Dont know if this has already been posted but cant find it anywear
Take a look.
http://icliverpool.icnetwork.co.uk/live ... y_continue
Share This Page:
Fury over grieving Marines pub ban
Fury over grieving Marines pub ban
Geezers Need Excitment
not lettin people in cuz they look agressive in uniform?! i have heard it all now!This is the email they are sending to people who complained
Thank you for your recent correspondence concerning the incident that took
place at Walkabout Liverpool last week. We have received a large number of
emails on this matter and we will be reviewing them in the days that
follow.
In order to provide you with a speedy response to your email, we sincerely
hope that you will accept this “open email” as an explanation of the
specific circumstances surrounding the recent incident in Liverpool and
clarification of the company’s policy towards uniformed service personnel.
The Licensing Act of 2003 places clear responsibility upon all of our venue
teams to ensure that all of our customers can enjoy a safe experience. The
careful screening of customers at the door entry point is critical to
achieving this objective. Nevertheless, Walkabout does not have a
nationwide policy concerning the admittance of uniformed service personnel.
On any given night and at any given venue our door team, in consultation
with the general manager on duty, is asked to make a judgment on safety
grounds as to whether it is appropriate or not to admit any customer.
On the night in question, our door staff took the decision to refuse entry
to the group in light of specific incidents that had taken place in the
city that evening. Regrettably, in our experience, some members of the
public do not always respond favourably to service personnel drinking
whilst in uniform. To help put this recent incident into context, in the
past six months the Liverpool Walkabout has had three incidents where the
safety of both uniformed service personnel and other customers was
compromised. Additionally, in October 2005 a serviceman (in civilian
clothing) was involved in an incident which sadly resulted in his death.
We deeply regret that this incident has caused considerable upset to you,
Cpl Nowak’s family, friends, comrades and all British servicemen. We are
extremely respectful of the work carried out by our service personnel at
home and overseas.
We sincerely hope that you appreciate our position given this particular
set of events and our clarification that we do not have a nationwide policy
concerning the admittance of uniformed service personnel.
For and on behalf of
Regent Inns Plc
Its aload of bullshit
Thank you for your recent correspondence concerning the incident that took
place at Walkabout Liverpool last week. We have received a large number of
emails on this matter and we will be reviewing them in the days that
follow.
In order to provide you with a speedy response to your email, we sincerely
hope that you will accept this “open email” as an explanation of the
specific circumstances surrounding the recent incident in Liverpool and
clarification of the company’s policy towards uniformed service personnel.
The Licensing Act of 2003 places clear responsibility upon all of our venue
teams to ensure that all of our customers can enjoy a safe experience. The
careful screening of customers at the door entry point is critical to
achieving this objective. Nevertheless, Walkabout does not have a
nationwide policy concerning the admittance of uniformed service personnel.
On any given night and at any given venue our door team, in consultation
with the general manager on duty, is asked to make a judgment on safety
grounds as to whether it is appropriate or not to admit any customer.
On the night in question, our door staff took the decision to refuse entry
to the group in light of specific incidents that had taken place in the
city that evening. Regrettably, in our experience, some members of the
public do not always respond favourably to service personnel drinking
whilst in uniform. To help put this recent incident into context, in the
past six months the Liverpool Walkabout has had three incidents where the
safety of both uniformed service personnel and other customers was
compromised. Additionally, in October 2005 a serviceman (in civilian
clothing) was involved in an incident which sadly resulted in his death.
We deeply regret that this incident has caused considerable upset to you,
Cpl Nowak’s family, friends, comrades and all British servicemen. We are
extremely respectful of the work carried out by our service personnel at
home and overseas.
We sincerely hope that you appreciate our position given this particular
set of events and our clarification that we do not have a nationwide policy
concerning the admittance of uniformed service personnel.
For and on behalf of
Regent Inns Plc
Its aload of bullshit
Geezers Need Excitment
-
foxtrotgolf
- Member
- Posts: 28
- Joined: Sat 07 Oct, 2006 4:29 pm
- Location: London
-
GreyWing
- Guest
We weren't there, we don't know what happened. We don't know how sober these 2 marine's were in, or how many were in their group and what state they were in. We don't know what's gone on in the venue before with regards to violent incidents. So wouldn't rush to judge if I was you.
