Online subscriber? Please Log In

Need Help? | Forgot Your Password?

Liquor privatization seems a solution in search of problem

Jan 10, 2014 | 4 Comments

By The News-Register Editorial Board

Only online subscribers may access this article. Subscribe online by clicking here. Already a subscriber, please .

Would you like to comment on this article?

Only online subscribers may comment on articles. Click here to see how you can subscribe.
Already a subscriber, please

Note: Some articles do not accept comments at all.


10:03 am - Tue, January 21 2014
Lulu said:
The argument endorsing the state's continuing monopoly on liquor because that's the way things always have been done is provincial and certainly anti-progressive. We are a laughingstock to outsiders. Just another Blue Law. Isn't it time to grow up?
08:01 pm - Tue, January 21 2014
Seabiscuit said:
Haven't seen any examples of being a laughingstock to outsiders and I really don't see it being anti-progressive. While it may be "inconvenient" at certain times, I see the current system as needing some modernization or tweaking, but I certainly don't want see hard liquor in every store either.

"shoplifting of spirits by organized crime rings has become an issue."
"One would think losing money would be reason enough for stores to protect their liquor bottles from thieves.
But police say they have seen shoplifting reports pile up since voters privatized Washington liquor sales in 2011. In response, state government may force problem stores to shape up or risk losing their licenses."
"Alcohol use by students on school property has gone up, and it’s not beer,” the prosecutor said."
"Liquor theft soars in Washington after privatization, but remains low in Oregon
A sudden, dramatic rise in liquor thefts in Washington could be seen as collateral damage from the state's recent move to privatization".

We don't need the additional problems.....................................

09:34 am - Wed, January 22 2014
Lulu said:
We don't need the additional government to save us from ourselves.
10:22 pm - Wed, January 22 2014
Seabiscuit said:
So, after 83 years, why create the extra government over site, taxing authorities and extra - additional regulations, extra licensing capacity as well as the extra people to enforce those regulations on a vastly expanded retail outlet by privatizing liquor? Not to mention all the "poor misguided souls", afflicted with a "disease", as well as the youth out for the thrills, who now see the open and accessible grocery and convenience store shelves as easy targets for 5 fingered discounts.
Sometimes, the way things are really isn't all that bad when the totality of the alternatives are considered.

© 1999- News-Register Publishing | © The Associated Press
The News-Register and are owned and operated by News-Register Publishing Co., P.O. Box 727, McMinnville, OR 97128.
All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Web design & powered by LVSYS