Deseret News | End to private-club laws sought

Reader comments
End to private-club laws sought

Mahershalalhashbaz | 6:07 a.m. May 17, 2008

Nice propaganda. Alcohol is destructive to individuals and to society in general. It's a drug. More abused than Marijuana. The more intelligent countries (like ours in the past) outlaw it. Huntsman is no friend to this state. Vote him out. Why is it that the Mormons love Huntsman the Younger, but hated Rocky? They are 2 peas in a pod politically. I just don't get it. They may not be drinking alcohol, but their obviously drinking something-maybe their bath water?

JIM IGLEHEART | 7:30 a.m. May 17, 2008

GLAD TO HERE UTAH IS COMMING OUT OF THE STONE AGE THIS SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED 40 YEARS AGO

Buster | 7:54 a.m. May 17, 2008

I know all of those LDS lawmakers must feel tremendously guilty about the state's role in regulating every last detail regarding alcohol consumption. And I know they must feel awful about receiving the millions of dollars from the state liquor store monopoly. I feel bad for them because they feel so guilty. It must be quite a burden to bear.

Maybe they should dump this terrible responsibility on those awful free enterprise people. Then they could sleep at night.

Comments continue below

Stenar | 8:00 a.m. May 17, 2008

End private clubs, and end the state liquor store monopoly.

Charli | 8:10 a.m. May 17, 2008

I don't like the idea! If people need to drink so much, let them go elsewhere. We moved to Utah for the first time 5 years ago and like the idea of less drinking. I grew up with drinkers and hated it.
It's refreshing to find someplace where drinking is
not such a big thing. WHY does Huntsman think he needs to do this? I would rather have tourist that drink less, and don't smoke here.
What a unique concept.... come to Utah to get a high with the beauty of nature they have to offer, not the raised liquour law. Too bad our governor thinks this is important. It's giving sway to the world instead of standing up for what's better. People who can remember what they did the night before, less DUI's, less headaches, etc. That is what I want!

Mark | 8:20 a.m. May 17, 2008

I agree that it's well past time to bring Utah liquor laws into alignment with the rest of America, and the world.

I do have a problem with this: "The LDS Church would be among the organizations contacted about any change to the law."

What happened to separation of church and state?

I guess Utah is still a defacto theocracy. A question. Is the Baptist church, which also opposes the consumption of alcohol, going to be consulted? Probably not.

The thing that matters is this: This measure won't increase alcohol consumption at all. Those who would consume, do already. Those who don't, still won't.

The plumber's friend | 8:55 a.m. May 17, 2008

Gordon Strachan has Nixon administration ties and testified in Congress following Nixon's resignation.

SLCindian | 9:57 a.m. May 17, 2008

Marshalalhashbaz: Your entire comment makes no sense, it sounds like ignorant rambling. Yes, alcohol is a drug. And yes, Alcohol does have many, many negative aspects; but as in life, it seems everything has negative aspects. If you look at the statistics, Utah has the highest rate of prescription use than any other state. These are drugs too (and many people abuse them). How exactly is Alcohol destructive in general; that can be said about most things...And what does Rocky have to do with anything related to the article? How exactly are they two peas in a pod? I embrace Huntsmans efforts to bring us out of the stone age, and I am NOT mormon, but if I was, so what? Maybe there is something in the water that makes our politicians MORE open-minded. In the future, try sounding less ignorant and better informed. I Would love to hear the supporting evidence for your argument! Have a good day!

Marshalalhashbaz | 10:00 a.m. May 17, 2008

Marshalalhashbaz; More intelligent countries? what more intelligent countries banned alcohol? Irag? Maybe you should move there, where you can live in your alcohol free reality.

Grew up here | 10:01 a.m. May 17, 2008

Hey, I've lived here for 43 years and this is about time. Don't like the change? Move elsewhere: this is my state.

Re:Mahershalalhashbaz | 10:03 a.m. May 17, 2008

Name one "more intelligent" country that outlaws alcohol. Man has been brewing some form of spirits, in every culture, since the beginning of recorded history. No one is forcing you to consume alcohol. If you don't like it, don't drink it.

Mel | 10:05 a.m. May 17, 2008

"The LDS Church has opposed the state allowing what's been referred to as liquor by the drink."

Another example of a church becoming involved in politics. They should lose their tax exempt status.

Club laws | 10:19 a.m. May 17, 2008

The club laws exist solely to keep the flock in line: Putting your name out there to be publicly recorded by a private club is a very dangerous thing for a church member to do.

