• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Restricting bulk sales of alcohol.

BretJ

BretJ

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2012
Messages
6,457
Reaction score
2,533
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
The UK found that by restricting discounts on bulk sales of alcohol, they reduced alcohol related violence, DUI etc. Would this fly here in the U.S.? Seems reasonable if doing so would save lives. Would reduce college binge drinking and potentially reduce date rape and domestic violence.
 
BretJ said:
The UK found that by restricting discounts on bulk sales of alcohol, they reduced alcohol related violence, DUI etc. Would this fly here in the U.S.? Seems reasonable if doing so would save lives. Would reduce college binge drinking and potentially reduce date rape and domestic violence.
Click to expand...

(First of all, I don't drink alcohol. It tastes awful while the effects and after-effects aren't worth the bother in my experience).

What constitutes "bulk sales?" More than one bottle of any liquor? Anything over a 40 oz. or six pack of beer?

Look, trying to over-regulate a vice typically causes more problems than it solves.

I can imagine all the methods people would use to get around this type of law. What? Having each member of a frat go in and make a separate purchase? Make legal levels of purchases in advance over time to still have that party? Adults standing outside liquor stores and asking other adults to go in and buy for them? Sheesh.

Will this lead to new laws to punish violators? Is this another step toward a War on Alcohol situation?

Too many questions for it to work here in the USA. I'd rather punish people for actually committing a crime, rather than set up a prevention system (never works does it?) which will end up punishing people because a once legal act that might lead to some harm now becomes illegal itself.
 
Last edited:
BretJ said:
Would reduce college binge drinking and potentially reduce date rape and domestic violence.
Click to expand...

Because buying restrictions have always stopped college kids right?
 
It might reduce those crimes but I am not in favor of such vice taxes. It is either legal or it is not. And making it more expensive just reduces lower income individuals' ability to obtain it more difficult.
 
What bulk discounts are we talking about? I haven't noticed any. :shrug:
 
Captain Adverse said:
(First of all, I don't drink alcohol. It tastes awful while the effects and after-effects aren't worth the bother in my experience).

What constitutes "bulk sales?" More than one bottle of any liquor? Anything over a 40 oz. or six pack of beer?

Look, trying to over-regulate a vice typically causes more problems than it solves.

I can imagine all the methods people would use to get around this type of law. What? Having each member of a frat go in and make a separate purchase? Make legal levels of purchases in advance over time to still have that party? Adults standing outside liquor stores and asking other adults to go in and buy for them? Sheesh.

Will this lead to new laws to punish violators? Is this another step toward a War on Alcohol situation?

Too many questions for it to work here in the USA. I'd rather punish people for actually committing a crime, rather than set up a prevention system (never works does it?) which will end up punishing people because a once legal act that might lead to some harm now becomes illegal itself.
Click to expand...

The Brits found that by eliminating cost breaks on bulk sales (12-24 packs, etc) reduced binge drinking and the related violence. It is not a tax at all. It simply eliminates cost savings for bulk purchases. In essence, if a single can of Bud costs $1.00, a 24 pack would cost $24.00 rather than say $18.00.
 
BretJ said:
The Brits found that by eliminating cost breaks on bulk sales (12-24 packs, etc) reduced binge drinking and the related violence. It is not a tax at all. It simply eliminates cost savings for bulk purchases. In essence, if a single can of Bud costs $1.00, a 24 pack would cost $24.00 rather than say $18.00.
Click to expand...

I can live with that (since I don't drink). ;)
 
BretJ said:
The UK found that by restricting discounts on bulk sales of alcohol, they reduced alcohol related violence, DUI etc. Would this fly here in the U.S.? Seems reasonable if doing so would save lives. Would reduce college binge drinking and potentially reduce date rape and domestic violence.
Click to expand...

Seems reasonable enough.

Captain Adverse said:
(First of all, I don't drink alcohol. It tastes awful while the effects and after-effects aren't worth the bother in my experience).

