Is Sydney Really This Bad? [Lockout Laws]

[Warks]

Re: Is Sydney Really This Bad?

The problem with alcohol is that only 9% of those over 18 claimed to never had a drink.60% were regular consumers.For 15-19 year olds the figures are 21% and 41%.It worries me that 41% of 15-19 year olds are averaging >7 standard drinks per day.

That is quite shocking. And yet quite a few young folks in that bracket of my acquaintance (over 18) have never had a drink. I know in my day almost everyone would have been drinking by 17-18 although they probably couldn't afford to drink much. Only at weekends too, not daily.

 

[Princess Fiona]

I read this yesterday and thought it must be from the Onion
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2016/02/07/sydney-police-question-wine-bar-over-wine-list

 

[drron]

I read this yesterday and thought it must be from the Onion
Sydney Police question wine bar over wine list | SBS News

Well in the Thailand is worse than Sydney vein Pattaya police win hands down-
British-led Card Room raided by officials in South Pattaya - UPDATE | Pattaya One, Local News in Pattaya Thailand
Confessions of a Bridge Criminal

 

[medhead]

Kings Cross ER is back on channel 9 on Thursday nights. I think these are repeats. Should give an idea of the problem in emergency departments before lock out laws.

That same emergency department yesterday said they'd had a 25% drop in serious injury presentations between 6pm Friday and 6am Sunday in the year following the lock out laws. Also a reduction in frequency of presentations with alcohol related issues. And a reduction in severity with only 3 admissions to the intensive care unit from the entertainment precinct. No evidence of increased alcohol-related assualts in nearby areas, like newtown, bondi Beach or Coogee. full media release https://svhs.org.au/home/newsroom/announcements/liquor-laws-two-years-on


Meanwhile, my night time social activities in these areas have not been impacted.

 

[moa999]

That same emergency department yesterday said they'd had a 25% drop in serious injury presentations between 6pm Friday and 6am Sunday in the year following the lock out laws. .

Which given foot traffic in the area is down by substantially more is not great.

Appears that assaults/person are actually increasing.

Hardly a great result

 

[medhead]

Which given foot traffic in the area is down by substantially more is not great.

Appears that assaults/person are actually increasing.

Hardly a great result

Is there a quantifiable expression of the decreased foot traffic? Has foot traffic also reduced in Newtown, Bondi Beach and Coogee? Or has it increased, without an increase in alcohol related assaults as observed by the emergency room people? An increase in foot traffic with no more assaults should be a good thing.

In any case, a 25% reduction in the use of my taxes to fix up personal misadventure is good in my books.

I will leave it with this quote from the media release. I haven't noticed a drop in people during the week, not quantifiable, but I haven't seen the area become a ghost town.

“Despite what you hear, Kings Cross is not a ghost town. More than 1 million patrons pass through Kings Cross’ nightclubs and bars every year – and that’s excluding restaurants and small bars.“As occurred in Newcastle when it brought in similar laws in 2008, we’re already seeing businesses in the area adapt.

Who cares about the definition? He doesn't want to read it, he won't read it, and short of you going up to him with a gun against his head threatening to end his life, you can't make him. That riff-raff hardly contributes to the issue at hand.

So he'll argue his side without the merits or lack thereof of having read the article. The thread has evolved a lot from taking a side on the article to more the broader issues arising from it. Plus, the article is hardly the first one on the matter for that side, albeit in my experience it is likely the most organised argument from that side I have seen to date.

Thank you for the support, I think. As mentioned my experience is that there is a good night life in Sydney in contradiction with the sensational headline of the story "will the last person turn off the lights". What I observe weekly suggests to me the merits of the article are limited. I stick with my observations.

 

[Milefest]

They've just announced a review on the lockout:

Liquor Law Review

 

[Milefest]

As mentioned my experience is that there is a good night life in Sydney in contradiction with the sensational headline of the story "will the last person turn off the lights". What I observe weekly suggests to me the merits of the article are limited. I stick with my observations.

Technically it's not sensationalism by definition, but also anecdotal evidence is an incredibly unreliable and ignorant way to judge a situation.

 

[whatmeworry]

Funny Article.

[h=1]Teenagers with goon bag in Hyde Park voted most happening venue in Sydney[/h]
[h=5]Following the Newcastle model, experts predict Sydney will become a thriving center of global culture on par with Newcastle.

...

[/h]The government has also been forced to clarify their position on why select organisations such as Casinos have been exempted from the trading restrictions. “This is about penalizing irresponsible drinkers who don’t think about the consequences of their actions, not responsible drinkers like drunken gamblers,” said a government spokesman. “Obviously only the most responsible of people would be drinking and gambling at a casino at 4 o’clock in the morning, and we’ve got a study funded by James Packer himself to back it up.”

[h=5][/h]

Teenagers with goon bag in Hyde Park voted most happening venue in Sydney – Honi Soit

 

[medhead]

Technically it's not sensationalism by definition, but also anecdotal evidence is an incredibly unreliable and ignorant way to judge a situation.

