2 Bars Closed Down Under Junta's Sweeping Booze Ban

[mikosan]

I bloody despair. Haven't the powers that be got something better to do? What a bunch of tossers.

Well argued response.

It wasn't meant to be an argued response, it was the expression of a point of view, containing a perfectly valid question!

[rjcampbe]

Most ppl come to Thailand for the bars and the girls. Shut these down, then most would question if there is a reason to visit or stay in the country ?

These kinds of comments that focus on the idea that "tourists want booze and girls and will go elsewhere if they can't get it here" are really missing the point...

It's not about drunk tourists. It's not about "sexpats". It's not even about the morality of drinking, or whether or not some people drink more than some other people think they should.

It's about the fact that this government just created a moronic decree that unilaterally changed the law affecting thousands of businesses and tens of thousands of workers, with ZERO notice, in a feeble minded attempt to deal with an issue that proper enforcement of existing laws could have resolved.

In addition to making themselves a complete laughing stock in front of the world, AGAIN!, this move will damage or destroy legal businesses, putting thousands of people out of work and potentially causing business owners to loose their investments and their livelihoods.

Let me be clear...

If there are unlicensed / illegal bars in these areas, they should be shut down. That is enforcement of EXISTING LAW.

If they are selling alcohol to underage drinkers, they should be penalized severely and/or shut down. That is enforcement of EXISTING LAW.

If they are selling alcohol to legal drinkers who are then driving under the influence, those drivers should be held accountable. You guessed it... under EXISTING LAW.

There is no rational reason why the legal business owner, Thai or Farang, who has followed all the laws and has the appropriate alcohol license and other licenses in place should be penalized like this just because their bar, restaurant, or store happens to be within the arbitrary distance specified by the dear leader.

If you run a bar, you are done. Close the doors... If you run a restaurant or store, the loss of revenue from alcohol is likely to be the difference between success and failure of the business.

And it's not just that you will loose the percentage of your margins from booze... Khun Prayuth has issued a death warrant to thousands of otherwise legal businesses employing tens of thousands of people across the country. Do you think you can run an Italian restaurant with no wine?? Can you run a pub / sports bar that has food, with no beer?? What customers are going to come to your place at all?

The stupidity is just beyond words.... I can only hope it is as short lived and ineffective as all the other idiotic decrees have been.

[rwdrwdrwd]

Suddenly real estate 301 metres from a school shoots up in value. Going to be loads of booze shops setting up with kickbacks to the bars, possibly even some kind of elaborate voucher system.

[spidermike007]

Most ppl come to Thailand for the bars and the girls. Shut these down, then most would question if there is a reason to visit or stay in the country ?

These kinds of comments that focus on the idea that "tourists want booze and girls and will go elsewhere if they can't get it here" are really missing the point...

It's not about drunk tourists. It's not about "sexpats". It's not even about the morality of drinking, or whether or not some people drink more than some other people think they should.

It's about the fact that this government just created a moronic decree that unilaterally changed the law affecting thousands of businesses and tens of thousands of workers, with ZERO notice, in a feeble minded attempt to deal with an issue that proper enforcement of existing laws could have resolved.

In addition to making themselves a complete laughing stock in front of the world, AGAIN!, this move will damage or destroy legal businesses, putting thousands of people out of work and potentially causing business owners to loose their investments and their livelihoods.

Let me be clear...

If there are unlicensed / illegal bars in these areas, they should be shut down. That is enforcement of EXISTING LAW.

If they are selling alcohol to underage drinkers, they should be penalized severely and/or shut down. That is enforcement of EXISTING LAW.

If they are selling alcohol to legal drinkers who are then driving under the influence, those drivers should be held accountable. You guessed it... under EXISTING LAW.

There is no rational reason why the legal business owner, Thai or Farang, who has followed all the laws and has the appropriate alcohol license and other licenses in place should be penalized like this just because their bar, restaurant, or store happens to be within the arbitrary distance specified by the dear leader.

If you run a bar, you are done. Close the doors... If you run a restaurant or store, the loss of revenue from alcohol is likely to be the difference between success and failure of the business.

And it's not just that you will loose the percentage of your margins from booze... Khun Prayuth has issued a death warrant to thousands of otherwise legal businesses employing tens of thousands of people across the country. Do you think you can run an Italian restaurant with no wine?? Can you run a pub / sports bar that has food, with no beer?? What customers are going to come to your place at all?

The stupidity is just beyond words.... I can only hope it is as short lived and ineffective as all the other idiotic decrees have been.

There is a possibility that if a child is exposed to alcohol close to their school, their minds and souls could be corrupted. Their utter purity could be spoiled. Keep the alcohol far from schools. Keep the angelic children pure. Since there is no alcohol in the average Thai home, the kids will be kept wholesome, without any bad thoughts, nor any bad intentions. This is how you keep your society moral and upstanding. The world should take notice.

