Tag Archives: beer

Big Apple Bureaucrat Wants Mandatory Breathalyzers for Motorists

NYS Assemblyman demonstrates what can happen when 'average' citizens drink alcohol excessively. Ironically, he seems to assume most New Yorkers are already hardcore alcoholics, otherwise, he wouldn't be proposing mandatory breathalyzers be installed in their automobiles.

NYS Assemblyman demonstrates what can happen when 'average' citizens drink alcohol excessively. Ironically, he seems to assume most New Yorkers are already hardcore alcoholics, otherwise, he wouldn't be proposing mandatory breathalyzers be installed in their automobiles.

The last time we heard from Assemblyman Felix Ortiz (D-Brooklyn), he was desperately trying to ban the use of salt in New York restaurants, followed by getting drunk to the point of vomiting on ‘Four Loko’ to prove why it also needs to be banned. Now, Ortiz wants to install breathalyzers in every New Yorker’s automobile by 2015.

Plain and simple, Ortiz does not trust New Yorkers to drink responsibly. Instead of targeting his efforts, state resources and millions in taxpayer dollars on keeping unrepentant alcoholics and repeat offenders off the roads, he prefers punishing responsible drivers and drinkers with Big Brother technology that has a zero tolerance policy towards alcohol and their use of personal judgment.

Read the text of Ortiz’ re-introduced bill and let us know what you think about his efforts to force New Yorkers to submit to breathalyzers every time they get behind the wheel.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Advertisements

Taxachusetts Voters Repeal Alcohol Sin Tax

No more gratuitous 'tips' to the nanny state.

No more gratuitous 'tips' to the nanny state.

In case you missed it, Massachusetts voters on Tuesday successfully repealed the 6.25% sin tax placed on alcohol, beer and wine last year. Nanny state advocates are now whining that the state will lose about $110 million in annual revenue that would have been funneled to anti-alcohol advocacy programs and organizations.

Jonathan D. Scott, president and executive director of Boston’s Victory Programs Inc., is upset that his organization will no longer be getting a piece of the alcohol sin tax pie:

For years, the sale of alcohol in Massachusetts has been treated as a necessity along with clothing and food, despite the serious harm it can create in people’s lives. This tax served as recognition that alcohol, like cigarettes, should not be considered a necessity, and created a fair way to fund important services.

Do you find anything “fair” about forcing responsible adult beverage consumers to foot the bill for rehabilitating those who abuse alcohol? Sound-off on Scott’s pro-sin tax/anti-alcohol diatribe in the Boston Globe’s comment section.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Feds Say We’re All Binge Drinkers Now

The CDC doesn't want you to end-up like granny after 5 beers.

The CDC doesn't want you to end-up like granny after 5 beers.

Refusing to simply take a report from the State-Run Media about America’s growing “binge drinking” epidemic for its word, one enterprising blogger decided to research the government-provided ‘facts’ and found out it’s the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) that’s more than a little loopy and totally drunk with power:

The most recent way our government defines binge drinking is “[f]our or more drinks within a few hours for a woman and five or more for a man.” That actually narrows yet again, as recently as the last few years it’s been “five or more drinks in a row,” which tends to imply more speed. Adding “within a few hours” means even drinking at a leisurely pace makes you a binge drinker. I wrote more about this shift last year in a post, Inventing Binge Drinking.

The CDC video further claims that “half of all alcohol consumed by adults in the US is binge drinking.” Wow, that’s pretty remarkable, especially if you consider that according to the DOJ only 54% of adults drink alcohol. We’re now a nation of binge drinkers. You’d think a society where 1 in 2 people drinking is on a bender would be more noticeable …

Naturally, they propose all the same old chestnuts to “fix” the problems they just created by inflating the statistics. Nothing new is ever proposed. Of course, none of the proposals ever work, either, wherever they’ve been implemented. Here’s the CDC recommendations.

  1. Increase alcohol taxes
  2. Close places that sell alcohol, reducing their number
  3. Close the remaining outlets earlier
  4. Enforce the laws that prohibit underage drinking

Read the rest of the article to learn how big government is inflating binge drinking statistics to “demonize alcohol manufacturers and criminalize law-abiding people,” as the Brockston Beer Bulletin’s Jay Brooks reports.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Idaho Wants Smokers and Drinkers to Pay for Budgetary Indiscretions

Potato head bureaucrats want to loot smokers and drinkers.

Potato head bureaucrats want to loot smokers and drinkers.

Idaho bureaucrats are struggling to provide continued funding for health and welfare, education and the state’s prison system, so they’re hoping smokers and drinkers will help pay the bills.

