Deseret News | Reader comments: Alcohol board may allow public to voice concerns

Reader comments
Alcohol board may allow public to voice concerns

Page:
1
2
Next >

Anonymous | 1:31 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

why don't utah just add more state liquor stores within the salt lake& ogden metro area to make it easy for people to get to. and for the flavored malt liquor beverages why don't they be more strict and card people who are buying these beverages then there wont be a problem.

keep it stone cold sober | 4:18 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

ï¿½Moving them is just moving them. Kids are still going to get ahold of them." The same could said of crack cocaine, but that doesnï¿½t mean we should make it available.

Anonymous | 7:48 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

You can change the laws (in hope) but just crack down on the underage drinking if that's the major concern. Honestly though, kids will find a way to get the alchol either way this goes.

Comments continue below

Me | 7:48 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Liquor laws in Utah make people poor. We are paying for liking alcohol and just because our mormom counterparts think it is immoral to drink. Having to order a side car at a bar is rediculous. If I want a double I should be able to have one. I don't go out and drink and drive and these liquor laws don't prevent that anyway. People are still going to do that. Make it cheaper and easier for us to get a drink and if we want it stiff let me just throw the bar tender a bone in order to get it. I work hard and on the weekends I like to unwind. I shouldn't have to throw away my paycheck in order to do it. Lower the taxes on alcohol and increase the taxes on cigarettes.

Dutchman | 7:55 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Until Utah gets serious about prosecuting adults who buy alcohol from their stores and give it to minors we will continue to see more and more teenagers getting intoxicated and killing people on the road or killing themselves by alcohol poisoning. This is an area of the law where law enforcement needs to get tough, but you never hear a politician talk about it. Is it because adults in Utah feel it is ok to serve alcohol to minors?

Common Sense | 7:56 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Utah's laws need to be updated. Other states have the same intentions as Utah but those states use smarter and more efficient methods to accomplish their goals. It is absolutely silly that wine isn't sold in grocery stores but beer is allowed.

fr1nk | 8:22 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

The private club law is the worst.

Tipsy | 8:27 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Sorry to shock some of you readers, but there are indeed people in Utah who drink alcohol--not drunks, just people who enjoy a glass of wine or two or a malt beverage with a taco supper. The laws in this state (and I've lived here all my life) are absolutely ridiculous. Taking malt beverages out of grocery stores isn't going to stop one kid from drinking who wants to. Why take the alcoholic beverages out of stores--why not just enforce the law (i.e., CHECK IDs)? If kids are getting this stuff, it's the stores' fault. Responsible drinkers shouldn't have to be penalized.

Why are people afraid? | 8:40 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

As a non-drinking mormon, I don't see why people are so afraid of alcohol. I don't drink it and I don't want to. Keep a bottle of liqour next to my table if you want. I don't care. Are people afraid they might order one if they can see the booze? or if they remove the glas partition they will go crazy and just grab a bottle?

Teach your kids yourselves | 8:49 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I should not be forced to drive further to by alcohol because parents can not teach their kids!

Other states sell hard liquor and wine at grocery stores and they seem to be just fine. Here in Utah where those types of beverages are limited to state liquor stores we still have a very high level of underage drinking.

I feel this is all on the parents.

Name | 8:50 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Malt beverages get moved to the liquor store. So what. When I was in high school, we all drank beer anyway. And if you wanted a bottle of Jack, or anything else stronger...you got it from your parents.

DSlacker | 8:53 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

The public should be more involved in these decisions. The main reason that the State Liquor Commission wants to move the flavored malt drinks to the State Liquor Store is the high profit margins. Flavored drinks are very popular with adults that want a ï¿½mixedï¿½ drink but donï¿½t want to go to the bother of going to the liquor store and making one themselves or having to go to a bar to and paying high prices for one. Look at the number of new ones hitting the shelves in the stores, they are taking more and more space, and the only reason the stores give more space is because of higher demand. Itï¿½s not to protect the kids, itï¿½s just plain and simple economics.

Honesty | 9:13 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Why is alcohol considered bad for youth and good for adults. Isn't that kind of hypocritical. "The day you turn 21 you become responsible enough to drink." That just seems stupid. I don't drink because I see all the problems it causes world wide. Anyone who doesn't see it is not looking. Abuse, car accidents, murders, large scale addictions, etc. etc. etc. What a waste! Our own mayor gets pulled over for drunk driving. That's rediculous.
People smoke pot to unwind too. So should that be ok?
Yes alcohol is in various household products, but so is msg. I doubt anyone would drink that.

Kevin of Arkansas | 9:25 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I am a former Utah resident who currently lives in Arkansas. I have heard for years that Utah's liquor laws are too strong, too restrictive and that the rest of the country has better, more reasonable laws. Let me tell you something about how it is in Arkansas, and most of the South. I live in a dry county. No alcohol is sold in any stores, or restarants in the town where I live (population about 30,000). The nearest place to get alcohol is a thirty minute drive away. Most of the residents in my community (non mormons) do not want the county to sell alcohol. In addtion, the wet counties next to the one I live in lobby hard to keep this one dry. So before you complain about Utah's "strick" liqour laws realize that the rest of the country does not have more reasonable laws and that compared to the South, has more lax laws. I would strongly comment against loosening those laws if I lived in Utah.

Anonymous | 9:29 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

" Coray.... asked listeners during a radio interview to call in with their concerns ï¿½ and heard nothing" What radio show was this, Doug Wright? Of course you aren't going to hear anything. X96's morning show has requested MANY times for any liquor commissioner to go on air and explain some of the laws and their views and they keep saying NO. What are they afraid of, actually hearing from the people who drink?

If they want to know the silly laws: how about the private club membership, that you can't have more than one drink in front of you at a time (talk about promoting drinking, you have to pound your drink down before the waiter can give you the next one). How about the limited number of licences available, or limited amount of stores? How about the weak 3.2 beer in the stores.... the list can go on and on. Coray, if you want to hear from the people go on X96 and answer the people. Get a REAL world point of view instead of the fuzzy view behind the zion curtain.

Common Sense | 9:37 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

The obvious solution is to change the laws where it is most needed, Salt Lake and Summit Counties. Leave the existing laws in place in the rest of the state. I believe that would be a win-win for all involved.

kmfp | 9:48 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Re: keep it stone cold sober. "The same could be said about crack cocaine"

Well, crack is completely illegal and guess what? people still get it. Even if alcohol was completely illegal, people would still get it.(remember prohibition?) The laws in this state are ridiculous. Perhaps parents should be responsible for their own children instead of making the state and tax payers regulate their children's drinking, or enforce the laws at already exist. Like checking IDs. These laws here do nothing to protect underage drinking, all they do is punish the tax paying, responsible drinkers.

Klimber510 | 9:53 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I'm in favor of making alcohol as difficult to get as possible. I don't care about the rights of drinkers to drink. I'm in favor of making the new downtown Salt Lake development an alcohol-free zone and would applaud making all sporting venues including the ES Arena alcohol free. Heard all the "logic," listened to the tantrums, and tried to find balance in toleration of the responsible drinkers. I believe we would be enormously better off as a community, in the well-being of families and individuals, to live without alcohol in our lives. I will gladly give up my right to drink alcohol for the benefits it would bring directly and indirectly to myself and my family.

Johnny Utah #9 | 9:57 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

People say these "alcopops" are being made available to children. Well, the last time I checked you still had to be 21 to buy them. I believe the "alcopop" move is a prelude to moving all alcohol out of the grocery stores. In California, if you sell to underage kids you'd lose your liquor license. Stores need to be more strict here about checking ID's and start being punished if you don't.

AdjustableSpanner | 10:20 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Tell the Liquor Commission to set up a web page where I can submit concrete suggestions and I'll be happy to do so. I'm in Cedar City and there's no way I'm going to drive to Salt Lake City to get 90 seconds speaking at a public hearing.

There are all sorts of ridiculous things that need to be addressed. The fact that St George has only ONE state liquor store that must provide wine as well as hard liquor to every restaurant with a liquor license in the southwest quarter of the state is just plain absurd. And the law that requires food to be served when someone just wants a beer is crazy - all it results in is a lot of sales of 69 cent chips and salsa that most people either don't want or don't need.

How can we be having a discussion of privatizing schools when the state runs a retail store monopoly? That makes no sense at all.

SMayes | 10:33 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Malt beverages with alcohol extracts aren't targeted at children, they are an option for me! I am 29 years old and I like sweet drinks- what a concept.
Barracading alcoholic drinks at a liquor store does not protect children. If your child wants to try something they will- just like YOU will. Choice is personal, not state or even parental mandated. Do your children a favor and teach them responsibility and/ or abstinence with alcohol-- let them use their power of choice!!

Joe | 10:36 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Let's face it, Utah's idiotic liquor laws are to keep Utah's cultural majority from being tempted and, worse yet, actualy enjoying an alcholic beverage

Huh? | 10:36 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

If you think alcohol is so dangerous, how do you feel about guns?

You can drink without being a menace to society or committing a crime.

You can own a gun without being a menace to society or committing a crime.