[brewsterbudgen]

And so it begins. It seems they are actually serious about this.

I doubt it...i heard somewhere that prostitution is illegal.

You heard wrong!

Really? Prostitution is legal in Thailand. Certainly the opposite of what I've ever heard.

It's regulated and many aspects of it are illegal (underage, trafficking, soliciting) but it's not illegal to pay someone for sex, and most gogo bars and massage parlours operate legally. Not really relevant to this thread though.

[thaigold]

Probably mentioned before, but why not simply close bars that sell to minors? Blanket closings seem so cowardly, when one undercover officer could unearth violators easily without punishing the public as a whole. In the west, if a bar is caught selling to underage teens - closed, simple.

[rjcampbe]

Yes I am not against this new law in principle at all BUT yes it should have been announced now for a more reasonable enforcement in say 6 months time to be fair to the businesses that are affected unfairly by this immediate enforcement. Surely though we have laws that forbid the sale of alcohol to those under legal alcohol drinking age (18 I believe here)and also laws to arrest those drunk and disorderly in public areas, so better would have been to strongly enforce those existing laws particularity in these areas close to educational establishments, rather than this strange within 300 Metre radius rule.

These laws that control freedoms are not what is actually needed but instead a strong enforcement of solid existing laws that protect the freedom of others. That IMHO is what is truly and sensibly needed. The less unnecessary controls and the more the firm enforcement of sensible socially acceptable laws the better it will surely be for all surely.

This sort of law of control should work both ways too of course to be fair, so you have to also say no new schools or colleges should be allowed to be built within 300 Metres of businesses that are already in existence that are licenced to sell alcohol, or at least not without suitable mutually agreed compensation paid out to such licensed premises to move elsewhere.

I strongly believe in fairness

What the hell are you saying???

You said you believe in fairness and you are "not against this new law in principle"???

Then you go on to describe that there are existing laws to deal with this already and they need better enforcement... so, in what way do you agree with this new law "in principle"?

"In principle", everything you said is AGAINST THIS NEW LAW and there wouldn't be any "fairness" even if there were a 6 month waiting period.

think before you type.

[rjcampbe]

Article 44 was enacted so the general could make sweeping changes to usher in the "New Thailand" It has nothing to do with students drinking and racing. It's just a good opportunity to make changes that will produce the end result he wants. He is determined to change the face and reputation of Thailand. With article 44 he has absolute authoritarian power. His mentor, the founding Prime minister of Singapore, Lee Kuan Lew. Lee used his authoritarian rule to helped Singapore to transition from a developing country to one of the most developed in the world, transforming it into a thriving international business hub. This is what Prayut is doing. He wants Thailand to be the "hub" of Asean. To do that he must make swift changes. Alcohol consumption, road accidents and human trafficking, just to name a few, must be addressed. Wrong or right history will be the judge.

What absolute RUBBISH!

Even if I could suspend reality long enough to consider this theory, what has he done with that power that is actually in the interests of the country as a whole?

Did he use this power to actually do something about police corruption? NO!

Did he use this power to address the harassment of innocent tourists by police? NO!

Did he use this power to address the scams and assaults and murders of tourists? NO!

Did he use this power to ensure a fair and transparent investigations in Koh Tao? NO!

Did he use this power to hold the rich, powerful and connected to the same standards as everyone else? NO!

Did he use this power to ensure that the court system holds everyone equal under the law? NO!

Is he using this power to actually improve the Thai economy and strengthen investor confidence? NO!

Is he using this power to meaningfully improve the Thai education system? or rural health system? or roads and infrastructure? NO! NO! and NO!

I don't know who you are or where you come from, but you are either a fool or a troll,

For the sake of an intellectual discussion, I might agree that a truly benevolent dictator with this power might be the only way to get this country on the right path for development, but this man is not that man. He lacks the vision, the insight, the common sense, the desire, the leadership, and quite honestly the intelligence, to make Thailand the hub of anything, except for the hub of idiotic decrees.

Making new laws, whether by democratic legislative process or junta decree, can not possibly change anything in a country with a top to bottom culture of corruption, an ineffective police force, and a court system that is incapable of holding people to the same legal standards no matter what their position is in society.

A year ago he may have had the opportunity to be the Lee Kuan Lew of Thailand. Today, he has made it painfully clear that he isn't.

[rjcampbe]

Long live the Taliban may they be successful in enforcing the Sharia! Economy and tourism further down the drain making people happy!

I think you meant "Thai-liban"

[easybullet3]

If they don't want alcohol being sold near schools and unis then fair enough but if you are going to make this law then u need give businesses fair warning and where possible time to relocate etc.

