Comments about ‘First step toward change in liquor law’

Apparently Balmforth and Valentine need some more sand poured over their heads.

Anyone who honestly thinks the silly private club law does ANYTHING to stop drinking and driving or consumption by minors obviously has their head buried in the sand.

Private clubs are meaningless. Anyone can buy a membership, all you have to have is cash and proof you're 21.

It's pretty sad when you have people at DABC, and in the legislature who are so out of touch with the real world that they think things like private clubs are having any impact on drinking and driving and underage drinking.

Not that that's anything new, most of these same people are the ones who seem to think kids were waltzing into grocery stores and buying "Alco-pops". They don't seem to grasp that kids get alcohol by having an adult buy it. Shsssssh no one tell them that putting them in a liquor store doesn't change that.

Balmforth said ...

"People sneer at us because our (liquor) laws are different. If this (liquor control law) is gone, they will find something else to sneer at."

Wow! Talk about a lot of hidden resentment. People (whoever those people are) are going to sneer at us anyway?

I guess all Utahns (me included) are doomed to be hated. We'd better just bury our heads in shame and accept our fate, the rest of the world considers us morons.

Time to leave the '50s and come into the present.

Being LDS would not stop me from voting against the issue. I believe people have a right to drink if they want to (as long as they are 21) doesn't mean I'm not going to drink. Proabition didn't work, being tough on DUI's doesn't work....People are going to drink why fight it.

Well, I for one am glad that the liquor laws a disappearing. Being in a business that relies on tourism, I just can't wait for the word to get out to all those tourists that refuse to come to Utah because that can't get drunk, and have them flood the state with tourist dollars. And now, I can stay home for there is no reason to leave on my yearly drinking alcohol vacation tours. No more having to explain to people why I live in a state that is so behind the times as to not have 24-hour liquor available everywhere. Whew! Hello future!!!

First to ANONYMOUS: that is bad philosophy. You can't say don't be old fashioned because there is no argument in it other than "I don't like you". If you are going to give an argument about legal issues than at least give a good one that actually addresses the issue of drinking in the state of Utah.

To EVERYONE:

Being LDS I believe in its teachings of drinking being wrong. Being a reasoning and logical adult, I believe that drinking is a very easy potential harm to society as it inhibits ones full ability to make choices between right and wrong. Getting drunk should be illegal. People wouldn't give a 5 year old a gun so why give a 30 year old a drink to many.

There are perfect reasons for abolition, the only reason why don't and shouldn't is America isn't ready for something that good.

The only way I would support a law like this is if I had SOLID proof that a law would prevent use at home involving children. That really can't happen.

Before anti-LDS people complain about Utah they should realize that drinking is wrong aside from the Church. Even our children are taught this.

By no means will we make it out of the 50's and all the way to the present. Part way, though.
The DABC people seem a bit put off that their absolute paternalistic power is eroding.
That alone is evidence that the whole regulatory framework should be collapsed.

I drink, yet I don't want this law to pass. If you're a drinker, you can and will get alcohol anyway.

It is about time. Why didn't they reconsider this before the Olympics?

The good news is you won't need a club membership to get a drink. The bad news is that the drink will be limited to a mix of one-half ounce of three different kinds of primary liquors, which may not be served cold.

Seriously, as much as I welcome the change, I shudder at the new restrictions that will inevitably accompany it.

to Truth: Just because the LDS Church says so, doesn't always make it right.

So much for that part of the First Amendment.

I'm inactive LDS, I have bought memberships in the past and have visited a number of establishments in SLC and Ogden. Having someone like Ms. Balmforth say that her lot in life is to "try and keep one group of society - the nondrinkers (ie. the Mormon majority, though there are non-Mormons that don't drink as well) - from the societal costs of abuse of alcohol ....." and to have to state not lose control over alcohol consumption is ludicrous.

I agree, people who want to have an adult beverage, whether in the privacy of homes, or in public at clubs, will do so, with or without memberships.

For the Mormon majority, it's called free agency. For the rest, it's called normalcy. That's why I love traveling out of state.

Let's call it what it is, membership dues means more $$$$ for the DABC. Plain and simple.

Now if they want to go after the smokers and make these clubs smoke-free, like in California and other states, please by all means do so. Smoking and second-hand smoke are much more dangerous than having the occasional adult beverage.

The true irony of this entire discussion was the section of the story devoted to telling us how many legislators won't vote for the change if it's opposed by the LDS church leaders. (Not like that was a surprise.)

The LDS leaders don't drink, and a good LDS member doesn't drink, as a few people above have demonstrated. Therefore, the portion of the population they represent has no real stake in this issue. Which means, to put it bluntly, this is a political issue they have no business sticking their nose in.

Last, to "Truth" @701am: Drinking may be bad for you and me. But I'm a legal adult and don't need the government to be my mommy. Maybe you do.

Also you seem to be making a direct correlation to legal drinking and being drunk. Being an LDS non-drinker, you may be surprised, but there are plenty of responsible drinkers who understand the concept of moderation. Get off your judgemental high horse.

Would someone explain how the private club law helps with anything?

As an active LDS member, I really don't see why the state legislature should concern itself over what the LDS Church leaders say on the matter. The state legislature represents *all* the citizens of Utah, not just the LDS members. The state should only be concerned with what people can and cannot do. Let the church worry over what people should and shouldn't do.

This is the only place in america where every comment is preceeded by "I am LDS therefore..." Or "I am not a Mormon, therfore..." Who cares what you are or are not, just be yourself. If you want to drink, drink. If you don't want to, then don't go to a pub or buy it in the store. It is like a vegetarian, do you see them protest and compaling that there is meat being sold in the grocery store? No, they just don't buy it. Simple really, when you think about it. Private clubs are another unfortunate stream of income for the state.

This is a good thing to get rid of, no matter what side of the issue you are on. Lots of good arguments out there and at the end of the day, just be who you are and enjoy what you want to enjoy, wether it is a beer, coke, or lemonade.

Nowhere is serving a patron in a bar without a having to purchase a private membership called "liquor by the drink" but here in Utah in this article, the rest of the nation calls it "normalcy".

Wow, you must have not spent much time here in Utah.

People give 5 year olds guns all the time around here...it's like a right of passage.

What a flawed argument you have in using guns as your "counter". Utah is a state that is willing to do whatever it takes to keep guns in the hands of anyone who wants them.

The irony is that it's nearly as hard to buy a beer without buying food as it is to get a concealed weapons permit. It certainly isn't any quicker to get a beer than a handgun.

I saw a small irony that has not much to do with the story unless you are a conspiracy theorists and think the newspaper planted it on purpose. The ad in the middle of the story was for the Iron Mission State Park Museum with a big headline "Travel Back in Time..."

I found it a little funny after reading the comments about the getting out of the '50s.

LDS or not... this is not going to increase under age drinking one bit! this is a law that if passed would only allow private clubs to not be private. It's impossible to "Bar Hop" in this town because of that private club law, to pay 5bucks isn't the issue, but to obtain a membership for every bar in the city is ludacris.

the LDS church should have little to no say because of their biased stance.. of course they'll oppose this bill, if they didn't oppose this bill it would be hypocrisy at it's finest.