Maybe Robocop.

'Drunken Louts'?
I don't give a Tinker's Cuss' about that, but I like the cut of your jib!

From one under your belt to one under dan:

It is redicul-us

To wi-shhh

For our so-“sigh”-ety to

Chan-“gee”.

From our long alco-“Hols”

Why not d rink “T”

AND…

Con-vert 2 I-slam

No offence 2 “one under god”—

individual,

If I was playing insipid academic excuses games, I would stop. I haven't offered an excuse for a single action. I have pointed out the inconsistencies in your argument:

1) Our actions are our own responsibility.
2) Bartenders are exempt from this, because they can't possibly monitor the customers in their overcrowded bars.
3) Drinkers are exempt from this, because they have to suffer the inconvenience of drinking in air conditioned bars which prevent them from feeling the effects of their alcohol consumption.

Who is responsible for their own actions, then?

On the other hand, I have argued that:
1) RSA laws exist, and obeying those laws is a condition of holding a liquor licence.
2) The purpose of the law is to provide a safe environment for patrons and for the wider community.
3) In cases where a law exists, they should be enforced. Bar staff and venues in which irresponsible service of alcohol is practised should be penalised. Similarly, drinkers who break this law should be penalised.

Not much academic about that, really. It is certainly more insipid than your argument, though. Yours is very exciting as it chops, changes and contradicts itself with each new post.

3) Drinkers are exempt from this, because they have to suffer the inconvenience of drinking in air conditioned bars
Otokonoko,
you made up that utterly out of context context.

2) The purpose of the law is to provide a safe environment for patrons and for the wider community.
It doesn't though does it ?
If you think our laws are adequate then have a look on tonights news again. Where a drunken moron bashed a young man & put him into 24 hr care for the rest of his life. The Judge made the moron eligible for parole in two years. It does make one wonder about the law & those in charge of it.

Otokonoko is that the law you are so taken by eh ?

Interesting point.

Out of context it may have been, but you DID offer air conditioning as an excuse for people drinking more than they should.

As for the drunken moron, how much more careful would the suppliers of the alcohol have been had they believed there was a chance that the law prohibiting the supply of alcohol to drunks would be enforced? It's a pretty hefty fine they face, and they would be much more likely to err on the side of caution.

Certainly the moron deserves a much stiffer punishment than he received. I won't argue with that. And certainly his actions are his alone. However, if he was served sufficient alcohol to intoxicate him, those who served him the alcohol must also be held to account. They, too, have broken the law.

I'm very aware that some people get charged up before they go out, some sneak hip flasks into venues and some get their friends to buy them drinks when they've been cut off at the bar. Plenty, however, are served long after they should have been cut off. They are served in venues crowded with more people than are manageable. I can't speak for nightlife districts nationwide, but I can safely say that, here in Townsville, where you take your life in your hands when you wander down the clubbing strip, the publicans are hardly fulfilling their duties to provide safe venues. Unsafe venues lead to unsafe entertainment precincts.

air conditioning as an excuse for people drinking more,
Otokonoko,
Either you're just playing silly or you are. At what stage did I say the above ? Please read again what I wrote