Restaurants and No Alcohol - What is the Logic (If Any)

[1FinickyOne]

1 minute ago, BobBKK said:

I can say I have never sat next to a sloppy spitting 'type' in my fav Italian restaurant! if I did I'd walk out. You rightly pointed out in your other post unsocial behaviors usually starts after midnight and mostly around the 3am as YOU pointed out. As I am usually tucked up in bed around 11 I see no relevance. 

Those same people who who are drunk at 3 am are still out there... I would guess they just start earlier... 

[Stadtler]

1 hour ago, Thomas J said:

Has anyone ever heard a government official explain what logic there is to no alcohol while eating? 

You can seriously ask a logical question when it concerns government and worse, the Thai government?

 

Really?

[tomazbodner]

48 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

tomazbodner

 

I have no problem not having a meal without alcohol.  I just wondered if there was any logic whatsoever to the policy.  As mentioned it would seem as likely that you would get coronavirus sipping a glass of water as you would sipping a beer.  Yet the ban was instituted as part of the coronavirus response.  This one sounds as logical as banning people from the beaches where it has been incontrovertibly shown that sunlight, fresh air, and warm temperatures kill the virus yet the government locked the beaches down. 

Your logic of course makes sense, but the responses of government are to control the behaviour of Thai people upcountry mostly, who are unable to control the alcohol consumption, leading to road carnage, home tragedies and overall bad behaviour. The restrictions are just an over the top response to irresponsible behaviour of many locals and foreigners alike. The only logic I can see in banning serving alcohol in restaurants is plugging the holes; you may be dining at a decent place that focuses on food. But "restaurant" could also be a joint that sells never-ending alcohol supply with each meal. The restrictions are likely intended for those.

[Bluespunk]

1 hour ago, Thomas J said:

what possibly reason could be presented for allowing a restaurant to serve you a meal, and a beverage but not a beverage that contains alcohol

I go to restaurants to eat, not drink, so no problem for me. 

[BobBKK]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

I go to restaurants to eat, not drink, so no problem for me. 

Yes, good, but we should defend our right to free choice and there is no reason or logic behind this arbitrary decision. 

[elliss]

1 hour ago, redwood1 said:

Sir I will lay money on betting your a reformed raging alcoholic.........And now need to save the world to make up for all the years of your life you drank away...

 

        I enjoy  a beer with my evening meal , we were visiting local restaurants , three time a week .

        No beer, no wine ,  restaurants now have very few customers , if any . 

 Now we have grab deliveries , and wine and dine @ home .

We  wont be eating out anymore ..

         

 

[CGW]

55 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

Certainly last time in Soi Buakhao Pattaya i saw some restaurants packed with drinkers, if they weren't so stupid it's possible it would be allowed by now

No, look at the numbers, your trying to justify a unjustifiable shutdown driven by a corrupt media IMO

You were lied to! accept the fact ???? 

[Thomas J]

30 minutes ago, KhaoNiaw said:

I'm only explaining the thinking.  I know you don't get it but you're only looking at this from your own perspective.
I can assure you that most of my Thai friends would not be tempted to get together at a restaurant solely for a Tom Yum party. If there's alcohol available it's different. I agree you can ban large gatherings. What they're doing is taking the simplest route and not giving restaurants or people going there any leeway. The gatherings I've seen this week are groups of friends getting together to drink, and there's food too. So I'd say there is some kind of rationale behind the ban, even if it's not logic a that you agree with. 

Khao Niaw

 

Nope not logical and not just my perspective.  According to you, they should be worried about WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN.  If you ban groups of 8 or larger than you have to explain how my "perspective" is not valid.  If they are so worried about large groups than why open the restaurants at all.  Using you "logic"  opening them at all MIGHT prove to be such a temptation to have 40 to 1000 people join together that all restaurants should be banned.  

Khao Niaw

 

Now can you also explain why the alcohol is banned for dining with a restaurant to prevent large groups from gathering but it is perfectly permissible to have 1,000 or more people together simultaneously at Maakro or to have hundreds of people queued up at immigration. 

[CNXexpat]

Many Thais have an alcohol problem. More than citizens of other countries. I know no country with the regulation that it´s not allowed to sell alcohol between 2 and 5 pm. If they are allowed to drink in restaurants, they will meet in masses there, order a little snack and drink like crazy. 