It's unreasonable and unfair to suddenly declare a law of this kind on a Thursday and then start arresting people for breaking the law just a day later.

Why not give a 3 or 6 month grace period for business owners to make the necessary changes in order to comply with the law then get tough on people for anyone in breach of the new requirements thereafter?

As much as I feel this is the wrong approach and that education to change attitudes towards drinking is the way to go this is certainly impressive.

I understand the point, police are actually enforcing a law. The fact that it is a ridiculous law kind of makes a mockery of their enforcement.

There is a school less than 200-300m from Walking Street in Pattaya....

i wonder how long it will be before 'certain' bars are allowed to remain open (within the 300 metre zone) because they have 'paid' a new sum of money to the Police.

i am sure that this 300 metre rule is just going to be a 'set-up' for a future 'levy' within these zones.

Some of these bars or clubs may have cost the owners 'millions' to build. and it would be terribly unwise for a government to just suddenly close them (without backlash).

i'm sure the police have instructions to 'temporarily' close them for now... and soon we will see an amendment and they will re-open, but they have to pay an amount of money to remain open within the '300 metre zone'.

if the government really wanted to stop drinking, they would just 'dramatically increase' the penalties for selling alcohol to minors (across the country), : ie: jail time, lose license and huge fine.

then no-one will want to risk selling alcohol to minors.

and the government can set up a special 'under-age sting-unit' that goes around provences trying to buy alcohol. (and offenders being punished by the law and publicised in the news). this will be the BEST deterrent to stop Minors from drinking.

i'm sure the government KNOWS that this 300 metre zone does nothing to stop someone from drinking!

so,, with taht said, I cant think of any other reason they did this, other than wanting to set-up a means to create some good 'tea-money' from all the big bars adjacent to schools.

[spidermike007]

Article 44 was enacted so the general could make sweeping changes to usher in the "New Thailand" It has nothing to do with students drinking and racing. It's just a good opportunity to make changes that will produce the end result he wants. He is determined to change the face and reputation of Thailand. With article 44 he has absolute authoritarian power. His mentor, the founding Prime minister of Singapore, Lee Kuan Lew. Lee used his authoritarian rule to helped Singapore to transition from a developing country to one of the most developed in the world, transforming it into a thriving international business hub. This is what Prayut is doing. He wants Thailand to be the "hub" of Asean. To do that he must make swift changes. Alcohol consumption, road accidents and human trafficking, just to name a few, must be addressed. Wrong or right history will be the judge.

What absolute RUBBISH!

Even if I could suspend reality long enough to consider this theory, what has he done with that power that is actually in the interests of the country as a whole?

Did he use this power to actually do something about police corruption? NO!

Did he use this power to address the harassment of innocent tourists by police? NO!

Did he use this power to address the scams and assaults and murders of tourists? NO!

Did he use this power to ensure a fair and transparent investigations in Koh Tao? NO!

Did he use this power to hold the rich, powerful and connected to the same standards as everyone else? NO!

Did he use this power to ensure that the court system holds everyone equal under the law? NO!

Is he using this power to actually improve the Thai economy and strengthen investor confidence? NO!

Is he using this power to meaningfully improve the Thai education system? or rural health system? or roads and infrastructure? NO! NO! and NO!

I don't know who you are or where you come from, but you are either a fool or a troll,

For the sake of an intellectual discussion, I might agree that a truly benevolent dictator with this power might be the only way to get this country on the right path for development, but this man is not that man. He lacks the vision, the insight, the common sense, the desire, the leadership, and quite honestly the intelligence, to make Thailand the hub of anything, except for the hub of idiotic decrees.

Making new laws, whether by democratic legislative process or junta decree, can not possibly change anything in a country with a top to bottom culture of corruption, an ineffective police force, and a court system that is incapable of holding people to the same legal standards no matter what their position is in society.

A year ago he may have had the opportunity to be the Lee Kuan Lew of Thailand. Today, he has made it painfully clear that he isn't.

There is so much that both Lee Kuan Lew and Singapore did to lure foreign investment, offer incentives to multi nationals, look after foreigners working in Singapore, create very effective law and order, root out corruption, create a reasonable visa policy, create a world class port, create a city/state with a very high quality of life, and countless other things that neither Little P. or the Thai nation as a whole, are not accomplishing here, nor are they even coming close to that objective.

[bangon04]

What is happening in Thailand? Words are being turned into actions.

As much as I feel this is the wrong approach and that education to change attitudes towards drinking is the way to go this is certainly impressive.

Police officers transferred to inactive posts and bars actually being closed down.

Give it 6 months and we will see if the drive towards this policy continues.

I was under the impression that a lot of the bars in Bangkok are also inactive posts for many policemen....

[Jiggo]

If they don't want alcohol being sold near schools and unis then fair enough but if you are going to make this law then u need give businesses fair warning and where possible time to relocate etc.

It's unreasonable and unfair to suddenly declare a law of this kind on a Thursday and then start arresting people for breaking the law just a day later.

Why not give a 3 or 6 month grace period for business owners to make the necessary changes in order to comply with the law then get tough on people for anyone in breach of the new requirements thereafter?

Come on this is Thailand......3rd world numptys

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Still absolutely no sign this is being enforced around the elementary school in my lower Suk neighborhood. In fact, there's a quite popular beer bar/restaurant located directly across the street from the school, along with a lot of other similar places nearby within a 300 meter radius.

[rubl]

I read the entire OP. I'm not going to read all 11 pages of posted comments. The pertinent parts were in the first few lines:

"All stores as well as venues serving drinks across the country have to stop selling alcohol at midnight, instead of 2am, effective as of yesterday, the Excise Department said.

The two daily periods when alcohol for personal consumption can be sold are 11am-2pm and 5pm-midnight, director-general Utid Tamwatin said. These hours do not apply to transactions in wholesale quantities.

The sale of liquor would also be banned starting next year at specified places including mini-marts at 10,000 gas stations nationwide, stores in school campuses and places of religious worship, he said.

The restrictions would go into effect on January 1 and stores in the listed locations would lose their licences when they expire on December 31."

Closing times at midnight. Alcohol sales in stores from 11 am to 2 pm and 5 pm to midnight. Liquor sales banned at gas stations, on school campuses, and places of religious worship, but these businesses were notified in November 2005 that they'd have to stop selling on January 1 2007, so they had time to prepare. The rest of your link dealt with cigarette placement and promotion in stores.

I don't agree with the nationwide midnight closing or restrictions on times of store sales, but the rest makes sense to me. I still maintain that Prayut's order is far worse. The 2005 restrictions were a nuisance for businesses, the 2015 order is a disaster.

"The restrictions would go into effect on January 1 and stores in the listed locations would lose their licences when they expire on December 31."

When restrictions go into effect on the 1st of January it doesn't really matter if the license to sell alcohol is lost on December 31 the day before or on December 31 at the end of the same year as that January 1 is in.

Anyway, very obviously the current government's order is worst since it not from a democratic government like the one which started all this in 2005, but by a junta appointed government. Never mind the government in 2012 came with

"The government has announced a ban on alcohol consumption on public buses.

The ban, issued under the 2008 Alcohol Consumption Control, went into effect yesterday. The order was signed by Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra on July 23."

and

"The sale of alcohol in public places will be restricted under a Health Ministry draft regulation. Likely to take effect on Jan 1, 2013, it prohibits the sale of alcoholic drinks on footpaths, in public parks, and in public areas nationwide."

All nice, acceptable because a democratic elected government involved.

BTW "For proof, just ask any "thirsty" teen whether he would be put off by having to travel an extra few hundred metres for a drink."

PS a ban issuied under 2008 Alcohol Consumption Control would that 2008 have a PM Samak or a PM Somchai government.

You are desperately reaching with this one rubl. Stores that sold alcohol in gas stations, school campuses and places of religious worship had to stop selling alcohol on January 1 2007. That's reasonable.

In 2008 alcohol consumption on public buses was banned. My uncle used to drive a bus and had to deal with drunk passengers, it wasn't pleasant. This ban is also reasonable.

In 2013 restrictions supposedly went into effect banning alcohol consumption in public places. Either public places are narrowly defined or it isn't being enforced.

"Anyway, very obviously the current government's order is worst since it not from a democratic government like the one which started all this in 2005, but by a junta appointed government."

Granted, the fact that this rule is being forced on the country by Prayut and his Article 44-ship is bad, but it is obviously worse because it is turning thousands of legal businesses into illegal businesses without recourse. Did any businesses close because they couldn't sale alcohol to drivers at gas stations or students on campuses? How many people lost their jobs because they couldn't drink in a bus or on a footpath?

This order, if strictly enforced, will close thousands of businesses, put countless people out of work, and devastate the tourist industry. But it's unlikely to be strictly enforced, it will just be used by the police and government officials to shakedown businesses for more bribes. Nice reform work, isn't it?

Well you always seem to complain that laws are not enforced and now you changed your mind?

What about that "In 2013 restrictions supposedly went into effect banning alcohol consumption in public places. Either public places are narrowly defined or it isn't being enforced." ? Just some daft measures from a government?

BTW I haven't seen any data on how many legitimate business are being forced out of business. Neither have I seen how many illegitimate business are being forced out of business. furthermore you 'assume' it to be unlikely to be strictly enforced and therefore you condemn a bit more with your "nice reform work, isn't it".

The OP mentioned TWO bars being closed in a 'sweeping' effort. The picture shows what seem to be real youngsters. The police should have asked for IDs as well. That's what happens in some Western countries when a bar is closed (or just raided). Next I guess we'll be even more PC and demand that songs with dubious contents are no longer played. Logical evolving from Western examples.

PS the fact that you disagree with me doesn't mean I'm getting desperate. I don't have a program to push.

[rubl]

Article 44 was enacted so the general could make sweeping changes to usher in the "New Thailand" It has nothing to do with students drinking and racing. It's just a good opportunity to make changes that will produce the end result he wants. He is determined to change the face and reputation of Thailand. With article 44 he has absolute authoritarian power. His mentor, the founding Prime minister of Singapore, Lee Kuan Lew. Lee used his authoritarian rule to helped Singapore to transition from a developing country to one of the most developed in the world, transforming it into a thriving international business hub. This is what Prayut is doing. He wants Thailand to be the "hub" of Asean. To do that he must make swift changes. Alcohol consumption, road accidents and human trafficking, just to name a few, must be addressed. Wrong or right history will be the judge.

What absolute RUBBISH!

Even if I could suspend reality long enough to consider this theory, what has he done with that power that is actually in the interests of the country as a whole?

Did he use this power to actually do something about police corruption? NO!

Did he use this power to address the harassment of innocent tourists by police? NO!

Did he use this power to address the scams and assaults and murders of tourists? NO!

Did he use this power to ensure a fair and transparent investigations in Koh Tao? NO!

Did he use this power to hold the rich, powerful and connected to the same standards as everyone else? NO!

Did he use this power to ensure that the court system holds everyone equal under the law? NO!

Is he using this power to actually improve the Thai economy and strengthen investor confidence? NO!

Is he using this power to meaningfully improve the Thai education system? or rural health system? or roads and infrastructure? NO! NO! and NO!

I don't know who you are or where you come from, but you are either a fool or a troll,

For the sake of an intellectual discussion, I might agree that a truly benevolent dictator with this power might be the only way to get this country on the right path for development, but this man is not that man. He lacks the vision, the insight, the common sense, the desire, the leadership, and quite honestly the intelligence, to make Thailand the hub of anything, except for the hub of idiotic decrees.

Making new laws, whether by democratic legislative process or junta decree, can not possibly change anything in a country with a top to bottom culture of corruption, an ineffective police force, and a court system that is incapable of holding people to the same legal standards no matter what their position is in society.

A year ago he may have had the opportunity to be the Lee Kuan Lew of Thailand. Today, he has made it painfully clear that he isn't.

The Lee Kuan Lew of Thailand? Some of us still hope for democracy this century although there are some more pessimistic

[Down the rabbit hole]

Not all that 'sweeping' if only 2 bars closed...

Probably forgot to pay their bung.

[tomacht8]

This law is nothing other, than the promotion and the full development assistance for corruption.

[nidieunimaitre]

The other English language newspaper' s website currently has a main topic about the alcohol ban.

Apparently the military have abdicated (but unfortunately only on this alcohol ban).

The justice minister is reported to have said that it is all a misunderstanding, there is no such thing as a 300 meter zone, and 6 months will be needed to decide where / where not alcohol can be sold.

[nidieunimaitre]

This law is nothing other, than the promotion and the full development assistance for corruption.

Yes, but - surprise surprise - they didn't think their plan through.

Oh well, another addition to the list.

[heybruce]

I read the entire OP. I'm not going to read all 11 pages of posted comments. The pertinent parts were in the first few lines:

"All stores as well as venues serving drinks across the country have to stop selling alcohol at midnight, instead of 2am, effective as of yesterday, the Excise Department said.

The two daily periods when alcohol for personal consumption can be sold are 11am-2pm and 5pm-midnight, director-general Utid Tamwatin said. These hours do not apply to transactions in wholesale quantities.

The sale of liquor would also be banned starting next year at specified places including mini-marts at 10,000 gas stations nationwide, stores in school campuses and places of religious worship, he said.

The restrictions would go into effect on January 1 and stores in the listed locations would lose their licences when they expire on December 31."

Closing times at midnight. Alcohol sales in stores from 11 am to 2 pm and 5 pm to midnight. Liquor sales banned at gas stations, on school campuses, and places of religious worship, but these businesses were notified in November 2005 that they'd have to stop selling on January 1 2007, so they had time to prepare. The rest of your link dealt with cigarette placement and promotion in stores.

