It only takes a little bit of greed to kill a child

Pennsylvania has some silly laws pertaining to the sale of alcohol. As the law currently stands in the state, the sale of wine and spirits is restricted to state-owned stores, beer distributors can only sell cases of beer and kegs (but not smaller quantities), and specially-licensed establishments can sell small quantities of beer. Furthermore, it is illegal to buy alcohol out of state and then transport it back into Pennsylvania without declaring it and paying taxes on it.

Not surprisingly, these laws tend to drive the price of alcohol up in Pennsylvania, which is why I make the quick drive down to Delaware whenever I purchase alcohol (and no, I don’t pay the taxes on it).

In a rare case where the government surrenders power, Pennsylvania is actually looking at privatizing the market to a degree and removing some of the restrictions. Most people I talk to are in favor of this, as the current laws are bad for consumers and many businesses. They limit the selection of products that a store can sell, giving potential customers less reason to make a visit.

Like any law created by the government, however, there are people who benefit, so there is some pushback on the move toward privatization. A commercial recently airing in Pennsylvania demonstrates the displeasure felt by some:

Who would run such a fear-inducing, illogical, and painfully overly dramatic ad?

The United Food and Commercial Workers Local 1776 (UFCW) is responsible for the commercial. And why are they concerned? The UFCW, who represents the workers of the state-run liquor stores, is likely to lose a nice chunk of money if the privatization measures are adopted. If there are no state stores, there are no employees to take as union members, and thus there are no dues to collect. In the commercial they mention greed as the prime motivator—yeah, I think they’re right.

As with just about anything, if you follow the money trail, you can expect to be led to the answer to the “Why?” question. In this case, someone is trying to use the forceful hand of government to keep their pockets full.

9 comments

  1. I have to admit that I do like the idea that there are separate liquor/beer stores and that you can’t buy alcohol and beer, except for rubbing alcohol in supermarkets, convenience stores, Walmart, and everywhere you go, but I’m certain that my reasons for this are not the same reasons as the LCB/state and the unions. I like that alcohol and beer is not in our faces everywhere we go. We’ve been to many other states and outside the US where alcohol is sold everywhere and there’s just something wrong about it. In Las Vegas, they have slot machines everywhere you go. That only tempts those who have a gambling problem and those who are under-aged which is exactly who they are targeting. I don’t think we need the LCB/state to run liquor stores and I agree that privatization is fine but I also believe that these businesses should be strictly liquor/beer sales. Alcohol/beer should not be sold in supermarkets, Walmarts, convenience stores, etc. It should not be in our faces, children’s faces and alcoholics faces all the time, just like slot machines shouldn’t. Children and alcoholics will be the targets for sure. There’s enough greed to go around on all sides of this issues. Yes, follow the money trail.

    • I do think that most people share your view that they don’t want alcohol being pushed on children. But just because it wouldn’t be against the law to sell alcohol in a grocery store doesn’t necessarily mean they would. There are ways that the market can handle such situations that don’t involve violence like the state uses.

      Yes, there are some businesses out there motivated by greed, but if they sold alcohol to children, it would be up to people like you (and I think there are many of you) to speak out about it and not give those stores your business. Businesses won’t sell alcohol to children if it hurts their bottom line.

      But anyway, I do think that the minimum drinking age laws have negative effects on things like this. I do not believe that irresponsible drinking isn’t as prevalent in places where there are no age restrictions. Knowing “how” to drink is part of the culture, so a relaxation and an ultimate elimination of vice laws would be beneficial.

      • Just to clarify, I didn’t say businesses would sell liquor to children. I don’t think businesses would be stupid enough to do that. But could kids be tempted to steal it (and would it be easier to steal and more accessible?) or would it make it easier to have someone of age to buy it for them? Yes. Having it in the faces of children and even adults will have a definite influence on them which is exactly the reason businesses would want it in their stores. And be assured…if the law does change to allow liquor to be sold in supermarkets and other stores, they would jump faster than you could shake a stick. Also, alcohol isn’t a necessity and sadly it has become more of people’s lives than it should. I have a neighbor who’s daughter, 16 yrs old, was drinking with her friends and driving. They got into an accident and my neighbor’s daughter was killed and another teen. Since then (it’s been a few years) my neighbor has been involved with MADD. And someone in my family was drinking and driving with his friend and they wound up hitting a car in front of them killing the man in the vehicle. Because this was in NJ my family member wasn’t charged because he wasn’t driving but his friend went to prison. They were well beyond legal drinking age. Sadly, this type of story is prevalent in our society and bringing liquor into supermarkets etc will only add to the already bad problem. So this is happening with state controlled stores. I can’t imagine how it would be if the law was relaxed on this issue.

        • I understand your concerns, but as it is today, it is pretty easy for someone under the age of 21 to get their hands on alcohol–to the point that anyone who does want it gets it.

          Just because something might happen because people are free doesn’t justify restricting their freedom. A car is an excellent weapon for killing someone, but we don’t call for banning them because of that. Unfortunately, people will always make bad decisions and do bad things, but if the state takes over and “takes care” of these problems, then we lose our ability to work together to solve problems and, even worse, by the very nature of government we lose options by which we could solve problems.

          Uncertainty of the future is not a good reason to take away the liberty of another individual.

          • Alcohol use is a bit different because it’s known to be addictive or at least become such a bad habit that people tend to drown themselves in it and then can’t function properly to the point they can cause harm and death to themselves and to others. A car is not addictive and it can’t get someone drunk and cause danger to people. Yes, I agree that alcohol in and of itself is not the culprit just like guns don’t kill without someone pulling the trigger, however, when people become desensitized because they see alcohol everywhere they go just about, then it’s no doubt going to create more of a problem. And even though it’s people who create the problem because some people are more prone than others to get drunk or to use alcohol in ways that are dangerous, alcohol is not a necessity like food is so its use should be monitored. Even if we got rid of all the cars in the world and rode horses again, if people drank too much they could still do damage, kill themselves or others. They can get rowdy and out of control.

            I do think each family should monitor their own family but that doesn’t happen unfortunately. And because drunk driving and killing is so prevalent someone needs to monitor alcohol use. Again, I think privatization would be fine but it should be confined to being sold in specific liquor type stores and not a free for all in any store. Marketing is a very powerful tool which is why beer companies pay millions to get their ad on TV during the super bowl. They tempt people on purpose and I don’t believe there’s any good in that. It’s all about money.

            Again, I’m not saying alcohol should be state controlled but there should be some type of restriction for selling it. And yes, people will do what they will. Even during prohibition alcohol consumption couldn’t be stopped. But it shouldn’t be in our faces either especially children’s and those who are hooked on it. I believe that God wants us to consider others. I know too many people who are alcoholics (can’t live without alcohol, not necessarily getting drunk but many do). It’s a weakness that people have and we shouldn’t add or feed other people’s weaknesses. Driving a car isn’t a weakness.

          • I agree that we should look out for each other. However, if you want to restrict certain businesses from selling alcohol, it means that you want to use violence to accomplish that. Are you comfortable with locking someone in a cage or beating someone because they stock their shelves with liquor?

            Putting restrictions on the sale of alcohol by the government means that it would be state controlled.

            That’s fine if you don’t want alcohol in your face and in the face of children, but I don’t think it would be, unless the demand in the market was such that it made it profitable. In that case, going after the businesses is fruitless…you have to change people’s minds.

            I’ll draw a comparison. Some people believe that raw milk is dangerous and want the state to regulate it. Since they truly believe that it is dangerous or bad, does that give them the right to impose restrictions on others? If you say that alcohol is different because of it’s addictive nature, what if people don’t care about its addictiveness?

          • Restrictions are not always bad. Parents need to restrict their children at times, don’t you agree? It’s for their safety and for their own good. Would you allow your child to read a playboy magazine or watch a movie that had sexual scenes, bad language etc in it? The rating R means Restricted. Is that wrong? Do children somehow get into R rated movies? I’m sure, and it’s been going on for years. Does that mean the restriction should be lifted? And how about playboy mags? Should all stores be able to display them for sale anywhere they choose like, say in the checkout aisles where the candy is? Is it taking away people’s freedom to have certain restrictions on that? Is it wrong for people to want restrictions? What about their freedom? https://www.afa.net/Detail.aspx?id=2147484054

            Hahaha…funny you should bring up raw milk. Raw milk is already being governed by the states. It’s illegal in many states to sell it. It’s illegal to cross state lines with it. I do understand your point however there are worse things that happen to people and farmers who sell raw milk. Is raw milk dangerous? No. But the gov’t and the milk industry wants us to believe it is. They use scare tactics to make us think it is. My family has been drinking it for about 9 years now. I’m no longer lactose intolerant as long as I drink raw milk. Was raw milk in and of itself the problem? No. It was a sanitation problem BUT when pasteurization came into play it was a way to salvage all that contaminated milk. Sound appetizing? Do you know what kind of process your milk goes through? I know what mine goes through. It goes from the cow into the pail and into the container that I buy. And I have been to the farm where my milk comes from AND I have gotten to know the farmer and his wife. It’s important to know where our food comes from.

            So, why do we need a license to sell raw milk? Because it’s AGAINST THE LAW to and we’ve been convinced AND conditioned to believe it’s dangerous and can even kill us. How ridiculous is that? It’s now beyond whether or not it’s legal or not. Now they have conditioned people to believe it’s dangerous to the point they won’t want it around them. I know people like that.

            Why do we need a license to sell real estate, practice medicine and law, drive a car, get married etc? These are all restrictions, too. But the reason they exist is because of the way people did business in unscrupulous ways. And understand that you can’t get a license to practice medicine and law, for instance, until you have taken the required courses and/or get degrees and passed certain exams. Do you think it was always this way? Who do you think controls what students are learning (primary, secondary, and higher education)? Was it always this way? And why do so many people just passively accept it? It’s definitely not freedom if I can’t teach my children what I believe they should learn.

            Now let’s look at vaccinations…the majority of people believe that vaccinations are mandated and that their children can’t go to school without them. The reason? Because big pharma and the gov’t have convinced them mainly by using scare tactics to make them believe this. People are believing in false and misleading info. They now TRUST in bad science and believe that those who do not vaccinate their children or get vaccinated themselves are putting them, their children and others at risk. This is ridiculous but it’s exactly what “they” want- to get the people against each other so “they” can save the day and be the heroes. And there’s money in bad science. Take the “germ theory.” It’s just that, a theory. Yet our whole medical and science establishments are based on the germ theory. If people would only open up their eyes and be brave enough to see what’s really going on…My friend was almost fired because she works at a local hospital and refused to get the flu shot. She was told it was mandatory and that her job was at stake if she didn’t get it. A doctor gave her inside information and went to HR about it. Her job was restored because there is an exemption for adults as well as parents. But now they’re trying to get rid of the vaccination exemption to FORCE all parents to get their children vaccinated and all adults. Is that OK by you? CHOP seems to be perfectly OK with it: https://www.chop.edu/service/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-schedule/history-of-vaccine-schedule.html

            Ok, let’s see…how about anyone who doesn’t choose conventional treatment for cancer? I was one of them and was threatened and bullied by the surgeon because of my decision. I have been studying and researching disease, wellness, the immune systems etc for 9 years now and have confirmed all I’ve learned with medical and natural doctors yet because I don’t have “degree” many people won’t believe it or accept it. And when a medical doctor realizes there are other treatments and cures aside from conventional methods, they are labeled a quack and lose many colleagues and friends. Some doctors I’ve read about have had their lives threatened. Is this kind of freedom acceptable to you?

            Let’s not forget all the gov’t mandated curriculum that’s being taught to our children and parents have no say in it. It’s so far gone now. Take evolution for example. It’s a theory, not a fact yet it’s being taught as fact in our schools and creationism is shut out even as a theory.

            There are so many more important issues going on, much more important than marijuana and alcohol. If you really want to help people to see what’s really going on then you’ll need to go the core of what’s going on and expose all the layers and layers of lies. That’s no easy task and it takes guts.

          • I am not against restrictions–I am against restrictions set by people who do not have the authority to do so. The state does not have the authority to restrict what a business owner stocks on his shelves any more than you or I have. And to the link about the AFA trying to get trashy magazines out of the checkout lanes, I support them 100%. They see a problem and they’re taking action peacefully and not using the coercive hand of the government. Why can’t the same thing happen with stores that sell alcohol (which is exactly what I’ve been saying)? I favor peaceful solutions to problems, not violent.

            I brought up raw milk because I knew it is already restricted by the government and I think that’s ridiculous. I’ve recently written about price floors on milk in Louisiana…take note of what I said in the very first paragraph.

            Licensing as administered by government is a competition-killing device that benefits the businesses that already have market power. It is driven by greed. Free market licensing on the other hand is generally beneficial to all and creates consumer confidence and keeps the businesses in check. If you’re interested in more of my thoughts on that, please look at the article I wrote that is previous to this.

            Marriage licenses? They were originally designed to keep biracial marriages from happening.

            Do you think it was always this way? Who do you think controls what students are learning (primary, secondary, and higher education)? Was it always this way? And why do so many people just passively accept it? It’s definitely not freedom if I can’t teach my children what I believe they should learn.

            This is one of the reasons I’m against the idea and practice of public schools and compulsory education.

            As far as vaccinations go, I completely agree that it’s messed up that they’re trying to force people to get them. It’s a personal decision and that’s it.

            Some doctors I’ve read about have had their lives threatened. Is this kind of freedom acceptable to you?

            I truly don’t know why you would ask me that question.

            There are so many more important issues going on, much more important than marijuana and alcohol.

            Sure, like how nobody cares how our military kills thousands of people overseas and how our own police forces kill innocent people every day. But you don’t go from Lyndon to Lysander overnight. Abolishing laws about alcohol and marijuana are good ways to get people involved in the liberty movement or at least introduced. In addition to this, I write about much heavier topics here all the time…it’s not as though I have a site about legalizing marijuana. But you know what? Alcohol and marijuana are serious issues. Why? Because some people think that they have the right to lock someone in a cage (and ultimately kill them if they refuse) because they smoke a plant. That’s messed up. There’s no way we can have a peaceful society if we can’t get over that hump first.

            If you really want to help people to see what’s really going on then you’ll need to go the core of what’s going on and expose all the layers and layers of lies. That’s no easy task and it takes guts.

            Yes, I know. That’s what I’ve been devoting nearly all of my time outside of day job for the past year or so to.

Comments are closed.