booze, banjo and bangalore

Most young guy says we want night life in Bangalore as with the western life. The new commissioner has become a 'villain' on their part. But, I believe the cons are more than the pros.

I was about to become victim to a guy who had his 'nightlife' and driving a Santro on empty road in full josh was about to hit me from back when I was walking on the roadside. I was feeling at that time why Government is not controlling this since I was on the receiving part of it.

Do we think that a person who drinks will not drive ? They show their josh only in driving. Can a person in the group go as a driver to the pub with his friends and do not have drink.

There are many who are living with low income and the main person in that family become addicted to this night life and spend all the income on the nightlife, what will be his family's fate?

In the name of the night life, 'other illegal activities' are also carried out. Example is the recent catching hold of people taking drugs in a pub.

One person, a BPO worker of Mphasis in TV9 interview was suggesting the Government should give transportation to those who go for nightlife!!. Our Government is unable to give good transportation for the office goers, for nightlife do we need transporation offered by Government to enjoy 'night life'?

Rich of Bangalore is quoting different reasons for the need of night life and saying they cannot live without it. Roti, Khapda,Makhan aur Nightlife?

Since Vedike has been brought in the picture on this thread, I wanted to ask if there ways to channel their energy in more impactful ways. Think of these, What if:

• every driver jumping red signals was taunted as non-kannadiga
• every cop caught taking bribe was presented a red and gold muffler
• every person chucking trash on the road started fearing Vedike
• etc etc

If Vedike's future goal is regular politics, they may think above is not a good line to pursue. But if they are in to create a vibrant local organization, they may be immortalized if they did some of above.

Even if they have political ambitions, doing above is going to win them supporters, at least in Bangalore, where the middle class numbers are significant.

Everyone knows that drinking is injurious to health. Still they drink. Problem really occurs after 50+ . Drunken driving will prepone it in a different way.

If we speak to a drinker, he will never accept this, rather will say it will keep the body warm during cold etc etc. So is the nightlife which goes in parallel.

Crime and theft is different. It should not be confused. Chances of crime is more in drunken state compared to normal state. A normal person if drunken may not involve in a crime (probably just with accident), but a criminal minded person can commit crime during this state.  I myself have seen drunken people behaving so badly with women on the MG Road/Brigade Road side especially during New Year. They just loose control. I have seen the otherside of nightlife personally. Someone like Dr.ASJ would be the right person to comment on this.

I have no problem obeying rules, as long as they are rational and necessary. I also believe in curing causes, and not symptoms.

The facts here are - we have inadequate road networks, a virtually non-existant public transport system, inadequate police force, and poor law enforcement especially on the road. The 11:30 deadline merely tries to eliminate a visible problem - drunk driving - rather than any of the root causes. Such solutions can not work long-term.

I work hard through the week, usually till 9 pm. On Weekends, I have household tasks to perform during the day. If I want to go to a leisure establishment late in the evening and enjoy myself, I believe I'm entitled to that as a tax-paying, law-abiding citizen of a free country. This 1130 rule violates my freedom. Why should I have to pay this price for the administration's inadequacies?

And to people who talk about pub culture not being 'Indian' - what basis and what right do you have to decide what others should do? You can have your own moral standards, and I'm entitled to mine. The law should not favor either - it has to be fair and considerate to all. You should not favor an unfair, draconian law - that covers up real problems and inadequacies of the administration - at the cost of our liberty - simply because it indirectly enforces behaviour you morally approve of.

By the way - if 1130 pm really is such a good idea - why is it not being adopted by other cities? And why do we still have more accidents?

circa 1996-97

IT companies were having interview/discussions to be held in pubs over beer

School kids shoving their ties infront of the bouncers, entering a pub at 4PM for a 'regular'

Sitting on MG road with a chilled K* waiting for the new year

Good muzic..not always loud..likes of doors and floyd

..most times it was all in 'moderation' as Tony Sinclair would say..signs of maturity!?

fast forward now:

MP's son goes trigger happy shooting rounds from a gun at 11!

Overly drunk hooligans(outsiders?) spoiling peace everywhere...kind of celebrating their new found independence!

Rave parties with overdose of everything!

signs of degeneration?!

ASJ

I agree with a lot of what you've said. No one is condoning DUI or any kind of irresponsible behaviour. And certainly, there is a need for restrictions. But, isn't this being too harsh on some of us, without trying other options?

