I just read this idea in the comments of an op-ed piece (http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/organised-crime-is-out-of-control-20091026-hgm4.html) and think it has huge merits:

Putting drug users on a licence that functioned like a drivers licence in that points were deducted for anti-social behaviour under the influence, with the loss of a licence resulting in mandatory treatment in a residential drug treatment facility, would give the general public peace of mind.

I think this could be applied to drinking easily, like if you pick a fight in a taxi rank in the valley bang lost your drinking licence for 6mths, pass out in a park, well that's really only worth a point maybe 2, glass someone at the Colmslie sorry buddy even when you're out of prison you've been suspended from drinking in licenced venues for 2yrs anyway.

This is genius! The key is more licenses, not encouraging social responsibility!

We should have breeding licenses, and drinking licenses, and pet licenses, and caffeine licenses and barbecue licenses and litter licenses and spandex pant licenses and ...

points were deducted for anti-social behaviour under the influence

That seems entirely fair, so long as it was only anti-social behaviour and not just the mere possession causes the loss of "points".

I've never created a single problem for anyone else as a result of my drug use, so I have nothing to worry about.

pass out in a park, well that's really only worth a point maybe 2,

I don't believe so.

Fighting and glassing don't belong anywhere near sleeping in a public place, you really have to seperate victimless crimes from violent/antisocial crimes.

last edited by CHUB at 10:46:46 27/Oct/09

sounds like another thing we have to pay for each year.

how about just ban alcohol everywhere, all together
it kills more people than marijuana

lets all get high instead.

We already have an existing system to deal with people that act up under the influence of drugs... stopping them from taking drugs is pretty much just pussying out of disciplining people that do it.

I'm sure habitual drug users/abusers would love this scheme because it basically just lets them not have any real accountability for their actions, but for the rest of us it sounds sort of completely and utterly silly!

Let's not.

Where would one purchase a 'spandex pant license'?

Hah we did this topic back in 2005!

I'm sure habitual drug users/abusers would love this scheme because it basically just lets them not have any real accountability for their actions, but for the rest of us it sounds sort of completely and utterly silly!

Interesting trog - back in that thread you said:

That's a neat idea

Not having a go - genuinely curious as to what prompted the 180..

last edited by Hogfather at 11:00:56 27/Oct/09

LMAO Hogfather.

An elephant never forgets.

And by starting this thread you've clearly indicated that you're an elephant.

88 keys today, got my skinny wardrobe back baby!

points were deducted for anti-social behaviour under the influence

Going to need someone who's going to police this.

Which ruins the point, because if they can police it then they should just lock them up overnight.

I blame not enough police locking people up overnight. (and not enough police)

Yeh - I was behind the idea in '05 but I've gotten older and crustier.

The Man has the power to fix the alcohol violence problem if they really wanted to.

i would dig seeing a photo ID for a drinking license

You would have to get drunk before the picture so it matches what you look like when someone checks your ID.

I blame not enough police locking people up overnight. (and not enough police)

My bro was locked up overnight for chatting to a security guard while taking a piss. He said, "Having a good night?". Security guard booted him from the club for being drunk. Bro tried to get back in to let mates know, security called cops, lock-up for you, sunshine.

We already have an existing system to deal with people that act up under the influence of drugs... stopping them from taking drugs is pretty much just pussying out of disciplining people that do it.

I'm sure habitual drug users/abusers would love this scheme because it basically just lets them not have any real accountability for their actions, but for the rest of us it sounds sort of completely and utterly silly!

Sorry I don't mean this to be in replacement of criminal laws that exist for violent or property crimes but on top of where drug/alcohol use is an influencing factor on the crime committed.

Here I'll fix my statement "Police need to lock up more people overnight WHO DESERVE IT" :)

Bro tried to get back in to let mates know, security called cops, lock-up for you, sunshine

Happens quite a lot.

That's all police deal with though, nobody admits to the crime, being drunk, causing a problem... everyone is always innocent.

So the police have to make a quick decision, the security guard says he's drunk and making trouble, who do the police believe?

This sounds like an interesting idea. I wonder if this would eventually lead to things like employers requiring you to forfiet your drinking/drug license to gain employment in certain jobs.

A breeding license would be cool or if you get pregnant you sign up as soon as possible and do a course on parenting. Anyone who doesn't has to rock up to a clinic to be punched in the stomach so the baby would be aborted.

Hah we did this topic back in 2005!

I'm sure habitual drug users/abusers would love this scheme because it basically just lets them not have any real accountability for their actions, but for the rest of us it sounds sort of completely and utterly silly!

Interesting trog - back in that thread you said:

That's a neat idea

Not having a go - genuinely curious as to what prompted the 180..last edited by Hogfather at 11:00:56 27/Oct/09

then I wrote "though" and listed all the problems with it. I guess in four years I have more of an appreciated for how much bullshit is involved in enforcing those sorts of things and now just immediately dismiss it as too hard to do logistically as opposed to thinking it might possibly work

the government is not your friend. fuck more licenses.

the Labor government is not your friend

Amirite?!

no, all government.

You're a wonderful paradox infi!

Any Govt.

Govt serves it people, not the other way around.

This is great, I wouldn't get a drinking licence and I would have an excuse to not go out and just stay home.

I would have an excuse to not go out and just stay home.

Or some self control.

Govt serves it people, not the other way around.

LOL.

Governments serve themself.

what's the problem with having an intense dislike for all government and their obsession with regulation, then having a preference for the lesser of two evils. it is not a paradox at all? so please explain.

i will be sitting at home on the dole pulling bongs so these new laws won't be able to effect me

what's the problem with having an intense dislike for all government and their obsession with regulation, then having a preference for the lesser of two evils. it is not a paradox at all? so please explain.

When one considers something the "lesser of two evils" one doesn't usually suck its cock endlessly.

I am surprised socialists like the UK, EU etc haven't already introduced this fantastically paternalistic idea.

I am pretty sure the Queensland government will continue to talk about about practical substance abuse measures, but not actually do anything.

What would happen if you lost your drug license after a night out on the drugs. You would just get a fine for not being able to produce your license!

So the only type of punishment we should ever consider is prison? It's just mindblowing that since Victorian times we've just kept throwing people in prisons and haven't even considered that the state might protect us in some other way.

that state cannot protect you from yourself. prisons are no answer either. but a pointless piece of plastic is not gonna make a lick of difference to drug users.

But it does to drivers who lose their licence and I think this is an analagous situation..

that is a license for the particular activity of driving. it is illegal to drive influenced by alcohol or drugs, or to use a phone while driving etc. the license is to regulate an otherwise lawful, and socially and economically productive activity.

drug taking is not socially or economically productive, nor is it lawful.

this is where the whole concept falls flat.

So the only type of punishment we should ever consider is prison? It's just mindblowing that since Victorian times we've just kept throwing people in prisons and haven't even considered that the state might protect us in some other way.

I became a big fan of the idea of corporal punishment after reading Heinlein's Starship Troopers

DINGASSSSS!@#

that is a license for the particular activity of driving. it is illegal to drive influenced by alcohol or drugs, or to use a phone while driving etc. the license is to regulate an otherwise lawful, and socially and economically productive activity.

drug taking is not socially or economically productive, nor is it lawful.

this is where the whole concept falls flat.

Following this reasoning alcohol is a lawful & socially productive activity (I won't say economically but it could be argued as any consumerism stimulates the economy). I see no reason that illegal acts committed whilst under the influence of alcohol could not result in a points demerit system which meant the culprit was suspended from their ability to purchase alcohol or attend a licensed venue.

Unless you feel that government licensing of driving is similarly unnecessary?

that is a license for the particular activity of driving. it is illegal to drive influenced by alcohol or drugs, or to use a phone while driving etc. the license is to regulate an otherwise lawful, and socially and economically productive activity.

drug taking is not socially or economically productive, nor is it lawful.

this is where the whole concept falls flat.

Following this reasoning alcohol is a lawful & socially productive activity (I won't say economically but it could be argued as any consumerism stimulates the economy). I see no reason that illegal acts committed whilst under the influence of alcohol could not result in a points demerit system which meant the culprit was suspended from their ability to purchase alcohol or attend a licensed venue.

Unless you feel that government licensing of driving is similarly unnecessary?

there was actually just a big study that was released, commissioned by the WA government, about smoking:

http://www.cancerwa.asn.au/prevention/tobacco/policyresearch/

I have been meaning to post about this for a while but it estimates the overall cost of smoking on the economy. I haven't fully digested it but once I do I'll probably start a thread about it because it's really interesting

Or some self control.

Skythra, pay attention, your responses clearly show you don't think about what is being said.


trog, you do realise that the whole point of Starship Troopers was that the humans are Nazis? You're meant to agree with them, because of how the story is told, despite their obviously fascist ways. Just like how you're meant to be on Norman Bates' side in Psycho when it looks like things aren't going to go his way. Doesn't mean you should rewrite your philosophy on life.

Following this reasoning alcohol is a lawful & socially productive activity (I won't say economically but it could be argued as any consumerism stimulates the economy). I see no reason that illegal acts committed whilst under the influence of alcohol could not result in a points demerit system which meant the culprit was suspended from their ability to purchase alcohol or attend a licensed venue.

except that the whole point of licensing driving with a demerit points system is that it is an economically productive and essential part of life. as such a demerit system is the fairest/most practical/most bureaucratic whatever way to balance the right and economic imperative to drive, against the need to maintain a set of road rules which must have penalties attached.

who gives a shit about someone's right to drink alcohol or take drugs or be an ass, if they are going to abuse those then loss of those rights will not affect their livelihood for example.

last edited by infi at 18:20:05 27/Oct/09

My bro was locked up overnight for chatting to a security guard while taking a piss. He said, "Having a good night?". Security guard booted him from the club for being drunk. Bro tried to get back in to let mates know, security called cops, lock-up for you, sunshine.

i got kicked out of a club for spitting in a sink in the bathrooms. the bouncer saw me and kicked me out. i hate bouncers / authority figures. they abuse their powers so easily based on their shit ethical grounds. rather, there should be stricter guidelines.

i could go on and on about the abuse our good friends in blue do, but i'll just get too agitated.

I got kicked out of the RE for falling over. I hadn't even had a single drink, I'm just really unco. I walked straight back in though, multiple doors!

the license is to regulate an otherwise lawful, and socially and economically productive activity.

I think you'lll find the cost to the community as a result of alcohol far exceeds any economic benefit from that industry.

Hey I have an idea - what about prohibition?

Where would one purchase a 'spandex pant license'?

shudap pinky you know u already have a german version..

i got kicked out of a club for spitting in a sink in the bathrooms. the bouncer saw me and kicked me out. i hate bouncers / authority figures. they abuse their powers so easily based on their shit ethical grounds. rather, there should be stricter guidelines.

i got kicked out of a strip club a few weekends ago, coz wifey followed me into the mens toilets to yell at me (for spending too much money)

lol you cant even go to a strip club without the wife

hand in your balls now lol

How bout a licence to get licences !!!