[BobBKK]

Just now, CNXexpat said:

Many Thais have an alcohol problem. More than citizens of other countries. I know no country with the regulation that it´s not allowed to sell alcohol between 2 and 5 pm. If they are allowed to drink in restaurants, they will meet in masses there, order a little snack and drink like crazy. 

What?  everyone I know goes to a restaurateur earliest 6pm normally 7/8pm so no relevance.  

[Bluespunk]

15 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

Yes, good, but we should defend our right to free choice and there is no reason or logic behind this arbitrary decision. 

You have the right to drink within the laws of the country you choose to live in. 

[CNXexpat]

4 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

What?  everyone I know goes to a restaurateur earliest 6pm normally 7/8pm so no relevance.  

Read my comment again and try to understand. 

[KhaoNiaw]

13 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

Nope not logical and not just my perspective.  According to you, they should be worried about WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN.  If you ban groups of 8 or larger than you have to explain how my "perspective" is not valid. 

I didn't say your perspective isn't valid. You want it done your way, which I agreed would be a valid approach. It's being done another way. I can also see some logic in that approach. You can't.
But that definitely doesn't mean I can see the reasoning or intend to try and explain what's going on in other situations ???? 

[bkk6060]

Most restaurants here do not care if you bring in your own drink.

I like Diet Coke so bring it in often as many places do not have it.  Never a problem.

So, think outside the box.

If as person is that desperate pour out half the Coke and fill with Rum or Vodka.

They won't do a smell test so you can get your booze fix accomplished.

[scubascuba3]

26 minutes ago, CGW said:

No, look at the numbers, your trying to justify a unjustifiable shutdown driven by a corrupt media IMO

You were lied to! accept the fact ???? 

All lockdowns are a mistake, but the restaurant element is because drinkers crowd into restaurants

[scubascuba3]

4 minutes ago, bkk6060 said:

Most restaurants here do not care if you bring in your own drink.

I like Diet Coke so bring it in often as many places do not have it.  Never a problem.

So, think outside the box.

If as person is that desperate pour out half the Coke and fill with Rum or Vodka.

They won't do a smell test so you can get your booze fix accomplished.

That's a bit cheap charlie, restaurants usually have Coke zero

[from the home of CC]

1 hour ago, Thomas J said:

CC

 

Glad that you were never engaged to be Confucius.  I guess according to your logic people can be relied upon if they drink within the confines of their home or at work but not at a restaurant. 

 

 

many who drink become garrulous and since they've proven louder speech transmits more virus this restrictive action is a no brainer, do it at home so when you drunk you can scream at the walls without killing anyone (unless your neighbor decides to shoot you). As far as leaving home after becoming drunk you can do so at the peril of the curfew enforcement and arrest. If they're drinking at work then they have a bigger problem on their hands than this virus. And although there are some folks who can take this drug responsibly unfortunately the 20% or so of the population who can't ruin it for the rest. It's kind of like the issue of all the visa scammers that cause extra scrutiny on the law following expats, a small segment causing everyone inconvenience..  

[2long]

I like beer.

I'm desperately waiting for my local Japanese place to open, so that I can sit for 2 hours eating unlimited food and drinking unlimited beer. But this rule does make some sense, even though I hate it.

Just like the 'booze ban' forums, so many TVF members like to justify reasons why the rules are not fair 'because I like a beer with my dinner' etc.

With a population of 60 million, laws have to be across the board. It's like school uniforms. There's no chance to allow common sense of flexibility because too many will take advantage, claiming their own case.

If booze is sold in restaurants, people will order a snack or small meal and have a session of booze, at least and especially until pubs open.

These rules are made to control the population of Thai people, who make up the vast majority of the country. Many of them are gagging for a social drink, and who can blame them? 

As I say, I don't like the rule, but I understand it. Maybe some on here should look outside their little boxes a bit.

[from the home of CC]

5 minutes ago, 2long said:

I like beer.

I'm desperately waiting for my local Japanese place to open, so that I can sit for 2 hours eating unlimited food and drinking unlimited beer. But this rule does make some sense, even though I hate it.

Just like the 'booze ban' forums, so many TVF members like to justify reasons why the rules are not fair 'because I like a beer with my dinner' etc.

With a population of 60 million, laws have to be across the board. It's like school uniforms. There's no chance to allow common sense of flexibility because too many will take advantage, claiming their own case.

If booze is sold in restaurants, people will order a snack or small meal and have a session of booze, at least and especially until pubs open.