Those who own guns or drink alcohol and commit gun or alcohol related crimes are responsible for their actions. The alcohol or the gun is not.

Steve | 10:37 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Actually yes, pot should be legal too. Just because you don't understand the recreational use of alcohol, that means it doesn't exist. I doubt you understand quantum physics, but you don't deny that. What you should be thinking about is that this country was founded on one overriding principle, freedom. People should be free to choose what they want when they want. Whether that be religion or drink.

Tia | 10:38 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Glass partition...how funny....how, oh how, have bars everywhere else been able to not have people grabbing beers when they're not looking? That doesn't happen! Why in the world are there partitions?

I remember going to Area 51 and them having to move one of the bars upstairs to an area non-21's couldn't SEE. We could see people drinking at the tables, but not really the bar itself. How does that help "the cause?"

Most liquor laws there are pointless because they don't stop people from driving drunk or anything like that. They just make it more difficult and a total pain to order a drink when you're out. But when you pay the membership fee and get inside and they hand the beer to you over the partition, you're still drinking and there is the possibility that a person may drive afterwards.

What we need is more education about the implications of drunk driving, harsher punishments for DUI offenders and parents who supply booze, and make the stores and bars responsible for checking ID's.

None of these silly laws help anything.

AdjustableSpanner | 10:49 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Common Sense, I have to disagree. At least people around Salt Lake have options within a drivable distance - it's an hour and a half to get to Mesquite from here. But I can tell you there are a lot mor Utah than Nevada plates on the cars in the liquor store parking lots there - which I would thin would tell the Utah liquor commission that they need more stores to serve the demand. Like any monopoly, the state liquor stores are run poorly from a retail standpoint. Privatize liquor sales and the state will make MORE money on the taxes.

John A. Reynolds | 10:49 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Alcohol kills thousands every year and ruins as many families and relationships. Why we keep allowing this to happen is beyond me.
Innocent people die on the highways as well.

Anonymous | 10:57 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Please government create more and more laws so that I don't have to make any decisions on my own... Also please raise my kids for me... I'm too lazy to teach them on my own... Only sell healthy, safe products for me. thanks.

BTW aren't guns targeted at kids? Lets start only selling guns/bullets at State Owned Gun Stores. Those stores should only be open Mon-Sat, should close very early, and never be open on holidays.

Ed1 | 10:57 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

The law sits at the compromise at this time. Some want the laws tougher, others want to loosen them up. That is why they are where they are.

Re: Klimber510 | 11:04 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

You don't care about peoples rights? This is a free country and if you start taking away peoples rights, you might as well move to Afghanistan. Since you don't drink you aren't giving up anything, so what do you care right? No big deal to you. There are other people in this state other than you. Get off your pompous horse and be realistic. You HAVE the right to live without alcohol in your life, go ahead and do that. Let other people do what they want to do.

Anonymous | 11:19 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

klimber510 - wow, thanks for deciding for me if I want to have a drink. Now I do not have to think for myself.
I welcome a public forum, traditionally these laws have been unfriedly to visitors, counter productive to stoping under age drinking and in large part made by people that do not even casualy have drink.
cheers!

Money | 11:23 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

People, you are talking about alcohol, the issue is not alcohol, the issue is money. The reason why the state has the laws is to make money, not prevent people from having alcohol. The state makes over 40 million dollars a year on the sale of alcohol, so do not think there will be a change in the laws. If the state does not have control, the state does not make money. The whole issue of alcohol is a ruse, the state monopoly is at stake.

Chester Copperpot | 11:27 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007

In 2003 Utah had 36 Alcohol realted deaths on it's highways(according to an article in Des Morning News). That same year they had 230 gun related deaths. Just thought I'd throw that out there for all the anti-alcohol folks with a gun safe in their basement.

Re: John A. Reynolds | 12:05 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Cars also kill thousands every year.(with sober people behind the wheels) should we ban those too? Let's get rid of those dangerous things, too many lives are being ruined. (sarcasm)

Chunk | 12:09 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I agree with Joe.

Jean | 1:09 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

The free market should be running liquor sales, not the State of Utah. The legal drinking age is the same in all states, and can be enforced at the point of sale in any store. All forms of liquor should be available in a variety of stores; could you imagine having a Trader Joe's in town, with it's fantastic variety of natural foods, specialty items, and low-cost wine and beer? Even with our extreme liquor taxes, citizens could then be able to but a bottle of wine as they shop for dinner.
Don't drink? Then don't go down that aisle!

Re: 11:04 a.m. | 2:37 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Yes I care about people's rights. But I don't care about your right to drink. I would like to see it taken away. Preferrably by the electorate. We aren't free to do anything you want in this country and that's a good thing. Every law we have curtails freedom to some degree in favor of something more desirable. You think the consumption of alcohol is something done in isolation with no consequence to anyone else? Open your eyes. I used to drink. Choose not to now. I'm not coming at you from a moral perspective, although there certainly is one. It is more out of economic and social desirability.

ll:19 a.m.: I don't care if you want a drink or not. I'd like for you not to be able to get one in this community.

Magic | 2:38 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Hey,
What would our DABC folks do if Jesus actually appeared here in Zion and started turning water into wine? In public? Even if it were only 3.2%...

I would happily volunteer my tax dollars to send these guys to Zion proper and experience what life really can be like without booze fascism (had the best time of my life out there).

Anonymous | 3:04 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I think the good people of Utah would be better served if they could do something about the obesity problem in this state.
Talk about health issues.

Wedding Feast | 3:09 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I don't think Jesus changed all that water into wine at the wedding party just so people would NOT have a fun time.

I agree with Money.... | 3:13 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

It is about the cash for the state. I don't mind so much about having to go to a liquor store to get wine or hard liquor. I'd even go there for beer if it meant getting rid of the 3.2 beers! The part that bothers me the most is the "memberships" to drink at a bar and of course the dreaded "metered pour". If they stopped metering drinks they'd most likely sell more alcohol and make more tax revenue. And you could actually get your money's worth when you order a vodka tonic. It's almost a good thing that they've been taxing it, that way it will never go away as some in this forum would like. Luckily demographics are changing in this state. I want a Trader Joe's too! I hope to see you all at the public hearing!

Re: Magic | 3:19 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

If Jesus appeared and started turning water into wine, I'm sure the state would tax it and make you go to a special store to get it.

Hey Klimber510 | 3:32 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

I'd like to see your right to post in a public forum taken away! My cosumption of alcohol does not affect others. Yes, there are people that drink too much and become addicts and then affect others than themselves. As far as an economic standpoint, alcohol sales help this state quite a bit. Taxes collected go to all kinds of things that I'm sure you and your family use daily, state parks, public schools? Maybe you should be responsible for the $40 million a year this state would lose should they decide to not sell alcohol.

Roscoe | 3:44 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Re: to Klimber510 -

So becuase you've had a problem with alcohol, nobody else should be able to drink? You think if SLC was dry that it would be an advantage economically?

People can go out, meet friends, have some wine or beer or whatever, and enjoy themselves. This is not bad social behavior. What's "more desirable" for the community I just one's opinion.

Anonymous | 3:56 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Re: Re:Magic

And then somebody would have a revelation that Jesus commands that we have liquor revenues.

Julie Newland | 4:00 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Way to go Sam Granato! I love that guy!

Much of our local history includes miners and bars along main streets in our communities. It's not like we haven't had it better here before. DABC, give it up please and turn over to private enterprise. Your time has ended.

Remember Jesus' first miracle: turning water into wine? Remember Pamela Atkinson distributing whisky and blankets to homeless people so they wouldn't freeze in the winter? If it's okay with Jesus, Pamela, and much of the modern world, let's make a change!

Alcohol should be private enterprise and not state run. We should be able to buy alcholic beverages in the stores. If we make this change now, we can move on to other topics of crisis: obesity and how to educate our kids.

Thank you everyone. Cheers to all of you trying to make a difference.

Klimber510 to 3:22 pm | 4:20 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

You'd like to see my right to post in a public forum taken away because you don't agree with me. You think the money the State makes off alcohol sales makes it at all redeeming? I'll take your offer and it will be a bargain. The economic and social costs of alcohol consumption are staggering. Unmeasurable if it is your own family member suffering from alcoholism or killed by a drunk driver.

Anonymous | 4:28 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

It just dawned on me - for a community that is so preoccupied with such concerns as socialized medicine being wrong and socialism being wrong in general - Isn't DABC and the way they run it, a form of socialism?

Klimber510: Roscoe | 4:45 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Why do you think I had a problem with alcohol? I drank for a period of time in my life. I enjoyed wine with a meal or a bottle of ale as a preference over beer. I watched hundreds of drinkers leave social clubs and drive away with compromised judgment and coordination. I do have people close to me who have suffered from the negative consequences of alcohol consumption. In support of them, I quit. I still go out, meet friends and enjoy their company and have a good time, and without alcohol. You might try it.

Anonymous | 4:49 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007

Clinical obesity is running amok in this state. Removing sugar-laden foods from consumers would be impractical and foolish as well.

Page:
1
2
Next >

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.