Hard News: Save the King's Arms
217 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 Newer→ Last
-
Sigh. ON goes my elected rep hat...
Further to my warning about the Council Liquor Policy process I have received the following information;
Council staff have confirmed that consultation is still continuing; key stakeholders (police, DHB, ALAC, Hospitality industry) are being asked to make submissions.These submissions will inform advice on future options for Council.
Staff believe that the government's consideration of the Law Commission's report will take some time to eventuate in any case, and any governmental response will severely water down the Law Commission's recommendations [i.e. do nothing].
Accordingly, if you thought by the Mayor's remarks and Cllr Bhatnager's comments that you didn't need to do anything - in fact you do. If you want to have your say, say it here.
And I lean over and watch my elected rep hat fall off my head....
-
Thanks, Christopher.
-
Violent Crime up in Christchurch.
The interesting thing here is that Christchurch is CCTV City and has an active liquor ban operating, anywhere you want to have fun.
There is no connection between CCTV & Crime Reduction, with the exception of theft from carparks.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/2923560/Violent-crime-up-in-Christchurch
-
Actually it is very hard to lose your liquor licence. Very hard. The Liquor Licensing Commission has never ever revoked a licence.
What this says to me is that we don't need a raised drinking age or anything else. What we need is actual enforcement of the law as it currently stands. Selling alcohol, like driving a car, is not a right. Society grants you permission to do something that it is recognised can cause harm and great inconvenience to others, and (supposedly) punishes you when you fail to adhere to the duly promulgated rules.
If (and I'm not doubting you, just to be clear) nobody has ever had their licence revoked, that says that the "right" to make a living from selling alcohol has been given far, far too much precedence. It should never have been allowed to be a greater consideration than adherence with the not-very-complicated laws that govern the sale of alcohol. Fuck up, and fuck off, to put it coarsely.
-
+1
-
Yes, the 'right' to make a living selling alcohol (somewhat profitably I might add - all those pokies and bottle stores in South Auckland aren't there for an altruistic reason...) takes absolute precedence over anything else.
Which is why any punishment the Liquor Licensing Authority (LLA) hands out will be along the lines of one to two days closure for bottle stores and restaurant, usually on Sundays/Mondays.
I'm sure the police have a few choice words to say about the LLA.
Membership of the LLA is one District Court Judge and several other members, usually retired JPs - who invariably are white, older and straight. You can draw your own conclusions about the world view of the Authority.
I support your 'Fuck up-Fuck off' policy Matthew. No law change is needed to apply this kind of policy - all the tools are there within the current Act - just have to encourage the LLA to actually apply the policy.
-
Is that never in Auckland, or never in New Zealand? Just out of curiosity.
-
From the windswept beaches of the far north to the blustery winds of the southern reaches of Raikura, never in Aotearoa.
-
That is quite disgusting, in so many ways. I feel thoroughly vindicated in my oft-repeated belief that the problem is not with the laws as they stand but, rather, with the non-enforcement. Enforcement that, we were promised, would be thorough and effective to tie in with the liberalisation of supply restrictions.
-
The law on "not serving drunks" is wishful thinking, really.
How drunk is too drunk? Over the limit for driving? Louder and happier than normal? Vocalising stupid ideas? A bit wobbly? Annoying to other customers?
I've never been in any country overseas (including the ones usually described as having a wet drinking culture) without meeting drunks in bars. And indeed, I've found that bars that tolerate excessive drinking (like a typical English country pub) are no more likely to have an "aggro" atmosphere than pubs which take a prescriptive attitude.
Left to their own devices, most bar owners would take the view that if a person drives away custom of a greater value than their own consumption, then it's time to chuck them out.
-
The law on "not serving drunks" is wishful thinking, really.
Yes, possibly, but that's only one law of many that're obviously not being fully enforced. The one that's of far greater concern is the supply of liquor to minors, and that's one that's easily measured in an objective fashion: a person is either 18-or-older, or they're not. There's no room for wiggle. Some licensees have multiple strikes to their names, but still they hold licences to sell alcohol. That makes a mockery of all the strident messages at the time of lowering the age about how there would be no tolerance for breaches of the law, etc etc.
As far as "too drunk" goes, there have been cases of premises serving people who were so drunk they were unable to stand unaided. That's pretty objectively "too drunk".
-
And astonishingly, I find that the LLA has, actually cancelled a licence.
Is this the first one? Will they cancel other licences? Will they show teeth?
But sadly, given the poor state of bureaucracy in NZ Aotearoa, someone will simply apply in another name - use a front company - make their grandmother the applicant - and will be granted the licence.
-
But sadly, given the poor state of bureaucracy in NZ Aotearoa, someone will simply apply in another name
That'll last as long as it takes for the police to hear that there's a new application going in, though. Then they'll file an objection and, hopefully, this new-and-improved LLA will circular-file the new application.
That cancellation was way overdue, too. Four convictions for selling to minors?!?! That's at least one too many, and in my book two too many. I'd give licensees a single chance to change, and then that'd be the end of it. Slip-ups happen, so a single "freebie" (that still carries the consequence of a non-negligible trading ban) is not unreasonable, but on something like this there should be very little leeway for people to claim ignorance or misfortune.
-
And I recall on one occasion, a convenience store owner who got caught in the act selling booze to the under-aged claimed he was pressured by gang intimidation. So far it's anecdotal, as there's no police report to back it up.
I also doubt there's any coincidence between the density of liquor outlets in a locality, and the likelihood of civil unrest, if Detroit in 1967 and South Central L.A. in 1965 & 1992 are anything to go by.
-
I also doubt there's any coincidence between the density of liquor outlets in a locality, and the likelihood of civil unrest, if Detroit in 1967 and South Central L.A. in 1965 & 1992 are anything to go by.
Those are all complex issues however. Police like to tag liquor outlets as the problem when they appear before a LLA hearing, but in terms of the three incidents that you've listed you can say a lot more about unemployment, race, the police, even the seasons (60s America was noted for having riots over the long hot summers) than about how many liquor outlets were stacked up next to each other.
-
The Southlander/Jetset Bar is up for sale.
I spoke to the bar owner about a year back and he had moved the skinz out, but it would seem no-one came back.
It's opposite CPIT & the Jazz School in Christchurch.
-
I also doubt there's any coincidence between the density of liquor outlets in a locality, and the likelihood of civil unrest, if Detroit in 1967 and South Central L.A. in 1965 & 1992 are anything to go by.
Woah... shall I say "correlation does not imply causation"? I also doubt its any coincidence that the the density of liquor outlets in localities where nice white middle-class media folks and politicians just happen to live and socialise don't excite the same concern.
Where I do have some doubts is the idea that this freshly expunged drunk driver and bigoted arse-face spent a lot of time getting pickled in Watts or South Central.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.