Just take a step back and think about everyone's point of view before we jump on this very emotive band wagon.
Just take a step back and think about everyone's point of view before we jump on this very emotive band wagon.
Sadly, many places take this view; a military 'look' even in smart civvies and an out-of-town driving license is enough for some venues to refuse entry in military towns; I've been turned away in Exeter, Exmouth, Plymouth, and even Portsmouth for having short hair?! Unfortunately as the forces are in the minority it's us who get refused entry rather than the civvies.
-
AJtothemax
- Member
- Posts: 1672
- Joined: Mon 20 Nov, 2006 8:37 pm
- Location: U.K
What a load of w***!!
This country favours the wrong-do'ers too much!
WHAT CRAP!some members of the
public do not always respond favourably to service personnel drinking
whilst in uniform
HMM I WONDER WHY THAT WAS?? Thats a joke! Bunch or prats probably tried to have a crack at them!To help put this recent incident into context, in the
past six months the Liverpool Walkabout has had three incidents where the
safety of both uniformed service personnel and other customers was
compromised. Additionally, in October 2005 a serviceman (in civilian
clothing) was involved in an incident which sadly resulted in his death.
This country favours the wrong-do'ers too much!
[quote="GreyWing"]We weren't there, we don't know what happened. We don't know how sober these 2 marine's were in, or how many were in their group and what state they were in. We don't know what's gone on in the venue before with regards to violent incidents. So wouldn't rush to judge if I was you.
Just take a step back and think about everyone's point of view before we jump on this very emotive band wagon.[/quote]
Does it matter what other peoples point of view is, these guys were refused entry to an establishment because they were in uniform, so fu*king what.
Are you saying they should not have been allowed in because they were in uniform.
I remember times before the " Ireland thing". You were allowed to go home in uniform and you never had to wait to long on a a lift ( this is before everyone had cars), it didn't seem to matter then.
Of course you became security minded after Ireland and it no longer became safe to hitch.
Of course you became target with the yobs, nothing changed has it.
The bouncers should have earned there money and let them in.
Just take a step back and think about everyone's point of view before we jump on this very emotive band wagon.[/quote]
Does it matter what other peoples point of view is, these guys were refused entry to an establishment because they were in uniform, so fu*king what.
Are you saying they should not have been allowed in because they were in uniform.
I remember times before the " Ireland thing". You were allowed to go home in uniform and you never had to wait to long on a a lift ( this is before everyone had cars), it didn't seem to matter then.
Of course you became security minded after Ireland and it no longer became safe to hitch.
Of course you became target with the yobs, nothing changed has it.
The bouncers should have earned there money and let them in.
-
GreyWing
- Guest
Got1....
I'm not having a go at anyone, and sometimes there can be an occasion when everyone is in the right, and I believe that everyone in this instance was correct.
I've been a doorman, in fact it was a serving Marine that was on the door with me that got me onto the marines. I've worked in the centre of York between 3 army bases and seen what happens when they are not in uniform never mind if they saw the other regiment in uniform. There would be no way they'd be allowed in.
Thing is, there is a lot of information that is missing from this story, what time of day was it?, was the pub busy?, How many doormen were on? The fact that they'd just come from a funeral would make me as a doorman think even more about admission, because you've got 3 or 4 chaps that are highly emotive and highly trained, and if that doorman is on his own or there are only 2 of them and something kicks off, his back up is about 5-10 minutes away with the police. These doorman do it as a part time job, they don't get sick pay or compensation once they've had there heads kicked in. If they are off work for 2 months with broken bones, who pays the mortgage.
The pub says it has a history of violence in the past, and has or is trying to mitigate risk, is that not armed forces are trained to do, mitigate risk?
When I was in Exeter, you knew the pubs you couldn't go in and you knew not to bother trying, I understood it and didn't complain.
All I'm saying is that there is too much info missing, to make a decision either way. It's a very emotive issue but doesn't mean emotion should make the judgement.