Oh, ok.
So there really is going to be a point in the very near future when the last person is going to leave sydney and will have to turn off the lights because of the lock out laws? No? Technically you might like to double check the definition of sensationalism.

Perhaps you might like to put up some scientific based evidence to disprove my observations, rather than resorting to negative characterisations?

 

[JohnK]

They've just announced a review of the lockout:

Oh goody. Businesses crying poor realising their obscene profits are in danger.

 

[medhead]

Ok I've just looked at the clickbait and confirmed that it is click bait full of ancedotal evidence and distraction.
We start with sensationalism that is devoid of reality. Note this is all of Sydney!

Would the last person in Sydney please turn the lights out?

everything in Sydney is now illegal- including fun.

then we have about 14 paragraph full of things like"

Sydney has not just regressed into a ghost town, but there is an undercurrent of something much more sinister in the way the city is being run.

On Saturday nights tumbleweeds blow across the main entertainment precincts for Sydney- Kings Cross, Darlinghurst and Oxford Street.

Every week, another venue or restaurant closes. The soul of the city has been destroyed.

Kings Cross, in particular, has been decimated so badly that it will never, ever, come back as an entertainment precinct.

That last sensational claim based on poor old Hugos Lounge which was the best nightclub in Australia five years running. Anecdotally revenue at Hugos fell 60%, due to stringent conditions imposed over the last 2.5 years. Hang on the lock out laws started less than 2 years ago. Was something else going on?

Maybe Hugos last won the best night club award in 2012 - two years before the lock out laws. Not in 2013. So is it possible that after 12 years people were just over the night club? No must have been the lock out laws.

Then after those 14 paragraphs of emotive anecdote. We get some numbers, claiming to be from 2012 to 2015. But those numbers are backed up by at table comparing 2010 to 2012. Greater than two years before the lock out laws were introduced. And what does that table tell us? Foot traffic declined between 29% and 59% in The Cross between 2010 and 2012. The smallest decline for those years was at Central St on a friday night between 11pm and midnight - do we think that was people getting the last train home. Anecdotal I know, I think it's a pretty darn good guess.

But anyway back to the point, there were significant reductions in foot traffic in the Cross more than 2 years before the lock out laws were introduced. If we normalise to 2010 and look at the reported reduction from 2012 to 2015 of 84% and apply it to the biggest reduction location in the table that gives us:

2010	2012	2015
100%	41%	7.4%

So of the foot traffic present in 2010 only 33% of it was lost between 2012 and 2015, compared to 59% the 2 years earlier. And the lock out laws were introduced in 2014. But it is all the fault of the lock out laws. Somehow people knew 4 years beforehand that those laws were going to "decimate" the cross. Nothing else going on...


I could go on, but I just can't be bothered. my point is proven. Merit of story = minimal

 

[moa999]

But anyway back to the point, there were significant reductions in foot traffic in the Cross more than 2 years before the lock out laws were introduced.
l

Granted that the opening of some venues in the CBD, Rocks, Darling Harbour pulled some crowds, but from living near the Cross, I can tell you that crowds are way down since the lockout laws came in
(and I agree that Hugos was getting stale)

But there is sensationalism from both sides.

 

[medhead]

Granted that the opening of some venues in the CBD, Rocks, Darling Harbour pulled some crowds, but from living near the Cross, I can tell you that crowds are way down since the lockout laws came in
(and I agree that Hugos was getting stale)

But there is sensationalism from both sides.

It would be nice to see some real numbers, rather than selective quotes. Not that I believe the quoted numbers in this, they do suggest that double the foot traffic was lost between 2010 and 2012, as was lost between 2012 and 2015. Even if that was all post lock out laws, it is still roughly double way before any lock out laws.

 

[Milefest]

So there really is going to be a point in the very near future when the last person is going to leave sydney and will have to turn off the lights because of the lock out laws? No? Technically you might like to double check the definition of sensationalism.

You're confusing sensationalism with figure of speech.

Perhaps you might like to put up some scientific based evidence to disprove my observations, rather than resorting to negative characterisations?

Your observations may be coincidentally correct, but unless you agree with the scientific fact that anecdotal evidence is unreliable then there is no point even having a discussion.

 

[medhead]

You're confusing sensationalism with figure of speech.

Not according to Oxford dictionaries online, or other online sources. Over-hyped, manipulation of the truth. Words like that are used in those other sources.

Your observations may be coincidentally correct, but unless you agree with the scientific fact that anecdotal evidence is unreliable then there is no point even having a discussion.

Indeed. which makes me wonder why there are 95 posts in this thread given the anecdotal nature of the linked piece. the discussion probably should stop due to the claim that opinion piece, that story, is in any way scientific. In any case, my observation and experience contradicts the claim that there is no night life in Sydney. Rigorous, peer-reviewed evidence is not required to refute such an extreme claim.

 

[drron]

You're confusing sensationalism with figure of speech.



