Jump to content
  • Announcements

    Welcome! New around here? Take a look at the New Members' Guide for some pointers.

    You can Sign up or log in with your Facebook account and you can soon be chatting away with friends old and new..

    Check out our Handy Information section if you're after something quickly!

  • calender payment

    Calendar Paymene

    Delivery Options
    Your NBN Forum Username:

  • If you would like to support the forum, please consider visiting the forum shop, where you can purchase such items as NBN Burgees, Window Stickers, or even a custom Limited Edition Wooden Throttle Control Knob

    Forum Shop

Recommended Posts

Just now, Philosophical said:

I think it is an offence to be drunk in charge of just yourself in public.

I believe that is drunk and disorderly!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
14 minutes ago, EastCoastIPA said:

I believe that is drunk and disorderly!

Don't think you have to be disorderly just drunk

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

Don't think you have to be disorderly just drunk

 

But can you be in charge of yourself if drunk?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
23 minutes ago, EastCoastIPA said:

But can you be in charge of yourself if drunk?

Maybe just drunk in public then

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Section 12 of the Licensing Act 1872 outlaws “every person found drunk in any highway or other public place, whether a building or not, or on any licensed premises”. Carries a £200 fine.

But then a few other laws still on the statutes might be pertinent on the Broads? What about those sailor hats sold in shops and worn by quite a few holiday makers? Ah you see, them despicable criminals is guilty of contravening the Seamen’s and Soldiers’ False Characters Act 1906 and could spend a month in clink for doing so.

But the real law breakers...are those despicable fiends that contravene the 1986 Salmon Act and commit the crime of 'handling a salmon in suspicious circumstances'. You know who you are! :default_eusa_naughty:

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

* Drunk is someone who can't go out and enjoy a few drinks but have to tank it everytime.

2 guys I work with when I get nights out from suppliers i'm on call week about so if there going somewhere I can't eat (funny sod) I plan it when I'm on call. Something I eat it's when he's on call. BUT he kicks off cause he can't drink that's why I call it 'T Total' week.

But what he can't get in his head and another guy is that I will still drive but I don't have to listen for the phone & enjoy the night and have a few when I get in. I only have a couple if out anyway but then it's £18 taxi for a 10 min drive in and out of town.

I'll clean my next quote up from what I get called

* Boring Git is someone who can drink but doesn't and spoil it for others who could.

I've never been a big drinker and working the trip boat for 15 years never been clubbing and law is zero drink for the crew till last passenger is off and the engine is off ( I'd have there pints pulled ready for them). I'd take for a bottle when on the bar if they bought me a drink so had them when I got in.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MM, just curious, why the interest in this topic?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, JennyMorgan said:

MM, just curious, why the interest in this topic?

There has been much said over the years about people not being stopped from boating when seen loading excessive amounts of booze on board a day boat. Similar comments have been made about drunken "stag parties". I like a drink or six and that started me wondering if people see me and think "He's drunk". So, when am I drunk in other peoples eyes? When is anybody drunk in other peoples eyes?

A ranger came under fire not so very long ago for sending "a dayboat full of drunken people" on their way. Apparently it seems, he should have stopped them and done something about it. So I wondered... Maybe he didn't think they were drunk, by his definition.

What definition should he have gone by?

So many questions were raised in my mind that I wondered what other members thought. Especially as some members have such strong views on the subject.

Recently the friend who has kept a roof over my head drank a case (3 litres) of Henry Westons 8.2% abv cider, the best part of half a litre of gin and all this was on top of a lunch time session in our local (4 pints of Adnams ordinary). He wasn't what I'd have called "drunk". his speech was slow and careful but that was the only sign. That worried me.!!!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MauriceMynah said:

A ranger came under fire not so very long ago for sending "a dayboat full of drunken people" on their way. Apparently it seems, he should have stopped them and done something about it. So I wondered... Maybe he didn't think they were drunk, by his definition.

What definition should he have gone by?

So many questions were raised in my mind that I wondered what other members thought. Especially as some members have such strong views on the subject. 

Which is why when I made my first post on this thread I said the following,

"I guess the more pertinent question here would be what constitutes being under the influence of drink to such an extent as to be incapable of taking proper control of the vessel?

I think we have all seen sober people that appear to be incapable of taking proper control of the vessel!

And that then poses the question, what is taking proper control of the vessel?

Having more than 35 micrograms of alcohol for every 100 millilitres of breath is very specific and with the right equipment enforceable, not so sure how you legally quantify being incapable of taking proper control of the vessel?

I chose some of those words, no copied some of those words very carefully because they were lifted from the relevant BA byelaw. To answer one of your questions, that is the definition he should have gone by, but as I think a few of us agreed, there are some sober people who are incapable of taking proper control of a vessel. The police at least have a prescribed limit when it comes to drink driving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In law, John, the only definition I can think of is that of a blood test as used by the police. In the meantime perhaps BA Rangers should carry breathalisers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

In law, John, the only definition I can think of is that of a blood test as used by the police. In the meantime perhaps BA Rangers should carry breathalisers. 

But what limit would they apply?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is clear from the responses here that ‘drunk is in the eye of the beholder’!! Everybody seems to have a different idea and it’s certainly made me think. To me, a drunk is someone who has clearly had too much and is incapable of proper conduct - ie can’t stand, talk or be rational. That doesn’t describe (most of the time anyway) what we see here on the Broads. We see young people, with cans or bottles in their hands, having a good time and probably being a bit over-zealous with their language and actions etc. That worries some but not others. 

MM - I think you are worrying unnecessarily, why be worried if some think you are drunk and incapable of reversing your boat into a mooring against the tide. Only you know the truth! :default_norty:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cars and boats are different. They are not comparable so the rules for each are, and need to be, different. Apply the same levels of alcohol to skippers of boats and you kill the broads (and any other boating holiday resort) for good, so no, we do not need or want the rangers breathalysing holiday makers.

Besides, it is the drunken passenger who is at the greatest risk not the helmsman.

Who is in greater control of their boat, the drunk with 50 years of boating experience or the stone cold sober elderly gentleman who has never helmed a boat in his life?

In the Ranger's case, how could he judge the capability of the dayboat skipper? and thus the level of intoxication to apply the relevant bylaw?

My sympathy is 100% with the ranger, working with vague rules and the inebriated general public. A no win situation however you look at it, besides, they left the mooring thereby proving the ability to helm the boat. 

Now the thread you started turned a little fractious so let's not go down that avenue barring the relevant aspect to this thread "When is a person "Drunk".?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a sobering thought. Perhaps the Rangers, as do the police, publicans, moderators and bouncers, should and do carry those valuable tools of experience and common sense to the job.

Has anyone witnessed a football match where a referee applies the exact extent of the rules and regulations? I have. There was nearly 45 minutes of extra time to play. Worst game of footie ever!

I think your average Broads Ranger must see so many more degrees of partying boaters in a week than most people and just like your beat bobby will know when action needs to be taken and what that action needs to be. 

As for my good friend MM, you need not worry. I have seen you turn around at 9:30 pm and walk away from the bar and say 'I've had sufficient thank you'. I've never met anyone more 'capable' than you sir!  



 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Timbo said:


As for my good friend MM, you need not worry. I have seen you turn around at 9:30 pm and walk away from the bar and say 'I've had sufficient thank you'

Hells teeth, I must have been absolutely smashed !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

Hells teeth, I must have been absolutely smashed !

Nah...I think the Cuban Cigar I gave you turned you green before you got to the bar!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about we forget about the booze issue in itself and just go with the rules of inappropriate, disruptive or dangerous behaviour caused by whatever reason is not tolerated and can lead to action by the Rangers, boat yards or police, without spoiling the fun of people enjoying themselves in a manner that does not obstruct or abuse others.

I know I enjoy a good gallon or two every Christmas and the odd special occasion aboard, but have never caused any issue or hazard to other users, rather help and encourage them when needed, and if I felt I was getting to a point where I was losing the little control of the boat I have or becoming a hazard I would put the glass down and get the boat moored up sharpish.

Never been to that point yet though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You only need to come over Hoveton /Wroxham bridge to see the problem. Would all those holiday makers behave like that on an A road at home... no. But they're on holiday and think it perfectly correct to wander out in front of  cars and seem most put out if you beep your horn to remind them your arriving in a ton of moving metal..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

Now the thread you started turned a little fractious so let's not go down that avenue barring the relevant aspect to this thread "When is a person "Drunk".?

I think this thread is starting to go round in circles! You ask for opinions on what constitutes a drunk, and those have been given by various people, including myself. You have also asked direct questions about what definition the ranger should have gone by, to which I referenced the byelaw, which received a friendly warning if you like, which has got me feeling like I'm walking on egg shells here. You've now gone full circle back to really just wanting an opinion so having already answered that, I'm out of this thread. :default_icon_wave:  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jayfire said:

How about we forget about the booze issue in itself and just go with the rules of inappropriate, disruptive or dangerous behaviour caused by whatever reason is not tolerated and can lead to action by the Rangers, boat yards or police,

I'm delighted to read that Jay, that is as it should be, but in fairness, the thread is about drunkenness and drunken behaviour, which may not necessarily be covered by the above. Personally I was interested in certain peoples views on how they would define "Drunkenness". I'm just as interested in the way some of them haven't replied or joined in the debate. (No names, no pack drill)

13 minutes ago, Jayfire said:

and if I felt I was getting to a point where I was losing the little control of the boat I have or becoming a hazard I would put the glass down and get the boat moored up sharpish.

I have been there once, and did exactly what you describe. In my case I was close to Barton so dropped the mudweight mid broad (outside the channel ) and had a little siesta.

