Drunk tank plan: Binge drinkers could be thrown in private sector run cells until they sober up | Vital Forums

Drunk tank plan: Binge drinkers could be thrown in private sector run cells until they sober up

#1
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/drunk-tank-plan-binge-drinkers-2281751

Top police officers believe intoxicated revellers should be kept in the tanks overnight and charged £400 for their care the morning after.

-----

Not the best report on it, but what do people think of this.

Subject to controls so it couldn't be abused by the private company, and it was the police's decision not the private companies decision on who constituted somebody to be dealt etc....I don't see why those who get too pissed to take care of themselves should drain the taxpayers purse anymore.
 
G

Guest

Guest
#2
The only way to sort out the drink problems in this country is to relax the laws on drink. Tell a kid not to do something - he will most likely do it..If he grows up without restraints - it will never be an issue.
 
G

Guest

Guest
#3
As for the drunk tanks - if you look at Cardiff city centre at 3am (sat night/sun morning) you could say they are a good idea. The Police and Hospitals shouldnt have to be put under the pressure that they are every weekend because of drunks. - Should save us money in the long run on these services too. Are you happy that your taxes are paying hospital staff/Policing - to look after drunks?
 
#4
GT I've just heard some liberals drop their cups of tea in relation to your first post....give people a choice and not instantly think EVERYBODY will be corrupted...we have legislation against that!
 
#6
I'm not allowed to use that excuse as a smoker, so I can't as a drinker either.

Also have to factor in time constraints, dealing with a twat who doesn't know when he's had enough takes policing and nursing away from those who haven't had a choice in their ailment that night.

But again, make people more responsible for their actions and I think you're far more likely to get an educated response from them rather than the preachy drink = bad for you.
 
#7
mike_field - 18/9/2013 19:12

I'm not allowed to use that excuse as a smoker, so I can't as a drinker either.

Also have to factor in time constraints, dealing with a twat who doesn't know when he's had enough takes policing and nursing away from those who haven't had a choice in their ailment that night.

But again, make people more responsible for their actions and I think you're far more likely to get an educated response from them rather than the preachy drink = bad for you.
I've used the same argument to support Smokers. That's part of the reason you pay so much, plus you all kick the Bucket early and hence put less strain on the NHS and Local Authorities. As a non Smoker, carry on!!!!

Seriously, though, I have no objection to this idea, but it needs a bit more research first. Who decides whether someone is detained? Would Police still be taken off the Streets whilst escorting drinkers to the cells? Would Private companies be responsible for this?

It needs fleshing out a bit before I decide.
 
#8
Agreed, it's choice. One of these days I'll quit as I'm bored of them, but it's just habit especially typing away at the computer now - I have a fag break when I'm trying to think of how best to put something lol

But it is slightly different to alcohol. There's drinking a moderate amount and accepting the risks, and then the treatment you've paid for, but that's not the same as getting absolutely arseholed on a night out - domestic disturbance, needing to be nannied and falling around like a cretin needing hospital treatment that is directly your fault and not the fault of the alcohol, but your inability to control what you drink.

I don't equate the two, so I'm all for them, but obviously a low profit set up would be more beneficial as £400 for a night when 99% of the time you'd just be letting somebody rant at a mental door or sleep it off does seem steep as a suggestion.

But it has legs, town centres would be less stupid places when people started paying attention to what they drank and so on, and it would free up more coppers/A&Es to actually do their real jobs instead of this babysitting nonsense.

I think, as said it wasn't the best report, there more details on the TV, it seems the suggestion would be the Police decide who needs a bed for the night and they'd detain them (in mobile cells) whilst the private company came and collected them so the coppers maintained the presence which seems sensible to me. And clearly with a bit of thought the private company could be in situ in most cases, on a shuttle basis. One leaves city centre, next one sets out from base to replace it etc.

Be surprised if we don't here a lot more about this, just wouldn't want it to be a cash cow for somebody, with the Police even taking a commission for referral. Bout time we started doing things with a mind to improving the country, not just lining people's pockets.
 
#10
That sounds reasonable Mike. My Sister is the senior Nurse at a big Hospital, and it is definitely a major problem in her A&E department.

