TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Booze ban sparks resignation of entire newfoundland fire dept.
Pages (4): « 1 2 [3] 4 »

quote:

Originally posted by Misanthrope Actually, it's pretty laughable that you are taking these posts so seriously.

Yeah, I know sometimes I just get worked up over nothing.. character fault!

Now if you would like to add something to the discussion at hand, please feel free.

quote:

Originally posted by FunkyGroove well thanks to you i did, twice and i'm still sticking to points

..if I can get the message across to one person (read the article and stick to your points).. i'm a happy man

quote:

Originally posted by AwakenedAddict I was merely saying that you were slanting every firefigher as a drunk bastard who can't help but drink on the job.

Really? Tell me, please, which one of the following quotes has me saying that? I must be blind:

quote:

Originally posted by Cosmic Fur Why are firefighters so concerned with being able to drink on the job?

quote:

Originally posted by Cosmic Fur Try as I might, I can't think of a better definition for a politician.

quote:

Originally posted by Cosmic Fur "No drinking till you're 19" seems like a pretty blanket statement to me. What if I'm mature at 17?

quote:

Originally posted by Cosmic Fur Yes I am. Not constantly, but "personal use" means drinking. I don't know what other uses for drinkable alcohol there are.

quote:

Originally posted by AwakenedAddict You example is pretty off-target as well. Someone who is 17 is still a minor, this means that they are not their own legal guardian and are not totally responsible for their actions in all circumstances.

You wanna split hairs? We'll split hairs: let's make the person buying the alcohol 18.

quote:

Originally posted by Cosmic Fur Really? Tell me, please, which one of the following quotes has me saying that? I must be blind:

Well none your your posts said that. However, you did quote me and highlight my post in a manner that made it look like you questioned the fact that firemen were sober on the job. (the O'RLY post). That and you pretty much confirmed it in the following quoted-post.

quote:

Originally posted by AwakenedAddict Are you insinuating that because people are allowed to possess alcohol at their workplace, they are constantly drunk?

quote:

Originally posted by Cosmic Fur Yes I am. Not constantly, but "personal use" means drinking.

I hate to agree with President Bush, but, "no one likes a flip-flopper"

quote:

Originally posted by Abercrombie Meanwhile in the news.... Tradgedy in Eastern Canada Gander Newfoundland (Canadian Press) Canada's Worst Air Disaster occoured earlier today when a Cesna 152 a small 2 seater plane, crashed into a cemetery early this morning in central Newfoundland. Newfoundland Search & Rescue have recovered 142 bodies so far, and expect the number to climb as digging continues into the evening.

BAN AIRLINERS!

(and bad jokes)

I did question that they were sober on the job. But I did not say that they were "drunk bastards who can't help but drink on the job". What made me question that? The fact that they had a bar inside their workplace, which was open to the employees for "personal use". Now, short of bartenders, I can't think of any profession where your managers would be okay with you bringing a Crown Royal bottle and setting it on the desk, and then when they undoubtedly ask you about it, you just reply, "Oh, it's okay, it's for personal use you see."

I just had to.

Question for the ban-wagoners:

Life functioned great in our society for 250 years. Based on the chicken littles out there banning everything left right and centre, life should have been nothing but anarchy as little as 30 years ago. Its a wonder we survived this long without government regulations and laws covering everything from sun tanning to smoking! WOW thank god we now life in a safe country!

NOTHING has changed except people's now selfish mentalities

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 Question for the ban-wagoners: Life functioned great in our society for 250 years. Based on the chicken littles out there banning everything left right and centre, life should have been nothing but anarchy as little as 30 years ago. Its a wonder we survived this long without government regulations and laws covering everything from sun tanning to smoking! WOW thank god we now life in a safe country! NOTHING has changed except people's now selfish mentalities

First, where is the question you speak of?

Second, I support what you're saying about bannings, but now you're just becoming an extremist. Maybe anarchy is the solution then? Clearly, the current way of life is NOT working.

quote:

Originally posted by AwakenedAddict Wow, sometimes people just make me laugh. You still haven't read the whole article, have you?

I just read it...again. I think we agree, so I'm not sure why you're singling me out?

I will ask...again...then how is their walking off the job of any real consequence, given that they have said that they will still respond to emergency calls? i.e. how much "routine work" do you think there is in a little town?

You and I agree on the specifics and the reason for the ban...while Jay is suggesting that these guys are "standing up for their rights" (as if "rights" are involved here).


From what is implied in the article (it's hard to discern the specifics since it's so vague with regard to actual facts)...other fire halls are allowed to have booze on the premises for personal use, while this fire hall has traditionally been allowed to also SELL booze, by doubling as a bar. Councillors are saying that, due to past problems, now they are banning ALL booze in this establishment.