I don't agree with the nationwide midnight closing or restrictions on times of store sales, but the rest makes sense to me. I still maintain that Prayut's order is far worse. The 2005 restrictions were a nuisance for businesses, the 2015 order is a disaster.

"The restrictions would go into effect on January 1 and stores in the listed locations would lose their licences when they expire on December 31."

When restrictions go into effect on the 1st of January it doesn't really matter if the license to sell alcohol is lost on December 31 the day before or on December 31 at the end of the same year as that January 1 is in.

Anyway, very obviously the current government's order is worst since it not from a democratic government like the one which started all this in 2005, but by a junta appointed government. Never mind the government in 2012 came with

"The government has announced a ban on alcohol consumption on public buses.

The ban, issued under the 2008 Alcohol Consumption Control, went into effect yesterday. The order was signed by Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra on July 23."

and

"The sale of alcohol in public places will be restricted under a Health Ministry draft regulation. Likely to take effect on Jan 1, 2013, it prohibits the sale of alcoholic drinks on footpaths, in public parks, and in public areas nationwide."

All nice, acceptable because a democratic elected government involved.

BTW "For proof, just ask any "thirsty" teen whether he would be put off by having to travel an extra few hundred metres for a drink."

PS a ban issuied under 2008 Alcohol Consumption Control would that 2008 have a PM Samak or a PM Somchai government.

You are desperately reaching with this one rubl. Stores that sold alcohol in gas stations, school campuses and places of religious worship had to stop selling alcohol on January 1 2007. That's reasonable.

In 2008 alcohol consumption on public buses was banned. My uncle used to drive a bus and had to deal with drunk passengers, it wasn't pleasant. This ban is also reasonable.

In 2013 restrictions supposedly went into effect banning alcohol consumption in public places. Either public places are narrowly defined or it isn't being enforced.

"Anyway, very obviously the current government's order is worst since it not from a democratic government like the one which started all this in 2005, but by a junta appointed government."

Granted, the fact that this rule is being forced on the country by Prayut and his Article 44-ship is bad, but it is obviously worse because it is turning thousands of legal businesses into illegal businesses without recourse. Did any businesses close because they couldn't sale alcohol to drivers at gas stations or students on campuses? How many people lost their jobs because they couldn't drink in a bus or on a footpath?

This order, if strictly enforced, will close thousands of businesses, put countless people out of work, and devastate the tourist industry. But it's unlikely to be strictly enforced, it will just be used by the police and government officials to shakedown businesses for more bribes. Nice reform work, isn't it?

Well you always seem to complain that laws are not enforced and now you changed your mind?

What about that "In 2013 restrictions supposedly went into effect banning alcohol consumption in public places. Either public places are narrowly defined or it isn't being enforced." ? Just some daft measures from a government?

BTW I haven't seen any data on how many legitimate business are being forced out of business. Neither have I seen how many illegitimate business are being forced out of business. furthermore you 'assume' it to be unlikely to be strictly enforced and therefore you condemn a bit more with your "nice reform work, isn't it".

The OP mentioned TWO bars being closed in a 'sweeping' effort. The picture shows what seem to be real youngsters. The police should have asked for IDs as well. That's what happens in some Western countries when a bar is closed (or just raided). Next I guess we'll be even more PC and demand that songs with dubious contents are no longer played. Logical evolving from Western examples.

PS the fact that you disagree with me doesn't mean I'm getting desperate. I don't have a program to push.

"Well you always seem to complain that laws are not enforced and now you changed your mind?"

I don't know what you're referring to. Would you care to give some examples so I can deal with that question in context?

Regarding the rest of your post, it seems you are equating limitations on the times and locations of alcohol sales and restrictions on drinking in public to the orders Prayut issued that instantly made thousands of formerly legal businesses illegal. Is that it? Are you stating that restrictions on alcohol that are common in the west are as bad as outlawing the livelihoods of countless Thais with a couple of poorly thought-out orders?

In my original post #71 I wrote:

"In his typical rule by decree manner Praut issued an order and made thousands of legal businesses illegal, put countless jobs at risk, and further damaged Thailand's already weak reputation as a good place to invest and do business. As the full article points out, this law in unlikely to be strictly enforced, it will simply provide police and government officials a tool to extort money from previously legal businesses."

In your reply you never refuted what I posted, you simply went off on a "But Thaksin started it!" diversion. Can you refute what I posted?

[SEEDGER]

There is way around this for the students and the club owners if they want it. The bars stop selling alcohol and sells orange and Cranberry juices basically the mixers. The student bring there own alcohol into the club. The club provides the music and the atmosphere and they charge a large cover charge to come in. And so much for sales of Alcohol. The paty goes on and the idiot government scratches there heads. They stopped nothing !

[ukrules]

There seems to be some 'face saving' attempts happening right now.