PS, that was back in the 90s, learned from it and not done it since.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

Personally I was interested in certain peoples views on how they would define "Drunkenness". I'm just as interested in the way some of them haven't replied or joined in the debate. (No names, no pack drill)

Are you referring to me? (hic) I will have you know, the last time we sat together over a few glasses, I was nowhere near as drink as you might of thunk. Can't vouch for Wussername though. . . . .

Seriously. And since you ask. . .

I was once told - by a doctor - that if you are in the habit of having a glass of sherry before your lunch, when you have got back from church on a Sunday morning, then you are an alcholic. All the rest is a question of scale! I happen to believe this, from my own experience.

I also believe it has to do with how you grew up. My father served all through the war on motor torpedo boats and I have no doubt that he survived it all on pink gin! So did all those around him. During my childhood on the Broads, he and his old friends, who had also been in the Navy, could stand in a pub and drink what they liked without ever showing the slightest affect from it. He encouraged me to drink from an early age, so that I would know "how to handle it". So there was I, having my half of beer in the Buck, among all these men for whom I had the greatest respect and I would never for one moment have let them see if I was becoming the worse for it! So I suppose I have always known "how to handle it".

Is this a good thing? No, it isn't, because the risk is that you end up not knowing when you have had enough. I freely admit that I am an alcoholic but I hope that, in accepting that fact, I have been able to keep it under control. For instance, I do all my driving in the morning, so it doesn't matter if I have had one too many for lunch.

Actually, I think Jayfire is right on this one. It is not a matter of how much you have had to drink : it is how you behave, how you control yourself. If you are going to behave like a lout anyway, then maybe a few drinks doesn't make much difference.

This is a very difficult subject and I accept that there are those for whom alcohol really is a poison. It affects their character, and can ruin their lives. I am lucky enough not to be one of those.

So maybe my father was right?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I don't think that booze is the root cause of any incident or behavior in the same way that petrol does not spontaneously burst in to flames.

So in the same way that petrol needs air and heat to burn. booze needs an individual to consume it and then be exposed to some circumstances where that individual has exercise judgement, skill, restraint, etc. for the effects to manifest themselves.

To make this broads related, sadly the ability of some people to control a boat properly or behave in a social manner is lacking even before the addition of alcohol.

This is not a new problem to the extent that in the 70's "instant age" a very appropriately printed T shirt was available.

INSTANT IDIOT....JUST ADD ALCOHOL 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MauriceMynah said:

I'm delighted to read that Jay, that is as it should be, but in fairness, the thread is about drunkenness and drunken behaviour, which may not necessarily be covered by the above. Personally I was interested in certain peoples views on how they would define "Drunkenness". I'm just as interested in the way some of them haven't replied or joined in the debate. (No names, no pack drill)

I can't answer your question really MM, personally though I try not to define people at all if I can.

I have no problem with a guy or girl sat quietly in the well of their boat steaming drunk causing no issue, someone acting like a complete bell shouting and swearing in front of women and children who is tee total would be receiving a strong conversation from me.

It's the attitude and behaviour that defines the problem not the level of intoxication. I know that isn't what you are asking but I believe it's a valid point regardless.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I was interested in was how various people defined "Drunk".  Not "a drunk", just drunk. When you see a person come out of the pub, at what stage of inebriation does he become … in your opinion... drunk (as opposed to "a drunk" which is very different and not what I am interested in.)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now this is difficult, due to what constitutes "drunk". I'm not a heavy drinker, one or two pints with a meal, and that's it. BUT . . there was an occasion when I used to let myself go when the annual holiday came round. Encouraged by my delinquent uncles, it wasn't unusual to have 7 or 8 pints at lunch, followed by a couple more in the evening. OK, 3 or 4 in the evening. Drinking steadily, I never felt out of control of all my faculties. Bladder, yes, faculties, no. However after one heavy lunchtime session we came across another uncle, purely by chance, who we hadn't seen for many years, due to family troubles. He was with his new partner, and renting a chalet. Invited back, wine was produced, and I foolishly had a glass or three. BIG MISTAKE! Apparently, after our goodbyes, I helmed us from Horning to Wroxham, made and served an afternoon cuppa, and was acting in a completely sober manner. I say apparently, because I have absolutely no memory of any of it. I remember taking leave of my uncle and his lady, but then nothing until I suddenly was aware of sitting in the bar of the Hotel Wroxham at 7.30 that evening. It became known as "Ray's lost afternoon" in the family. It frightened the life out of me, and I haven't mixed drinks since.

The point of this disgusting episode is this. If I'd been breathalysed, I'd have put the reading off the scale, but I was acting as soberly as if I'd never taken a drink in my life. So what's "drunk". :default_winko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • NBN Mobile App

    Want to use NBN when you're out and about?

    Get our mobile app for Android and iOS!

    Get it on Google Play

×

Important Information

For details of our Guidelines, please take a look at the Terms of Use here.