These rules are made to control the population of Thai people, who make up the vast majority of the country. Many of them are gagging for a social drink, and who can blame them? 

As I say, I don't like the rule, but I understand it. Maybe some on here should look outside their little boxes a bit.

if I had the virus and was asymptomatic and didn't know it and later found I transmitted it to someone who died because of my selfish actions I would feel responsible forever, imo that's part of looking beyond their little boxes..

[Leaver]

27 minutes ago, from the home of CC said:

if I had the virus and was asymptomatic and didn't know it and later found I transmitted it to someone who died because of my selfish actions I would feel responsible forever, imo that's part of looking beyond their little boxes..

Now picture what you describe, except for, you pass it on to a friend or relative, and kill them.  

[Havefunme]

The word LOGIC and COMMON SENSE doesn't exists in Thailand everything is based on WHAT IF 

[Thomas J]

1 hour ago, CNXexpat said:

Many Thais have an alcohol problem. More than citizens of other countries. I know no country with the regulation that it´s not allowed to sell alcohol between 2 and 5 pm. If they are allowed to drink in restaurants, they will meet in masses there, order a little snack and drink like crazy. 

CNXexpat and where exactly do you draw those facts from.  Again, if there is an issue with "Problem Drinkers" than you have the restaurant and/or police deal with those who either are drunk and/or gather in groups larger than 8.  Using your logic we should ban EVERYONE from driving because after all Thai drivers are notoriously bad and they have a traffic mortality rate far higher than the rest of the world.  If you give them the ability to drive they will all get in their cars drive 150 KPH and mow everyone down.  We sure know that too don't we. 

 

[Thomas J]

30 minutes ago, Havefunme said:

The word LOGIC and COMMON SENSE doesn't exists in Thailand everything is based on WHAT IF 

Havefunnme

 

I don't think the lunacy with politicians and policies is exclusive to Thailand.  Consider in the USA a shops selling marijuana were declared essential and was never closed during the pandemic but hospitals performing surgeries like inserting heart stents, hip, and knee replacements, and cancer screenings were deemed non essential and had to be closed. 

[Thomas J]

2 hours ago, kenk24 said:

Some people who have a couple of drinks get belligerent if they are not allowed to have more... many many get sloppy and spit when they are drinking

Kenk24

 

And some people who see a easy victim on the streets beat them up and rob them.  Does that mean you favor locking everyone up because "some" do something wrong.  You take corrective action against the person or people who violates the rules.  If they gather in too large a group and/or are rowdy you have the restaurant or if necessary police take the necessary steps to curb those who abuse the rules.   For all you or I know, people who go out to eat might get belligerent, sloppy and even spit if they are refused a beer with their meal.  My factual evidence of that behavior and likely outcome is every bit as strong and fact based as yours. 

[Leaver]

43 minutes ago, Havefunme said:

The word LOGIC and COMMON SENSE doesn't exists in Thailand everything is based on WHAT IF 

EVERYTHING is based on the BAHT.  

[roger101]

3 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

Certainly last time in Soi Buakhao Pattaya i saw some restaurants packed with drinkers, if they weren't so stupid it's possible it would be allowed by now

PM me the restaurants,  I do like a drink when I'm eating.

[ukrules]

3 hours ago, lee b said:

The ban means your not going to stay for a few more pints? 

The point is - does it matter?

 

Is anyone going to be infected with the now absent COVID if people have a few drinks? Or course not - it's gone from Thailand.

 

This has descended into a farce.

 

In the next few weeks we're going to see major European countries open up while Thailand continues to cower in fear.

 

[scubascuba3]

4 minutes ago, roger101 said:

PM me the restaurants,  I do like a drink when I'm eating.

you were probably there

[roger101]

19 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

you were probably there

Nope. I do like a glass of wine (or 3) with my food. I have drunk wine with every meal for years. If I cant have my wine I wont bother to go I'll stay home and cook instead (and save money).

[1FinickyOne]

4 hours ago, Thomas J said:

but what possibly reason could be presented for allowing a restaurant to serve you a meal, and a beverage but not a beverage that contains alcohol. 

I was just answering your question and giving you possible reasons... why ask a question if you are just going to object to answers... you wanted possible reasons and I gave them to you... you may not like them or agree with them.. they are possible reasons in these difficult times.. maybe they are going a bit too far, erring on the side of safety, but that is not what you asked...