Thursday, August 20, 2009

Wowsers still on parade

That unbridled wowser Geoffrey bloody Palmer wants to put the boot into drinkers.  Again.  He now wants to ban “being drunk in a public place.”  Well, that would certainly have changed the 1984 election, that’s for sure.

I won’t repeat what I’ve said before about his attacks on enjoying yourself – here it is here, and there’s a lot of it – and here’s a practical objection to his latest bout of inveterate nannying -- I’ll just say again that he has a face that desperately needs punching.

And if you say that’s an initiation of force, then I’ll simply point out that he started it by putting the boot into us.

Labels: , ,

21 Comments:

Anonymous Russell said...

God sake, you can't be drunk anywhere anymore. I've often been confused a having been thrown out of bar on to the street for being to drunk in the bar; only to be told outside that I'm drunk in public. I wasn't drunk in public until they threw me outside - you just can't win.

8/20/2009 09:48:00 am  
Blogger Greig McGill said...

People who know him claim he's an extremely intelligent person. It would be great to have a public debate with the likes of him on an issue like this. A great way to promote a libertarian view to a nation largely ignorant of it, I think. If he's as intelligent as people say, he should be open to having his view changed also.

Any ideas or connections that could make this happen, or is it a stupid idea? Should we just find him and punch him in the face? ;)

8/20/2009 10:04:00 am  
Anonymous twr said...

Funny how so many supposedly intelligent people end up as academics and spout forth such utterly unintelligent drivvel. eg treaty revisionism, socialism, greenwash, etc.

8/20/2009 10:11:00 am  
Anonymous Sean Fitzpatrick said...

Russell

Would that mean the bar staff were responsible for be accessories to an offence by forcing a drunken man into a public place?

Seems we need a professor of law to answer that one......

8/20/2009 10:21:00 am  
Anonymous Russell W said...

Sean: I suppose so, but in retrospect I'd throw me out too. Although, I have to say, sober people and barmen do seem to be getting more and more sensitive these days, what's with this "you can't leap off the bar into the band" stuff anyway, when did that start. Hm, it might me that there is more & more of as the years go by - some people seem to be getting hurt. Scotch is a funny drug :)

8/20/2009 10:30:00 am  
Anonymous Manolo said...

Palmer is an unrepentant imbecile.
He should be ignored at all times.

8/20/2009 10:30:00 am  
Blogger Greig McGill said...

twr: One word - upbringing. Parents and childhood education/environment have a seriously long lasting effect on a psyche. In NZ, compassion is associated with lefty ideals at an early age, so basically, if you're want to be nice, you have to be a lefty.

We need to fix that.

Sean: Haha, wherever will we find one of those?

8/20/2009 10:32:00 am  
Blogger Philip said...

The problem I have with an offence of being drunk in public is how unevenly it will be enforced. The police aren't going to arrest every single person who has had a couple of beers. It gets dangerous once you have to rely on the police officer's discretion to determine who gets arrested for this.

I'm sure it will be the same old groups who get rounded up for things like this, leading to a further distrust and loss of respect for the police and the law..

8/20/2009 10:36:00 am  
Blogger Night City Trader said...

This proposal just shows the underlying wetness of Palmer.

It more or less admits he was too wet to ever take part in the '6 o'clock swill' when he was younger, nor has he ever been drunk (let alone in a public place).

8/20/2009 10:37:00 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Can't walk home drunk from town anymore! I'll be in a public place!

Perhaps I'll just stick to driving home so I don't get arrested.

8/20/2009 10:48:00 am  
Blogger Dinther said...

Even this idiot Leighton Smith, who usually is pro self responsibility thought this ban is a good idea.

But...

Being drunk in public does not the same as disorderly behaviour.

What is disorderly behaviour anyway? The inability to walk on the sidewalk in a straight-line? Or is it the inability to ignore the public around you with an emotionless expression on your face.

Is cheerful waving at the public around you disorderly behaviour? And if so, what will they do about the happy people with Down Syndrome?

This is a typical police state thing where a law is made to prevent you from being in a position to do things other people might find uncomfortable although they are not directly affected by it.

