Over on Counting Cats in Zanzibar, the proprietor has noted something.
All those who delight in the smoking ban in winter but moan about smokers in the beer garden in summer can take heart. Soon they won't need to put up with the smokers outside.
Why? Is smoking outside to be banned too? Not yet. Drinking outside is to be banned before that happens.
Some gems from the article:
There are now 712 zones, some covering vast areas where there is no record of disorder. There are city-wide bans in Coventry and Brighton, which cover even the quietest suburban streets.
Smokers used to have one railway carriage. Drinkers now face a similar restriction. Not troublemakers, note. Drinkers. Glass of wine with your picnic? No chance. It'll get you arrested.
Birmingham tried to introduce a city-wide ban but had to back down in the face of public opposition. Instead it is introducing the drinking zones gradually across the city.
The public didn't want it so they're introducing it on the sly anyway. Ah, the power we hand to the most cretinous in our midst is astounding.
...police are routinely ignoring Home Office guidelines and confiscating bottles of wine and beer from peaceful picnickers and other adults having a quiet drink outdoors. In some cases, drinks have allegedly been seized by police from adults who have just bought them from an off licence and are on their way home.
Yes indeed. Mere possession of a bottle of booze with intent to drink it is illegal now. Except it's not. Not really. Just as photography isn't illegal but you can be arrested for it anyway. The police and the pseudoplods now make up the rules as they see fit. It's only a matter of time before someone snaps and one of these idiots is found dangling from a lamp-post. Then the shit will really hit the fan.
Warwickshire police confiscated 150 cans and bottles of alcohol in two evenings during the annual Mop Fair in Stratford-upon-Avon last October, yet there was only one arrest for drunk and disorderly behaviour.
150 cans and bottles, one case of drunk and disorderly. Damn, he must have been seriously plastered.
“The law is clear that these powers should only be used to address nuisance associated with drinking alcohol in a public place, not to disrupt peaceful activities such as family picnics or to challenge people consuming alcohol who are not causing a problem. We expect local police forces to use common sense in the application of these powers,” a Home Office spokesman said.
They expect common sense? From the pseudoplods they've foisted on us? Common sense is not part of the selection procedure for these uniformed tyrants. A general desire to be a total swine is the only qualification required. As for the police, well, we've long since given up on most of them. And the local councils are staffed entirely by drooling, gibbering Bedlam rejects with as much capability for rational thought as a patch of gravel. Common sense? I don't think we can even call it that any more. It's become increasingly less common in recent years. Soon it must surely be known as 'rare sense' and be made illegal. If it hasn't already.
The Righteous have been allowed to control us for so long now that they think there are no limits. They can push and push and meet no resistance. They are looking at it the wrong way. Rather than pushing a compliant jelly, they are stretching an elastic band of patience. They will meet little resistance in doing it, just the same, but unlike the jelly they think they are pushing, which would eventually collapse, the elastic they are pulling will snap.
When it does, it will hit them in the eye. And once it snaps it cannot be mended.
I'm sure there are those who want us to riot, so they can have an excuse to impose even stricter controls. I have always thought it was a bad idea to give them the excuse and still do, although I now wonder whether they will be able to impose any controls at all when the public finally snaps. These ever-more-insane petty attacks have put the public in the position where they now see the councils, the police and especially the worthless tyrants in uniform known as C3POs or something equally irrelevant, as their enemy. Once they start to retaliate, are they going to listen to more pronouncements from those they already regard as the enemy?
It has already gone too far. The camel's back is creaking under the strain of one more straw, one more straw, one more petty and pointless little straw. It's proved to be a very strong back but that final straw is coming. Any day now.
The Righteous think it's funny to wait outside an off licence for someone who has bought a legal product and is carrying it home, then force them to open it and pour away the contents while they laugh. Dance, boy, dance for your master. When that elastic snaps they will see what real fury looks like and it will not be wearing a uniform and it will heed no rules. Fury calls no man master. Rage does not care what names you call it. Anger uses sticks and stones, not names.
