Thursday, 6 December 2012

Nice Try, But Consumption’s Not Obligatory…

A Swansea solicitor has hit out at "ridiculous" nightclub drink promotions after three men "miraculously" escaped serious injury after a road smash.
Mark Davies was representing Rhys Beck, a 20-year-old who admitted crashing his car after drink-driving.
And what sort of promotion was this? Do they hold you down and force alcohol down your throat?
Mr Davies said his client, of Glanmor Terrace, Penclawdd, had been out with friends at the Oceana nightclub and when he ordered one pint of beer, he was told he would receive two extra pints for free, as part of a promotion the club were running.
Mr Davies accepted his client had willingly drunk the alcohol before deciding to drive his Renault Clio, but said the promotion was "quite frankly asking for trouble".
Umm, why? If I get offered two free tins of beans when I buy one at a checkout, I don’t feel obliged to cram them all down my throat. I might give them away to someone else. I don’t even feel obliged to take them in the first place!

Why didn't he simply refuse them, or offer them to his friends?
"His intention wasn't to consume a large quantity of alcohol but he wanted one drink. When confronted with two more for free, it's often that people will consume the other two. He didn't believe he was over the limit," added Mr Davies.
So….he was only going to have one because he was driving (which is sensible, and responsible), and he knew that more than that would put him over the limit. But, when faced with free beer, he suddenly thought these two pints somehow wouldn't count?

He’s not too bright, is he?
Mr Davies said: "It's a shame this young man comes before the court as he's of clean character, he's educated and is waiting to go to university."
Ah. Well, why should lack of intelligence stop anyone from going to university these days?
Meanwhile, police in Swansea have said they are concerned about cut-price drinks promotions in the city, and are working with the council and bars, pubs and clubs to try to ensure "safe and sensible" drinking.
Superintendent Phil Davies said: "Drinks promotions are a concern for the police. "While we have got no legislative power to stop them, we are working closely with the local authority and licensed premises to encourage safe and sensible drinking."
Well, perhaps you could start by pointing out what utter rubbish is being spouted here by Mr Beck’s mouthpiece?


Hogdayafternoon said...

Don't spend too much time sitting in magistrates courts, you could die laughing (or crying).

Hogdayafternoon said...

Don't spend too much time sitting in magistrates courts, you could die laughing (or crying).

Anonymous said...

My client informs me that on the night of the alleged offence, a barmaid forced him to the ground and by means of a large plastic funnel and against his will, poured a gallon of cider through his mouth.

Anonymous said...

I am afraid you are ignoring an important bansturbator point here, the one being made in defended of the real victim by his solicitor - who may have received advice from Alcohol Concern. It is the existence of the "buy one get two free" and like offers, and indeed any "cheap alcohol" which is the crime. Their very existence over-rules issues like commonsense and responsibility tom the point of negating them entirely. How can people be expected to be responsible and use common sense in the face of such malicious temptations to just get blind stinkingly drunk and worse, as AC would no doubt add - for the outlay of just "pocket money". The existence of the cheap booze was the crime and once it disappears no one will ever, ever drink to excess and then do stupid things, IT IS A FACT and Alcohol Concern and the like have the "evidence" to prove it. The pub landlord should have been taken outside and shot. The people owning the pub should have been taken outside and shot. The people supplying the beer should have been taken outside and shot. In fact everyone comnnected with the wicked sinful business should have been taken outside and shot, except the poor "real" victim who was duped and connived into drinking more than was sensible and being either too stupid to realise that he had somehow drunk probably three times as much as he had intended to drink because of that "offer" - normally when he necked umpteen pints, being such a good driver, he would have been perfectly OK driving home half-pissed, as he would no doubt tell you. But being unwittingly one and a half times pissed because of all that "free beer" well, that impaired his abilities a little bit.

ivan said...

More spam has got past the filters.

Furor Teutonicus said...

XX ivan said...

More spam has got past the filters. XX

Aye. But you must admit, it take some brains to spam an Engliosh speaking website in Japanes! ;-)

Furor Teutonicus said...

I guess my keyboard must be Japanese as well, the spelling is nearly as good. :-)

Ian Hills said...

The Chancellor of the Exchequer said "Minimum pricing and the outlawing of free beer offers is nothing to do with my wanting more money to make up for tax avoidance. It is all to do with health and road accidents". Spokesmen for Vodaphone, Starbucks and Goldman Sachs agreed, as they pushed brown envelopes into the Chancellor's family trust, based in Jersey.

Johnnyrvf said...

@ ANONYMOUS 15.36. NO it is not the the club promoting the alchoholic beverages fault, it is the person who imbibes the beverage who is at fault. It comes down to self discipline, maturity and self control, and perhaps some intelligence to say NO. To say that the crime was the " cheap booze " is so preposterous and peurile as to completely render any opinion that you bore the world with as null and void.

Anonymous said...


Sir, please read my post at 15:36 again - I apologise now for the typo's. If you truly cannot see that in that posting I am showing myself to be 100% in agreement with your sensible contention that the fault lies fair and square with the arrogant dickhead - and his pals - who saw nothing wrong with him climbing behind the wheel whilst incapable, then I am sorry for not expressing myself more clearly. I just felt that by expressing the angle being peddled by his solicitor, and of course by bodies such as Alcohol Concern, in the most ridiculous and overblown way it would help show it up for the crock of steaming horse turds that it is.

The Jannie said...

johnnyrvf doesn't get irony, then . . .

JuliaM said...

"Don't spend too much time sitting in magistrates courts, you could die laughing (or crying)."

I've yet to be called for jury service for a real court, sadly!

"...who may have received advice from Alcohol Concern."

Oh, I wouldn't be a bit surprised.

"It comes down to self discipline, maturity and self control, and perhaps some intelligence to say NO."

All things we seem intent on breeding OUT of the population.