On a typical Friday/Saturday night, the number of people enjoying 'nightlife' is certainly more than 5,000 and could probably be much higher. Do all of them deserve these 'restrictions' because a few cause some damage sometimes? Not all of them are 'horses without reins'. If they were, you wouldn't see a large number of people, and women, from decent families, visit these places.

Most of us are responsible citizens only looking to let our hair down for a bit. Most of us DO take rickshaws (even at the extortionist rates quoted), or ensure there is someone  not drinking, so he/she can drive on the way back. In case nobody realized, we care about our own safety also! And there is a lot of breath-checking at unavoidable road junctions by the police, which works as a deterrent.

If DUI is such a big problem, I'm sure simpler solutions can be found:

The clubs can tie-up with cab companies to ensure their guests can get home safe, without paying ridiculously high fares. (Here's the irony - safe, reliable, affordable transport for women is a major reason why people take their own cars even when though they know they will be drinking, and risking 'public safety' on the way back)

Most clubs offer valet parking services. They could use breathalyzers to check the driver's 'fitness' before returning his car keys. If not in a suitable state, they could arrange paid assistance. In the worst case, they could inform the police. If this is enforced strictly for a period, visitors will fall in line.

I'm just thinking out loud, but I'm sure better solutions can be found, than the current approach - which to me appears like using a road-roller to crack a walnut. Sure, it works, but is a crude solution that hurts many like me.

Finally, the working class respects the law, or at least fears it. The most famous and blatant cases of accidents involve celebrities or politicians' family members who consider themselves 'above the law', and are the most reckless. They could easily get drunk at private parties (they probably do) and endanger public safety driving later. These restrictions don't bother them as much as they hurt the majority - ordinary professionals like us.

I feel, in stead of condemning everyone who wants 'nightlife' as 'hooligans' and taking away their freedom, we should focus on the real problems and try to find solutions that would be acceptable to all. If we sincerely try, it shouldn't be that difficult.

I am really surprised to see the comments like :

On a typical Friday/Saturday night, the number of people enjoying 'nightlife' is certainly more than 5,000 and could probably be much higher. Do all of them deserve these 'restrictions' because a few cause some damage sometimes? Not all of them are 'horses without reins'. If they were, you wouldn't see a large number of people, and women, from decent families, visit these places.

It is the few people's perception and promotion of nightlife may cause so many fatalities in not so controlled environment. How much do we spend on entering pubs, imported alcohol and some side food on friday nights.

If on the other hand, the same 'Guys and Gals' can spend the same amount in a say orphanage with food from the neighbouring bakery and enjoy with orphan kids, how good will it be. There are so many families in Bangalore whose monthly income will not be as much as the expenditure on nightlife for one night.

One has to question himself what am I gaining from this Nightlife after all the hype? Does a drink solve all my problems - It just hides it for a while and gives a new problem. Daddy and mummy will be upset, wife will be upset, cannot face the kid directly and has to hide the smell - problems are aplenty.

I would say everyone who wants nightlife question yourself what am I gaining from this???

Vasanth

I quite agree with Nikunj. We could do without moralising here, please! 

Muralidhar Rao

ASJ

Couple of gaping holes in you arguments:

1. Comparison vs. UK is not 'apple-to-apple' at all. There, people have a very good work-life balance in general. Few work beyond 5 pm, or 6 at the most. Then they can head off to their pubs or wherever they want. This means by 11pm- they've already spent ~4 hours there, so the deadline is not really restrictive. Shopping malls, stores and other commercial establishments also close between 7 and 8 pm there. In fact, since they have enough time for all this during the week, most establishments remain closed on Sundays.

In Bangalore, we work till much later everyday. A lot of us working 'days', finish at 8pm. Those working 'evening' shifts finish much later. We go out later in the evening, and do that only on weekends. To say 11pm is OK for bangalore 'coz it was OK for London, is simply ignoring all these ground realities. It's no better than suggesting all our shops and malls should close by 8pm, and remain closed on Sundays. I'm sure everyone would realize that can not work here.

