Fuck DuWayne Bridges (Hooray Gourmet Bottle Bill)

[Kaos]

What do you think of vegans? When everyone at the cook-out is enjoying their delicious steak and one guy has to make a point that they don't like meat, and breaks out his salad? Does this guy think he's better than you cause he doesn't eat meat?

Same thing. Nothing to do with insecurity.

Not the same. 

I've always got other drink options.  Give me a water. I never make a big deal out of it.  I try to do it quietly. Hardly ever goes that way. I order last and those that got booze have questions.  Order first and it becomes uncomfortable. 

Vegan comes to my house and doesn't tell me in advance I might not have other options.  I'll try to find something.  Tells me up front and I'll try to accommodate. 

By the same token if I'm going to a vegans house I'm not going to bring my own steaks.  Can't tell you how many times I've had friends and family who know I rarely drink show up with their own fucking cooler and jam stuff in my fridge. 

Got friends we enjoy doing stuff with but we are excluded from anything where alcohol might be involved.  Never said anything about it. Don't judge.  But "no thanks, we don't drink beer" was enough.  Fine by me. 

You can rationalize this to yourself any way you want.  I've been on both sides. 

It is what it is. 

[Vandy Vol]

Booze provides no value that can offset its harm.

Your logic is that alcohol's harm > alcohol's benefits, therefore alcohol is evil and should be banned.

Applying such logic to other scenarios, gun's harms (deaths from non-self defense situations) > gun's benefits (successful self defense situations), therefore guns are evil and should be banned.

I've never said it should be illegal.  If I ruled the universe it would not exist. I don't rule the universe (yet).

You stated that alcohol hurts you, and thus government intrusion would be fine with you.  While not a direct endorsement for making alcohol illegal, it is very indicative of such.  If you're fine with the government making alcohol illegal and think that this is what "should" be done, then yes, you are stating that alcohol should be banned.

But I'm not calling for it to be illegal or saying consumption is immoral.

Evil = immoral, no?

What I've seen in this thread is exactly what I deal with on a regular basis as the usual non-drinker in social or business settings.

"you dont want a beer? You one of them religious nuts? In a program or something? Bring my man here a beer!"

If I decline it's assumed I'm some kind of intolerant prude who is trying to shit on the fun parade.  I'm viewed with suspicion.  They can't take the first no at face value. 

Far too many drinkers only feel good about themselves if they can get others to join in.  I see it as insecurity.  Few respect my simple "no thanks." I almost always end up having to explain that I just don't drink.  That leads to conversations about why, the unstated suspicion that I'm looking down on the rest of them and think ilm better than they are. And then I get tapped to be the driver.

Speaking of sham arguments, no one's argument in this thread has referred to you as a prude or has attempted to force alcohol upon you.  The only thing that has been stated is that your personal view on alcohol can not and should not be legally enforced.  Not because it's not feasible to do so as proven by American history thus far, but because there is no reason to ban a substance which can be used responsibly.

[JR4AU]

Didn't say legal.  It is legal. 

I'd prefer it all to be destroyed and the ability to make it forgotten. 

I'm not an idiot, the shit is way too entrenched now for any legalization efforts to succeed.  It's not going away.

I'm merely asking why it's necessary.  And no one can ever, ever, ever answer that. 

It's not. 

And since it kills people (proven), addicts them (proven), destroys families and careers (proven) I just have to wonder why it's so vehemently defended. 

The anti-smoking push has worked better than expected.  It's a brilliant campaign that's taken something that used to be considered normal and routine and made those who do it pariahs. 

At some point the same tactics will be used to shame people out of drinking.  I'll be on that bus if I'm around to see it come to pass.

Because it's been man's "pacifier" since the dawn of time.  Just because you don't like it, or see any benefit in it, doesn't mean everybody else that does has some inherent flaw, (needs a pacifier as you put it) is an addict or drunk.  By far, the majority of consumers consume it within the window of responsibly. 

And your contention that it has zero benefits is false too.  There's evidence to suggest (according to the Mayo Clinic):

Moderate alcohol consumption may provide some health benefits. It may:

    Reduce your risk of developing heart disease
    Reduce your risk of dying of a heart attack
    Possibly reduce your risk of strokes, particularly ischemic strokes
    Lower your risk of gallstones
    Possibly reduce your risk of diabetes

Moderate alcohol use may be of most benefit only if you're an older adult or if you have existing risk factors for heart disease, such as high cholesterol.