“Our reserves are gone,” said Senate Finance Committee Chairman Dean Cameron (R-Rupert). “We can’t expect more federal stimulus.”

Sensing desperation, anti-smoking advocates are telling lawmakers they can pull-in a quick $46 million in revenue with a $1 per pack cigarette sin tax increase. House Minority Leader and wordsmith John Rusche (D-Lewiston) managed to pass-off the penalty tax targeting smokers as “another smoking prevention tool [for kids].”

Rep. Lenore Hardy Barrett (R-Challis) scolded greedy big government lawmakers for budgetary indiscretions in the past and wanting smokers and drinkers to pay for their mistakes today.

“Boil it down: stop spending and lower taxes,” Barrett advises fellow legislators.  She defended smokers and drinkers targeted by sin taxes, stating, “that’s their choice and they’re not breaking the law.”

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Congress to Decide on Lowering Drinking Age for US Troops

Give Radar a beer!

Give Radar a beer!

According to Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.), top military leaders “unofficially” support lowering the legal drinking age to 18 at on-base watering holes. Drinking a few cold ones with the big boys could help relieve stress among teenagers serving in combat zones, he said.

Kingston legislation’s that would lower the drinking age has bi-partisan support and opposition, reports The Florida Times-Union. Military leaders are hesitant to voice their opinions out of fear that they might upset lawmakers who are ultimately charged with regulating the drinking age among servicemen.

Kingston said he would like to get an “official opinion” from military leaders before Congress votes on his legislation that could have potential drawbacks, as well as benefits, that might not have been considered by civilian lawmakers.

“If you are responsible enough to be willing to sacrifice your life for your country, you should be able to drink alcohol,” said Sheila McNeill, the Navy League’s former national president. “They should not have to sneak around and do it.”

What are your thoughts? Should Congress lower the drinking age of men and women who are old enough to sacrifice their own lives in defense of our nation’s freedom?

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Court Rules Ladies Can Still Get Drink Specials

UPDATE (09/10/2010): The Second Court of Appeals rejected a frivolous lawsuit Wednesday challenging the constitutionality of “Ladies’ Night” drink specials. Read more.

The following article was originally reported by NSLF on July 2, 2010.

Bureaucrats Say “Ladies’ Nights” Violate Human Rights Law

All the ladies in the house say, “Boo!” No more free drinks for you, thanks to some busy-body bureaucrats in Minnesota who have declared “ladies’ nights” at bars and night clubs illegal.

According to a report from Minnesota Public Radio earlier this month, establishments that hold “ladies’ night” promotions are “discriminating against male patrons.”

The promotions, which offer female customers free or discounted drinks, violate the Minnesota Human Rights Act, department officials said in a statement.

“It is the Department of Human Rights’ position that ladies’ night is illegal. Gender-based pricing violates the Human Rights Act,” Commissioner James Kirkpatrick said.

Makes you wonder if the Human Rights Commission will target gay and lesbian watering holes for what some might perceive to be exclusionary practices that don’t exactly encourage heterosexuals to patronize their establishments.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Fire-Breathing Bartenders Must Have Messed with the Wrong Bureaucrat

Fire-breathing bartenders now deemed domestic terrorists.

Fire-breathing bartenders now deemed domestic terrorists.

After spewing fire to the amazement of patrons at the same bar they’ve been tending for more than a decade, two hot-shot bartenders are now facing domestic terrorism charges and nearly half a century in prison.

This sort of nonsense usually happens when a business owner manages to tick-off a fire marshall or health inspector, but usually it results in a hefty fine or being held under close scrutiny. The incident at Jimmy’s Old Town Tavern in Herndon, Va. takes the cake for some bureaucrat having a huge axe to grind, though no one is quite sure at the moment why Fairfax County fire inspectors waited so long to haul-in these bartenders who allegedly pose an extreme risk to local drinkers.

Jimmy Cirrito, owner of the bar, described his bartenders long-time act as involving “juggling bottles of alcohol and spitting out streams of flames using matchbooks and lighters.” When fire officials arrived, “They were being treated as if they were terrorists, charged as if they intentionally tried to burn down the tavern,” he said.

According to TheFoxNation.com, bartenders Tegee Rogers, 33, of Herndon, and Justin Fedorchak, 39, of Manassas, were formally charged with “manufacturing an explosive device, setting a fire capable of spreading, and burning or destroying a meeting house,” in addition to several fire code violations.

Who are the real domestic terrorists? Fire-breathing bartenders or big government bureaucrats abusing their power to destroy small businesses?

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine