensate for the idiots that speed through built up areas or who tailgate at 100mph on the motorway?

Most people accept that there has to be some sensible restriction on the sale of alcohol for the general good of our society and most people are reasonably happy with the status quo, if the change in licensing hours proved anything it is that there is actually not the demand for 24 hour drinking or even much very late night drinking, but rather that most of us would like the opportunity and choice even if we rarely take it up. Alcohol retailers need to take their responsibility more seriously and they need a level playing field to do so, something that is currently not the case between big retailers in the off-trade and the on-trade.

We believe that the answer is education not taxation and we believe that there needs to be a sensible balance between the two. A joined up process that balances out the problems of excess alcohol consumption with the sensible consumption of the vast majority. We also believe that within a democratic society we all agree on the rules and we punish those that break them and not the innocent.

Beyond The Blue offers training to the licensed retail sector in courses ranging from the National Certificate for Personal License Holders (NCPLH) to the Award in Responsible Alcohol Retailing (ARAR) we accept and champion the responsibilities of alcohol retailers and we believe strongly that training and education as well as sensible control measures and individual responsibility of retailers and consumers is the solution to alcohol related problems.



Please visit our website at www.btbl.co.uk