New South Wales, for example, are now moving to make citizens legally liable for the free choices of others.
MATES who shout a round of beers to their drunk friends could end up in court under tough new drinking and intoxication laws.I suspect that Gallacher's definition of 'irresponsibly drunk' will differ greatly to that of an Australian majority, considering his vow to 'crush' something he calls a 'culture', thereby logically suggesting it to be accepted as not too burdensome a problem by most.
[New South Wales Police Minister Mike Gallacher] said he was determined to crush the culture that made it acceptable to get irresponsibly drunk.
The former police officer said friends and family needed to shoulder some of the responsibility of curtailing a drunk's boozy night before the person became a menace.
He said mates could find themselves in court giving evidence about why their friend had been drunk and disorderly.
And while it's clear (at least, I think it is) that the guy is referring to consequent criminal or delinquent behaviour on the part of the inebriate at the moment, the installation of such a charge of failing as one's 'brother's keeper' - in an era where personal lifestyle choice is being routinely dismissed as a concept - doesn't take much moving of the goalposts to become more sinister, does it?
Especially since we know the kind of levels now considered to be hazardous by the bansturbulary (© Mark Wadsworth) in the UK, and probably in upside down land too. That is, more than two pints per day.
So, the social custom of buying rounds is under attack again, which isn't too much of a surprise from a conservative of any stripe. The eradication of rounds was, after all, a brilliant idea promoted by our own pretend free market Tory, David Cameron.
But how about this aspect of Gallacher's determined plan to restrict his grown-up infantilised charges from doing as they have done for many decades. The denial of due judicial process.
Mr Gallacher said he would also be working with Attorney-General Greg Smith to ensure those charged with being drunk and disorderly would not be able to escape punishment by appealing against the penalty through the court system.Nope. No appeal allowed. Once charged, that's it. You're guilty, and how dare you even consider appealing against it.
The state is infallible, you see, and always knows best. You, however, merely exist to be managed as an inconvenient hindrance to their daily routine of spending your money.
Oh sorry, did you still believe the state existed to cater for you and your enjoyment of life? Don't be silly, there are far more important things to waste your taxes on.
H/T Menzies House via Crampton