Rum Raisin ice cream banned after 10.30pm

From ‘Fairprice restricts sale of alcoholic ice cream’, 21 Apr 2018, article by Lydia Lam, ST

Supermarket chain FairPrice has restricted the sale of Udders ice cream with alcohol content that exceeds 0.5 per cent to comply with the Liquor Control Act. Ice cream that has more than 0.5 per cent alcohol cannot be sold between 10.30pm and 7am at its outlets.

This includes four of Udders’ flavours: Rum Rum Raisin (3.9 per cent alcohol), Tira-miss-u (3.8 per cent alcohol), Wineberries (3.5 per cent alcohol) and Orange Liqueur Dark Choc (2.7 per cent alcohol).

…Under the 2015 Liquor Control Act, “liquor” means a beverage containing more than 0.5 per cent ethanol by mass or volume; a mixture of ethanol and some other substance or liquid (including water) and containing more than 0.5 per cent ethanol by mass or volume; or any other substance prescribed by the regulations as liquor.

Yes, rum raisin ice-cream is technically a form of ‘liquor’ according to its legal definition. And yes, you possibly may get drunk on ice-cream. That’s if you melted 10 tubs of Udders into liquid and shoot it up your rectum as an enema in addition to eating it with a ladle.

Also according to the definition, any ‘mixture of ethanol’ containing more than 0.5% falls under the list of abusable substances. Which means in order to be consistent and fair to Udders, Fairprice should also remove Listerine mouthwash off the shelves after 10.30pm, especially since it contains more than 40 TIMES the alcohol limit.

Screen Shot 2018-04-21 at 6.54.30 AM

But, but – you say, people don’t DRINK MOUTHWASH!

Or do they?

There are in fact medical case reports of extreme intoxication following mouthwash abuse. So the answer is yes. People are more likely to get drunk on Listerine than an entire tub of alcoholic ice cream. More so if you restrict alcoholics from their nocturnal booze like what we’ve done here. In fact, regular non-drunkard users of mouthwash may get exposed to more alcohol through swallowing than people eating that occasional Tira-miss-U.

But still, thanks Fairprice for letting the world know that alcoholic ice-cream exists. One ice cream company’s udders must be swelling and getting all tingly with delight.

Advertisements

Drink don’t drive ad difficult to understand

From ‘Simple language works best in public campaign advertisements’, 30 Jan 2017, ST Forum

(Michael Loh Toon Seng): An advertisement by the Singapore Police Force, Singapore Road Safety Council and Sgcarmart.com reads: “Get a ride home. Don’t drive to drink, and you will never drink and drive.”

It took me a while to figure out what the message was. At first, I thought it was saying that if you drive to drink, you will never drink and drive again because you will surely die in a road accident.

Why didn’t the ad just say that to avoid having to drive after drinking, don’t drive? A plain “don’t drink and drive” would also have sufficed, as there is strength in simplicity.

It is well and clever to use catchy phrases in ads, but if people cannot grasp a message’s meaning at the first reading, they will likely ignore it. Messages in public campaigns should use plain, easy-to-understand language so that they get the right message across.

The current anti-drunk-driving slogan may be tongue-twistingly catchy as “She Sells Seashells”, but breaks the first rule of public communications; it needs to be re-read at least twice. ‘Don’t drive to drink’ on its own already requires some cognitive juggling to interpret as ‘Don’t drive the car to the pub/bar’, while ‘you will never drink and drive’ requires a background understanding that drinking and driving is bad. There are limits to how you want to play around with words and puns in such a campaign, and while simplicity would work for the first time reader or drinker, people would soon grow tired of repetitive warnings and it’ll just become naggy after a while.

In 2011, the Traffic Police went for the jugular and presented the drink-driving message as an obituary, hoping to shock people into abandoning their cars and alcohol altogether. While the content was painfully obvious, some found it in bad taste.

anti-drink-drive-obituary-600-66500

Like visuals of oozing cancer on cigarette packs, the authorities also tried to pump up the gore factor, with a 2009 campaign that looks straight out of a slasher flick. It may have been too ‘PG’ for some parents’ liking.