What constitutes "bulk sales?" More than one bottle of any liquor? Anything over a 40 oz. or six pack of beer?

Look, trying to over-regulate a vice typically causes more problems than it solves.

I can imagine all the methods people would use to get around this type of law. What? Having each member of a frat go in and make a separate purchase? Make legal levels of purchases in advance over time to still have that party? Adults standing outside liquor stores and asking other adults to go in and buy for them? Sheesh.

Will this lead to new laws to punish violators? Is this another step toward a War on Alcohol situation?

Too many questions for it to work here in the USA. I'd rather punish people for actually committing a crime, rather than set up a prevention system (never works does it?) which will end up punishing people because a once legal act that might lead to some harm now becomes illegal itself.
Click to expand...

It seems you did not read the OP.
 
Paleocon said:
It seems you did not read the OP.
Click to expand...

Nah, I just misread it.

You have to forgive me, I am multi-tasking...watching Fear the Walking Dead while simultaneously skimming over the Forum.

BretJ said:
It is not a tax at all. It simply eliminates cost savings for bulk purchases. In essence, if a single can of Bud costs $1.00, a 24 pack would cost $24.00 rather than say $18.00.
Click to expand...

I guess in this case I couldn't handle both tasks as efficiently as one. ;)
 
Carjosse said:
What? Shooting them? Otherwise I do not think it is possible.
Click to expand...

Making the punishment for providing alcohol to a minor so severe that no one in their right mind would risk it. $5000-10,000 fine would probably do it. Come on, wouldn't the reduction in date rape (90% alcohol related) and deaths (just had a kid here at UF fall to his death after drinking) be worth it?
 
I am absolutely in favor of restricting bulk sales of alcohol.

I no longer drink, I am now a teetotaler. I believe alcohol has only negative effects for society. In fact I would support prohibition if it was proven to actually work, since prohibition did not work I do not support it.

Fun fact, there is actually a Prohibition party in America, they ran a candidate for president and several elections name Gene Amudsen, Who lived on Vashawn Island Washington, about 3 miles from where I grew up.
 
BretJ said:
Making the punishment for providing alcohol to a minor so severe that no one in their right mind would risk it. $5000-10,000 fine would probably do it. Come on, wouldn't the reduction in date rape (90% alcohol related) and deaths (just had a kid here at UF fall to his death after drinking) be worth it?
Click to expand...

You might reduce the instances of providing alcohol to minors, but for those who still do it, you would spend more and incarcerating and trying them then the damage you would prevent in my opinion. As far as fines, somebody who is $30,000 in student loan debt is not my idea of a person you could collect from
 
BretJ said:
The UK found that by restricting discounts on bulk sales of alcohol, they reduced alcohol related violence, DUI etc. Would this fly here in the U.S.? Seems reasonable if doing so would save lives. Would reduce college binge drinking and potentially reduce date rape and domestic violence.
Click to expand...

You can NOT compare one country to another. It is apples to elephants.

We fought two very costly wars to rid ourselves from "Big Brother" on the other side of the pond.

People are ALWAYS pointing to the UK laws as ones we Americans should follow.

There are too many graves of former patriots that make me say otherwise.

Pardon the pun, but piss on their laws.
(PISSED means drunk over there)
 
Last edited:
EMNofSeattle said:
I am absolutely in favor of restricting bulk sales of alcohol.

I no longer drink, I am now a teetotaler. I believe alcohol has only negative effects for society. In fact I would support prohibition if it was proven to actually work, since prohibition did not work I do not support it.

Fun fact, there is actually a Prohibition party in America, they ran a candidate for president and several elections name Gene Amudsen, Who lived on Vashawn Island Washington, about 3 miles from where I grew up.
Click to expand...

Are you sure about that?

Actually, Prohibition Was a Success - NYTimes.com
 
Crovax said:
Are you sure about that?

Actually, Prohibition Was a Success - NYTimes.com
Click to expand...

