[DeductiveReasoner]

IMHO, alcohol is NEVER an excuse for committing a crime/act of violence. Maybe an excuse for saying stupid things, but violence?

[Paradox1987]

I have a bit of a theory--feel free to break it down. I'm open-minded and I could certainly be wrong. My theory is simply this: Nobody will do something under the influence of alcohol that they haven't contemplated doing while sober. Do you find this statement to be true or false. Why?

Well, it depends, the issue with alcohol is that it lowers inhibitions. Therefore, if when utterly drunk someone says "I dare you to dance naked on the balcony", whilst you may honestly never have once contemplated the idea when sober, you will be contemplating it drunk. Since you are more suggestible when your inhibitions are lowered, there is a goodly chance that you'll say "sure, why not?" as opposed to "you know, the idea that I could do that never once occurred to me before today, so I will dismiss it summarily." At least that's how I see it?

I have found that I have personally kept true to my personal moral standards even when I was practically wasted, and find it difficult to believe that others lack that same capacity. This is what has made me so curious... in case you wanted to know ;)

Thoughts?

Depends on the act again. The criminal law (at least in the UK) doesn't suggest that drink limits the capacity to commit an offence, it merely says that you can be so intoxicated as to be unable to form "specific" (as opposed to "general") intent. This distinction is only really relevant in Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm and Assault Occasioning Grievous Bodily Harm. Therefore, you can still be held accountable for your actions, but your impairment in being able to intend the exact outcomes are acknowledged by the lessening of the offence.

However, this all assumes social drinking, when drinking in your own home, by yourself it may yield a set of different results. Not to mention that alcohol affects different people differently in the long run. I know violent drunks, mean drunks, happy drunks, random drunks, promiscuous drunks and social butterfly drunks, depressive drunks etc etc etc. So it may depend on your individual reaction to the stuff itself?

[pinkrasputin]

Well, it depends, the issue with alcohol is that it lowers inhibitions. Therefore, if when utterly drunk someone says "I dare you to dance naked on the balcony", whilst you may honestly never have once contemplated the idea when sober, you will be contemplating it drunk.

Lowering inhibitions does not mean you've never contemplated it before.

in·hi·bi·tion (Noun)
Noun:
A feeling that makes one self-conscious and unable to act in a relaxed and natural way.
A voluntary or involuntary restraint on the direct expression of an instinct.

Depends on the act again. The criminal law (at least in the UK) doesn't suggest that drink limits the capacity to commit an offence, it merely says that you can be so intoxicated as to be unable to form "specific" (as opposed to "general") intent. This distinction is only really relevant in Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm and Assault Occasioning Grievous Bodily Harm. Therefore, you can still be held accountable for your actions, but your impairment in being able to intend the exact outcomes are acknowledged by the lessening of the offence.

Yes, this is what Mothers Against Drunk Driving have been fighting against for years over here. There is responsibility in taking a drink that holds you accountable.

However, this all assumes social drinking, when drinking in your own home, by yourself it may yield a set of different results. Not to mention that alcohol affects different people differently in the long run. I know violent drunks, mean drunks, happy drunks, random drunks, promiscuous drunks and social butterfly drunks, depressive drunks etc etc etc. So it may depend on your individual reaction to the stuff itself?

I don't believe those differences are due to to the affects of alcohol. Rather, I believe those are inner violent people, inner mean people, inner happy people, inner random people, inner promiscuous people, inner social butterflies, etc.

How come I never turn violent or mean when I'm drinking? I would only be that way if I was already feeling that way inside before the alcohol.

And in the case of victims who resign or comply in the face of adversity or fear, I believe those are naturally passive/compliant people and alcohol intensifies that tendancy.

[Paradox1987]

@pinkrasputin

Indeed, I didn't suggest that inhibition was synonymous with contemplation. Just that your willingness to undertake actions you've not necessarily contemplated before may be higher?

I couldn't really speculate, it all depends on the person. If they know how alcohol affects them, then they should exercise moderation? Of course, you could well be right, as the Romans would have said: "in vino, veritas".