I'm not having a go at anyone, and sometimes there can be an occasion when everyone is in the right, and I believe that everyone in this instance was correct.
I've been a doorman, in fact it was a serving Marine that was on the door with me that got me onto the marines. I've worked in the centre of York between 3 army bases and seen what happens when they are not in uniform never mind if they saw the other regiment in uniform. There would be no way they'd be allowed in.
Thing is, there is a lot of information that is missing from this story, what time of day was it?, was the pub busy?, How many doormen were on? The fact that they'd just come from a funeral would make me as a doorman think even more about admission, because you've got 3 or 4 chaps that are highly emotive and highly trained, and if that doorman is on his own or there are only 2 of them and something kicks off, his back up is about 5-10 minutes away with the police. These doorman do it as a part time job, they don't get sick pay or compensation once they've had there heads kicked in. If they are off work for 2 months with broken bones, who pays the mortgage.
The pub says it has a history of violence in the past, and has or is trying to mitigate risk, is that not armed forces are trained to do, mitigate risk?
When I was in Exeter, you knew the pubs you couldn't go in and you knew not to bother trying, I understood it and didn't complain.
All I'm saying is that there is too much info missing, to make a decision either way. It's a very emotive issue but doesn't mean emotion should make the judgement.
-
Alfa
- Guest
80% of the doormen in Liverpool are w@nkers who like to throw their weight around, usually with guys much smaller than themselves, so I wouldn't be sticking up for them. Half the bouncers cause more trouble than they break up.
They probably just bottled it when they saw a bunch of marines turn up cause they wouldn't be able to push them round.
They probably just bottled it when they saw a bunch of marines turn up cause they wouldn't be able to push them round.
GreyWing wrote:We weren't there, we don't know what happened. We don't know how sober these 2 marine's were in, or how many were in their group and what state they were in. We don't know what's gone on in the venue before with regards to violent incidents. So wouldn't rush to judge if I was you.
Just take a step back and think about everyone's point of view before we jump on this very emotive band wagon.
When they speak about the service man who died in there it was nothing to do with him being in the forces he was on leave and having a drink with his friends in civy clothes and he knocked in to someone which resulted in him being punched an hitting his head on the floor i think it is sick that they can use this as a excuse for not letting them in the bar.
Last edited by carlmoly on Fri 01 Dec, 2006 12:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Geezers Need Excitment
I agree with you 100% worked i a night club and witnessed this a number of timesAlfa wrote:80% of the doormen in Liverpool are w@nkers who like to throw their weight around, usually with guys much smaller than themselves, so I wouldn't be sticking up for them. Half the bouncers cause more trouble than they break up.
They probably just bottled it when they saw a bunch of marines turn up cause they wouldn't be able to push them round.
Geezers Need Excitment
-
GreyWing
- Guest
Carlmoly,
I didn't apportion blame to anyone, all I was saying if you read what I wrote is, "there isn't enough infomation in this text to make an informed decision on blame". There still isn't.
The doorman never used this excuse (about the chap that died), this was a mitigating factor explained by a representative of the bar chain at a later date.
As for 80% of doorman are w@nkers, well don't go in 80% of the pubs then.
If people on here keep making judgements based on emotional tangents, then they are heading down the same path as the muslims with regards to crazy thinking. I'm advocating making judgement of facts, and in this case there isn't enough of them.
Don't forget a lot of servicemen do door work as an extra income, I've worked with them and until you've been in that position, you'll know it's better to be safe than sorry with regards to risk.
I didn't apportion blame to anyone, all I was saying if you read what I wrote is, "there isn't enough infomation in this text to make an informed decision on blame". There still isn't.
The doorman never used this excuse (about the chap that died), this was a mitigating factor explained by a representative of the bar chain at a later date.
As for 80% of doorman are w@nkers, well don't go in 80% of the pubs then.
If people on here keep making judgements based on emotional tangents, then they are heading down the same path as the muslims with regards to crazy thinking. I'm advocating making judgement of facts, and in this case there isn't enough of them.
Don't forget a lot of servicemen do door work as an extra income, I've worked with them and until you've been in that position, you'll know it's better to be safe than sorry with regards to risk.