Your observations may be coincidentally correct, but unless you agree with the scientific fact that anecdotal evidence is unreliable then there is no point even having a discussion.

And the evidence is that emergency admissions for alcohol related violence and trauma are down since the lockout laws.There has been no evidence of an increase in such emergency admissions in other areas.Reports of such an increase on here are just hearsay and anecdotal so as you say not reliable.

 

[anat0l]

Something I just thought: how are the statistics for "alcohol related violence" collected?

For example, if a patient comes into hospital, you would need to establish:

• The patient was involved in a case of violence.
• The violence was a result of alcohol, or highly probable. The patient could well be a "sober" victim and their "drunk" belligerent may or may not be hospitalised alongside them. To be related to alcohol, it probably has to be established via testimony suggesting significant mental impairment (due to alcohol from a "sober" baseline), and/or something like blood alcohol level.

Just seems confusing as someone would need to do a lot of connecting the dots with data not just collected by the hospital. My guess is that there is other violence which happens not necessarily alcohol-fuelled, though one could still make the argument that violence is violence and the lock out laws address all sorts of those, even if it is merely by limiting foot traffic and numbers.


There was one suggestion on a Facebook comment I read (not backed up by numbers or studies), as an alternative to lockout laws, that full accountability in movement in a critical area and alcohol consumption for all patrons be maintained via ID tracking. For example, when you enter a club, your ID gets scanned. Same when you order a drink, which is also noted down. The data bank would be centralised. The data could even be shared amongst venues, but also accessible by the police and hospital system. The logistics of organising an effective ID system would not be trivial to say the least. Also starts to get a bit tricky if you're ordering for mates, e.g. you're not consuming all of those six drinks being registered against your name (right?). But I think their overall idea is that if a fairly full record of your movement and consumption habits are being recorded, if you mess up, restrictive penalties can be applied on the basis of your record, versus currently where no such record exists and a lot of evidence of patterns have to be more or less guessed or up to witnesses. That increased knowledge of what you are doing would act as a deterrent for you to step out of line and do something stupid.


There's also quite a bit of sentiment there to apply lock down on Star Casino. The only difference is Star Casino is crawling with so much security and cameras, the idea would be that you would find yourself thrown out on your backside back on the street posthaste if you even look like you're about to **** up.

 

[Princess Fiona]

Something I just thought: how are the statistics for "alcohol related violence" collected?

For example, if a patient comes into hospital, you would need to establish:

• The patient was involved in a case of violence.
• The violence was a result of alcohol, or highly probable. The patient could well be a "sober" victim and their "drunk" belligerent may or may not be hospitalised alongside them. To be related to alcohol, it probably has to be established via testimony suggesting significant mental impairment (due to alcohol from a "sober" baseline), and/or something like blood alcohol level.

Just seems confusing as someone would need to do a lot of connecting the dots with data not just collected by the hospital. My guess is that there is other violence which happens not necessarily alcohol-fuelled, though one could still make the argument that violence is violence and the lock out laws address all sorts of those, even if it is merely by limiting foot traffic and numbers.


There was one suggestion on a Facebook comment I read (not backed up by numbers or studies), as an alternative to lockout laws, that full accountability in movement in a critical area and alcohol consumption for all patrons be maintained via ID tracking. For example, when you enter a club, your ID gets scanned. Same when you order a drink, which is also noted down. The data bank would be centralised. The data could even be shared amongst venues, but also accessible by the police and hospital system. The logistics of organising an effective ID system would not be trivial to say the least. Also starts to get a bit tricky if you're ordering for mates, e.g. you're not consuming all of those six drinks being registered against your name (right?). But I think their overall idea is that if a fairly full record of your movement and consumption habits are being recorded, if you mess up, restrictive penalties can be applied on the basis of your record, versus currently where no such record exists and a lot of evidence of patterns have to be more or less guessed or up to witnesses. That increased knowledge of what you are doing would act as a deterrent for you to step out of line and do something stupid.


There's also quite a bit of sentiment there to apply lock down on Star Casino. The only difference is Star Casino is crawling with so much security and cameras, the idea would be that you would find yourself thrown out on your backside back on the street posthaste if you even look like you're about to **** up.

As well thought out as this is it sounds like some sort of Orwellian nightmare.

I have stayed out of the debate thus far but I feel strongly that it's a real shame that the relatively relaxed European licensing regulations and low rates of violence cannot be replicated here.

It also smells really bad that exemptions are granted to Casinos, really bad

 

[anat0l]

As well thought out as this is it sounds like some sort of Orwellian nightmare.

I have stayed out of the debate thus far but I feel strongly that it's a real shame that the relatively relaxed European licensing regulations and low rates of violence cannot be replicated here.

It also smells really bad that exemptions are granted to Casinos, really bad

Orwellian as it may be, I guess it all comes back to the same roots which also apply to these lock out laws (and why your conclusion of "a real shame" is as such): The government doesn't trust you.