egafd.com

Their missing the point if they do

Kids have sex underage so raisng the age just means it will go underground

You dont stop bad/destructive behaviour by barring it.You stop it by setting the example.From what i've seen in Britain & Australia we do the exact opposite

We celebrate with alcohol,we commiserate with alcohol

Untangle that and you may find the right solution

We also blame alcohol when we do wrong, or lean on alcohol when the church or medical science can't help.

Read into that what you will.

It is a crutch for many no doubt about that

I was in a bottle shop a week ago and this guy 20/21 was absolutely shitfaced(rollng eyes up into head)and reeking of alcohol.he was happy enough and said I'm mildly drunk at the minute but after this(carton of beer 2 bottles of scotch)I should be shitfaced

I asked myself then should people in that state be allowed to buy alcohol

I dont see any difference between that and buying a drink at a club/hotel
while intoxicated not that clubs/pubs/nightclubs enforce not serving to the intoxicated

Ive heard it settles the nerves .

steve. alcohol is an anesthtic so it ceratinly calms ur nerves. infact it puts u to sleep and deadens ur brain so u get less enjoyment out of things.

I see cheers Sandie.

Last post on this.

Sam Slater wrote:

> Why? You could quash all my confusion by telling me where you
> stand on raising the age limit on alcohol consumption.
>

I already have

> Should it be raised to 21 or not?

AS I SAID IN MY ORIGINAL POST In the format it's in no (for the reasons I gave) BUT I agree with what they are trying to achieve and this could be a way forward.


>If there's something I'm missing point it out. Please forgive me if I've no >inclination of trawling the web to digest other countries' legislations (if
> you were that interested in me reading it, you'd have supplied a link).


No I wouldn't. I'd expect you to know what you're talking about and you clearly don't.


> It's a simple enough question, and if I've misinterpreted
> everything you've said, I'm sure you could easily rectify it.
>

I have frequently and have no intention of doing it anymore on this.

[quote]Sam Slater wrote:

> Why? You could quash all my confusion by telling me where you
> stand on raising the age limit on alcohol consumption.
>

I already have

> Should it be raised to 21 or not?

AS I SAID IN MY ORIGINAL POST In the format it's in no (for the reasons I gave) BUT I agree with what they are trying to achieve and this could be a way forward.[/quote]

In the format it's in? Right, well......I've checked out your original post and you never said you disagreed with any format. For clarification, I'll quote the relevant paragraphs on drinking (only omitting the Richard Littlejohn and 'Shami Chipolata' comments).

You wrote as follows:

"I actually agree with what they are trying to do and this could be the way forward, as far as I am aware they can still use pubs and that could be a good thing for the pub industry which is in decline, but can see the consequences already.

"Trains of under 21's heading to the border towns etc. and instead of under 18's causing issues it could go up to under 21's."

Where in this original post did you disagree with the format? You 'agree with what they're trying to do' and 'think it could be the way forward'. There's no mention of condemning the method in achieving the goal (whatever they are!).

[quote]>If there's something I'm missing point it out. Please forgive me if I've no >inclination of trawling the web to digest other countries' legislations (if
> you were that interested in me reading it, you'd have supplied a link).


No I wouldn't. I'd expect you to know what you're talking about and you clearly don't.[/quote]

Why are you being a abrupt, randyandy? I thought I was pretty polite in asking you to forgive me if I'd missed something. I just wanted to know where you stood. Your last post seems to contradict your original though, so even though you answered my question -thank you, btw- it was in vain. I'm non the wiser.

What is it you're agreeing with, and what format are you disagreeing with? You really haven't made it clear, randyandy, despite your continual assurances to the contrary.

Are the Labour party as baffled as me when you're conversing with them?