3553506640_d5c1b27f13

So how do you find the middle ground between in-your-face viscera and pedantic finger-wagging? How about a morality tale of killing your best friend and living the rest of your life in eternal regret as an amputee in a wheelchair? This 2005 ad reminds boozers that it’s not just your life at stake when you DnD.

In real life, though, a different story pans out if you happen to be a Mediacorp celebrity. A decade back, Christopher Lee was jailed 4 weeks for drunk driving. Today, he’s still promoting bak kwa during CNY and likely to be given a Lifetime Achievement Award despite his past drunken indiscretion. Drink and drive, and all is forgiven.

Or a light-hearted approach with cute doggies? Check. Though some would say it trivialises a serious crime.

Not saying that such campaigns are entirely futile. The number of drink-driving cases reportedly fell in the first half of 2016, though that could also be attributed to the Government’s overall crackdown on public alcohol consumption, enforcement, the rise of private car hires, ride-sharing and bars offering valet services, or even ‘drink-counting’ apps. 

So, like the fact that smoking kills, everyone already knows that drunk-driving does too, but it’ll take more than blunt public announcements to steer the message home. Maybe the Traffic Police can turn their attention to campaigns urging people to actually drive in the right direction on roads too, like ‘Drive on the Right Side of the Road, or we’ll See you on the Other Side’. Hur. Hur.

 

Beer promoters banned from hawker centres

From ‘Why are coffee shops allowed beer promoters?’, 21 May 2015, ST Forum

(Rajasegaran Ramasamy): I FULLY support the “no go” for beer promoters in hawker centres (“Breweries told to withdraw beer promoters from hawker centres”; yesterday).

I am puzzled that the National Environment Agency has decided to implement the ban only at hawker centres.

Why are coffee shops, where these promoters also operate, exempted? Are they either registered stallholders or stall assistants? Alcohol, like cigarettes, can be addictive, and its promotion should be discouraged at all premises.

The reason NEA gave for the ban was that beer promoting activities may give rise to ‘disamenities’ such as touting and patron harassment, not so much that alcohol is bad and beer ladies, by peddling their addictive product to uncles, are part of a nationwide problem, as the writer suggests. Beer bottles were recently banned from Tekka hawker centre in order to eliminate the ‘disamenity’ of people threatening each other with broken glass shards. If we want to purge our society of any form of beer promotion short of banning alcohol entirely, why stop at beer servers? How about banning Tiger beer ads about ‘The Unofficial History of Singapore’? Or ban any form of beer sponsorship  of major sporting events because we don’t want our aspiring sportsmen to be ‘under the influence’ after competitions? Let’s all hide beer behind the counter like cigarettes too, so that we have more fridge space for our healthy oxygenated mineral water.

If such disamenities do in fact exist, however, NEA is merely transferring the problem elsewhere, such as the ‘fierce competition’ already happening in some kopitiams between the ‘beer aunty’ and the ‘pretty little things’ in tight polo-Ts and mini skirts. Maybe we should start banning bottles from coffee shops too, before they turn catfights into blood brawls.

‘Disamenities’ is a terrible catch-all word to describe social ‘problems’ that seems to apply exclusively to consequences of inebriation. MP Indranee Rajah includes ‘peeing in the river‘ as one such disamenity. So is puking on the sidewalk or talking loudly, anything that may be classified as a nuisance without becoming a full-blown crime like drunk-driving your car into someone’s living room or rioting on the streets. I used to think it referred to any business or establishment that does the opposite of what a proper ‘amenity’ is supposed to do, like a void deck karaoke room or a bustling watering hole with live bands playing past midnight. These days, it refers to specific human activities like beer ladies fighting for the attention of some half-drunken sweaty uncle. If your beer buddy is misbehaving in public, he’s not just a menace, he’s also a ‘disamenity’. Try explaining the term to him and it may just stump him into sobriety.