Here's the link so you can pick out the stuff to argue it's harm outweighs any good that can be accomplished in other ways: http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/alcohol/SC00024

There's also general evidence that clearly shows stress relief is good for the health, and if a glass of wine, a beer, or stiff drink offers that, then there's benefit in that.  And if someone chooses that, over running a couple of miles, they should be free to, and should be free of the judgement that they "need a pacifier" simply because you don't like the shit. 

Clearly heavy and long term alcohol use/abuse can have numerous negative impacts on the body and health.  Again, that's a decision made by the user.   Eating lots of Big Macs over time will have negative effects on your health.  And an benefits of the Big Mac can certainly and easily be attained through better choices.  Only the fucking moonbats want to ban Big Macs because some people can't control their intake.

As for your contention that it has "innocent victims".  Pffft.  All those are victims of the actions of a person or persons who made a conscience decision to engage in some behavior.  It could be going out and drinking without a plan to get home safely without driving drunk.  At some point the chain is started with a sober, rational thinking decision.  Sometimes the decision maker fails to use good judgement, and that gets compounded by their inability to limit their intake.  At some point along the way, again, there was a conscience and rational decision, though the judgement may have been clouded by alcohol, they were still at their wits enough to say "I need to stop". 

The same goes for addiction.  Yes, addiction is real.  It's both mental and physical when it comes to alcohol.  A heavy drinker can die from DTs when drying out.  Still, in the end, there was a point when the problem became evident, but it wasn't too late to stop drinking.   It takes a decision to stop if you have a problem, and ONLY a decision to stop, jail/prison, or death will make an alcoholic stop.  Those that wind up in jail/prison or dead, had the chance to make a decision before it got to that point.  All alcohol does is sit in it's container until someone pops the cork and takes a drink.   

[JR4AU]

"you dont want a beer? You one of them religious nuts? In a program or something? Bring my man here a beer!"

If I decline it's assumed I'm some kind of intolerant prude who is trying to shit on the fun parade.  I'm viewed with suspicion.  They can't take the first no at face value.

Far too many drinkers only feel good about themselves if they can get others to join in.  I see it as insecurity.  Few respect my simple "no thanks." I almost always end up having to explain that I just don't drink.  That leads to conversations about why, the unstated suspicion that I'm looking down on the rest of them and think ilm better than they are. And then I get tapped to be the driver. 

That (and this whole thread) is so full of judgement of drinkers it's pathetic, and it's you being pissed at being judged for being a non drinker!  Irony?

[Kaos]

Your logic is that alcohol's harm > alcohol's benefits, therefore alcohol is evil and should be banned.

Nope.  Said I would prefer it didn't exist.  Think whooping it up or even arguing for the right to purchase it in ever larger containers is a bullshit waste of time. 

Applying such logic to other scenarios, gun's harms (deaths from non-self defense situations) > gun's benefits (successful self defense situations), therefore guns are evil and should be banned.

You keep banging on the gun drum like you're eventually going to get a song out of it.  Wrong again. 
Guns provide some benefit.  They are necessary for protection in many instances. You don't buy too many guns and become incoherent.  You can't swallow so many bullets that you can't make logical decisions.  The "value" of alcohol is miniscule, if there is such, and the negatives far outweigh the positives. 

Guns are regulated.  If you commit a crime with a gun you likely can't get another one legally.  Kill somebody in a DUI?  Beat your wife senseless because you're smashed?  If you can scrape together enough coins, you can walk right into the ABC store and load up again the next day. 

Are you seriously so dense that you can't see the difference (and I'm using the metaphorical you, not the specific one) between something that impairs you physically and mentally even when used strictly as intended and something that can be wrongly used?  Holding a gun doesn't alter your brain patterns.  Drinking even one swallow of alcohol does.  Even one. 

Eating a ham sandwich while driving is a distraction. So is brushing your hair, whacking off, putting on lipstick, reading a book, ogling the babysitter or fiddling with the radio.  Distraction does not equal impaired. 

You stated that alcohol hurts you, and thus government intrusion would be fine with you.  While not a direct endorsement for making alcohol illegal, it is very indicative of such.  If you're fine with the government making alcohol illegal and think that this is what "should" be done, then yes, you are stating that alcohol should be banned.

If the government decided to intervene, I wouldn't be offended.  But I'm not campaigning for such.  I'd prefer it simply didn't exist and still haven't heard one valid rationalization beyond "Cuz I like it" that it should.

Evil = immoral, no?

Speaking of sham arguments, no one's argument in this thread has referred to you as a prude or has attempted to force alcohol upon you.  The only thing that has been stated is that your personal view on alcohol can not and should not be legally enforced.  Not because it's not feasible to do so as proven by American history thus far, but because there is no reason to ban a substance which can be used responsibly.