So this has nothing to do with anyone thinking that they're drinking on the job and everything to with a FIRE HALL doubling as a bar that is now no longer able to do so, apparently becuase there have been past problems there.

I fail to see why this has even become a debate. It's a fire hall and place of business. It shouldn't double as a bar that sells booze. They've had problems, so no more booze. End of story.

omg, call the civil rights activists!

quote:

Originally posted by Cosmic Fur First, where is the question you speak of?

FTW

ok, how many of us are bored to shit at work today?

I wish I could have a drink right now, but my workplace doesn't double as a bar.

quote:

Originally posted by Cosmic Fur Maybe anarchy is the solution then? Clearly, the current way of life is NOT working.

Yep, life here in Canada sucks.... did you hear about the big cholera outbreak in Mississauga, the poisoned water in Montreal, the Government Secret Police beating and killing the gays in the streets of Woodstock, and the protesters getting run down by tanks in Ottawa.... shit... I shouldn't have said any of that, they're going to send me to a prison camp on Baffin Island

quote:

Originally posted by MarkT ok, how many of us are bored to shit at work today? I wish I could have a drink right now, but my workplace doesn't double as a bar.

That would be me. I would also like to be watching the game right now. It would go perfect with a pint in hand.

quote:

Originally posted by Cosmic Fur I can't think of any profession where your managers would be okay with you bringing a Crown Royal bottle and setting it on the desk, and then when they undoubtedly ask you about it, you just reply, "Oh, it's okay, it's for personal use you see."

Well as long as you don't drink on the job, there are many employers who wouldn't mind. In addition, from personal experience I know that lawyers at the firm I work for have drinks at lunch, and possess alcohol in the office. I could go grab a couple beers right now if I wanted to.

quote:

Originally posted by MarkT I just read it...again. I think we agree, so I'm not sure why you're singling me out? I will ask...again...then how is their walking off the job of any real consequence, given that they have said that they will still respond to emergency calls? i.e. how much "routine work" do you think there is in a little town?

It's nothing personal.. sorry

As for the routine work, I have no idea what that consists of, but surely it is important since they felt that by walking off the job they had the upper hand in the ensuing negotiations (if there are any).

quote:

Originally posted by MarkT ok, how many of us are bored to shit at work today? I wish I could have a drink right now, but my workplace doesn't double as a bar.

+1 (to the bored to shit)!

I work in a law firm, there is beer galore here.. lawyers + booze are like PB&J (natural combination). I need a drink, but I'm sick and hopped up on cough medicine.

quote:

Originally posted by AwakenedAddict I work in a law firm, there is beer galore here.. lawyers + booze are like PB&J (natural combination). I need a drink, but I'm sick and hopped up on cough medicine.

I must work for the wrong firm!! No beer here.

quote:

Originally posted by AwakenedAddict Well as long as you don't drink on the job, there are many employers who wouldn't mind. In addition, from personal experience I know that lawyers at the firm I work for have drinks at lunch, and possess alcohol in the office. I could go grab a couple beers right now if I wanted to.

But that's the thing though - having alcohol right where you work is a strong implication that you will at some point drink on the job. Also, I know some people here who look at porn while at work, that doesn't give them the right to walk off the job when someone tells them to stop.

quote:

Originally posted by Cosmic Fur But that's the thing though - having alcohol right where you work is a strong implication that you will at some point drink on the job. Also, I know some people here who look at porn while at work, that doesn't give them the right to walk off the job when someone tells them to stop.

Sure, having alcohol around the office give one the capacity to drink at work. However, it doesn't necessarily mean that they will drink. It's all about trust, if you are trustworthy you can have the priviledge. I would have thought that firefighters could handle the priviledge. If certain individual firefighters cannot help but drink on the job, they should be fired. It does not make sense to ban the possession of alcohol in the workplace.

I really have no idea where you were going with that porn reference.. so we'll leave that alone.

However this point is moot, since they banned alcohol in fire stations due to the fact that the firefighters were selling beer to the public. Not in reaction to drunk firefighters (of which there has been no mention at all). In fact this whole discussion is quite pointless.. i'm not going to debate further whether or not firefighters should be allowed to possess alcohol in the workplace, since it is legal in all fire departments except the one quoted in this article.

let's all walk off the job until we can have booze AND watch the soccer game in our workplaces!!!

quote:

Originally posted by MarkT let's all walk off the job until we can have booze AND watch the soccer game in our workplaces!!!

Hell ya, I have a right to cable TV in my office.

quote:

Fire Chief Fraser Stuckless said he complied with a town order this spring to stop selling booze to the public.

So there goes everyone's argument supporting the ban... And now onto other business...

quote:

However, he said the force of a dozen firefighters should still be allowed to enjoy a drink on special occasions. "The other fire departments, they do have alcohol .... The alcohol is there for personal use for the firemen and, as far as I'm concerned, we should be allowed to do the same," said Stuckless.

It IS about rights. Other firefighters are allowed to drink, why are these guys being singled out? They complied with the original town order to stop SELLING the booze, and then it got banned anyway, see how one little rule can lead to more?

quote:

However, Mayor Robert Elliott says past problems at the hall prompted the town council to take a firm position. "The fire department has been told [on] many, many occasions, you can't sell beer. On many occasions they've never listened," Elliott said.

But right at the beginning of the article, the chief claims he DID complie with the requests to stop selling booze, so why ban it?

quote:

"This is the only solution we saw. Take it out, [and] then you can't sell what's not there."

Or, you could acknowledge that they had already stopped selling what's there.

quote:

The withdrawal will not leave Point Leamington altogether in the lurch. While the force will no longer do routine work from the fire hall, Stuckless said members will respond to emergency calls.

Can we all sit down for a second to remember that these guys are VOLUNTEERS? That means they do it out of the kindness of their own hearts, they don't have to do jack shit if they don't want to (like the rest of their town), yet they're willing to put their lives on the line to put out any fires in this town. Now, the mayor has removed their ability to have a drink in the fire-hall. Most of you guys are saying "Who cares? We don't want drunk firefighters anyway."

Cosmic Fur especially seems to be of this opinion. One I agree with actually. But lets remember here, it takes a couple drinks to get a buzz going, a couple more to get flat-out drunk. These guys aren't fighting for their right to get trashed in the firehall, they just want the same rights that are extended to every other firehall. That is, the right to have an alcoholic beverage at work, without becoming intoxicated.

In the end, their walk-out is inconsequential anyway, it's purely symbolic, because they're still going to respond to emergencies. So what's the big deal?

quote:

Originally posted by TO guy Hell ya, I have a right to cable TV in my office.

NICE ONE!

I called in sick the past two days (terribly sick), but it allowed me to sit on the couch and watch 3 world cup games each day They play the games on flat screens in the PATH foodcourt (under my building), but it just ain't the same.

quote:

Originally posted by AwakenedAddict NICE ONE! I called in sick the past two days (terribly sick), but it allowed me to sit on the couch and watch 3 world cup games each day They play the games on flat screens in the PATH foodcourt (under my building), but it just ain't the same.

Yeah, I've caught parts of some of the games in the food courts, but you're right, its just not the same.

quote:

Originally posted by Spam So there goes everyone's argument supporting the ban... And now onto other business... It IS about rights. Other firefighters are allowed to drink, why are these guys being singled out? They complied with the original town order to stop SELLING the booze, and then it got banned anyway, see how one little rule can lead to more? But right at the beginning of the article, the chief claims he DID complie with the requests to stop selling booze, so why ban it? Or, you could acknowledge that they had already stopped selling what's there. Can we all sit down for a second to remember that these guys are VOLUNTEERS? That means they do it out of the kindness of their own hearts, they don't have to do jack shit if they don't want to (like the rest of their town), yet they're willing to put their lives on the line to put out any fires in this town. Now, the mayor has removed their ability to have a drink in the fire-hall. Most of you guys are saying "Who cares? We don't want drunk firefighters anyway." Cosmic Fur especially seems to be of this opinion. One I agree with actually. But lets remember here, it takes a couple drinks to get a buzz going, a couple more to get flat-out drunk. These guys aren't fighting for their right to get trashed in the firehall, they just want the same rights that are extended to every other firehall. That is, the right to have an alcoholic beverage at work, without becoming intoxicated. In the end, their walk-out is inconsequential anyway, it's purely symbolic, because they're still going to respond to emergencies. So what's the big deal?

- the fire hall said they stopped selling to the public...perhaps it's still being "sold" to employees (off duty or not)...perhaps they did NOT stop selling to the public. The counter-claim is that there have been problems there in the past. Since none of us know what those "problems" are, we can't really comment.

point being...this isn't a case of "rights". AFAIK, no one has a "right" to drink at their place of employment (volunteer or not).

Ask yourself this...without even knowing all the facts, why would they strip them of their ability to drink booze there if there were NO problems? Is this a case of a councillor trying to stick it to the volunteers?

sounds shady to me...

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.