MP Lam Pin Min accused of inciting enmity towards Hindus

From ‘Film-maker Martyn See makes police report against PAP MP Lam Pin Min’, 26 Feb 2015, article by Rachel Chang, ST

Film-maker Martyn See made a police report on Thursday against People’s Action Party (PAP) MP Lam Pin Min, whom he accused of making racially seditious comments. Dr Lam had posted on his Facebook page earlier this month about three Singaporean men who were arrested at Thaipusam celebrations on February 3 for various offences. These include disorderly conduct and voluntarily causing hurt to a police officer.

Linking to a blogpost that has since been deleted, Dr Lam wrote: “An example of how alcohol intoxication can cause rowdiness and public nuisance.” In his police report on Thursday, Mr See charged that these comments “distorted an allegation by the Police into a statement of fact”.

A police statement on the trio’s arrest said that “all three men were believed to have been drinking earlier as they smelt strongly of alcohol.” But, Mr See said, this has yet to be established by the authorities as fact and the three men have not yet been tried.

In saying that the three were intoxicated while participating in the holy festival of Thaipusam, Dr Lam incited enmity towards the Hindu community, he charged.

Mr See also complained in his police report that Dr Lam’s comments “caused ill-will and hostility between different races and communities. The responses on his Facebook page show overwhelming hostility to his remark. Yet, he has allowed his offending words to remain online”.

He added that Dr Lam breached the sub judice rule, as judicial proceedings in this case have yet to be completed.

I wonder if Martyn See was aware of what another prominent figure said about Indians on a bus, a man who once campaigned for President branding himself as the ‘voice of the people’, represented by a bizarre logo that really says ‘Someone needs a tight slap every time he opens his mouth’.

Tan Kin Lian’s ‘Mumbai’ remark pales in comparison, of course, to what another MP in the past used to say about Little India, that it was in ‘complete darkness because there were too many Indians around’.  You didn’t need to file a sedition charge against ex-MP Choo Wee Khiang then because he got jail time for corruption anyway.

One man who managed to get away with ‘hard truths’ even if they threatened to ‘incite enmity’ among the races was LKY himself, who had some controversial thoughts about Muslims and their dietary habits. Now in ICU and fighting for dear life, it appears that all is forgiven. God bless his hardy soul, and anyone who has the audacity to charge our ailing founding father of inflammatory hate-speech deserves to rot in hell for all eternity.

On Feb 11, the AGC issued a warning against anyone commenting publicly on the Thaipusam scuffle, that they take a ‘serious view’ of any remark calculated to interfere with the ‘integrity of the administration of justice’, while Lam posted his ‘inflammatory’ comment on Feb 4, latching on what the Police reportedly believed to be another kind of spirit lurking within the premises of the religious procession. It’s still online as we speak, and captured here for posterity. Maybe Lam was too busy distributing oranges to his ward folk over CNY, or his FB administrators were sleeping on the job, intoxicated by CNY junk food.

Screen Shot 2015-02-26 at 8.50.45 PM

In the last GE in 2011, a police report was filed against a PAP MP hopeful for allegedly campaigning on ‘Cooling Off Day’, with the following post:

OooOoooOooh! so that’s what REALLY happened? Wow. I think tears in Parliament is worse than ANYTHING ELSE!’

Tin Pei Lin’s defence for the breach of election rules? The ‘web administrator’ did it. OooOoooOooh so that’s what happened! Tin is still MP, by the way. The fate of her bimbo administrator remains unknown.

See’s police report is a shrewd test of the dictum ‘no one is above the law’, and with ordinary people getting successfully sued for defamation or arrested for sensationalising the Thaipusam incident, it’s interesting to see how someone in a position of power reacts, and the events that unfold, when the tables are finally turned. A very inauspicious year for Dr Lam then, ( born 1969, year of the rooster. According to Grand Master Tan Khoon Yong, the outlook for Lam’s sign is ‘gloomy’, his ‘judgement may be affected’ and ‘lawsuits are possible too’), who now has to stop unpacking his ang pows, get over the columbarium saga and explain away the alcohol comment invariably using the ‘Get Out of Jail’ word ‘context’. Hopefully some hapless social media manager doesn’t become the scapeGOAT this CNY.