[slipperylobster]

yep...

everyone in a hum for nothing.

nice the kids still have a place to go. even the big kids.

imaging the wealth of knowlege available....might as well get the education over with early.

Edited July 27, 2015 by slipperylobster

[ukrules]

I wonder if the guy who's been widely reported as saying the distance should be extended to 500m will keep his job ?

[rubl]

"The restrictions would go into effect on January 1 and stores in the listed locations would lose their licences when they expire on December 31."

When restrictions go into effect on the 1st of January it doesn't really matter if the license to sell alcohol is lost on December 31 the day before or on December 31 at the end of the same year as that January 1 is in.

Anyway, very obviously the current government's order is worst since it not from a democratic government like the one which started all this in 2005, but by a junta appointed government. Never mind the government in 2012 came with

"The government has announced a ban on alcohol consumption on public buses.

The ban, issued under the 2008 Alcohol Consumption Control, went into effect yesterday. The order was signed by Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra on July 23."

and

"The sale of alcohol in public places will be restricted under a Health Ministry draft regulation. Likely to take effect on Jan 1, 2013, it prohibits the sale of alcoholic drinks on footpaths, in public parks, and in public areas nationwide."

All nice, acceptable because a democratic elected government involved.

BTW "For proof, just ask any "thirsty" teen whether he would be put off by having to travel an extra few hundred metres for a drink."

PS a ban issuied under 2008 Alcohol Consumption Control would that 2008 have a PM Samak or a PM Somchai government.

You are desperately reaching with this one rubl. Stores that sold alcohol in gas stations, school campuses and places of religious worship had to stop selling alcohol on January 1 2007. That's reasonable.

In 2008 alcohol consumption on public buses was banned. My uncle used to drive a bus and had to deal with drunk passengers, it wasn't pleasant. This ban is also reasonable.

In 2013 restrictions supposedly went into effect banning alcohol consumption in public places. Either public places are narrowly defined or it isn't being enforced.

"Anyway, very obviously the current government's order is worst since it not from a democratic government like the one which started all this in 2005, but by a junta appointed government."

Granted, the fact that this rule is being forced on the country by Prayut and his Article 44-ship is bad, but it is obviously worse because it is turning thousands of legal businesses into illegal businesses without recourse. Did any businesses close because they couldn't sale alcohol to drivers at gas stations or students on campuses? How many people lost their jobs because they couldn't drink in a bus or on a footpath?

This order, if strictly enforced, will close thousands of businesses, put countless people out of work, and devastate the tourist industry. But it's unlikely to be strictly enforced, it will just be used by the police and government officials to shakedown businesses for more bribes. Nice reform work, isn't it?

Well you always seem to complain that laws are not enforced and now you changed your mind?

What about that "In 2013 restrictions supposedly went into effect banning alcohol consumption in public places. Either public places are narrowly defined or it isn't being enforced." ? Just some daft measures from a government?

BTW I haven't seen any data on how many legitimate business are being forced out of business. Neither have I seen how many illegitimate business are being forced out of business. furthermore you 'assume' it to be unlikely to be strictly enforced and therefore you condemn a bit more with your "nice reform work, isn't it".

The OP mentioned TWO bars being closed in a 'sweeping' effort. The picture shows what seem to be real youngsters. The police should have asked for IDs as well. That's what happens in some Western countries when a bar is closed (or just raided). Next I guess we'll be even more PC and demand that songs with dubious contents are no longer played. Logical evolving from Western examples.

PS the fact that you disagree with me doesn't mean I'm getting desperate. I don't have a program to push.

"Well you always seem to complain that laws are not enforced and now you changed your mind?"

I don't know what you're referring to. Would you care to give some examples so I can deal with that question in context?

Regarding the rest of your post, it seems you are equating limitations on the times and locations of alcohol sales and restrictions on drinking in public to the orders Prayut issued that instantly made thousands of formerly legal businesses illegal. Is that it? Are you stating that restrictions on alcohol that are common in the west are as bad as outlawing the livelihoods of countless Thais with a couple of poorly thought-out orders?

In my original post #71 I wrote:

"In his typical rule by decree manner Praut issued an order and made thousands of legal businesses illegal, put countless jobs at risk, and further damaged Thailand's already weak reputation as a good place to invest and do business. As the full article points out, this law in unlikely to be strictly enforced, it will simply provide police and government officials a tool to extort money from previously legal businesses."

In your reply you never refuted what I posted, you simply went off on a "But Thaksin started it!" diversion. Can you refute what I posted?

My dear Heybruce, you don't have to go out of your way to come with nonsense. You simply don't like anything this government does. That's fine, no problem.

As for refuting what you post, why should I?

