Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Utah Mulls a Database of Bar Customers

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the legislating-adulthood dept.

Privacy 623

sundancing alerts us to a political dustup in the state of Utah, which doesn't have bars like the rest of the country does. Instead, "private clubs" require you to fill out an application and pay a fee if you want to have a drink outside the home. While there is pressure to reform this arrangement — one argument is that it's bad for tourism — the head of the state senate recently floated a proposal to create a database of every bar patron's visits. Now Utah's governor has called that idea "almost Orwellian," adding that "it's very difficult to legislate adulthood," and its supporters seem to be backing off. The idea of requiring bar patrons to swipe their drivers licenses as proof of age is still on the table, though.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Ob (5, Funny)

Bloke down the pub (861787) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751543)

This idea is absolutely mormonic!

Re:Ob (1, Funny)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751625)

I always wondered who slipped that second "m" in "moron".

Re:Ob (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751753)

Sloppy Spelling and witting.
moron without the o = morn
that rn combination with bad handwritting or right font look like a rn - m so when they rewrote it the following happened

M O R (then he looses focus and then focuses on the letter) M (focus returns) N
so we get Mormn
Then someone points out hey you lost a vowel (well you don't know wich one so lets choose the first)
Morman

There you go.

Re:Ob (1)

Atraxen (790188) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751843)

In this context, I guess that makes you a real Moroni!

Re:Ob (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751853)

In addition I just wanted to add. I am not making fun of their religion or anyones, just letter play with broken though processes.

Phelps poll (5, Interesting)

Joe the Lesser (533425) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751885)

I saw an amusing poll on ESPN about Michael Phelps, who recently admitted to using pot.

Across the country about 75%-90% said they thought no less of the best swimmer in the world for using a recreational drug.

Except in Utah where almost 50% said they thought less of him. They are very detached from the mainstream.

Re:Phelps poll (4, Insightful)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752025)

I thought less of him. But just for being stupid enough to let his picture get taken with a drug when he has tens of millions of endorsements that could go down the drain. Crap, if I had that much money in endorsements just for being the best at moving my arms back and forth really fast (oversimplification, but the point is that it is not a real social benefit to be able to swim fast), I sure as hell wouldn't do anything to risk it.

So while smoking a joint doesn't shock me, his stupidity does. He went through this before with a DUI, he should be smarter than that.

Re:Phelps poll (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26752095)

"They are very detached from the mainstream."

So they are indie, non-conformists. I thought that was a good thing.

Re:Ob (1, Funny)

Hatta (162192) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752041)

Yeah! Get a brain mormans!

Re:Ob (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752197)

Now that's funny!

Yeah... Ok (1)

dmacleod808 (729707) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751545)

Utah still has(Had) a firing squad as method of execution until not long ago IIRC. Yeah, this is surprising /sarcasm

Re:Yeah... Ok (4, Interesting)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751669)

Utah still has(Had) a firing squad as method of execution until not long ago IIRC

What's wrong with that? If you believe in the death penalty then I don't see firing squads as being any worse than lethal injection. Hell, I'd actually prefer the firing squad myself -- I'm afraid of needles. If you don't believe in the death penalty then it seems that you shouldn't be limiting your criticism to Utah.

Re:Yeah... Ok (2, Insightful)

Joe the Lesser (533425) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751813)

I know it's not manly and tough but...

Lethal injection is considered humane because no pain is felt.

Civilized societies have long moved towards executions that are as respectful of life as possible, as opposed to some societies which still publicly rape and stone to death.

It's the same idea about those who abuse animals end up abusing humans, and lethal injection, which is very nonviolent, is one of the better ways to separate the death penalty from murder.

actually (3, Interesting)

BitterAndDrunk (799378) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751891)

Lethal injection is considered humane because no pain is felt.

There's a fair bit of debate in this point, leading to a Supreme Court case. Lethal Injection Potentially Not Painless [newscientist.com]

Re:Yeah... Ok (4, Interesting)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751911)

Lethal injection is considered humane because no pain is felt.

Says who? If you believe the anti-death penalty crowd it's horrible agonizing pain. I don't really know who to believe as every side has an agenda and we can't exactly ask the people who were executed what it was like. I suspect the reality is probably somewhere in the middle of the 'no pain' and 'worse than being burned alive' arguments.

I know it's not manly and tough but...

*shrug*, for me at least it doesn't have anything to do with that. I'd honestly rather be shot than strapped to a table and killed with a needle. A head shot would be even better and probably painless (the brain is destroyed faster than the pain receptors can fire) but I'd still take the shots to the heart over the needle. To each their own I guess....

Civilized societies have long moved towards executions that are as respectful of life as possible, as opposed to some societies which still publicly rape and stone to death.

Raping and/or stoning would be cruel and unusual punishment. Being shot isn't, IMHO.

Re:Yeah... Ok (2, Interesting)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751923)

For reasons ill understood by me, the method of lethal injection commonly used in human capital cases is actually pretty nasty. Fuckups that involve some minutes of the injectee screaming and struggling and whatnot are practically routine. I'm not sure why this is so, given that the technique used on domestic animals pretty much Just Works; but it is.

In the present state, firing squad is probably actually more humane, in terms of intensity and duration of suffering. It is a lot messier, so it looks more barbaric; but anybody who measures humaneness by how queasy the bystanders are is Doing It Wrong.

Re:Yeah... Ok (1)

genner (694963) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751977)

I know it's not manly and tough but...