Anonymous | 10:57 a.m. May 17, 2008

HEY Mahershalalhashbaz, you must be one of those "UTAHNS" who is heavily addicted to pain killers, we lead the country in that addiction, did you know that?
It's ok in this State to be "Hand's off" if it relates to guns, which I am pro gun, so keep your self righteous hands off of my Alcohol and controlling my options for access or at least making more expensive to access with pointless membership fees. I suggest you do move to the middle east where religion controls the world. Now there are some intelligent countries!

KC | 11:44 a.m. May 17, 2008

The destructive affects of alcohol on the individual, their family, and society have clearly been proven. The easier to get alcohol, the more people will drink, and the people and families of Utah will have to pay the consequences. Huntsman has sold out his values and the values of most of the state.

Robert | 11:55 a.m. May 17, 2008

I would not support any such change, for the following reasons:

First, liquor sellers are complaining about the very laws they lobbied the state to enact. Private club liquor laws were enacted when liquor sellers (the same people who want the current change) persuaded the state to allow sales in "private" establishments where memberships were limited, such as at the Alta Club in Salt Lake City. Liquor sellers got around the law, to their advantage, with the current practice of calling just about every place where liquor is sold a "private club" and selling "memberships" to everyone who asks for a drink. These are the same people who call the current laws "silly".

Second, what about drinking and driving? How do we keep those who drink alcohol off the roads? That question should be the primary question that should be resolved before the state even considers easing restrictions on sales of liquor. I would feel much more sympathetic with liquor sellers if they first came forward with a way to answer that question before they asked for the changes they are asking for.

Willdabeast | 12:23 p.m. May 17, 2008

ROBERT: Whether or not the first point you made was correct is irrelevant, times change and the whole idea of this notion is to be more hospitable to tourists, one of Utah's biggest industries. And with the economy in the state that its in, it could only help all of us.

Secondly, it really isn't the responsibility of the liquor sellers to cut down DUI's. Having said that, I do agree with you that driving under the influence is ignorant and needs to be eliminated completely; ultimately it comes down to the individual to decide whether or not to get behind the wheel. I am a student at the U, and I drink very often. I get my school work done, I make the grade, then I smack some watered down 3.2 brews. And as often as I drink I NEVER drive drunk, or buzzed etc. Unfortunately not everyone is as responsible/ afraid of DUI's as I am. If you are truly and honestly concerned about DUI's in your (our) fair city, then TRAX needs to run past the closing time of the bars. One "Last Chance Train" would eliminate a majority of drunk driving in SLC

Robert | 1:28 p.m. May 17, 2008

Willdabeast: Thanks for your comments. If every drinker were as responsible as you, I would not worry about liquor sales in Utah, or anywhere else.

But people who drink all too often drive, and thereby make the roads more dangerous. The members of the trade association that is calling for a change in the state's liquor laws have financial interests in selling more liquor; that is their reason for being. However, many of the rest of us see things quite differently: When more liquor is sold, the sad result is more injuries and deaths on the roads. For that reason, nothing good can come from listening to the trade association.

If the governor believes that lifting restrictions on private clubs will benefit the state, he carries the obligation to convince us that any such change will not result in more deaths on the highways, or at the very least explain to us what he intends to do to keep such a result from occurring.

Alot of thing are bad. | 2:17 p.m. May 17, 2008

Robert,

Nice try but it your double standard will not work. How do you keep guns out of criminals hands? do you restrict access? How about tired drivers should we have laws making it so ever indvidual get at least 7 hours of sleep? Criminals do not get guns leagally, kid do not get alcohol leagally, and sad but true Drunks get behind the wheel leagally, its only if they get caught when it becomes against the law. whether you pay a membership fee or not people will still have access. It the responsible ADULTS this law restricts, and its a stupid law at that. Huntsman is rational, other law makers have no business in government, only in your ward.

Changes | 2:54 p.m. May 17, 2008

Whether or not they are called bars or private clubs, anyone can still drink, so it's not preventing anything. All one must do is fill out a paperwork or be told that the stranger at the door will be their sponsor for the evening. It just makes it more of an inconvenience and unpleasant experience all while looking foolish.

I lived in NYC for several years and many people I met, both from the States and Europe, had been to Utah for a ski trip but said they don't return due to the alcohol laws. Perception is reality and although some laws have changed, like no passing out wine lists at restaurants, lingering perceptions exist. All were quite reasonable in their arguments about one being able to drink responsibly. They were sophisticated consumers, not a bunch of frat boys looking to drink beer bongs and get rowdy.

Next point is to reduce drunk driving install more mass transit, have more cabs, and build more urban multifamily apartments downtown where several bars are. The sprawl creates some of the problem. Obviously drunk driving cannot be totally eliminated but if bar goers had convenient options it would reduce amount.

Anonymous | 2:25 a.m. May 18, 2008

I didnt break the TOS, but for some reason D-news decided to delete my post. Pfft

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.