One more tug on the elastic, Righteous. Keep pulling. Sooner or later, one of your petty little control freaks will pick the wrong target.
And then...


Comments
I can't have a peaceful drink without people thinking I'm going to puke in their faces or murder them. So I can't have a nice little picnic in my nicely-kept local park because I will have my beer removed off me after someone snitches. But will they deal with the abusive and violent drunks who are swigging? Will they fuck! I'm vulnerable so I get picked on.
Even the local publicans blithely blame alcohol rather than drinkers themselves. They are quite happily helping to kill off their livelihoods and they can't comprehend it even when I try to tell them.
And they wonder why people are voting for extremist parties?
Knives cause knife crime. Guns shoot people all by themselves. Roads are deadly, we'd be safer without them. Cameras cause terrorism and paedophilia. Anyone having a drink, a smoke or a hamburger is only doing it to cost the NHS money. That's the mindset out there and it's spreading. Nobody is responsible because nobody can be responsible. As Dick Puddlecote says below, they think of us as children. If they keep it up, we might act like children and pulverise an MP or two.
Planting a derelict area gets you in trouble if you don't do it with Council approval.
http://thylacosmilus.blogspot.com/2
If they're not in control, then it's illegal. That's how they think.
Every little crappy, petty, nasty little restriction is another party political broadcast for the BNP, and they don't see it. The BNP do see it. They aren't stupid. They don't need to campaign. All they have to do is sit back and wait for the votes. It worked at the Euro elections and it's going to work at the general election too.
Lib Dem, Tory, Labour, all say they want to 'fight the BNP' while all the time they are handing them votes on a plate.
Stop fighting, guys. You're losing.
I'm not a BNP supporter, although I am a supporter of British culture, and the way I saw the country and way of life a few years ago - and I agree with the note that the BNP will win more votes, without even campaigning, as the other parties keep chipping away at "Good old British values" until there isn't much left to value. This is precisely why "The Sun" sells so well - as it writes to and for the lowest common denominator - the 'average bloke on the street' who doesn't want to hear about all this stuff, and doesn't like it when he does. The country is being 'dumbed down', and that's arguably as worrying to me as having freedom's taken away.
On my walk, I went into the local Co-Op. Apparently, since June 1st, they have had a new rule. It used to be that if you looked under 21 you had to provide ID to purchase alcohol. Now, it is 25. No beer unless you carry your passport or a driving licence. At 25.
The bar is being raised steadily on the rules for being classed as a 'kid'.
Whenever I buy a bottle (Glenfiddich 15-year-old, hardly a hoodie's choice, was the most recent) the till gives out a 'beeeep'. It's to alert the checkout operator to check I'm over the boozer limit. I'm well over and look the part but then I've looked the part since I was 14.
I ask 'Is there a problem? That sounded like an alarm.'
Young checkout operator says 'No, it's okay. It just tells me I have to check your age.'
Me. 'Oh. You need to see some ID?'
Red-faced checkout drone: 'No, its fine'.
Me (indignant). 'Are you saying I look old?'
Beetroot faced and shaking drone: 'No, but you look older than 25.'
Me. 'Well, I am. I'm 26.' (pick up bags) 'It's been a hard life'.
It only works once per drone but they change so fast, it's still a good game.
It does mean fewer fathers had a bottle for Father's Day. No point having a kid, they can't buy you booze for 25 years now and it's likely to move away from them faster than they grow.
What's life like for a 21-year-old these days? Everything is legal but you just try getting any of it. When I was 21 I'd been boozing for more years than Im going to admit in print.
Then they'll ban anybody from walking the streets or something.
Oh it's awful, it really is. D&D has always been an offence, it's not the first 'D' that matters, it's the second. As is being 'sober and disorderly', for that matter.
Dungeons and Dragons was never an offence. Offensive, certainly, but not actually arrestable. I used to like painting the little lead figures but never bothered with the game. There were some scantily-clad wenches...