My concern would be to ensure that private Companies detained people for the right reasons, not to make money, and I would be worried someone could get hurt, or even die, in custody. The solution you give covers the first one. The second is tougher, but I hope that someone would keep an eye on them all whilst detained.

As I say, my first reaction was positive, and it remains so.
 
#11
Interestingly, there was someone on the Radio earlier suggesting that if people were encouraged back to their local Pub, then many of the problems could be reduced. A good landlord knows his customers, and you can effectively control people who get out of order. There is also the Social stigma of losing control in front of people who know you.

How about reduced tax on alcohol in local pubs? Make it cheaper to drink at your local? It would be good for the community as well.
 
G

Guest

Guest
#12
In the article it says a member of the medical profession will be at these drunk tanks to be on hand. I think the main issue is that these drunks are are off streets and in a safe place for the night where they cannot hurt themselves or anyone else. Of course this system will be abused for the money - they will be empty Sun - Thur and yet full on Fri and Sat - it will need to pay for itself and have a return. The 400 quid wont go along way when you look at the overheads. Toilets smashed, walls/doors kicked in, vomit everywhere, violence towards staff - none of it will come cheap. Would you work one night a week for a couple of hundred quid, knowing you could get stabbed, kicked, butted, punched by some drunken head case? Then mop up all the puke, unblock the bog the next morning? No thanks!

But if someone is willing to do it - I will support them and wish them luck, as it helps clean up our city centres, allows more police on the streets and takes pressure off the health service.

But I also agree with article that it dosnt actually put a safe message across to everyone who consumes alcohol - that I think is where the rules need to change. If you smack a child - he will most likely be naughty in school!
 

Pride of Lions

Vital Football Legend
#13
My concern is the availiability of cheap alcohol at supermarkets basically around the clock.

"Our children" are 95% tanked up from cheap supermarket booze before they hit the likes of Broad Street. When I was a teenager (in the old days) the only places you could buy alcohol was at a pub or an off licence. Now you can buy it almost anywhere. Until they do something about the cause, they'll always have problems.
 
G

Guest

Guest
#14
Pride of Lions - 18/9/2013 19:52

My concern is the availiability of cheap alcohol at supermarkets basically around the clock.

"Our children" are 95% tanked up from cheap supermarket booze before they hit the likes of Broad Street. When I was a teenager (in the old days) the only places you could buy alcohol was at a pub or an off licence. Now you can buy it almost anywhere. Until they do something about the cause, they'll always have problems.
Ive been to many places in the world where alcohol can be purchased far, far cheaper than in this country - yet the locals dont/rarely abuse it.

The problems lie in the suppressed manner in which us Brits have to live(brought up) that cause the issues with alcohol - not the pricing or availability!
 
#15
Some good points being made in here, but I'll leave the smack a child = child behaves badly argument for another thread as that's nonsense.

Good points about local pubs, neighbours etc as opposed to blind drinking in a pubs r us city centre joint where that social control of not being anonymous doesn't kick in.

Also a fair point about repressed behaviour when it comes to drinking, needs to be less right of passage and more accepted like in many countries abroad who don't have the same (or at least the same reported levels of problems) as the press also plays a huge part here as what we call binge drinking now we did used to call the weekend!

But equally, the preloading they call it I believe, is the main problem. Pub takings in the main are down even on binge nights, so people aren't drinking more in the pub than ever before, it's because they've already drank half of what they would before they go out and then you get those who think starting the night with a bottle of spirits gives them a headstart.

Health issues would have to be paramount as well, but the issues of cost in terms of replacing equipment. I used to work in security and there is equipment out there that is anti suicide, very tough wearing that can stand abuse that would last yonks ages because after all we are talking about an environment that would need to be clean, not 5 star status and pretty to look at.

Also, along with on site medical treatment that would need to be a must, I'd see no problem with good quality CCTV and sound to help the monitoring but it would need to be included along side physical visits.

Simple way round staffing and quiet days is you simply second workers for the required nights, it would still be a saving on general manpower, and nullify the worry of highly skilled people only working 2-3 nights a week.
 
#16
Yeah, the loading up at home is more of an issue now. I remember it being common in Scandinavian Countries, because of the high prices at bars, and now it's come here.

I was allowed to drink with my family from around 12, and yes, I had much less of a problem when I left home for Uni. If you see it as something completely normal, you treat it differently. The people with real problems were the ones let off the leash at 18.

Is it actually illegal for parents to allow it at home? I just assumed it was what most parents did? I do drink, but I've never got to that point where I don't know what I am doing, and never been in trouble through drinking. Mind you, these days it's because I don't want the hangover next day!!
 
#17
I was cheeky, I was drinking from about 14 even in the local but it was relaxing, 2-3 tops, and again not encouraged by family but at family gatherings I wasn't stopped - I was just probably watched a lot more than I thought I was to make sure I didn't go over the top also.

I've been very drunk on nights out before, but never to the extent I got involved in any real trouble and nor to the extent I wasn't with it enough to find my way safely home at the end of it.

As you say the taboo or right of passage or something new isn't there, so you don't treat it as such.

In fact my drinking buddies often ended up putting an end to the night when those who hadn't drank before joined us as they hadn't learnt control, so we spent nights making sure they were home safe etc before hitting one of our homes for the play station or whatever because we still had hours left in us lol

Along with that though came the idea of clubs and bars being able to open 24 hours, as it seemed to put an end to getting in a few cans to finish the night off if you wanted once home, too many just stayed out and then hit problems because of lack of tolerance kicking in.

Think it's illegal in public places but not so sure about the home to be honest. Everybody knows I have the occasional night when I've clearly had too much on here and I've been too engrossed in a thread or argument to realise I've hit my level and it's time to log off, so it happens to all, but if that's going to happen better to be safely home in my mind and make sure it's a rare occurrence not a weekly deal. But even then, for all my nights over the years, I know I've been able to catch myself, not hit submit, and logged off 5/6 times easily for every 1 I missed.

I equate the 'being engrossed' element to just enjoying the night out - especially if you've already preloaded - even for those look out for the limit can miss it at points. And if you've got somebody you're trying to impress, mates egging you on for one more, that would make it even more difficult as the inhibitions go.

Ha - never had a hangover!

As you say it's about balance, education, and not (especially at that age as it's natural to want the world) really being introduced to it without having the grounding first to know what the signs are.

But I do think for the vast majority, having a night in one of these places if operated properly and then getting a bill at the end that they can't worm out of would make many wake up and think, and even if they only halved the level of preloading the next weekend, that would have a dramatic difference to behaviour.
 

The Fear

A Wise Man (once sat next to him)
#18
Mr Lee, the head of Northamptonshire Police, said: “I do not see why the police service or the health service should pick up the duty of care for someone who has chosen to go out and get so drunk that they cannot look after themselves.



Tend to agree. The cities and towns are an embarrassment when you see the people puking, falling over, fighting etc.

Police and NHS can't cope.

Not sure drunk tanks are the answer, imagine trying to control them all? Plus imagine the reaction when the first death 'in care' occurs.

Conclusion?

KIIIILLLL THEM...

 

kefkat

Vital Football Legend
#19
HeathfieldRoad1874 - 18/9/2013 19:08

Revenue on Alcohol brings in £9.8bn a year, and Alcohol related problems cost around £6bn.

You could argue that they are paying for themselves.


:56: :56: :56:
Alcohol related is more than that, Heath. It is £22 billion as a whole! That includes not just the alcohol related illness, but all the rest people forget about, such as police, hospitals, social services, foster carers,courts and family costs, the professionals and agencies, the time lost off work and more.
 

kefkat

Vital Football Legend
#20
The Fear - 18/9/2013 21:58

Mr Lee, the head of Northamptonshire Police, said: “I do not see why the police service or the health service should pick up the duty of care for someone who has chosen to go out and get so drunk that they cannot look after themselves.



Tend to agree. The cities and towns are an embarrassment when you see the people puking, falling over, fighting etc.

Police and NHS can't cope.

Not sure drunk tanks are the answer, imagine trying to control them all? Plus imagine the reaction when the first death 'in care' occurs.

Conclusion?

KIIIILLLL THEM...
No different to being locked up in a cell. Someone checks on them every half and hour or so and they get a bill the next day. Totally agree with it, which some may find surprising..