Guest TPAFKATS Posted October 21, 2016 Report Share Posted October 21, 2016 Bunch of jakeys on here....... I would hope Scottish Courts had more pressing matters than cheap poxy booze The Scottish Court system has only been involved in this matter due to the Scotch Whisky industry insisting on fighting the legislation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted October 21, 2016 Report Share Posted October 21, 2016 5 hours ago, tony soprano said: The Scottish Court system has only been involved in this matter due to the Scotch Whisky industry insisting on fighting the legislation. Indeed, and the European Court had to waste time on this matter too for much the same reason. The thing is though the policy looks flawed. First off the minimum prices quoted won't affect most of the popular brands I even understand that the price of Buckfast would remain unaltered. And secondly instead of using taxation to raise prices the Scottish Government instead opted to allow the breweries and retailers to retain the extra profit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faraway saint Posted October 22, 2016 Report Share Posted October 22, 2016 7 hours ago, cockles1987 said: Mythbuster......... The current prices in Asda, Morrison's and Tesco for popular brands of Bells Whisky, would see a rise of between 5 & 33%. Whilst Smirnoff Vodka, Bacardi Rum & Gordon's Gin would see a rise of between 10 & 25% If that's not affecting prices then I don't know what would in Walter Mitty's world. All the price increases are as they are presently priced for anyone to check. Oh, that's a bit shit. Who get's all this extra money? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintnextlifetime Posted October 22, 2016 Report Share Posted October 22, 2016 21 hours ago, Isle Of Bute Saint said: Norway used to have much lower prices for drink than it has today as such the country suffered with drink problems in the population. Norway decided to put a high tax on alchol to combat the problem. All that happend was home brew kits went through the roof. Most Nogies now drink heavily in the house before they go out so high tax does not work. However cheap torpedo bottles of cyder and beer in the uk make it easy for the young to get plastered this where our problem lies. Also we don't educate enough about over consumption of acholic drinks. It's a hard one to fix. In this country , I think cheap supermarket booze has been the major factor in pubs closing , more so than the smoking ban . The days of meeting your Buddies in the pub for a couple of beers and some good chat are rapidly on the decline , which is sad in as much as it has been a cultural thing for a long time but the social media sites are also part of the decline too . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted October 22, 2016 Report Share Posted October 22, 2016 Indeed, and the European Court had to waste time on this matter too for much the same reason. The thing is though the policy looks flawed. First off the minimum prices quoted won't affect most of the popular brands I even understand that the price of Buckfast would remain unaltered. And secondly instead of using taxation to raise prices the Scottish Government instead opted to allow the breweries and retailers to retain the extra profit. What taxation powers could the Scottish Government have used to increase taxation on alcohol. Isn't it reserved to Westminster? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsidebud Posted October 22, 2016 Report Share Posted October 22, 2016 Don't agree with this - its just a case of treating a symptom rather than the root causes in the individuals themselves or society as a whole. The way I see it is that the people being targeted are likely to find ways of getting the money for booze - whether it be alcoholic parents spending less on their families to cover the increases in prices or underage drinkers who may be getting the money for their binging through illegal means. However I can see it impacting honest people who just happen to be poor and who currently look forward to a wee cheap weekend tipple. Why should they be impacted? If certain people are causing problems through drink then deal with those people on a case by case basis Or not - and while we're at it why not ban cars due to the number of irresponsible drivers who as a group seem to be regularly causing death and injury due to dangerous driving... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintnextlifetime Posted October 22, 2016 Report Share Posted October 22, 2016 4 hours ago, southsidebud said: Don't agree with this - its just a case of treating a symptom rather than the root causes in the individuals themselves or society as a whole. The way I see it is that the people being targeted are likely to find ways of getting the money for booze - whether it be alcoholic parents spending less on their families to cover the increases in prices or underage drinkers who may be getting the money for their binging through illegal means. However I can see it impacting honest people who just happen to be poor and who currently look forward to a wee cheap weekend tipple. Why should they be impacted? If certain people are causing problems through drink then deal with those people on a case by case basis Or not - and while we're at it why not ban cars due to the number of irresponsible drivers who as a group seem to be regularly causing death and injury due to dangerous driving... I think to a large degree , they are dealing with these people mostly at the weekends . Something like 50% of police call outs are drink related . There is obviously a cost with that, whearas ,the system of increased taxation is a revenue spinner for them so they are always going to push for that . . A policeman once told me he would rather go to a house full of druggies than a call to a house full of drunks . . Per the American prohibition period , people who want drink will always get it somehow . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted October 22, 2016 Report Share Posted October 22, 2016 4 hours ago, southsidebud said: - and while we're at it why not ban cars due to the number of irresponsible drivers who as a group seem to be regularly causing death and injury due to dangerous driving... Good post, but you miss something. The actual parallel to your example is that the Scottish Government would simply increase the cost of fuel .This of course doesn't stop the group that seem to be regularly causing death and injury due to dangerous driving, it simply makes it more expensive for them to kill people. And the extra money that's raised won't go to policing, the NHS or to the emergency services, no that would be stupid. It would be far better to give all the extra profit to the oil companies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Posted October 22, 2016 Report Share Posted October 22, 2016 Not before time. But, but, surely the us pair of jakeys would be worst off money wise according to shull [emoji12] [emoji485] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kendo Posted October 22, 2016 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2016 1 hour ago, renfrew said: But, but, surely the us pair of jakeys would be worst off money wise according to shull Perhaps, however we're minted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insaintee Posted October 23, 2016 Report Share Posted October 23, 2016 On 21/10/2016 at 0:49 PM, faraway saint said: On 21/10/2016 at 1:37 PM, Kendo said: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougJamie Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 On 21/10/2016 at 4:49 PM, faraway saint said: Indeed, stupid. ^^^^^^^^^ (Could use narrow minded, short sighted, selfish, naïve but stupid seems to cover all bases) Well those seems to describe u perfectly . Great self assessment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gruffalo Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 The whole principal of minimum pricing of alcohol will not solve the problem of what is primarily a social problem. It is unclear how a more expensive drink solves the need for you to have a drink in the first place. If you price alcohol out of the someones price range they will get their hit from either black market drink or will find a cheaper avenue to get a hit. It is worth noting that the majority of alcohol abusers tend to be fairly affluent. The changes to government policy will not impact them. The way to solve the problem is to engage with the concept of why do people drink, why do they drink in excess together with how they purchase their alcohol. For years the UK government have tried to price cigarettes out of the market for obvious health reasons through taxation. While it had a minimal impact it did not stop people smoking in fact what it showed was that certain people would rather forego a necessity to get their nicotine hit. It is no coincidence that a government policy to make smoking socially unacceptable with the smoking ban has reduced the number of smokers. (The reduction in cigarette smoking can also related to the introduction of E cigarettes) The manner of how people purchase alcohol has changed dramatically in the last 30 years and in my opinion has influenced how people drink and how they deal with the social interaction with alcohol. You can now buy your tipple while purchasing your petrol ??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antrin Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 The cost of supermarket beer is cheaper than what they sell bloody water for!! I never fail to be amazed at mugs who BUY water, especially with so much beautiful, clean, free stuff draining from the hills to our taps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shull Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 Disgraceful that decent people, who enjoy alcohol without any problems, are being overcharged because of jaked morons. Sort out those with issues and leave the rest alone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salmonbuddie Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 The cost of supermarket beer is cheaper than what they sell bloody water for!! I never fail to be amazed at mugs who BUY water, especially with so much beautiful, clean, free stuff draining from the hills to our taps. You've never had to drink what comes out of the taps in Renfrew, then... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 2 hours ago, shull said: Disgraceful that decent people, who enjoy alcohol without any problems, are being overcharged because of jaked morons. Sort out those with issues and leave the rest alone. The SNP are sorting it out Shull. You've got to give them credit for that. They are introducing sobriety tagging - a new innovation where a tag will pick up on you drinking alcohol by reading the levels in your sweat. They are going to give judges the opportunity to sentence a criminal to wearing a sobriety tag as an outcome for their violent anti social behaviour instead of getting the guilty party into jail, or making them doing community service. The flaw in their plan is that these tags all use GPS technology - in Scotland our GPS coverage is often patchy at best, and if someone wearing one of those tags happens to be drinking and the tag picks this up the onus will fall on the already overstretched police force to go on the thimble hunt looking for the miscreant. So if you happen across a burglar trying to break into your property and you phone the police, just bear in mind that the reason they might not be able to get there straight away is because they're scouring large areas of GPS black spot land trying to find someone on a sobriety order who's probably been smart enough to look up the GPS black spots in their area before selecting their park bench to go on a bender. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salmonbuddie Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 The SNP are sorting it out Shull. You've got to give them credit for that. They are introducing sobriety tagging - a new innovation where a tag will pick up on you drinking alcohol by reading the levels in your sweat. They are going to give judges the opportunity to sentence a criminal to wearing a sobriety tag as an outcome for their violent anti social behaviour instead of getting the guilty party into jail, or making them doing community service. The flaw in their plan is that these tags all use GPS technology - in Scotland our GPS coverage is often patchy at best, and if someone wearing one of those tags happens to be drinking and the tag picks this up the onus will fall on the already overstretched police force to go on the thimble hunt looking for the miscreant. So if you happen across a burglar trying to break into your property and you phone the police, just bear in mind that the reason they might not be able to get there straight away is because they're scouring large areas of GPS black spot land trying to find someone on a sobriety order who's probably been smart enough to look up the GPS black spots in their area before selecting their park bench to go on a bender. What a pile of wanky pish... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deekthebuddie Posted October 25, 2016 Report Share Posted October 25, 2016 Shower of shite, promoted mainly by the SNP, based on the 'Success' of the methadone program Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTOF Posted October 25, 2016 Report Share Posted October 25, 2016 Fantastic idea. Especially given the news today that liver cancer deaths in Scotland have increased by 52% in the past 10 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted October 25, 2016 Report Share Posted October 25, 2016 Shower of shite, promoted mainly by the SNP, based on the 'Success' of the methadone program This is Dickson-esque in its wanky pishness Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted October 27, 2016 Report Share Posted October 27, 2016 (edited) Quote Justice Secretary Michael Matheson said: “Rather than just deciding on what kind of electronic monitoring they’re going to use, they work out what they’re trying to achieve first of all and then look at whether electronic monitoring would help to achieve that aim,” he said. “And it could be different types. It could be GPS or the radio system which we have at the present time. We want to focus on outcomes. “The report highlights that we could use electronic monitoring in a much more effective way, for example, for individuals remanded into custody.”Read more at: http://www.scotsman.com/news/criminals-could-be-given-sobriety-tags-and-gps-trackers-1-4247842 Coward - here's your arse. Edited October 27, 2016 by Stuart Dickson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insaintee Posted October 27, 2016 Report Share Posted October 27, 2016 On 25/10/2016 at 6:58 PM, Deekthebuddie said: Shower of shite, promoted mainly by the SNP, based on the 'Success' of the methadone program The methadone program is successful in its primary aim. The reduction of civil disorder by junkies. In that aspect it is extraordinarily successful. It does very little or nothing in terms of weaning junkies of drugs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted October 27, 2016 Report Share Posted October 27, 2016 27 minutes ago, Slartibartfast said: Coward - here's your arse. You're a funny guy. Cockles asks you for proof of your assertion that they use GPS tracking, you provide a link that says they use radio tracking and you think that you win the argument. As I said, you're a funny guy. Go on, do your best Joe Pesci impersonation. You can't read. Mathieson says that they use GPS OR Radio tracking. That obviously means some prisoners are going to be on GPS only tags with all the blackspots that we've got. It proves the point I made. It proves the SNP is soft on crime. It proves that the police forces will have to pick up yet another f**k up from the Scottish Government and it proves that the police will have to do the work prison officers currently do - despite the force already being stretched beyond breaking point. As your carer to have another wee go at helping you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted October 27, 2016 Report Share Posted October 27, 2016 (edited) 17 minutes ago, cockles1987 said: https://www.holyrood.com/articles/news/criminals-be-satellite-tracked-and-electronically-tested-alcohol-new-tags Would Sir like his own arse served warm, cold or stuffed. The article I used quoted the Justice Minister directly. Your Hollyrood one didn't. It's quite clear that the tags do not have multiple formats. They are EITHER GPS or radio. Reading your article suggests that the Scottish Government is considering putting GPS tags on sex offenders - one of THE most ridiculous and scary outcomes I could ever imagine as a parent. Your arse is on a plate. Just accept it. GPS technology has massive blackspot areas all over Scotland. This is car crash government in action. Edited October 27, 2016 by Stuart Dickson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.