RM>>Why then should a publican be lumbered with the job that we already pay our taxes for?

The publican also has an obligation to not serve intoxicated people. Now, if they did their job, we wouldn't have to worry, would we!

Remember, the publican does not care about what happens after they close and this is where the problem lies and this is one area where we can improve on.

It is obvious that the current system is failing, so, we have to come up with new strategies and I am suggesting a legal limit while in public. .05 is far to low, but .15 may be the number, perhaps even .2, but there must be a magic number somewhere.

We have all but stopped smoking in public buildings, so we can do this.

Now as for fingerprinting, my kids to go to clubs and I have no problem what so ever with them having to provide this.

In my view we should all have to provide a DNA sample from birth. Then at intervals throughout our lives if required. It would reduce crime instantly in my opinion.

Indi>>Food is simply to expensive to provide, especially after midnight. $40 per hour for wages alone. Just wont happen as the profit margins in food are to low.

Now there is another solution. Random breath testing in venues, but first we have to have a legal limit established.

All I am seeking is safer streets.

Like I said, individual, I can see where you are coming from. However, a logical extension of your argument is an overturning of the law that prohibits the service of alcohol to intoxicated patrons. You are saying that bartenders are not able to determine whether or not patrons are intoxicated, so they should not have that responsibility. Do you really want this? I'm not saying the drunk abdicates all responsibility - I'm just saying that the burden is shared. If the establishment wishes to allow too many people in to accurately monitor levels of intoxication, that is their choice as well. What we are seeing here is a series of choices made by pubs and clubs to increase risk, while you seem to argue that they should not bear the consequences of that risk. I just don't agree.

Otokonoko,
I picture a real-life situation where a member of a group gets drinks from the bar & the bar tender has no way of knowing who the drinks are for.
This of course would be easier in a european style cultured bar where a waitress brings drinks to a table. A waitress would find it easier to determine if a member of a group has had enough. Problem is where to you find a cultured drinking establishment here ? I mean having rows of half-tanked people three-deep at the bar trying to out-yell each other over the full volume races monitors or the Juke box is part of the drinking problem. Were there waitress served tables you'd find a much more desireable environment with milder after effects..

"""
The publican also has an obligation to not serve intoxicated people. Now, if they did their job, we wouldn't have to worry, would we
"""

Have you even seen a violent drunk rehctub? Most of them don't appear drunk and you wouldn't know until they smack you in the mouth, I grew up with one and know several others.

How a publican is supposed to pick every violent drunk in his bar is beyond my imagination, I don't think it's possible; which brings me back to the cops being on the street and doing their job and the government providing the resources to ensure the problem drinkers are dealt with decisively. It doesn't take long to weed them out, they have a problem.

The government is lax in this department, they need to get tougher on the culprits and send a clear message, not create more bulldust rules that won't work and inconvenience business even further, we have enough of them already, sigh!

RawMustard,
We're constantly debating real-life issues with idealistic academic dreamers here. The challenge is to make these so-called intelligent people realise their actual lack of intelligence & grasp of reality. If you get enough people in a group all dreaming the same dream then to them that dream is reality. To people like me their reality is my nightmare. What, on this god-forsaken sphere of rock & salty water is it that makes so many simply not understand that your action is yours & your own responsibility not someone else's.
Btw. Otokonoko, where's my 100 bucks ?

Spare us the drivel about intelligence, individual. You're bound to make a fool of yourself otherwise.

You make a valid point: "your action is yours & your own responsibility".

So, when a bartender breaks the law and serves alcohol to an intoxicated person, that action is the bartender's and his/her own responsibility. When a publican allows more people into a venue than his/her staff can manage, that action is the publican's responsibility.

I know it's a difficult concept for you to grasp, but nobody here is excusing the behaviour of drunks. You, however, are defending the illegal behaviour of bartenders who (*sob*) couldn't tell if a person was drunk or not.

If you don't want the law to be enforced, it stands to reason that you want it abolished. No more "no more, it's the law". Only then I suspect you will be complaining about publicans exploiting drunks. To some, the world must seem a very dismal place.