Elites Beware: The New York Liquor Limitation Law could be coming to a restaurant near you!


By: Guest Authors

An Anecdote for the Hypocritical Left!  

At a Long  Island, New York bar on Friday night I had the opportunity to discuss what I  happen to view to be the lunacy of New York City Mayor Bloomberg’s attack on  large sugary drinks.

My conversation partner was a Liberal who felt that  this type of ban, for the good of the people, was way overdue.

What  about parental and personal responsibility I asked?

How about parents  leading by example or the dangers to our freedoms that are inherent in the  overreach of government into our person lives?

Where I asked, will it  all end if people merely follow along like sheep when the government tells them  what is and what is not right for them in their own lives?

The answer  was as predictable as it was disturbing.

‘Have you ever seen ‘these’  people where both parent and child can’t fit through the door because they are  so obese? Are you aware of the problem of childhood and adult-onset diabetes?  This law is exactly what is needed in order to protect those who either cannot  or will not protect themselves.’

What about potato chips, ice cream,  fast food and every other food that tastes great that’s high in fat and calories  but possess few other redeeming characteristics?

‘Lose them all’ he  said!

Okay, but what would this Liberal think about the following  made-up law that could hypothetically be enacted some day directly affecting him  and others like him?

For the good of ALL of the people, how’s this for  government intervention the elites would have a huge problem  with?

Theoretical (for now) New York  Law: The Fine Dining Liquor Limitation  Law

Summary:

Hypothetical research has  determined the following: In New York dining establishments that possess liquor  licenses and that generate an average check amount per person  greater than $20, the consumption of alcohol has been estimated to  have at times been excessive leading to the potential for patrons to hurt both themselves and others.

The rationale for this  supposition is that said potential excessive consumption could lead to blood  alcohol content (BAC) of patrons reaching a level greater than the legal limit  for driving (.08).

Although only some of the restaurants  within the city limits have been determined to be in locations that absolutely  require the use of a car in order to have access to them, the city council  has decided the following, ‘for the good of the  people’: 

Consumption of alcohol by ANY  establishment patron of legal drinking age will be limited in ALL of  the restaurants that fall under the average per person check amount  guidelines regardless of any other mitigating factors:

Patrons below  150 lbs. as determined by the bartender or server, will be limited on a  per night basis to one of the following:

Wine: 4 ounces
Beer: 12  ounces
Spirits: 1 ounce

Patrons above 150 lbs. as determined by  the bartender or server, will be limited on a per night basis to any  combination of the following not to exceed a total of three:

Wine: 4  ounces
Beer: 12 ounces
Spirits: 1 ounces

For restaurant  management, either the table server or bartender must be tasked with looking at  the back of patrons hands each time a drink is ordered to determine whether  there is a marking indicating that they have already been served an alcoholic  beverage either at the current establishment or some other establishment within  the legal boundaries of the town or city.

For patrons at either the bar  or seated at a table who qualify under the law to be served a drink, upon  receipt of a serving of an alcoholic beverage the bartender or server will be  responsible to make a mark on that patron’s hand in indelible ink.

Going  forward and depending on the weight of that patron, it is then up to employee  discretion to either take the alcohol order or deny it due to the alcohol limit  deemed to have been reached.

If an employee is proven to have been  incorrect in the assessment of a patrons weight leading to over-serving of  alcohol or with having served a drink in error for any other reason, violations  of this law by the establishment can result in fine, loss of liquor license or  both.

Conclusion: Economic and societal!

A law like this  would be devastating to the business model of restaurant owners who rely on the  sale of alcohol for a great deal of their revenue.

This type of law  would also likely result in people going to each others homes instead of  restaurants where they would have the ability to make their own alcohol  consumption decisions. This would lead to an even greater loss of business for  the restaurants, likely forcing some to close and /or layoff workers.

This in turn would result in a loss of tax revenues for the town or  city.

This law would reduce the business efficiencies of the restaurant  due to the increased oversight required and would likely increase overhead costs  including that of insurance due to greater liability.

It would penalize  those businesses who have some or all of their patrons within walking distance  and would be unnecessary governmental control over those groups of people who  drive together and have designated a driver who will not drink.

Finally,  it would represent a huge overreach of government, telling people who should be  responsible for themselves that they are not capable of being so.

The  government in all of its ‘wisdom’, would most likely consider all of the above  ramifications and impacts of the law and then likely decide to implement it  anyway ‘for the good of the people’, businesses be damned!

In this  particular scenario, however, how do you suppose a law like this would be  tolerated by the people who would be most affected by it, namely the elites who  can actually afford to go to a restaurant to eat and drink?

By: Michael Haltman

This law  would not affect the people who the elites say need a law limiting the  consumption of big sugary drinks because they are incapable of deciding for  themselves what is best.

No, this would directly affect the elites  themselves who, in this case of government overreach attempting to limit their  alcohol consumption, would fight tooth and nail for the right to assume  responsibility for their own actions.

Of course a law like this would  never come about because of the impact it would have on the reelection prospects  of the politicians involved.

If it did, however, rest assured that it  would show the incredible hypocrisy of the Left who can tell you what is good  for others, but who don’t take kindly to others deciding what is good for  them.

Read more at http://politicsandfinance.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-new-york-fine-dining-liquor.html#pk2W8QTwIu50xTFp.99

No Comments

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.