Public consumption of alcohol to be banned after 10.30pm

From ‘Stricter laws on public alcohol consumption proposed’, 19 Jan 2015, article in CNA

The public will not be able to purchase alcohol for take-away or consume alcohol in public places from 10.30pm to 7am daily when liquor control laws proposed in Parliament on Monday (Jan 19) kick in. The Liquor Control (Supply and Consumption) Bill was introduced on Monday.

The start time of 10.30pm is aligned with the closing time of most businesses in residential areas, and it is the time by which most community events, including getai, end, said the Ministry of Home Affairs in a media statement. The restriction will apply to all public places to avoid displacement of problems from one area to another, MHA said.

People will continue to be allowed to drink at home, at approved events and in licensed establishments such as bars and coffee shops outside of these hours, the MHA said.

Under the proposed law, Little India and Geylang will be designated Liquor Control Zones and come under stricter restrictions on alcohol consumption and retail hours of take-away alcohol, based on the police’s operational assessment. Such zones are where there is significant risk of public disorder associated with excessive drinking.

Under the new restrictions, you can’t bring booze to a BBQ in East Coast Park at night without applying for a ‘liquor consumption permit’. Likewise if you and your significant other intend to celebrate Valentine’s Day with champagne over a moonlit picnic. The punishment for your midnight revelry is a fine of up to $1000, and if you happen to be intoxicated within the Liquor Control Zone, the police have the right to tell you to ‘leave and DISPOSE of your liquor’, failure of which is a 6 months jail-time. All this doesn’t, however, address the problem of drunk-driving, which accumulated over any festive period may cause more deaths, injuries and blocked roads than your occasional Little India Riot, whether you drink in the day or night. You don’t even need a drop of alcohol to trigger disorderly behaviour. SMRT bans ALL forms of drinks on the train but people still fight over priority seats anyway.

To single out Geylang is no surprise, it being called a ‘powder keg’ and all, but this zonal extension is a ominous sign of ‘nanny-creep’, where you may have LCZs being slowly formed elsewhere for our ‘protection’, from Joo Chiat to goddamn Joo Koon.  Tekka hawker centre near Little India has already suffered from the migration of the drunken blight, with police banning beer bottles in the premises. So what’s a midnight outdoor drinker to do? Stock up your fridge, invite your friends over, get pissed drunk, and get into an indoor brawl over cricket. Well, at least it’s not a PUBLIC disgrace- that is until someone gets thrown out of the 8th storey window in the heat of battle.

What about those Robertson Quay teens, who now deprived of their fun beverage, decide to turn to another drug of choice, nicotine, or something more illicit perhaps? They sure as hell ain’t converting to detox juices. Worse, they may even drink MORE than their usual fill before the curfew clock strikes 10.30pm, after which the police won’t just be stalking people holding onto beer cans, but fishing out bodies from the river into which the intoxicated kids plunged to their deaths.

If the Government is serious about the alcohol scourge, they should ban outdoor consumption 24/7, or risk having public buses impeded by suicidal drunks in broad daylight. It seems like the only thing stopping us from banning alcohol altogether is sin taxes. But as if increasing the tax isn’t enough, now you’ll need to pay for a permit to bring a chiller stocked with Tiger beer to a beach party. Might as well make full use of that hard-earned permit by binging and destroying your livers too. Good luck with that, though, if you intend to hold a party for some Bangladeshi guest workers. You may have to pay the authorities extra for the chaperone riot police.

In fact, with the ban in place and you can no longer buy cheap beer from 7/11 in the middle of the night, alcoholics are being nudged towards the ‘licensed retailers’, meaning bars and kopitiams benefit, so hooray for more sin taxes, and if you have to drive just to get your fix, then you’re giving the traffic police, or the Grim Reaper, more work to do. If the objective is the maintenance of public order and safety, then a supplement Bill should be tabled along with the alcohol curbs. How about the banning of picking and throwing of projectiles, lighting fires, or use of makeshift bamboo poles as spears in public? Hell, even walking around with your face glued to your phone is a safety hazard. Why not ban public texting or watching Korean drama videos on phones too?