Never said it should be illegal (again I say this, but I doubt it will sink in).  I only wish it didn't exist.  Never even attempted to say that was enforceable.  Only asked for ANYONE to show me what value it provided in contrast to the wreckage it leaves in its wake.  Only THS came close (Chizad's link was very weak) with his link from Harvard.  But the reality is that those marginal benefits don't come close to offsetting the damage.  10,000 auto deaths a year?  How many of Chizad's heart attacks, strokes, etc. are booze related?

I ask you again.  What if PetroChem came out with a BuzzaGas, a cannister of gas you could inhale that produced hallucinations, was highly addictive and caused myriad physical and mental impairments. What if PetroChem put out a report that said 10,000 people (1500 children) per year would die as a result of car crashes as a direct result of BuzzaGas.  What if PetroChem said another 30,000 a year would die as a result of illnesses and organ damage directly related to BuzzaGas. What would happen to that product? Would it get to market?  Would there be panic in the streets?  Would there be marches on Washington, riots? Calls for the executives of PetroChem to be prosecuted? 

It wouldn't exist.  Which would be okay by me. 

Alcohol cannot be used responsibly.  That is my position.  Many people seem to think it can, many of them are dead ass wrong. 

If you've never behaved in a manner you would not ordinarily, if you've never been a boor in public, if you've never violated your own set of internal moral codes because you drank a little too much, then you're either a liar or the rare exception who can possibly use alcohol responsibly.  I'm not going to point fingers but some of the claims of responsible use are utterly laughable in light of what's known. 

I can't claim consistently responsible use. 

Sure, if you have a grenade and pull the pin a couple of times a week, if you're responsible it won't blow up in your face.  But it only takes one fuckup.   Just one. 

Why pull the pin?  What purpose does it truly serve?  (Hint: None)

I also never said anyone in this thread referred to me as a prude.  My point was that should anybody say no to alcohol -- even in the spirit of "I wish it didn't exist" the defense is fairly typical.  If you don't drink YOU'RE the one with the problem and you must be educated. 

[Kaos]

That (and this whole thread) is so full of judgement of drinkers it's pathetic, and it's you being pissed at being judged for being a non drinker!  Irony?

Wouldn't know it if you smelled it. 

I've judged nobody.  You've all put words in my mouth and argued positions I never took, but that's typical.

[Kaos]

Moderate alcohol consumption may provide some health benefits. It may:

    Reduce your risk of developing heart disease
    Reduce your risk of dying of a heart attack
    Possibly reduce your risk of strokes, particularly ischemic strokes
    Lower your risk of gallstones
    Possibly reduce your risk of diabetes

Moderate alcohol use may be of most benefit only if you're an older adult or if you have existing risk factors for heart disease, such as high cholesterol.

Lots of maybes and possibles up there. 

Let's deal in realities. 

Deaths:  Alcohol related per year, a conservative estimate is 50,000.  That's not a maybe or a possibly.  That's a fact. 

Strike 56. 

Keep swinging.  I enjoy the breeze. 

[JR4AU]

Wouldn't know it if you smelled it. 

I've judged nobody.  You've all put words in my mouth and argued positions I never took, but that's typical.

This isn't judgement? It is your words.

"Some babies have to have their pacifier so they sqawk and scream when they don't.  And they want even bigger pacifiers. Some adults have to have their pacifier too. "

"Far too many drinkers only feel good about themselves if they can get others to join in.  I see it as insecurity."

Please tell me what words I put in your mouth, or what arguments I attributed to you that you didn't make?

[Kaos]

This isn't judgement? It is your words.

"Some babies have to have their pacifier so they sqawk and scream when they don't.  And they want even bigger pacifiers. Some adults have to have their pacifier too. "

"Far too many drinkers only feel good about themselves if they can get others to join in.  I see it as insecurity."

Please tell me what words I put in your mouth, or what arguments I attributed to you that you didn't make?

Sure.  The pacifier line was reaching.  I found it funny.  I guess I should have used titty because you're actually getting some liquid out of a titty, much as when you suck on a bottle. 

Too many drinkers are insecure.  That's my experience.  I get tired of being encouraged to "be one of the guys" and have a drink.  I don't care for it.  Don't care if you do, but don't force me to do the same.  I don't want to most of the time.  That need for me to drink just because you (metaphorically) are is insecurity IMO. 

I watched a friend who was trying desperately to stop because he was concerned about the impact it was beginning to have over his life get relentlessly badgered.  You can have just one.  Why can't you have just one?  Come on.  Have a glass of wine.  Quit being a puss.  Just one glass. It's not going to hurt you.  Where are your balls, man? 