2. The %ages and numbers you mentioned are skewed to the extent of being rhetorical.

For one, I said >5k on any SINGLE night. This is a very conservative estimate, and is only a small sub-set of the total set of people who want the deadline extended. In fact, just the number of employees at establishments suffering due to this deadline probably exceeds 5k. So, the number of people who's interests I'm talking about is much, much higher. If it wasn't, you wouldn't see TOI running a campaign about it. (Pl read TV Mohandas Pai's views on this, published on Page 1 of Bangalore Times yesterday.)

And to say that 90% are in favor of the deadline is also extremely inaccurate. Of the 7 Mio ppl in Bangalore, about 1/2 lie outside the 18-40 age bracket, and probably don't relate to the issue. Of the others, I'd say another 30-40%, at least, can not afford these establishments, and again, don't relate to the issue. That does not mean all of them are opposed to deadline extension with good reasons. Do not assume 'no opinion' is the same as 'opposition'. Even if it is 'opposition' - but without 'knowledge' - that's unfair and shouldn't count.

A proper, fair analysis is likely to reveal the numbers on both sides of the fence to be even, and not 90% vs. 5k as you suggest.

Lastly, the reason I equated this with Talibanisation - is that essentially it is a case of some people conveniently enforcing their moral standards on others. I'm simply not prepared to accept the argument that allowing people to party beyond 1130pm makes them 'horses without reins' and a danger to public safety that can not be managed. I've seen the crowds, (in fact, I'm often a part of them), and this is just a bloody unfair judgment passed without examining realities and trying to work out 'win-win' solutions. Other cities in India - and even Karnataka - do not have such suffocating restrictions. And we in Bangalore finish our work and go out later in the evening than people in other cities. Yet, we are made scapegoats here, because it is convenient for the powers-that-be, and other citizens don't know and don't care to understand us. The lack of empathy is shameful.

With a virtually non-existant nightlife, we still have one of the highest urban crime rates in the country. So, nightlife is clearly NOT the root cause of the problem. Insufficient and lethargic law enforcement is.

And I request anyone supporting the deadline/bans in later comments - to provide solid facts, figures and logic. Arguments based on assumptions and 'morals' are completely pointless.

Misread, Misunderstood and Misrepresented - that's how I feel right now.

Lets take stock of the thread to see which bits I am referring to.

My anology of horse without reins - this was my way of explaining a medical fact (not fiction nor a rhetoric) of what in medical jargon will be called cortical disinhibition. There was no finger pointing. Alcohol in smallest amounts can affect attention a frontal lobe attribute - hence the advise is not to drive even after drinking within so called legal limits.

Now apple for apple - Read carefully (again and again if need be). My mention of UK was to explain why alcohol is a problem pertaining to economics, politics, social and moral values. In this case I exemplified the political and economic aspects.

I did compare apple for apple - the handcart puller, the housewife, the resident doctors and many in all walks of life work as hard as an IITian. As for numbers, I took what was mentioned in the thread. One can try to use the best estimate, how about a 100,000 partying each night - its still a fraction is it not?

Now, Taliban - a rhetoric which was introduced in the thread - but not by me - its only fair that I get to respond to it (my freedom).

As for who is imposing on whom - its open to judgement, the number of people partying each night says a lot more than anything on this thread.

Facts - I know for sure that even in not so hard working UK (as suggested) booze accounts for disproportionate number of accidents, crime and attendance at casualty departments. Amazing, if anything there is no link between hard work, letting down hair by drinking booze.

Now, I am happy one can get to drink and merry until 1130pm. Those who are not and want it extended - its for them to put up a case.

So the onus of finding hard facts and figures lies on those who want extended hours imposed on larger majority (and not other way round).

ASJ

SB, do post the details to appropriately inform this thread.

I said above, figures are missing in this thread, but I overlooked the ones mentioned by TS (those figures are sufficient enough to consider restrictions).

The police perspective is vital - Last year I was in a public meeting where Pune's then commissioner Umranikar was asked about penalties for driving offenders. He said, our laws are so ancient, they still have to penalise with Rs 100 (price of a coffee and a bit more now a days) only. It hardly has an impact. They hence try to be creative - take the license away, get them to spend a day at the HQ/lower courts to get it back (idea being to cause sufficient discomfort to get the person to think twice before offending again).

ASJ

I have to admit - reading this thread has made me more aware, than I earlier was, of the DUI problem. I agree with all of you, that this problem deserves more attention. However, my disagreements stem from my belief that throttling nightlife to this extent is neither the ideal solution, nor is it fair to a large number of ordinary citizens. I'll try and explain why, please read on...

First, a fact. I don't know where this '100 rupee fine' idea originates, but the law is this:

1. Under section 185 Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, the concentration of alcohol has been specified maximum as 30 mg/100 ml of blood detected in a test by a breath analyzer.
2. The penalty for the first offence is with imprisonment for a term upto 6 months or with fine upto Rs.2,000/- or both. 
3. For second or subsequent offence (if committed within 3 years of the commission of previous similar offence), with imprisonment for a term upto 2 years or with fine upto Rs.3000/- or with both.

Strict enforcement of this law - with rigorous checking of drivers' breath around establishments serving alcohol and imposition of the penalties including jail terms - will surely make for a very effective deterrent. For sure, people's judgment is not the best when drunk. But we are talking about the possibility of a significant fine, a jail-term, (and the possibility of being denied a Visa to a Western country due to a recorded DUI offence - something especially relevant to people in Bangalore). I'm sure it would take more than a couple of drinks for everyone in a group to completely lose their minds and take this chance.

The reality is - checking isn't rigorous. Even if caught, you can simply grease the cop's plam with Rs. 50 and drive away. I feel our energies would be better utilized against THIS problem, than in arguing over limits of freedom. If anyone is serious about tackling this, please let me know and we'll try and do something together.

The case for extending the 1130 deadline is also simple:

1. The clientele for the establishments in question, typically, does not operate on a traditional body clock, due to longer and later working hours. Crowds start building up only after 930 pm or so. And they are dispersed by 1130, giving them almost no time to enjoy themselves (and please, lets not argue if they have a need or right to enjoy themselves, if this is still a free country)

2. No other city, definitely none of the 'metros', has such tight restrictions. But they manage well enough. Why must Bangalore kill it's nightlife options?

As a sidenote, examination of data reveals that most DUI-related accidents occur between 6 and 10 pm. This can NOT be related to discs/pubs, because their crowd typically leaves after 1030 pm. Logically, the high accident rate is due to a combination of peak traffic and DUI. So, wouldn't forcing establishments to open after peak traffic hours (say, 10 pm) make for better legislation rather than forcing them to close early? Cities like Singapore limit nightlife to specific zones. Why don't we try a similar approach, with either zones or timings?

In an earlier comment, I also suggested making the clubs more accountable for their guests' behaviour, and providing viable transport alternatives to self-driven vehicles for inebriated people. Simple solutions to many problems can be worked out if an honest effort is made, and I'm willing to participate if a working group is formed. (That was why I joined this forum, and specifically this discussion)

I did adopt a more confrontational approach in some earlier comments, because I was very disappointed by judgmental attitude and the lack of empathy displayed by some people here. Leisure establishments play a key role in enabling stress-relief and social interaction for many young working people in Bangalore (like myself). By and large, we are sensible, responsible citizens, and not the reckless, dangerous monsters we are being made out to be. Allowing us a little more freedom does not hurt the so-called 'majority', if proper checks and controls are put in place and work like they are supposed to. Making us scapegoats by ignoring our wishes and restricting us to unreasonable extents is regressive and unfair. We - the people of India (and Bangalore in particular) - can, and should do better than that.

Yes, alcoholism and DUI are problems. Lets examine them fully and objectively, and work towards proper, fair solutions, rather than making a scapegoat of all nightlife.

(ASJ - I STILL disagree with most of what you've said. As an example, 'we work harder' is not my own ill-informed opinion, as you might think. Westerners I work with, have often personally complained that 'Chinese, Indians and Japanese work too hard and raise the bar for us'. And my comments on London not being comparable with B'lore are also based on first-hand experience of both cities.

But I hope we all can set our differences aside for a bit, and try and work out 'middle-ground' solutions acceptable to all, including some 100,000 people you don't seem to like very much  Please consider this a 'virtual handshake'. Cheers! )

Right 'spirit', gentlemen! I extend my hand to you both in the virtual handshake. I was with SB at the talk by Mr Shankar Bidari, the Commissioner (SB would soon be posting a report on that). He has welcomed us to meet him on matters where we feel his intervention may be required. As such, once we have formulated a plan, as suggested by Doc, we could go over and meet the Commissioner.