Ironically, the tagline for Singapore’s own Tiger beer is ‘UnCAGE’, but what we’re creating here, because we don’t trust people to behave responsibly in the presence of alcohol, are depressing cages of sobriety.

Police banning beer bottles from Tekka hawker centre

From ‘Tekka hawker centre stops selling bottled beer’, 5 Oct 2014, article by Kimberly Spykerman, CNA

Stallholders at Tekka hawker centre have stopped selling bottled beer, as highlighted in recent media reports. Only canned beer is available for sale there. But grassroots leaders hope more can be done to enforce this no-bottles move. They have noticed more people thronging Tekka Centre – particularly after restrictions were put in place to curb alcohol consumption in Little India’s public areas.

The police had engaged stall owners in August and September to reduce the risk of glass bottles being used as weapons in fights. It added that all the stall owners whom police spoke to said they will consider doing so for safety reasons.

…Still, the no-bottles initiative has not stopped some from bringing their own into the hawker centre. This has caused some stallholders to worry about their business, since they stopped selling bottled beer on Oct 1. Hawkers whom Channel NewsAsia spoke to said their customers generally prefer bottled beer to canned beer.

“Price-wise, customers feel canned beer is not worth it compared to bottled beer,” said Maureen Ho, the owner of Little India Hot & Cold Drinks stall. “A can is 500ml, bottle is 640ml. They also feel bottled beer tastes better. For most, when you tell them there’s only canned beer, they get fed up.”

Zero bottles of beer on the wall

Zero bottles of beer on the wall

The jury is still out if bottled beer tastes better than canned beer, with people conducting blind taste tests just to address this very important topic. The canned beverage was designed to make the drink portable, with the Americans generally favouring the aluminium, as exemplified by former WWE superstar Stone Cold Steve Austin’s trademark chug.

Yes you can

No one has done an official survey among Singaporeans about their preference, though the notion that bottled beer tastes nicer for the same brand may be psychological. It’s like comparing Coke in a curvy glass bottle vs boring can. It all comes down to presentation. The former just seems, well, ‘sexier’. For example, I can’t remember the last time I saw a Tiger ad featuring people chugging out of a can. Director Anthony Chen draws lusty stares because he has a Tiger bottle nearby. A woman holding a beer bottle probably draws more stares from men than another grabbing a can. ‘Toasting’ with a couple of cans also doesn’t have the desired effect as the consistent, crystal-clear chink of glass bottles. The beer bottle is sophisticated High Society; slick, smooth, neat. The can belongs in a locker room or in a cooler at a hockey match; rough, messy, sweaty. And you don’t get a bucket of free ice cubes with it.

Restrictions are unlikely to stop here following the prohibitions in Little India, as revellers can jolly well bring their alcohol, and fights, elsewhere as a result of the spillover, short of banning glass bottles ENTIRELY. The bottle ban also takes a toll on the livelihoods of drink-stall hawkers, all because our authorities prefer to take the half-hearted way out rather than try to manage the actual root cause of violence. It also penalises the true connoisseur of bottled beer, who instead of just chilling peacefully watching the world go by like he used to, now has to risk maiming his finger prying open a metal tab and stare at a stumpy cylindrical thing for hours. Curiously, the latest campaign for Tiger is called ‘UNCAGE’, which is the last thing you want to see happen in a place like Tekka hawker centre.

If troublemakers want to rough someone up, the absence of glass bottles is not going to hinder a mob from getting creative with other makeshift weapons. A glass mug to hold your canned beer, for example, can cause some serious damage. Tables, chairs, crockery, choppers can all be wielded if you’ve seen classic bar brawls in Western movies. A stray pair of sturdy chopsticks can make the difference between a gash on the head, or eye/nose impalement. The metal tray return shelf itself can crush some ligaments if you topple it onto someone. Or even trays, for that matter, with edges that you could slam onto someone’s jugular repeatedly. In Tekka market itself, a stallholder once tried to attack co-workers with a 1kg frozen SLAB OF BEEF. Even the alternative of beer cans, especially when UNOPENED, can be used as projectiles, or as a melee weapon itself to bash someone’s face in like how one would attack with a heavy stone. The difference from attacking with glass bottles is that you can still drink from the damned can after brutally bloodying someone’s face with it.