And then he did. 

Why?  Because if he wasn't "with" them, they assumed he was against them.  Crab in the bucket.  Can't let somebody do better because that might reflect badly on me. 

I've seen that same shit play out (not just with alcohol) over and over and over in my life. 

I'm sure some of you honestly think you can "drink responsibly."  It's my opinion (based on years of observation) that there's really no such thing. 

You don't pull the pin on a live grenade every day just for kicks.  You don't swallow a shot glass of poison just because it probably won't kill you this time. 

[JR4AU]

Sure.  The pacifier line was reaching.  I found it funny.  I guess I should have used titty because you're actually getting some liquid out of a titty, much as when you suck on a bottle. 

Too many drinkers are insecure.  That's my experience.  I get tired of being encouraged to "be one of the guys" and have a drink.  I don't care for it.  Don't care if you do, but don't force me to do the same.  I don't want to most of the time.  That need for me to drink just because you (metaphorically) are is insecurity IMO. 

I watched a friend who was trying desperately to stop because he was concerned about the impact it was beginning to have over his life get relentlessly badgered.  You can have just one.  Why can't you have just one?  Come on.  Have a glass of wine.  Quit being a puss.  Just one glass. It's not going to hurt you.  Where are your balls, man?   

And then he did. 

Why?  Because if he wasn't "with" them, they assumed he was against them.  Crab in the bucket.  Can't let somebody do better because that might reflect badly on me. 

I've seen that same shit play out (not just with alcohol) over and over and over in my life. 

I'm sure some of you honestly think you can "drink responsibly."  It's my opinion (based on years of observation) that there's really no such thing. 

You don't pull the pin on a live grenade every day just for kicks.  You don't swallow a shot glass of poison just because it probably won't kill you this time.

You have your experience, and your opinions.  I quit drinking, and all my drinking friends went out of their way to not drink around me for a while.  That pissed me off.  I felt like I was keeping them from doing something they wanted to do.  None tried to get me to drink.  Never had that in any social setting either.  I don't think I've ever had anybody question me when I declined to have a drink.  Maybe at most a cursory "we have a designated driver" but no badgering.

It's your opinion that nobody can drink responsibly.  Some people have the same opinion about exceeding the posted speed limit, or owning a gun.  There's plenty of anecdotal evidence all around you to say otherwise, but you're entitled to your opinion.

To some, most in fact, alcohol isn't poison.  It's not like pulling a pin on a live grenade to have a drink.  They're not playing with fire.  Some people simply are not predisposed to alcoholism, and they can make decisions about when and where they drink so as not to endanger others.  They can drink socially, occassionally and in moderation their entire lives with no adverse effect on job, family or health.   In fact, that's most drinkers IMHO and experience. 

[AU_Tiger_2000]

Give not one shoot about its economic value. Worst response of the day. 

We put people in jail for profiting from things proven to kill.

No, it was good and valid response.  You just suck and are stupid.  Or put a way that you will understand...pffffffttt!

Me: 
You: 

Shake and bake

[AWK]

My conclusion is PERFECTLY logical. 

It provides no benefits.  It causes harm. 

I'm still waiting for one single thing, one benefit alcohol provides that makes it worth the utter carnage it causes.  You won't because you cant.  You'll make every other argument in the world, stomp your feet and end up crying about your pacifier.  But you won't and can't show me a risk/reward relationship that makes alcohol worth the risk. 

War?  Yep.  I get it.  People die.
NASA?  People died to get us to the moon.  It was worth it. 
Dangerous jobs like underwater welding?  Sure.  It's a risk. 
I even get NASCAR.  You run the risk of dying every time you get in there but you do it for reward and entertainment. 

Booze?  PFFFFFFFFFFFFFTTTTTTT.  I don't give a fiddling fuck how much you like your afternoon brew and the numbing effect it has on your senses.  Your enjoyment isn't worth the lives it takes.  Not today, not tomorrow and not ever.

Do you have a personal reason to dislike alcohol? 

Does that affect your opinion on this issue?

Same answer.

[Kaos]

You have your experience, and your opinions.  I quit drinking, and all my drinking friends went out of their way to not drink around me for a while.  That pissed me off.  I felt like I was keeping them from doing something they wanted to do.  None tried to get me to drink.  Never had that in any social setting either.  I don't think I've ever had anybody question me when I declined to have a drink.  Maybe at most a cursory "we have a designated driver" but no badgering.

It's your opinion that nobody can drink responsibly.  Some people have the same opinion about exceeding the posted speed limit, or owning a gun.  There's plenty of anecdotal evidence all around you to say otherwise, but you're entitled to your opinion.

