The cut-and-thrust of incisive political debate.

On the Today program this morning, people were burbling on about the upcoming change to licencing law. People who should know better. They should all have been shot. There was not one reference - well, there never is any reference, so presumably all the London media establishment should be shot - to the fact that this is probably the best-trialled legal change Britain's ever had. There's been a thirty-year pilot project involving a tenth of the British population, and it has totally failed to lead to the sort of disaster that the prophets of doom claim is inevitable. But does anyone choose to bring up this somewhat-relevant fact?

No, of course not. That would be sensible. Why would anyone want to introduce actual evidence into lawmaking?
Tags: ,
The three wise monkeys spring to mind,whenever I bother to take an interest in any kind of political bullshit!

The people who oppose the extended licensing laws are the same ones that believe they can win the war on drugs,by simply making them all illegal.

It would be fairly simple to standardize most class A's and make them safer,this would in turn put a stop to accidental overdoses and needless violence and would also create an immense amount of revenue by taxing them so the fat cat politicians to all take early retirement.

Same with sex education in schools,I'm a firm believer that by putting condom machines in school toilets,it would(wait for it!)cut down on the number of teenage pregnancies in this country(highest rate in Europe,I understand)but NO!...because for some fucked up reason,we're all told that that would ENCOURAGE under-age sex.In my opinion I don't think the randy little bastards need any encouragement!

Rant over...
Rant appreciated, though. I don't understand the anti-condom logic either (possibly because it isn't based on logic).
Right. Not giving kids condoms, in order to not encourage them to have sex, is like not giving kids toothpaste, in order to not encourage them to eat sweeties. Go figure.
That's a good analogy. Thanks. I'll have to remember it for future deployment.
...and don't forget the legislators in Westminster are 100% exempt from such laws with their 3 bars which can and do open twenty-four hours. Hippocrates.
Well, to be fair a majority of them voted to pass this legislation (and it's therefore too late to actually stop it now) - it's just a bunch of peers getting cold feet.
Ah, but that experiment was conducted in another country, so there's no guarantee that it would work in England...
There's another country in the UK with different laws? Where could that place be?

I notice a similar thing when a report starts mentioning research carried out in England-and-Wales but within a sentence or two will be talking about what this means for the UK. Gah.
Two, actually - or one-and-a-bit, anyway. But yeah.

I remember something similar when I moved to Scotland in the seventies - their licensing rules had just relaxed to approximate parity with Norn Iron. Then the laws here relaxed further over the next decade or so, so when I was in England in the mid/late 80's there was another sudden catch-up exercise. To which, of course, the Scots responded by relaxing their rules even further (although I think we've come back from those more extreme days).
I think the evidence has been used in the lawmaking.

We rarely see genuinely well informed, sensible people in the media though because that's boring. What the media tends to do is round up a bunch of ignoramuses with half-baked ideas and puts them in a studio or gives them a column. That seems to sell better.

Net result, the public at large end up ill-informed or mislead and form their own half-baked ideas.

It's a whole nother string to the Beer and Circuses bow.