The possibilities in a hawker brawl are endless. The same, sadly, can’t be said of the imagination of the authorities.

Drunk man arrested for kicking a bus in Serangoon Road

From ‘Man who kicked bus at Serangoon Road arrested’, 31 March 2014, article in CNA

Police arrested a 51-year-old man on Saturday after he tried to stop a bus and kicked it when the bus driver could not let him board. The video of the incident went viral after being uploaded online. Bus operator SBS Transit said that on March 29 at about 6pm, a Service 65 bus heading towards Tampines had pulled out of a bus stop in front of an Indian temple along Serangoon Road when a man rushed across the road from the right.

The man stood in front of the bus, obstructed its path and demanded to be allowed on board, despite the fact that the bus was no longer at the bus stop. According to SBS Transit, the bus was in fact already on the second lane of the road.

When the man’s request was refused, he proceeded to hit and kick the bus exterior and damaged the left rear mirror and the front wiper of the bus. Meanwhile, the bus captain called the Operations Control Centre, which then contacted the police for assistance.

A passer-by also came forward to assist by advising the man to get back on the pavement. The SBS Transit spokesperson added that as a result of the incident, the trip had to be disrupted for the 45 passengers on board. The man was subsequently taken away by police to assist with investigations. (According to ST, they ‘understand that the man was drunk’)

The video is pure entertainment and uniquely Singaporean from start to finish, with action, comedy and drama all rolled in one. Here are some of the best bits, with dialogue unsurpassed by anything Jack Neo’s Singlish script generator can muster.

0.25: ‘Eh brudder, brudder, don’t open lerh, I scared lerh’

0.28: ‘L*nj*ao la!’

1.25: THIS gesture

http___makeagif.com__media_3-31-2014_nLJUzB

1.39: Drunk:OPEN!

          Driver: CANNOT! (LOL)

1.45: ‘Wah, Spiderman huh’?

1.49: ‘He’s marbuk (drunk) ah? Marbuk already’.

1.55: Drunk man swings on a windscreen wiper.

http___makeagif.com__media_3-31-2014_UsjGXR

2.11: An Indian man steps in and takes a shove calmly, with a van passing close by. Thankfully, this being Little India, only 1 other man gets involved, though there were many bystanders watching the scene unfold.

http___makeagif.com__media_3-31-2014_ODSwpH

2.37: This holy man on the extreme left, presumably from the temple nearby.

Screen Shot 2014-03-31 at 6.37.16 PM

2.53: Indian hero saves the guy from being knocked down by a passing car. Even helps him up.

2.57: ‘Sibei Siao eh’

3.04: ‘His leg kena, his leg kena.’

Hilarity aside, the bus driver did the right thing not to be intimidated and allow the nuisance in, and luckily the man wasn’t strong enough to smash the glass door in, as a Chinese national did last year. Incidentally, that also happened around Little India, which has already been identified as a ‘powder keg’ ready to explode. Here’s what could happen if you’re drunk and on a bus:

If you’re drunk anywhere near a bus stop, you could fall asleep on the bus bay, get run over and killed instantly. Or you could lose your balance and fall before a bus, like what happened to trigger the Little India Riot last year. That’s not including he numerous DUI accidents and deaths as a result of intoxication.  All this despite recent curbs in alcohol licensing and tax increases, from a country that has banned adultery sites and chewing gum. It looks like alcohol and all its consequences, the laughable and fatal ones, are here to stay.

It’s a shame that this incident took place just days before the roll out of the enhanced security measures from the Public Order (Additional Temporary Measures) Act. If it had occurred on April 1st (POATA implementation date), we’d have more to chuckle about, that being April Fools’ and all.