To some, most in fact, alcohol isn't poison.  It's not like pulling a pin on a live grenade to have a drink.  They're not playing with fire.  Some people simply are not predisposed to alcoholism, and they can make decisions about when and where they drink so as not to endanger others.  They can drink socially, occassionally and in moderation their entire lives with no adverse effect on job, family or health.   In fact, that's most drinkers IMHO and experience.

No anecdotal evidence to prove that alcohol (even in the smallest of doses) does not begin to cause chemical reactions that lead to impairment.  Not an opinion.  Fact.  There is no "responsible" use of something that damages your system and causes you to be impaired.  That's not in question.

The poisonous quality of alcohol is not an opinion either. It's a fact.  Alcohol is a poison. You pour it on your plants, they die.  You feed it to your pets, you're endangering their lives. You spray it on bugs, they die.  Alcohol poisons every organ in your body with which it interacts (brain included). 

I've seen enough here that I'm just going to plant my victory flag and move on. 



In a few weeks, months, years maybe I'll give you the opportunity to fight this (and lose) again. 

[Kaos]

Do you have a personal reason to dislike alcohol? 

Does that affect your opinion on this issue?

Same answer.

Whatever personal reasons there may be only gave me clarity enough to look at the realities without the prism of beer ads, peer pressure, media, etc. 

Those personal reasons caused me to ask what value alcohol truly served.  Trust me, I sought it out.  I wanted to find a redeeming value to make sense of the senseless. 

There isn't one. 

It's one of the few things on the planet that aren't symmetrical (at least in the manner in which we use it).   Almost everything has balance.  There's a tradeoff.  Taking a shit is nasty, but that shit recycles into the soil and fertilizes new growth. 

Alcohol (in our context) is a giant pulsing negative with the slimmest of possible health benefits (all of which can be derived in other ways) and a glaring neon "Because I like it" as the only redemptive values.  There's no symmetry.  No balance.  No redemptive good that makes the bad palatable.

That's not enough for me. 

[JR4AU]

No anecdotal evidence to prove that alcohol (even in the smallest of doses) does not begin to cause chemical reactions that lead to impairment.  Not an opinion.  Fact.  There is no "responsible" use of something that damages your system and causes you to be impaired.  That's not in question.

The poisonous quality of alcohol is not an opinion either. It's a fact.  Alcohol is a poison. You pour it on your plants, they die.  You feed it to your pets, you're endangering their lives. You spray it on bugs, they die.  Alcohol poisons every organ in your body with which it interacts (brain included). 

I've seen enough here that I'm just going to plant my victory flag and move on. 



In a few weeks, months, years maybe I'll give you the opportunity to fight this (and lose) again.

There are lots of things that in small doses are not harmful, but in large doses are poison.  Not just alcohol.  Using only half the equation to "prove your preconceived notions" is flawed.

Your assertion that the least little bit impairs you...again, you're using the black and white, when it's shades of gray.

Plant your "I win the opinion war flag".  It's just another opinion. 

[Kaos]

There are lots of things that in small doses are not harmful, but in large doses are poison.  Not just alcohol.  Using only half the equation to "prove your preconceived notions" is flawed.

Your assertion that the least little bit impairs you...again, you're using the black and white, when it's shades of gray.

Plant your "I win the opinion war flag".  It's just another opinion.

Maybe you didn't see this while you were blinding yourself with your failure to discern the difference between opinion and fact.

[JR4AU]

Maybe you didn't see this while you were blinding yourself with your failure to discern the difference between opinion and fact.

Maybe you didn't hear...

[Kaos]

Maybe you didn't hear...

You failed. 

I'll let you try again after you've worked on your position for a few months.  This has been on my mind for 23 years. 

You can't win.  But at least figure out the difference between "impaired" and "distracted" and get a handle on what's a fact and what's an opinion when you give it your next shot. 

[wesfau2]

You expect me to have sympathy because you couldn't buy beer in 55 gallon drums?

Here's the silliness of the ban on larger bottles: you can already buy beer by the keg in AL.  Why the restriction on any size in between?

[Kaos]

Here's the silliness of the ban on larger bottles: you can already buy beer by the keg in AL.  Why the restriction on any size in between?

I thought bitching about it to begin with was stupid and thus my comment. 

I'm sorry you couldn't get beer in 40s.  Nowhere in Alabama is anyone more than 2.5 hours from a place where you could.  If having a big ass bottle is so fucking important, haul ass over the line. 

Just don't drink it on the way back. 

And if it's REALLY taste (ridiculous argument) drink the non-alcoholic kind and nobody has an issue.