Group files petition to put private club law to public vote in 2010

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • 21 and older can enter
    May 17, 2008 12:53 a.m.

    Simple. Just like it should be.

    I've never thought Utah's alcohol laws were too restrictive - just too cumbersome. (try living in a dry county, now that's too restrictive)

    I'm all for laws that make a differance... thR private club craziness has never made any difference.

    No negative effects will be realized when it's changed. The only real change will be the lack of confused visitors saying "I have to what to come in the bar?"

    The sooner the better - thank goodness.

  • hatfield
    May 17, 2008 12:40 a.m.

    There is one Booze I can do without right now on the Utah Jazz.

  • i'mfrommagna
    May 17, 2008 12:12 a.m.

    This is deffinantly a good thing. I don't know how many times i have walked into an empty bar and then they tell me i need to buy a membership. Haa. I dont belive i should have to pay double to try someone eles product. Instead of at least wanting to stay for one drink before i get bored, I leave and they dont get squat. That was so lame.

    Whats wrong with bar hopping? If i see someone i dont like i'd rather be able to leave and go to another bar without the hefty price tag. Same idea with empty bars. I would want to leave if the bar was dead and find another bar more lively. We dont live in a dictatorship you know. Bye the way i usually walk to the bar.. good excersize! I'll be signing this patitiion when i see it.

  • gbthecoach
    May 16, 2008 11:51 p.m.

    To me its not about church or no church. I like the law because there are less drunks running people over in Utah then any other state I have lived in. Making it tougher to get into a bar is a good thing.

  • non drinker
    May 16, 2008 8:23 p.m.

    I had no idea these laws existed. How is this? Im LDS and for someone to preach free agency and then take free agency away from someone is crazy! If someone wants to get a drink and pay taxes...let um! Tourism will never flourish if we don't!

  • Re: Good
    May 16, 2008 7:15 p.m.

    Booze is already here. We're not voting on prohibition, just getting rid of the archaic Utaah club rules.

  • Good
    May 16, 2008 6:11 p.m.

    Let the people decide.

    There is no inalienable right to booze, and it seems perfectly good to let a community to decide its own standards. A public referendum is a good way of handling this.

  • RE: :Lets Copy CA
    May 16, 2008 6:07 p.m.

    Those were conservative judges that overturned the Gay Ban in CA, check it out in any CA news paper.

  • Anonymous
    May 16, 2008 5:27 p.m.

    I am thrilled to realize that there is such a thing as liberal Mormons.
    May God bless you all!
    There is still hope left.

  • Carl
    May 16, 2008 4:58 p.m.

    As usual, good call by the Gov! It's way past time.

  • change is good
    May 16, 2008 4:49 p.m.

    Headed towards the future.
    Just when you thought things would be stuck like in the wacky prohibition days when the local conservatives were getting away with moralyzing murder.

  • Anonymous
    May 16, 2008 4:41 p.m.

    Its about dang time... its the stupidest rule...

  • Lets copy CA
    May 16, 2008 4:30 p.m.

    The voters shouldn't be able to decide this just like they couldn't on gay marriage in CA. If this thing passes I think it should be over turned by a conservative jugdge. That would be sweet!! Why should the liberal judges have all the fun.

  • lone wolf
    May 16, 2008 4:19 p.m.

    Huntsman is showing again that he puts commerce over principle.

  • uncannygunman
    May 16, 2008 4:17 p.m.

    Huntsman is right, why wait until 2010?

    Now if somebody will just challenge the smoking ban.

  • Anonymous
    May 16, 2008 4:08 p.m.

    Anonymous 3:26is puzzled at "base their travel plans on where they can get a drink."

    Probably has never heard of the Sonoma or Napa Valleys. Probably could never afford to visit their either.

  • Anonymous
    May 16, 2008 3:52 p.m.

    Uh-oh!
    Here comes Utah to the 21st Century.
    What the (blank) are they gonna do now?
    Pack their bags and head for Missouri?

