- Joined
- Oct 28, 2007
- Messages
- 23,946
- Reaction score
- 16,548
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Northamptonshire Chief Constable Adrian Lee, who leads on the issue of problem drinking for Acpo in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, told the BBC that police cells were not the best places for people who got so drunk they were "incapable of looking after themselves".Preferring the term "welfare centres" for the so-called drunk tanks, Mr Lee said the taxpayer should not have to pick up the bill for people's drunkenness.
"Why don't we take them to a drunk cell owned by a commercial company and get the commercial company to look after them during the night until they are sober?" he said.
"When that is over, we will issue them with a fixed penalty and the company will be able to charge them for their care, which would be at quite significant cost and that might be a significant deterrent."
He said police were not "experts on health", so it could be hard to decide whether people should be in a police station or a hospital - and drunk people should not be "clogging up" A&E departments. Link.
I think "drunk tanks" are a great idea, but I also think the taxes that have hiked the cost of alcohol in the UK should be lowered to more reasonable levels. Many people like a drink but governments in England and Scotland have successively raised the price with the supposed aim of tackling alcohol abuse where the reality is that it adds to government revenue.
The effect is that all legal-age drinkers are paying extra because of a blunt tool to tackle excessive drinking. "Drunk tanks" would levy the costs on those who abuse alcohol - which in the UK, we all as tax-payers pay for.
There are problems with binge drink and Friday night city-centres in the UK - violence and clogged up Accident and Emergency centres are struggling to cope but this is where drunk tanks and penalty charges on those responsible should be part of the answer.
Not a bad idea, and at the same time lower the taxes on alcohol and cigarettes. They're legal substances, and it only harms those who can least afford it. If adults want to smoke and drink... that's their concern.I think "drunk tanks" are a great idea, but I also think the taxes that have hiked the cost of alcohol in the UK should be lowered to more reasonable levels. Many people like a drink but governments in England and Scotland have successively raised the price with the supposed aim of tackling alcohol abuse where the reality is that it adds to government revenue.
The effect is that all legal-age drinkers are paying extra because of a blunt tool to tackle excessive drinking. "Drunk tanks" would levy the costs on those who abuse alcohol - which in the UK, we all as tax-payers pay for.
There are problems with binge drink and Friday night city-centres in the UK - violence and clogged up Accident and Emergency centres are struggling to cope but this is where drunk tanks and penalty charges on those responsible should be part of the answer.
-- Another problem is when it's commercial, what happens if they don't get enough customers? They close down. What then?
I think "drunk tanks" are a great idea, but I also think the taxes that have hiked the cost of alcohol in the UK should be lowered to more reasonable levels. Many people like a drink but governments in England and Scotland have successively raised the price with the supposed aim of tackling alcohol abuse where the reality is that it adds to government revenue.
The effect is that all legal-age drinkers are paying extra because of a blunt tool to tackle excessive drinking. "Drunk tanks" would levy the costs on those who abuse alcohol - which in the UK, we all as tax-payers pay for.
There are problems with binge drink and Friday night city-centres in the UK - violence and clogged up Accident and Emergency centres are struggling to cope but this is where drunk tanks and penalty charges on those responsible should be part of the answer.
That's not a problem in the UK right now, we spend £2.7 billion a year in the NHS universal healthcare system because of alcohol abuse.
I'm not arguing the NHS stop caring for alcoholics but the immediate cost of the Friday night/ Saturday morning clean-up is crippling the UK.
I think "drunk tanks" are a great idea, but I also think the taxes that have hiked the cost of alcohol in the UK should be lowered to more reasonable levels. Many people like a drink but governments in England and Scotland have successively raised the price with the supposed aim of tackling alcohol abuse where the reality is that it adds to government revenue.
The effect is that all legal-age drinkers are paying extra because of a blunt tool to tackle excessive drinking. "Drunk tanks" would levy the costs on those who abuse alcohol - which in the UK, we all as tax-payers pay for.
There are problems with binge drink and Friday night city-centres in the UK - violence and clogged up Accident and Emergency centres are struggling to cope but this is where drunk tanks and penalty charges on those responsible should be part of the answer.
Drunk tanks sound like a good way of "stemming the bleeding" and "fixing the symptoms" but I prefer a more radical approach. Now I understand people like a drink, but I've been doing my research. I'm afraid I don't have direct statistics but I'm sure you would agree that alcohol is the cause of increased teenage pregnancies, car accidents, pedestrian accidents, rape, violence, abuse, a HUGE list of medical problems and the major issue of horrific dancing in public. As a result of all this we can hardly say "oh well" to drinking as a problem. Now the supposed "benefits" of alcohol are really so minimal as compared to the negatives that it can't be seen as a reason to drink. Of course, other drugs (and alcohol is classified as a depressant) are banned because of all the above reasons and are used in very small, controlled capacity for their limited medicinal purposes and I think the the enforced banning of such drugs is extremely positive to society. So why don't we attack the problem at the base? I know banning alcohol is very extreme and I don't expect it would ever occur but I push for it in the hope at least some limimation is one day applied to alcohol distribution and consumption.
I think "drunk tanks" are a great idea, but I also think the taxes that have hiked the cost of alcohol in the UK should be lowered to more reasonable levels. Many people like a drink but governments in England and Scotland have successively raised the price with the supposed aim of tackling alcohol abuse where the reality is that it adds to government revenue.
