Are these lockout laws necessary, or are we officially a nanny state now? 276

Let's Talk


View Profile

In Queensland, last drinks will officially be called at 2am from July this year. These laws will get even tougher, with lockouts being enforced at 1am from February next year.

This tough new stance has divided public opinion. Some people believe stricter lockout laws will curb drug and alcohol related violence on our streets. For other people though, these laws signal Australia’s official transition into a “nanny state”.

Under the new Tackling Alcohol-Fuelled Violence Legislation:

1. Drug offenders can be banned from popular pub and club precincts

2. Trading hours for licensed venues will gradually be adjusted

3. Last drinks will be called at 2am, from July this year

4. Lockouts will become effective from 1am, starting February next year

This tough legislation aims to curb drug and alcohol related incidents. For example, late last year a 60-year-old man became the target of a coward punch, in just one shocking instance of violence.

However, not everybody is happy about these changes. Many people feel that it’s the responsibility of nightclub patrons and their families to enjoy alcohol responsibly.

One Facebook user wrote, “How about parents just teaching their kids the value of life and respect for others? People are no longer held responsible for their actions so how do they learn?”

Whilst another added, “Alcohol or no alcohol, lockout or not, thugs committing these crimes will continue to happen while society cant take responsibility for there actions”.

“People blame poor upbringing, hard lives, teachers, video games, movies, stop letting criminals get a slap on the wrist with sob stories”.

Where do you stand? Are tough lockout laws necessary? Or has Australia become a nanny state, where wrongdoers take no responsibility for their actions?

Starts at 60 Writers

The Starts at 60 writers team seek out interesting topics and write them especially for you.

  1. I still reckon the drinking age is too low !!!! When I was growing up you weren’t allowed or be in a hotel until you were 21 yrs old

    8 REPLY
    • What a bloody carry on. Society has brought this on themselves. The drinking age got lowered and the pubs now stay open nearly all night. When I was younger the drinking age was 21 and the pubs closed at 10 pm. None of the drunken violence that is around now. We all went home without drinking ourselves senseless.
      It’s about time this happened

    • Yep dead right nor could you vote or wed without parental permission these days you have half grown kids with all the rights of a responsible adult and they have absolutely no idea of how to manage the privildges.

    • I half agree with you. The only thing against this is that young people can join the army and fight for their country at 18 and yet they would not be able to legally consume alcohol. It is a difficult one because as I said half of me agrees with you.

    • Debra Vandemeeden you are so right we have had a generation of adults who thought they were kids and they have reared a generation of boorish selfish little hooligans.

    • Debbie Bryant the vote was given to eighteen year olds because the government was conscripting eighteen year olds to go to war…but what everybody forgot is was that the army was quiet happy to take an 18 year old volunteer provided they had parental permission during the 1st and 2nd world war and the Korean war and part of the vietnam war and no one complained about those CHILDREN who proudly joined and went of to defend home and country…the only difference with the kids who were given the vote was that certain people were anti conscription and that was one of their standard slogans ” To young to vote but old enough to go to war”.

  2. Yep those were the good old Days.Back in the 70s.Bring back the age to 21.18 is far to young .

  3. Some parents of young people told me that their kids get drunk at home as its too expensive in the clubs, then go out at midnight

  4. It used to be that alcohol was not available until 10am and then all facilities were closed by 10pm. Laws were relaxed gradually and even in the past we still had idiots that could not control their alcohol intake and caused as much trouble.

    4 REPLY
    • Yes Ron we did still have drunks in the days of 10 oclock closing but the use of knives broken glasses and bottles and gangs of 5 to 1 were very far and few between most drunks in those days vomitted it up and then staggered home.

    • I disagree to a point. In the western suburbs of Sydney you still had your gangs that used any weapon they could find. I will agree that there were not as many, but they were still there

    • Ron Pryde I remember fist fights among teens / underage drinkers at the time when 21 was the legal age…I think a lot of it boils down to binge drinking and immaturity….unfortunately those bad habits can be carried on into adulthood….alcohol has been the downfall of many broken families

    • I have first hand experience of that. My family was destroyed by alcohol when I was 6 years old. That was also in the time when the government had the “right” to take children from their families and put them in homes. Luckily all of my siblings have their own families and are living happy lives. I agree with Judy Graves that it is theimmaturity of people that causes the trouble. That doesn’t mean you have to be 21 to be mature as I have met a lot of immature “adults”

  5. Be interesting to see how far they go with this. Maybe back to the six o’clock swill? If they were serious they would raise the drinking age to 21 but really you can’t legislate for stupidity…

    2 REPLY
    • No no need for the 6 oclock swill the hours of 10 to 10 worked very well and there wasnt a lot of violence from the drunks they just staggered home or found a spot to sleep it of and there was very little in the way of energy drugs such as meth was available if you looked hard enough but most people were satisfied with an alcoholic buzz.

  6. With the violence in Melbourne at these all night haunts I hope they bring those laws in Victoria. Couldn’t care less if we are called a ‘Nanny State’ which seems to be the title given if you make tough decisions.

    1 REPLY

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *