Quote:
|
Originally Posted by clarie
With alcohol, there is currently no proof that there is a direct impact on the health of non-drinkers from people drinking around them that is strong enough to warrant prohibiton of alcohol consumption in public places.
|
Alcohol related illness, whether it be a peppered liver from years of drinking, a gash in the face from a passing drunk or a car crash caused by a drunk driver IS a major burden on the NHS. Removing these unnecessary cases from the NHS workload would significantly speed up the queues and allow people to be treated that much quicker. It therefore IS having an effect on the health of non-drinkers. Try attending casualty at 1 a.m. on a friday or saturday night and, chances are, you will have quite a wait ahead of you.
Alcohol is completely unnecessary in society. Nobody needs it (or should need it). It costs the NHS a lot of money and takes up a lot of resources. It does affect the health of drinker and non-drinker alike. Why shouldn't it be banned?
It's as fair and reasonable as a ban on smoking. Smokers are, in the main, willing to compromise through dedicated sealed smoking areas and the like. It's the non-smokers that refuse to bend in any way to a compromise but will throw a hissy fit if anyone suggests taking away their beloved booze FOR EXACTLY THE SAME REASON that get me.
I am a drinker and a smoker. I don't want to see either banned but I also want to be able to go for a pint and a smoke whether it be through smoking/non-smoking pubs or dedicated smoking areas.
Oh, and it's "moot" Pierre