Oh. I see. Drink-driving wasn't illegal when I was a kid but then cars didn't go quite so fast and the drinkers didn't have to drive quite so far. I'm agin it anyway because I'm not good at getting out of the way in a hurry.
As you say, it's the driving part that kills people, drinking can only harm the drinker and that's nobody else's business. Sober and disorderly, well, just be under 16 and wear a hoodie and you'll have no problems.
Object to being arrested for trainspotting, and expect to be tazered.
It's not a police state. In a police state, at least you know what's legal and what's not. Here, what's legal and what's not depends on which uniformed anencephalic slides up and drools 'ullo'. There's no logic or consistency involved.
One of them is going to be splattered. Which one? It's all down to chance.
The point that the plods (pseudo or otherwise) can make up the law as they go along is key to all this, that's the whole point, to keep everybody in a state of mild panic that they are going to be nicked for something, even if they are later released without charge a few hours later.
BTW, I think that in a police state they make up the laws as they go along as well.
Balding Nobhead
This was very helpful! I’ve bookmarked it. Thanks.
I generally manage to get served in pubs without handing over my passport. However for supermarkets the odds are much narrower for some reason. I probably get asked about every one in four or five times when buying booze from a supermarket.
It really concerns me that there seems to be institutionalised provocation - maybe NuLeibour do want an excuse to invoke the Civil Contingencies Act - but they could be playing a *very* risky game... We Brits have an undoubted propensity for extreme violence, the fact that our football hooligans are world famous and our military have a world-class reputation (for the people, NOT the equipment) gives some corroboration and if it really does "kick off" the authorities could find themselves swamped and hanging from lamp-posts PDQ. There are a lot of guns "in the wrong hands" in this country (the Met estimates the numbers into the millions) and there could genuinely be "bloody insurrection".
I'm not saying that a lot of the fuckers don't deserve it, but the "collateral damage" of a near civil-war might be a price too high.
Pogo
Balding Nobhead
I live next to a huge area of woodland that is very popular in the area (Kinver Edge, if anyone is interested). At the entrances to this area are the obligatory huge signs with a picture of cans and bottles with a line through it and "This is a designated public area - drinking is not permitted." When I first saw these appear I was amazed at the reactions of people I mentioned it to. Blase complacency - "Oh, it's to stop the chavs. Fair enough." When I pointed out that there were already laws to deal with drunk and disorderly, public nuisance, abusive behaviour, assault and the like and that now they could have their wine confiscated on their picnics, they just said, "Oh no, they wouldn't do that." "But they can!" I argued. "But they wouldn't," they replied, missing the point completely.
In a similar vein, I remember when the Smoking Ban came in and this Righteous takeover of our lives became apparent. A number of pubs in my local town have no beer gardens, so when the Smoking Ban came in it seemed that the only choice was for people to smoke in the street. However, the streets were "Designated Alcohol Free Zones" so you couldn't take your drink out there. So the bars which had paid admission had to come up with a "stamp on the palm" system to try and deal with people going in to drink and out to smoke as well as a safe area where drinks coud be left without their being nicked or drugged with Rohypnol. Had enough of this fascism and just want to go home? Tough - the street is also designated a car free zone after 6pm so you need to walk half a mile through underpasses and past drunks to get to the nearest taxi rank. Needless to say, most of them are closed now.
And the aforementioned drunks continue to vomit and piss in the street and smash shop windows without intervention from the Police.
What next? 100% of crime is committed by the living, hence we are instituting extermination camps for everyone? After all -- think of the chiiiiiildren!
That was the philosophy of Judge Death, one of the most brilliant satirical creations of the 2000 AD writers. I think Pol Pot was heading towards a similar philosophy in Cambodia: all equal, all dead together in a mass grave - the only way to achieve true socialist equality.
If people can't contol themselves, controls will be imposed - no bad thing. But why the lack of control? I blame single mums - a creation of the welfare state.