  • Anonymous
    May 16, 2008 3:26 p.m.

    I think it's funny that people think that Salt Lake will be more "tourist friendly" by letting people get an easier drink. That's like me saying, "They drink wine in France? Well, heck, forget them. I'm not going."

    What a bunch of idiots who would actually base their travel plans on where they can get drunk. Are those the kind of people we want here in the first place? Maybe we should set up a red-light district too to attract even more tourists! I bet Salt Lake liberals would love that. We're all about rights!

  • Tom
    May 16, 2008 3:04 p.m.

    I really don't think that we will see an increase DUI's or alcohol related crimes. People get drunk whether bars allow them to or not. IF cover charges, etc. are too much of a hassle, they just get drunk at a private location. (Think back to High School, when kids still couldn't legally buy alcohol. Did that prevent anyone from drinking)?When people drink responsibly, there aren't really any problems.

  • Chris Plummer
    May 16, 2008 2:49 p.m.

    the private club rule has always been a little weird. It has stopped me plenty of times from grabbing a drink at a bar that I don't' have a "membership" at. Which in effect stops a lot of people from spending their money at local pubs/bars. It doesn't stop me from drinking mind you... just makes it cost more money. Please do away with that rule.

  • Anonymous
    May 16, 2008 2:36 p.m.

    More evidence that the neocon movement is dying.
    Thank God!

  • SC-Born
    May 16, 2008 1:56 p.m.

    I am from SC...we have liquor by the drink...we also have children being ran over by people who drink to much...we have multitutes of DUI's and it keeps our magistrates real busy...mostly slapping the drinking people on the wrist...

    Let them drink if they want to but if caught DUI --take license...1st offense...if caught driving without a license after 1st offense...hardtime in the county jail..and make it tougher and tougher...

  • Dutchman
    May 16, 2008 1:47 p.m.

    If the State wants to loosen the liquor laws then Gov. Huntsman and the legislature should put some teeth into enforcing and prosecuting adults who knowingly serve and provide alcohol to minors in the same way adults are prosecuted for providing guns to minors who then kill or commit crimes with those guns. Minors who injure or kill people after drinking alcohol supplied by adults are no different.

  • Anonymous
    May 16, 2008 1:21 p.m.

    Since when has the Gov actively pushed this change? I doubt he has spent any of his political capital on this issue.

  • Anonymous
    May 16, 2008 1:14 p.m.

    Wow, Utah is actually considering joining the rest of the world, it's about time.

  • Utah Resident
    May 16, 2008 1:09 p.m.

    It would be the best thing to happen to Utah since the Manifesto in 1890. These laws are archaic, stupid, and belong to a different era. They also contribute more to Utah's "great divide" than any other single issue.

  • more hypocrisy on the way?
    May 16, 2008 12:49 p.m.

    This is great!
    Conservative Mormons are always whining about government interfering with John Q. Public.

    Now watch and see what happens.

  • Ema
    May 16, 2008 12:48 p.m.

    That would be so nice! It's silly having to pay a cover just to get inside a bar. It's also confusing how they differentiate between places like The Bayou and Squatters. Both have very similar atmospheres and Squatters has plenty of liquor, but The Bayou is a private club with a membership fee. It's very odd. I hope we will be informed when and how to include a signature on that petition.

  • Johny Fairplay
    May 16, 2008 12:45 p.m.

    What is liquor by the drink?

  • RabidStoat
    May 16, 2008 12:44 p.m.

    I see why they're doing it. Heck, I'd like to not have to pay a cover charge just to go out with friends every once in a while. But what kind of increase in alcohol related accidents and crimes will we see? Has this even been discussed? Requiring memberships at each bar does reduce "bar hopping."

  • Tom
    May 16, 2008 12:38 p.m.

    I love the church, and I believe in our leaders. But why, why in the world does the LDS church have to be consulted before changes in the liquor laws can be made? I hope this resolution passes immediately and we as a people can give up the idea that others need to be told how to live if they're not a member of our faith.