The effect is that all legal-age drinkers are paying extra because of a blunt tool to tackle excessive drinking. "Drunk tanks" would levy the costs on those who abuse alcohol - which in the UK, we all as tax-payers pay for.
There are problems with binge drink and Friday night city-centres in the UK - violence and clogged up Accident and Emergency centres are struggling to cope but this is where drunk tanks and penalty charges on those responsible should be part of the answer.
Drunk tanks sound like a good way of "stemming the bleeding" and "fixing the symptoms" but I prefer a more radical approach. Now I understand people like a drink, but I've been doing my research. I'm afraid I don't have direct statistics but I'm sure you would agree that alcohol is the cause of increased teenage pregnancies, car accidents, pedestrian accidents, rape, violence, abuse, a HUGE list of medical problems and the major issue of horrific dancing in public. As a result of all this we can hardly say "oh well" to drinking as a problem. Now the supposed "benefits" of alcohol are really so minimal as compared to the negatives that it can't be seen as a reason to drink. Of course, other drugs (and alcohol is classified as a depressant) are banned because of all the above reasons and are used in very small, controlled capacity for their limited medicinal purposes and I think the the enforced banning of such drugs is extremely positive to society. So why don't we attack the problem at the base? I know banning alcohol is very extreme and I don't expect it would ever occur but I push for it in the hope at least some limimation is one day applied to alcohol distribution and consumption.
Thread: Should the drunk be charged for their healthcare?
If by "the drunk" you mean chronic alcoholics, then there is no point to charging them -- chances are they don't typically have much money lying around.
-- Require everyone to buy "drunk insurance".
Isn't there already a fine that is associated with being picked up and thrown into jail for a night?
We have a huge problem with Friday-night pint-and-a-fight drunks - these are usually people with jobs who let off far too much steam on a Friday night in most of the UK's city centres. They tend to be well off and can afford the inflated prices that the government charges everyone in tax.
At the moment, responsible drinkers are hit by the sledgehammer tool of high alcohol tax charges and while young irresponsible drinkers carry on regardless and end up in accident & emergency units when they get into drunken fights at 2 in the morning.
How does that work?
Not in the UK unless the drunk is causing criminal damage or driving a vehicle.
We have a huge problem with Friday-night pint-and-a-fight drunks - these are usually people with jobs who let off far too much steam on a Friday night in most of the UK's city centres. They tend to be well off and can afford the inflated prices that the government charges everyone in tax.
At the moment, responsible drinkers are hit by the sledgehammer tool of high alcohol tax charges and while young irresponsible drinkers carry on regardless and end up in accident & emergency units when they get into drunken fights at 2 in the morning.
I think "drunk tanks" are a great idea, but I also think the taxes that have hiked the cost of alcohol in the UK should be lowered to more reasonable levels. Many people like a drink but governments in England and Scotland have successively raised the price with the supposed aim of tackling alcohol abuse where the reality is that it adds to government revenue.
The effect is that all legal-age drinkers are paying extra because of a blunt tool to tackle excessive drinking. "Drunk tanks" would levy the costs on those who abuse alcohol - which in the UK, we all as tax-payers pay for.
There are problems with binge drink and Friday night city-centres in the UK - violence and clogged up Accident and Emergency centres are struggling to cope but this is where drunk tanks and penalty charges on those responsible should be part of the answer.
The intention of reducing those problems is clear, but whether prohibition actually does achieve that intention or not is quite another question. Alcohol prohibition is a funding black hole to try to effectively enforce. It simply can't be done. Way too ubiquitous and societally/culturally accepted, and too easy to make.
prohibition has been tried, and it was a disaster.
Prohibition in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Mmm.
I see what you mean. Do you agree though that if it were possible, it would be worthwhile?
If these people are functional enough to hold and keep jobs and stay out of jail, what exactly is the huge problem? Is your law enforcement failing to charge people with assault and battery?
-- Responsible drinkers presumably drink less, and thus pay less of the sin tax than heavy drinkers. And people who don't drink at all are paying 0% of that tax, which is also proportional.
1) You want taxes on alcohol to be lowered.
2) How does that coincide with you wanting people to drink less?
I don't follow - if the government has to put more into alcohol-related crimes, shouldn't they have every bit of a right to raise the cost of liquor?
Your argument isn't coming together very well. . . and what you bring up first (taxes and drunk tanks) has little to do with paying for healthcare.
What is it that you think a drunk tank is? In the US is just what they refer to when someone is intoxicated and is taken in by the police. They refer to holding them until they're sober enough to process out as 'being in the drunk tank' - other than that, it means nothing.
See my earlier post regarding the cost of these drunks ending up in Accident and Emergency units on a Friday night...
Doesn't address that taxes on alcohol in the UK are ridiculous. Going for an after work drink with 5 friends used to cost around £7.50 a round if they all had a pint. Now, thanks to the duty escalator it's over £15 for 5 pints for 5 friends.
I'm not sure you read the OP? The police proposed drunk tank is a care unit run by private healthcare business. Drunks would be looked after by trained medical professionals rather than police officers who are better handling crime and disorder than caring for unconscious drunks.
Taxes... tax on beer = tax on all consumers. We have something called a duty escalator which although stopped, automatically raised taxes year on year on alcohol.
Petition your government to stop covering these services. If they want to fight with each other and pay for their own subsequent medical costs, so be it. You said yourself that they're well enough off.
-- Bummer. Ever consider homebrewing?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?