Yet, would I be allowed to act drunk in public while being sober?

Of course, it is easier to breath test a pedestrian on the side walk and fine them than it is to be there when a member of the public commits a real offence.

I say let everyone do as he pleases drunk or not provided nobodies property is destroyed and no acts of violence are committed.

Oh wait, we have laws for that already.

8/20/2009 10:51:00 am  
Blogger PC said...

If you don't like what you see at 3:30 in the morning in Courtenay Place, then just stay the hell out of Courtenay Place at 3:30 in the morning.

It's not complicated, is it.

8/20/2009 11:02:00 am  
Anonymous Sus said...

"I say let everyone do as he pleases drunk or not provided nobodies property is destroyed and no acts of violence are committed.

Oh wait, we have laws for that already."


Yes, Dinth. Exactly the point I made to LS earlier this morning which he has thus far chosen to ignore.

Probably because I criticised his new best friend Mike Sabin, along with Palmer. Authoritarians, both.

8/20/2009 11:05:00 am  
Blogger Night City Trader said...

What is worst about Courtenay Place at 3:30am is not so much large numbers of pissed people, but that they are civil servants ...and hard working Capitalists' tax dollars are being used to buy the drinks for these scum!

8/20/2009 11:07:00 am  
Anonymous twr said...

No I'm not.

8/20/2009 11:17:00 am  
Anonymous Nick said...

Whai i wrote over at KB:

Forget that there is already crimes against being disorderly in the Summary Offences Act, Palmer and his merry wowsers will create some more law, and create more duplicate crimes which the police can already enforce.

If you are drunk and disorderly, you can already be charged. If you are drunk and notdisorderly, then WTF is the problem?!?!

Ironic that much of my first year of law was spent reading many of Palmer’s articles- ironically most being about New Zealand’s “hyper-lexis” gland- I.e the vast masses of new law that is churned out each year, without any thought as to whether it will be effective, efficient, or even necessary.

So then Palmer, why the fuck are you trying to criminalise something which is already a crime?! Are we going to have police cruising the streets at night to breath test people? Will there be a limit to what constitutes drunkeness?

Another move by hand wringing wets to ban something which can already be policed, to look as though it is doing something. Fuck. This is the kind of shit we voted Labour out for.

8/20/2009 01:06:00 pm  
Anonymous Sean Fitzpatrick said...

Ditto what twr said - I am frequently thoroughly dieseled walking down Courtney Place at that time and am a self-employed businessman.

Whatsmore I have never caused problems while so under the influence so frankly the drinking is no excuse.

8/20/2009 01:12:00 pm  
Anonymous El said...

Sean, a professor of law would probably spew out some pomowanking non-answer anyway.

8/20/2009 02:05:00 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just knew stuff like this would break out once they managed to push anti bear-baiting legislation through.

Its a slippery slope. The ancient sport of drunkard baiting could now be in jeopardy if the pissheads are removed from the boulevardes of Wellington.

George

8/20/2009 09:18:00 pm  
Blogger The Tomahawk Kid said...

Come to Tauranga - they have now banned standing up to drink when you are outside! - TRUE story

Who wants to stand up anyway - you're gonna fall over later.

I wonder if you can get arrested for laying down to drink? - may have to try that one!

8/24/2009 11:37:00 am  
Blogger The Tomahawk Kid said...

Russell:
When you were just a wee strap of a lad jumping off the bar into the band was just a mere incovenience - nothing the pointy end of a guitar or mic stand could not fix. . . several years later your more obvious presence amidst where the band used to be - amongst the scattered instruments and bleeding band members causes a little more of an upset. - This may possibly have something to do with your dilema.

the flattened

8/24/2009 11:46:00 am  

Post a Comment

Respond with a polite and intelligent comment. (Both will be applauded.)

Say what you mean, and mean what you say. (Do others the courtesy of being honest.)

Please put a name to your comments. (If you're prepared to give voice, then back it up with a name.)

And don't troll. Please. (Contemplate doing something more productive with your time, and ours.)

<< Home