tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-591881213265091346.post6766096758136325014..comments2024-03-13T11:10:25.333-04:00Comments on Why The PLCB Should Be Abolished: A response from the oppositionLew Brysonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04084380741402026573noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-591881213265091346.post-67052974884524473902011-02-18T17:04:59.096-05:002011-02-18T17:04:59.096-05:00ooops, my comment was meant for the article about ...ooops, my comment was meant for the article about 'Why can't I get Pikesvile Rye?"Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14380279875615392034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-591881213265091346.post-90275250895732313362011-02-18T17:01:10.852-05:002011-02-18T17:01:10.852-05:00As far as "Breaking the law occasionally"...As far as "Breaking the law occasionally", let's look at what can happen under the Almighty code, (that none of us ever voted on). A first offense costs you $25 per "package", plus court costs, or prison, not to exceed 90 days.[section 491.(2). If it's your 2nd offense, or a"commercial transaction", hold on to your hat! Now "Article VI, (a) Forfeitures" comes into play. Any "vehicle, boat, vessel, animals or aircraft used in the ...illegal transportation of liquor,...or brewed beverages... shall be deemed contraband, " and forfeited to the commonwealth. Don't worry about your car, though, you won't be needing it 'cause [sec.604] your license will be revoked. We're not done yet; [sec. 611 (a)] says "any room, house, building, boat, vehicle, structure or place, except a private home, where liquor, ... or brewed beverages are ... possessed, ... in violation of this act" are declared a common nuisance, and [c] upon the court's decree may order that "the room, house, building, structure, boat, vehicle or place shall not be occupied or used for one year thereafter..." Seems fair.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14380279875615392034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-591881213265091346.post-73867133577686087802011-02-15T11:50:08.270-05:002011-02-15T11:50:08.270-05:00Correct, Nathan, and again, I'd remind people:...Correct, Nathan, and again, I'd remind people: if there's something you'd like to see IN that bill or OUT of the bill...NOW is the best time to let your reps know!Lew Brysonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04084380741402026573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-591881213265091346.post-31607244821743104952011-02-15T11:37:16.207-05:002011-02-15T11:37:16.207-05:00It's important to note that this is the bill f...It's important to note that this is the bill from the previous legislative session, which died in committee. There could be significant changes between HB 2350 and the bill that is introduced this session.Nathanhttp://plcbusersgroup.org/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-591881213265091346.post-30417346319959649932011-02-15T11:24:20.910-05:002011-02-15T11:24:20.910-05:00For Point 8. The carding of people who look under ...<i>For Point 8. The carding of people who look under 30 is the current requirement so that hasn't changed at all.</i><br /><br />Although many sellers (including state stores) voluntarily observe such a policy, there is currently no such legal requirement.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-591881213265091346.post-78254474948665341572011-02-15T11:19:18.205-05:002011-02-15T11:19:18.205-05:00Currently the way the situation works is that a mu...<i>Currently the way the situation works is that a municipality police force can respond to a call at the bar, give them civil citations, and are then reviewed by the Liquor Board to determine if the offenses were localized, or if they violated the liquor code. If any violations of the liquor code are found, the BLCE will conduct an investigation to make a citation which is held pending against a license when renewal time comes around.</i><br /><br />Almost everything in this description of the process is inaccurate.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-591881213265091346.post-59795721658415466172011-02-15T09:40:50.657-05:002011-02-15T09:40:50.657-05:00Again, Raymond: it's a proposal. What you need...Again, Raymond: it's a proposal. What you need to do -- if you support privatization in general -- is email your rep and senator about this. Tell them you're generally in favor of privatization, and most of Turzai's proposal, but that you really want to see "properly regulated" home delivery of wine, meaning an adult signature for delivery (which most services require anyway) and payment of PA taxes, which wineries handle for other states every day. (Really, there's no good reason for the state NOT to allow that anymore, especially if they can get the taxes off it.) But if you don't speak up, you <i>will not be heard.</i>Lew Brysonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04084380741402026573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-591881213265091346.post-50263022646590942232011-02-15T09:15:11.068-05:002011-02-15T09:15:11.068-05:00Point 7: Everyone has a hot-button issue and quit...Point 7: Everyone has a hot-button issue and quite frankly not being able to have wine I purchase over the internet shipped directly to my house renders this bill useless in my eyes.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13091368006136401144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-591881213265091346.post-90422570017835400302011-02-15T08:29:07.600-05:002011-02-15T08:29:07.600-05:00For Point 1 made by the poster the local authority...For Point 1 made by the poster the local authority would have greater control over the establishments in their jurisdiction. You would,'t have to wait for the BLCE to decide if the place was too noisy, served Happy Hour too long or any of the other things that most normal police departments handle in the course of their regular duties. If anything Liquor Code enforcement should be better because the local police will be watching rather then waiting for the BLCE to get their act together. Also, these establishments will be licensed or zoned by the local municipalities too and will not have to solely depend on Harrisburg to decide if the establishment should continue in business.<br /><br />For Point 2. Losing the purchasing power of the state is certainly not a detriment considering on how inefficiently they run things and without the "bottle fee" wouldn't even break even. Buying large quantities of wine that were rated 4 or 5 years ago and sat who knows where under unknown conditions is one of the reasons they get things so cheap, not because they are good shoppers. If you look at the 3 people in charge of the Chairman's selection program not one of them is certified in wine but they are the ones deciding for an entire state what we should drink. That will certainly improve under privatization. <br /><br />For Point 3. Since we don't know what the "permitted merchandise” will be allowed to be this point is moot.<br /><br />For Point 4. While there will be an overlap between some State Stores and Private Stores being open there won't be geographical competition. The open State Store isn't going to be across the street from the Private Store but there probably will be concurrent operations in a county. If anything it will show how badly the State Store system is.<br /><br />For Point 5. raising the age of workers to 21 will not effect the workforce available to the establishment. Look at the current part-time workforce in all of the State Stores in Pennsylvania now and you'll find very very few under the age of 21. If anything this will help the new private stores hire the better displaced State Store workers.<br /><br />For Point 6. The Gallonage tax rates are instead of the Flood tax. Section 341-A. "Excise tax on wine and spirits." gives the tax rates with no mention of the Flood Tax. However, it does seem that the 6% sales tax on the retail sale is new. Since under the current system the licensed establishments get a 10% discount now buying from the State Store (and that is up from what it used to be) which is in line with what private markets do, it won't shrink the profit margin to 24% as stated. If one believes that prices will be lower in the private stores it may actually increase their profit if their pricing remains the same.<br /><br />For Point 7. While direct shipping seems to remain the same this is a proposal and not the final bill so that may or may not change.<br /><br />For Point 8. The carding of people who look under 30 is the current requirement so that hasn't changed at all.<br /><br />My Point 9. The state should NOT decide for me what legal products I, as an adult, should or should not be able to buy.Albert Brooksnoreply@blogger.com