Op-ed. Pure opinion. And, upon further reading, a pretty awful justification for prohibition.

His entire argument seems to be "alcohol-related crimes went down," which is essentially true but effectively meaningless and doesn't address the removal of freedom the Volstead Act and Prohibition introduced.
 
Kobie said:
Op-ed. Pure opinion. And, upon further reading, a pretty awful justification for prohibition.

His entire argument seems to be "alcohol-related crimes went down," which is essentially true but effectively meaningless and doesn't address the removal of freedom the Volstead Act and Prohibition introduced.
Click to expand...

The article wasn't arguing for prohibition, only that prohibition achieved it's goals. The point being that if you are arguing that prohibition doesn't work, you are wrong. If you are arguing that we shouldn't have prohibition because of personal freedoms that's a whole different argument.
 
Crovax said:
The article wasn't arguing for prohibition, only that prohibition achieved it's goals. The point being that if you are arguing that prohibition doesn't work, you are wrong. If you are arguing that we shouldn't have prohibition because of personal freedoms that's a whole different argument.
Click to expand...

Prohibition of marijuana exists today (albeit not constitutionally enforced) and apparently nobody smokes weed then. Yanno, since it works.
 
Kobie said:
Prohibition of marijuana exists today (albeit not constitutionally enforced) and apparently nobody smokes weed then. Yanno, since it works.
Click to expand...

Kobie,
I remember a while back you said you like old silent movies.

On a slightly related theme as this thread. I also have recordings of Marijuana songs popular back in the 20's and 30's.

Evidently the black & white jazz artists smoked MJ quite a lot. Gene Krupa was a big fan.

Reefer Man by Cab Calloway
When I get Blue, I get High by Ella Fitzgerald

and about 8 more. I got them off LimeWire, but I can get all of the names and artists for you so you might be able to get them if you like, or I could email them to you without you having to download them anyplace....if you like.
 
Last edited:
BretJ said:
The UK found that by restricting discounts on bulk sales of alcohol, they reduced alcohol related violence, DUI etc. Would this fly here in the U.S.? Seems reasonable if doing so would save lives. Would reduce college binge drinking and potentially reduce date rape and domestic violence.
Click to expand...
It’d be helpful if you were clearer about exactly which restrictions you’re referring to. There have been all sorts of changes made in recent years, often different ones in different parts of the UK, plus a whole load of different proposals and ideas that haven’t (yet) been implemented. I’d also question how definitively outcomes could be attributed to any specific legal or regulatory change given how much “natural” variation there is in such things and I’d be interested to see any actual reports or studies backing that up.
 
RetiredNSmilin said:
Kobie,
I remember a while back you said you like old silent movies.

On a slightly related theme as this thread. I also have recordings of Marijuana songs popular back in the 20's and 30's.

Evidently the black & white jazz artists smoked MJ quite a lot. Gene Krupa was a big fan.

Reefer Man by Cab Calloway
When I get Blue, I get High by Ella Fitzgerald

and about 8 more. I got them off LimeWire, but I can get all of the names and artists for you so you might be able to get them if you like, or I could email them to you without you having to download them anyplace....if you like.
Click to expand...

Sure, just send me a PM with the song names and some artists, I'll take a look. Appreciate it.
 
Kobie said:
Sure, just send me a PM with the song names and some artists, I'll take a look. Appreciate it.
Click to expand...

OK...I will send it tomorrow sometime. I think I am getting too sleepy right now.
 
BretJ said:
Making the punishment for providing alcohol to a minor so severe that no one in their right mind would risk it. $5000-10,000 fine would probably do it. Come on, wouldn't the reduction in date rape (90% alcohol related) and deaths (just had a kid here at UF fall to his death after drinking) be worth it?
Click to expand...

That is the same logic that gives us Minimum Mandatory sentences, which have failed so miserably.

I would not object to eliminating bulk sales, but it's been known for years that the unintended consequences of "good laws" are often far worse than what they are trying to prevent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom