What does privatizing liquore stores actually mean? (Harrisburg, Mechanicsburg: home, school)

[Avalon08]

Originally Posted by Mr Yuk

Wegmans. They have a great selection of microbrews. But before they started selling beer, it was tough to even find a 6 pack of Guinness. Now that Wegmans sells beer, I tend to stay away from places that also sell 40 ouncers.

Wegman's are even harder to find than State Stores here in the Philly area. That's changing, thank goodness, but still, it's not like there's a million of them.

[RomaniGypsy]

Originally Posted by Avalon08

Right....the system (I believe) is a hold-over from the post-Prohibition era and the Quaker influence on Pennsylvania liquor laws. I've heard that same old tired argument from the anti-privatization lobby -- "do you want liquor stores on every corner?". Well, yes I do! It would certainly be a heck of a lot easier on me. And really, people will just go to NJ and DE to stores that are more convenient and user-friendly, so what's the point, PA?

The truth is that liquor stores are associated with blight and crime. People are so desperate for their alcohol sometimes that they will rob liquor stores... so by adding more stores that sell alcoholic beverages, a city or state will add to its crime risk. I lived in PA for a while, and am strongly considering going back. One thing I liked was how you couldn't just go out and buy intoxicating chemicals everywhere.

Where I live right now, the entire city was "dry" but for selling wine and beer at food stores... you couldn't get hard liquor anywhere unless you went to a different town. Then the city council voted to allow stores dedicated to liquor and/or tobacco and what did we get... stores popping up all over the place that sell liquor and tobacco. Literally within two months we had something like TEN new stores pop up that sell these things... and they are VICES. Few people in town (apart from the burnout smokers and drinkers) actually wanted them because it was easy enough to go to the next town for their liquor and then come back to ours where it was "cleaner", but the city council figured that the city could rake in more money in tax revenue if we had more liquor and tobacco sales.

I think this is one of the reasons why the citizens voted them all out of office last week.

There is really no need to expand sin-based industries. People can get their vices if they really need them, and if that means they go elsewhere to do it, whatever. If they're willing to spend the money for gas to get their vices, whatever. Just because it's inconvenient doesn't mean that PA, a naturally beautiful state, needs the blight that would be associated with more liquor stores.

[pman]

Originally Posted by RomaniGypsy

The truth is that liquor stores are associated with blight and crime. People are so desperate for their alcohol sometimes that they will rob liquor stores... so by adding more stores that sell alcoholic beverages, a city or state will add to its crime risk. I lived in PA for a while, and am strongly considering going back. One thing I liked was how you couldn't just go out and buy intoxicating chemicals everywhere.

actually, you can buy intoxicating chemicals all over...drugs. you seem to be making a lot of baseless assumptions and conflating wine and liquor. if these stores cause crime and blight, then why isn't PA safer?

Originally Posted by RomaniGypsy

There is really no need to expand sin-based industries. People can get their vices if they really need them, and if that means they go elsewhere to do it, whatever. If they're willing to spend the money for gas to get their vices, whatever. Just because it's inconvenient doesn't mean that PA, a naturally beautiful state, needs the blight that would be associated with more liquor stores.

sin based industries? so there's a sin in having a glass of wine or two? seems like some extremist fanatical thinking to me. the fact is, there is no proof that our system leads to less blight, crime, or alcohol abuse...sorry. your entire opinion is based on conjecture and personal hatred of alcohol.

[BettyTheHun]

Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81

I agree. One battle at a time. Wholesale reform is just too much for Pennsylvania folks.

Correction, it's just too much for PA politicians and special interest groups.

[Craziaskowboi]

Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81

I agree. One battle at a time. Wholesale reform is just too much for Pennsylvania folks.

Except that the majority of Pennsylvanians are in favor of wholesale reform.

[RomaniGypsy]

Originally Posted by pman

actually, you can buy intoxicating chemicals all over...drugs. you seem to be making a lot of baseless assumptions and conflating wine and liquor. if these stores cause crime and blight, then why isn't PA safer?

I've lived in PA and there are certain areas of PA which I would consider the safest I have ever experienced. Honestly, I think that most of PA is quite safe. As for drugs, yes, you will always be able to find illegal drugs if you look hard enough. What's your point? Do you not know that by legalizing this stuff and making it easier to access (as would be the case with alcohol if the state system were changed), all you'll get is more users of intoxicating chemicals who can (and will) do stupid stuff while under the influence?

Originally Posted by pman

sin based industries? so there's a sin in having a glass of wine or two? seems like some extremist fanatical thinking to me. the fact is, there is no proof that our system leads to less blight, crime, or alcohol abuse...sorry. your entire opinion is based on conjecture and personal hatred of alcohol.

Not quite. Read the stats yourself. Don't take my word for it. Show me some statistics and proof to back up your assertion, or it's just going to be ignored.

As for sin... alcohol is a known, proven bodily poison. Let's say you have a child whom you know is poisoning himself in some way. That wouldn't upset you at all?

[Ohiogirl81]

Originally Posted by Gnutella

Except that the majority of Pennsylvanians are in favor of wholesale reform.

Oh, you're so funny! Especially considering you're usually one of the leaders of the status quo chant in these threads -- which you must not actually read if you can make such an uninformed statement.

[BettyTheHun]

Two snippets of conversation I will always remember with regards to this topic:

Beer distributor owner - "Of course people should be able to buy a six-pack of beer in a grocery store, but it will never happen."

State store worker after being asked whether privatization should happen - "Yeah, it's a no-brainer, but that's not how things work in PA."

It's obvious, even from people that have a vested interest in keeping things the same, that this draconian system needs to end. I don't recall ever, and I'm not exaggerating, meeting someone who wants to keep things how they are. All this talk that Pennsylvanians don't want reform is bs. We don't have a choice. It doesn't matter who we elect either. I didn't vote for him, but I had hope that Corbett might make some headway in eliminating the current system. He talked a good game. It's become more and more apparent that this was false hope.

And just throwing this out there for people who claim that privatization will lead to underagers getting booze easier. I get carded for buying smokes, but have never been carded at state stores for buying booze. Beer distributors and bars card me about half the time. Privatization that requires sellers to swipe a driver's license is an easy solution.

[Avalon08]

Originally Posted by BettyTheHun

Two snippets of conversation I will always remember with regards to this topic:

Beer distributor owner - "Of course people should be able to buy a six-pack of beer in a grocery store, but it will never happen."

State store worker after being asked whether privatization should happen - "Yeah, it's a no-brainer, but that's not how things work in PA."

It's obvious, even from people that have a vested interest in keeping things the same, that this draconian system needs to end. I don't recall ever, and I'm not exaggerating, meeting someone who wants to keep things how they are. All this talk that Pennsylvanians don't want reform is bs. We don't have a choice. It doesn't matter who we elect either. I didn't vote for him, but I had hope that Corbett might make some headway in eliminating the current system. He talked a good game. It's become more and more apparent that this was false hope.

And just throwing this out there for people who claim that privatization will lead to underagers getting booze easier. I get carded for buying smokes, but have never been carded at state stores for buying booze. Beer distributors and bars card me about half the time. Privatization that requires sellers to swipe a driver's license is an easy solution.

Yeah, I don't know anyone (except for maybe the person above who thinks alcohol is sinful) who thinks the State Store system should stay in place. I just listened to Corbett's recent radio interview on the status of privatization -- he said they're expecting a report from their experts on I guess the economics of it. He said the state should definitely be OUT of the business of selling liquor and PA is one of only two states who still control the entire distribution. He expects the number of liquor stores to double, which is in line with the norm in other states, and that PA will still make money from the taxes on alcohol.

This is all well and good, but my concern is that the new "privatized" system will be subject to the same draconian PA alcohol laws -- same inconvenient hours and separate alcohol/beer system. I hope they understand that it's not just that we want "private" liquor stores, we want the same convenience that we can find in NJ and DE.

[Craziaskowboi]

Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81

Oh, you're so funny! Especially considering you're usually one of the leaders of the status quo chant in these threads...

Except I've been in favor of eliminating the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board for as long as I've known it's existed. "Preserver of the status quo" my ass.

The only reason the PLCB survives is because of the store employees, the busybody Bible-thumpers, and groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving. They're the five percent of the people who make 95 percent of the noise on this issue. They're the squeaky wheel that gets the grease.