1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Big up the tube drinkers

Discussion in 'London and the South East' started by editor, Aug 16, 2008.

  1. cesare

    cesare don't mourn, organise!

    There are loads of over 50s on the tube. How do you suppose people get to work? If you'd said over 70s, maybe. But over 50s :confused:

    There aren't that many prams/pushchairs especially at rush hour. But there are plenty of small children, again though, not many at rush hour. Lots of school kids at certain times of day, depending on the tube.
  2. fogbat

    fogbat The Talibum

    Noisily and obstructively for the most part :p
  3. Badgers

    Badgers Mr Big Shrimp

    It has probably already been said but.....

    I used to like a beer on the train a LOT and occasionally one on the tube or bus.

    I never spilt any as I had a good lug before we started moving.
    I always take the empty cans with me the same as I do in a public park/space where it is legal to drink.
    I never vomit on trains as I like a couple of beers rather than a soft drink or a stupid coffee.

    Basically Boris is trying to legislate against morons who will always be fucking morons. The same people who eat boxes of fried chicken on the tube, listen to their phones out loud, drop litter and stick gum to the seats. Also the people who get on the tube pissed out of their faces, rude, aggresive and likely to vomit are 'okay' as long as they are not holding an open alcoholic drink!!

    Has Boris actually done anything apart from this?
    All I can see is that he has annoyed people, done photoshoots, lost a lot of his staff and got rid of bendy buses........Oh.........Hang on.........Wait..........Oh.......No!
  4. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    I can say with absolute confidence that I have never, ever, ever spilled beer on any tube train ever.
  5. Badgers

    Badgers Mr Big Shrimp

    I have to confess that once a can did fizz a little on opening and despite my best efforts a drop or two ran down the side and landed on the floor. I felt bad for a while but this was before the ban so I could do nothing apart from wipe it up with a tissue.

  6. ovaltina

    ovaltina Well-Known Member

    I've never seen anyone spill booze from a can on the tube, but one December a few years ago (xmas party season) I saw a very drunk man in an expensive suit, who was passed out in the seat next to me and pissed his pants without waking up.

    I remember seeing the little dark patch spreading across his grey trousers and leaping out of the seat. He didn't have an open can of lager tho, so would have still been able to travel post Bojo-ban.
  7. Badgers

    Badgers Mr Big Shrimp

    Public transport is fun during the office xmas party season isn't it?

    I recall a few years ago getting a late tube from the City to High Barnet. I was sitting alone in a carriage when this lass stumbled on wearing a teeny skirt and some sort of mistletoe earrings. She promptly passed out across from me, spread her legs open about 90 degrees and started drooling.

    Tricky thing is do you:

    A) Ignore it
    B) Change carriage
    C) Try to wake her and risk the scream of 'RAPE' when she opens her eyes
    D) Get out your camera phone

    Life's decisions....
  8. ovaltina

    ovaltina Well-Known Member

    Ergh! I'd have gone to the other end of the carriage.

    Reminds me - I was sitting fairly close to a woman in her 20s, again wearing a smart suit, who was passed out on the tube. She woke up, puked down the front of the suit, then passed out again, before throwing up again and falling asleep a couple of minutes later.

    Again, she wasn't carrying an open container of alcohol at the time... :hmm:
  9. George & Bill

    George & Bill Well-Known Member

    I sometimes eat on the tube, but not smelly food, and I don't leave any detritus behind me.

    If you can get people to change their behaviour, why not get them to do it in a moderate and sensible way, rather than a draconian one?
  10. Jessiedog

    Jessiedog Keeping the faith.


    Given the difference in cleanliness, pleasantness, lack of litter, lack of odours, etc. between the tube and the MTR, it would seem that the one with the mandatory restrictions wins on all counts.

    If you think a voluntary system would work and everyone would pull together to create a sparkling tube system, then just compare the tube with the MTR to see the reality of how that actually works.


  11. George & Bill

    George & Bill Well-Known Member

    You're completely missing the point, which is that whatever the rules, people have to respect them for them to work.

    It's already illegal to drop litter on the tube - a 'mandatory restriction' - and yet litter remains the biggest unpleasantness associated with tube travel.

    I'm no expert, but I would imagine the way the rules work in HK has a lot to do with how Hong kongese people are, and the way the rules work/don't work in London has a lot to do with the way Londoners are. The rules don't work in a vacuum like!
  12. Citizen66

    Citizen66 splash the cistern

    Oh Yes!


    The finest works of art always abided by them.
  13. Jessiedog

    Jessiedog Keeping the faith.

    I'm not missing the point at all.

    You are right.

    We don't have (in any way worth mentioning stastiscally,) any kind of gun crime, knife crime, robbery, muggings, burglary, hate crimes or much any other kind of anti-social public behaviour either.

    And this is beacause we have, of course in general, an extremely tolerant society, where a falling down drunk will be looked at as someone who needs help - and will be helped, peeps will call an ambulance while they wait and make sure you're OK.

    We can do this because we don't need to worry that coming to peoples' aid will result in an assault. It won't! That's not how we do things here.

    How would assaulting anyone help us as a society to create a better environment/world for all?

    We (of course, once again, generally,) realise that we're all in this together and therefore recognise that co-operation and tolerance of differences is the "way to go".

    Any kind of violence would undermine our tolerent society and precipitate an acceptance of "mob rule", "jungle rule" or some such.

    Why would any civilised society accept that kind of shit?


    We don't! We are intolerent only of intolerence and will not accept the level of violence and lack of civic responsibility that seems to be routine in so many other societies.

    We have very severe penalties for street crimes, et al. We want to be safe to walk around alone, kid, woman or man at any time in anyplace within our region and, (in general, etc, etc.) we are.

    It works!

    We vocally criticise our (HK) politicians and executive and (of course, in general,) they respond to our concerns.

    We are far from a perfect society, but we've been here for over one hundred years (I mean "us", the growing immigrant community - HK has gone from 130,000 population in 1930 to over 7,000,000 in 2008,) and perhaps being a "refugee" population has allowed us to create this level of tolerance and understanding of each of our individual struggles.....

    ....You get on with your shit, I'll get on with mine. We're all different and yet we're all the same. We see that this society is a place where we can integrate and prosper and it's in our own interests to keep fostering the same ethos and culture within society.


    If you want to come and play with us, that's cool - we have a very welcoming immigration policy and we always welcome talent, eccentricity and creativity.....


    We have certain rules when you travel on the MTR.

    No smoking. No drinking. No eating.

    We like it that way so we made a law - to make it clear where we set the boundaries.


    You might imagine that, in such a society, we are very tolerant odf those the "break the rules within certain limits" - a woman who gives her infant a sip of water or milk on the MTR - or a group of kids straight of the public basketball court who sup their water - or even (god forbid :hmm: ) the occasional complete tosser who is drunk and leery and spilling her piss all over the place. We can and do accomdate this.

    Though it seems that there is a consensus about where to draw the line and (in general, of course,) everyone seems to be, in general, in agreement as to where that line lies - it's not about homogeneity, it's about diversity among peeps who have an unspoken (other than through the normally accepted and vocal avenues of protest: assembilies, marches, gatherings, protests, demonstrations, writing to the press, screaming from the rooftops - [we're very tolerant of that one], etc, etc.

    But there is a social covenant that needs to be respected - or you will simply not be welcome (we denied Paul Francis Gadd entry to HK today, sent him back from ehence he came, in the hope that he gets back to where he belongs and will be monitered properly and get the help that he obviously desperately needs).

    It's a fantastic social experiment.

    It's under threat from forces that you can't imagine. Forces that, if permitted, would swamp us with the violence, corruption, repression, fear, chaos, starvation, murder and destruction that swept China between 1954 and 1978.

    The very concept of this society is also under threat from those societies that have aquiesed to accepting a level of violent crime that deems that "mugging" someone on the steet might warrant a sentence of "sweeping the roads for 260 hours".

    Come here and rob someone with violence (or the threat of it - knife, gun, bottle, club..... ANY weapon,) on the street and you will be caught, and you will be sentenced to six years in jail.

    If you actually really hurt someone - badly stab, badly bash, shoot, etc. you will get a sentance of probably 8 - 12 years.

    In the meantime, you can get pissed/wrecked, shout (within reason), make fun (24/7 - we never sleep), fall over, laugh and play.....and if you hurt yourself.....of course, we will come to your aid.

    But if you are violent towards others?


    Do not pass go.

    Oh! And did I mention?

    We have the most bestest, most cheapestest, most cleanestest, most pleasantest, most efficientest, most joy-to-travel-on est public transport system on the planet (rivalled, perhaps, only by Singapore - but they are a million miles behind us in terms of the "freedoms" we so cherish and vehemently defend. Tokyo can't compare either - the level of physical sexual abuse against females neccessitates "women only" carriages).

    I'm not suggesting that a "three NO's" (other than water,) policy on the London Tube would suddenly create the same degree of "civil society" that we enjoy over here (if only,) and I've already said that the "Boris Booze Only" policy is daft and politically motivated.

    I'm only suggesting that a "3 NO's" policy might just provide a better environment and make travelling on the tube a more pleasant experience for most of those using it.

    But I do appreciate and accept your point that while this kind of "social contract" works extremely well in a city like HK, it may simply not be possible in a city like London where, it seems to me, that any concept of this kind of social contract has, almost, completely disintigrated.

    That's why I recognise - and am so grateful that - I have been fortunate enough (through random circumstances - other than being a refugee, as we almost all are here, first or second generation,) lucky enough to be a part of our beautiful, open, tolerant society.

    Wanna play?


  14. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    Jolly good. But London has always had a laissez-faire attitude to people enjoying a drink on the tube.

    Until Boris decided to make a new law based on nothing more than his own personal prejudices, of course.
  15. Jessiedog

    Jessiedog Keeping the faith.

    Very good.

    I love freedom.


    We have humoungous freedoms here too - as I explained.

    The best ones for me are the freedom from violence, thuggery and crime.



    As I said.

    That's daft.

    He's just a stupid cunt!


  16. George & Bill

    George & Bill Well-Known Member

    Sounds great. Doesn't explain what's wrong with eating a sandwich on the tube, though.
  17. Jessiedog

    Jessiedog Keeping the faith.



  18. fogbat

    fogbat The Talibum


    Congratulations - you've just won the thread :D
  19. George & Bill

    George & Bill Well-Known Member

    IMO, civil society doesn't legislate against crumbs, it catches them in the sandwich box :p
  20. Jessiedog

    Jessiedog Keeping the faith.

    While I'm quite prepared to accept that you, personally, would be most careful and even enhance the crumb catching capacity of your sandwich box with a dainty napkin draped over your lap, the disgusting state of the tube (especially in comparison to the MTR which is pristine - if we allowed food, you could eat it off the floor,) suggests that you've got some way to go in convincing your fellow London travellers to join you in your expression of civil society.


  21. Jessiedog

    Jessiedog Keeping the faith.

    Oh God.

    That's disgusting.


    They don't let it on the tube, do they?


  22. fogbat

    fogbat The Talibum

    Does BoJo even use the tube, other than for the occasional photo-op?
  23. I'd have no problem legislating against egg sandwiches. :mad:
  24. Jessiedog

    Jessiedog Keeping the faith.

    And that's another thing about the booze ban.

    It's a silly thing to do as has been pointed out; it's kinda like banning only egg sandwiches - and then after another couple of years adding kebab to the list and then fish and chips and then........

    Hence the sense of a "3 No's" policy.


  25. se5

    se5 Well-Known Member

    According to the BBC no one has been thrown off public transport as a result of the booze ban - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7701392.stm . Apparently Police have "spoken to" 35 people seen drinking alcohol and no criminal offences have been recorded. This is why we (although not me and I suspect most on here) elected you Boris... tough measures to crack down on anti-social behaviour or maybe not
  26. Dravinian

    Dravinian 100k smug liberal points

    Much like the smoking ban, most people have some consideration and just don't do it once it is banned, whether they agree or not.
  27. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    What 'consideration' should someone quietly - and harmlessly - enjoying a can of beer on the tube be expected to show?
  28. upsidedownwalrus

    upsidedownwalrus RIP R.I.P.

    Cheaper than the mainland?

    Double woof!
  29. Dravinian

    Dravinian 100k smug liberal points

    Consideration for the ban?

    If I can't smoke in your face, because it is banned, why should you be allowed to flaunt the ban on drinking in my face?

    Consideration, it goes all ways, you don't like someone smoking in a crowded place, on a train, on a bus, but regardless of what anyone else thinks about drinking you believe you have the right to drink, even when it is banned.

    Why should some be forced to adhere to a ban and not others? How about a bit of consideration for people who can't smoke on the tube and a bit of solidarity.

    I know you will come back and claim passive smoking is something different and that it is harmless to drink alcohol, but frankly that idea means nothing. You don't get to decide which bans are ok and which are not...if you do, why can't smokers get to decide too? What makes you so special?

    Or are you suggesting that we should all be allowed to smoke on the Bus and Tube now too?

    I doubt it.
  30. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    How does one "drink in your face" and what health risks does it pose to fellow passengers?

    You flaunt your ignorance, intolerance and bigotry most days here, but I put up with it. It's called tolerance. You should try it sometimes.

Share This Page