PS how many thousands of 'legal' businesses were made illegal? How many jobs in how many businesses? How many 'bars' are globally seen as a good investment? How many protest groups in democratic Western countries oppose the sale of alcohol to youngsters and tell their 'elected' representatives to do something?

Anyway, 7:32AM, time for coffee.

Edited July 28, 2015 by rubl

[Andreas2]

From the OP 2 Bars Closed Down Under Junta's Sweeping Booze Ban

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/843669-note-to-readers-clarification-on-new-laws-curbing-alcohol-sales-in-thailand/

• "Junta chairman and Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha issued the ban on 23 July by invoking Section 44 of the interim charter, which grants him authority to unilaterally enact legally-binding orders."
• "The ban prohibits the sale of alcohol "in the vicinity of educational establishments" and student dormitories."
• "Thai officials have clarified that "vicinity" refers to a 300 meter radius around any educational establishments, an all-encompassing term that includes schools, vocational colleges, and universities."
• "Acting under the new order, police officers raided two bars close to Rangsit University in Pathum Thani province shortly after midnight on 25 July and shut both places down."

From this OP Note to Readers: Clarification on New Laws Curbing Alcohol Sales in Thailand

• "We would like to clarify the differences between the two measures, which have led to some confusion about the scope and definition of the new regulations."
• "The amendment outlaws selling alcohol within 300 meters of the "fence" of universities and colleges, both public and private."
• "The amendment, which will come into effect 30 days after its publication, also exempts hotels, “entertainment zones,” and wholesale factories and distributors from the restriction."

What a mess - not just in my post...

As it seems, the "clarification" also addresses the costumed fools in this OP's picture - Provided they can read - Provided they even got the memo.

Btw: Are restaurants counted as "entertainment zones"? "Currently, only Patpong district, and parts of New Petchburi Road and Ratchadapisek Road are considered entertainment zones in Bangkok." Oh, obviously not. Does "currently"/"parts" also mean, that it is up to the officer then on duty?

Ok, I have to stop now - It's already messy enough... In my post, I mean.

[spidermike007]

The problem with this kind of stuff -- totally apart from alcohol -- is, when you have laws but routinely don't enforce them, it leads the public to have a general disregard for the police and the law, all laws. And that's a bad thing.

If you're going to have laws, enforce them!!!! If you're not going to enforce them, then don't have them.

Good point of view because no one enforces the laws! They worry about the booze ban but not about the helmet law that could save thousands of lives. If the PM wants to crack down on anything i think he is not putting priorities in order. If a student want booze all he or she has to walk or drive a little further. Save lives on the road and quit worrying about the 300 limit from the school!

You are referring to traffic safety. For some reason, there has never been much concern over traffic safety here. If there was, they would set aside a budget for a highway patrol. The only time I ever see them is when there is a serious accident, and they are called out. If there was concern, people would be getting pulled over for reckless driving. I cannot drive more than 50 km. on the highway, without encountering two or three people who pull stunts that would be considered unnecessarily reckless, by any standards. They are putting their lives at risk, their families at risk, and those driving in their vicinity at risk. Do the authorities care? For me, action speaks so much louder than words. The lack of action with regard to traffic safety says it all. Not only the helmet law, but the under age laws with regard to driving motorbikes. I see 12 year old kids driving motorbikes on Samui all the time. Does anyone care? Do the police care? What police?

[novo58]

So,

We have been told about TWO bars that according to the OP were visited by police ........" shortly after midnight on 25 July and shut both places down".

Whilst the OP mentions the "new regulations/legislation" ...........................is it just possible this has more to do with trading illegally AFTER MIDNIGHT, rather than a first step in a wide ranging

( and somewhat stupid) new law pertaining to the sale of alcohol close to " educational institutions".

In my youth a bar WAS an educational institution, learnt just as much there as any college or uni.

Personally, I will wait until I hear about Soi Cowboy & Pattaya Walking street being closed before I start crying that the sky is falling.

[brewsterbudgen]

So,

We have been told about TWO bars that according to the OP were visited by police ........" shortly after midnight on 25 July and shut both places down".

Whilst the OP mentions the "new regulations/legislation" ...........................is it just possible this has more to do with trading illegally AFTER MIDNIGHT, rather than a first step in a wide ranging

( and somewhat stupid) new law pertaining to the sale of alcohol close to " educational institutions".

In my youth a bar WAS an educational institution, learnt just as much there as any college or uni.

Personally, I will wait until I hear about Soi Cowboy & Pattaya Walking street being closed before I start crying that the sky is falling.

Just wait a couple of weeks and it will all be forgotten about. Just like the "ban" on beer promotion girls and advertising alocohol on beer mats and menus!

In any case, expat/tourist areas are not their prime targtes as they're not often frequented by Thai students.