To many drunks around today.

What a very good idea Frank drunks are such a nuisance.

Too many drunks? So what would be an acceptable number?

Don't encourage him.

Zero

I don't think it's true that one has to be rich to get drunk!

In my experience many drunks are poor as their money has gone down the pan so to speak!!

Trouble is you have got the benefits drunks as well, they get a disabilty alowance for being alcoholic plus a free bus pass.
its the same with the druggies as well , taxpayers are paying for there luxurys.
I am a member of Campaign for Real Ale ,and just drink real ale,and only in small amounts as average for a pint is over £3 plus in some areas.
Mick

Michael

They should not get a disability allowance for being alcoholic as most of them would just spend the money on drink.
Anyway why should I as a taxpayer pay for these people?.

Frank

I think you would find Frank that the drunks you refer to could not pay a £200 fine never mind a £20,000. It certainly does not cost a lot to get drunk these days and many people have taken to drinking at home rather than pay the prices in the pubs and clubs.

Alcoholism is an illness and should be treat as so. Next you will be saying that someone with lung cancer caused by smoking shouldn't get any benefits either. There is no difference.

Mick - do you know any addicts? They rarely have luxurious lifestyles. And most are not the ones you are probably thinking about. My daughter was Drug Action Officer for a large area and most of her 'clients' were what might be termed middle class women who had become addicted to prescription drugs.
Labelling people 'druggies' shows a depth of ignorance.

Well said Greatnan

FrankYou still don't have to be rich to drink!

www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/mar/13/minimum-alcohol-price-cameron-fudge
The government have refused to implement the medically recommended increase on the unit price on Alcohol and the selling of cut price alcohol, happy hours etc.
No doubt because of the financial and political interests of the current government and some individual government members in both personal financial and political terms.

www.alcoholpolicy.net/ conference report

Developmental Epidemiology and Prevention (PPT) David Foxcroft
Professor Jonathan Chick and Dr Jan Gill – A Tale of Two Cities

Professor Jonathan Chick and Dr Jan Gill discuss findings from their ongoing research into drinking behaviours in Glasgow and Edinburgh.

Their research supports the evidence that those drinking at the most harmful levels purchase the cheapest alcohol – particularly white cider and cheap vodka.

nelliemoser you're right. That's why there is a huge policy debate on at the moment about introducing a minimum price per unit for alcohol, plus pressure from the clinicians:

www.rcplondon.ac.uk/press-releases/health-bodies-say-government-must-stand-firm-minimum-unit-price

And Frank you're talking (writing) complete nonsense. Cheap booze is readily available to (and killing) poor people, because anyone can afford to drink because alcohol costs less than some of the fancy sparkling waters:

www.mungos.org/press_office/1566_cheap-alcohol-is-killing-homeless-people

Most of the drunks seen on the street on Friday and Saturday nights are not (yet) alcoholics - mainly young people who think it's cool to over-indulge. Alcoholics often don't present as 'rolling in the gutter' drunks because they are inured to large quantities of alcohol. And, Frank, how on earth would you get £20K out of a young idiot who's been vomiting in the gutter on a Saturday night?

I should also point out that my daughter met many alcoholics amongst the middle class housewives, who thought that drinking expensive wine did not count as boozing.
Much as I enjoy some soaps, I think the constant depiction of people drinking every day helps to normalise it. It is, of course, highly unlikely that a worker in a factory would be able to drink every lunchtime and every night after work, and they certainly would not be able to buy a round. Even Emily, the devout Methodist, if often seen with her sweet sherry!

The fastest growing group of people who regularly drink more than the recommended weekly maximum is oldies, apparently. Cheers.

Michael and Frank So by that logic are you saying smokers with lung cancer or COPD should not get disabilty allowances either as they have caused their own problems?

And anyone with a sports injury? Or the overweight?

I can't see the connection between drunks on the street and the Grand National.

Wondering if this thread is slightly awry. After all Frank seems to have addressed his op to many drunks and not to gransnetters at all. It could of course be seen that he is commenting that there were too many drunks around. Surely such a wealthy and experienced man ( not to mention arrogant and patronising) wouldn't make such a basic mistake while conducting his mission to put us all right. Tut, tut Frank . Maybe you need to spend less time composing your pompous posts and a little more time on proofreading.
Why are intelligent and rational women encouraging his rants by participating? Or could it be (heaven forbid) that it's a nationwide conspiracy to wind him up???

em

Could well be, em! Perhaps Frank really did mean "A toast to many drunks"....("Here's tae us - wha's like us? No' many - and they're a' deid!")

A commissioners decision states that you cannot have DLA for being alcoholic. Only if there are sequaele such as epilepsy or dementia.