Lethal injection is considered humane because no pain is felt.

Civilized societies have long moved towards executions that are as respectful of life as possible, as opposed to some societies which still publicly rape and stone to death.

It's the same idea about those who abuse animals end up abusing humans, and lethal injection, which is very nonviolent, is one of the better ways to separate the death penalty from murder.

Several bullets to the head is painless too. Less painful actually. You don't have to feel the needle prick your skin.

Re:Yeah... Ok (5, Interesting)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752033)

Yeah, whatever. It's a terrible thing to have to execute someone. It shouldn't be something you can support from arms length. It shouldn't be something you hire a professional to do for you, so you can keep your hands clean and remain philosophical about it. If you, as a community, are deciding to execute someone, and you as an individual are supporting the decision, then you should have to confront the consequences, see the blood and pain, and have good reason not to be cavalier about it.

Societies that have an executioner who takes them into a room where no one can see and makes the person disappear are the barbaric ones, while those societies where the citizens stone the person to death are the civilized ones. It has nothing to do with the pain suffered by the dying, and everything to do with the pain suffered by the living.

Killing people doesn't make you manly and tough. But hiring someone else to do it for you does makes you cowardly and small.

Re:Yeah... Ok (0, Flamebait)

v1 (525388) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752053)

Lethal injection is considered humane because no pain is felt.

Civilized societies have long moved towards executions that are as respectful of life as possible, as opposed to some societies which still publicly rape and stone to death.

Criminals get many of their rights temporarily suspended because they have deprived others of their rights. If you've behaved badly enough to deserve death, society has very little moral obligation left to you.

I think the criminal view of the death penalty has lost a lot of its "deterrent-factor" over the years, partly due to the slowness of justice (spend 4 yrs on death row etc) and all this effort to make executions more "pleasant". There was a time in the past when a bank robber would make it a point not to shoot their gun for fear of "gettin the chair". Nowadays they'll cap the old lady that's blocking the door on the way out.

Bring back stoning. It might help.

Re:Yeah... Ok (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26752195)

society has very little moral obligation left to you

Society has the moral obligation to remain on the high ground and not sink to the level of the criminal. Otherwise, we should just go back to killing anyone who does anything we don't like.

Re:Yeah... Ok (5, Funny)

Shajenko42 (627901) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751919)

Hell, I'd actually prefer the firing squad myself -- I'm afraid of needles.

I'm no fan of needles, but I'm also afraid of bullets.

Oh, and death itself.

Re:Yeah... Ok (2, Insightful)

digitig (1056110) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752029)

Hell, I'd actually prefer the firing squad myself -- I'm afraid of needles.

But you're not afraid of a volley of bullets flying towards you?

Re:Yeah... Ok (1)

NeverVotedBush (1041088) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751953)

To borrow from Texas...

"Utah - It's like a whole 'nuther country."

fp (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751551)

I like shaved pussy.

Re:fp (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751733)

I like shaved pussy.

I believe Utah requires a permit for that too.

bad title (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751561)

Wouldn't the story more accurately be titled "Utah stops mulling a database of bar customers"?

Re:bad title (1)

idontgno (624372) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751845)

Or, an even more technically accurate title, "Utah mulling not mulling a database...". Nauseating, but accurate.

Or, a good flamebait title, "Utah mulling not having database...". That's in the classic pattern of "When are you going to stop <hideous vice>?"

Holy moly... (2, Interesting)

Orleron (835910) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751567)

That's really scary! Is it really true that there are no conventional bars in UT? I sincerely hope this is inaccurate. Can anyone from UT give some insight? Do Mormons in UT's gov't really control your lives in so much depth that they legislate what you are allowed to do in your own free time?
*boggles*

Re:Holy moly... (4, Informative)

mbone (558574) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751685)

There are conventional bars in Utah, or at least there are things that look a lot like bars, they just are technically clubs and require you to fill out a form and pay a small "membership fee" to get a drink.

I don't know whether, like Virginia, they require the bar to also serve food, but I would bet that they do, and the ones that I went to had restaurants attached. (In the 1960's, by the way, bars in Fairfax, Virginia, also required, or at least were supposed to require, membership.)

Re:Holy moly... (1)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751739)

They also limit the alcohol content of beer below a certain percentage. It's a rather strange state.

Re:Holy moly... (4, Informative)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751961)

They also limit the alcohol content of beer below a certain percentage. It's a rather strange state.

That's not actually that uncommon. New York (hardly a red state full of religious types) does something similiar. New York also prohibits grocery stores from selling wine/spirits (they can sell beer though) and liquor stores from selling beer (they sell wine/spirits).

Re:Holy moly... (1)

characterZer0 (138196) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752081)

NY also has strict regulations about owners of grocery stores also owning liquor stores. It is not about morality, it is about protection of current business models.

Re:Holy moly... (3, Interesting)

peektwice (726616) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751773)

Is this news to anyone? Where I live, in a dry county, the same rules apply. Liquor in private clubs only, and you have to sign in, and pay to be a "member". There is a lot of circumvention of the rules, but to get booze, I have to drive to the state line. I agree that it's backasswards, but it's not news. In Utah it's Mormons, elsewhere, it's Baptists. These guys need to learn how to party like Lutherans.

Re:Holy moly... (3, Funny)

characterZer0 (138196) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752115)

These guys need to learn how to party like Lutherans.

To eat casseroles, stare at their own feed, and mumble about the weather?

Sorry, "feet", not "feed". (1)

characterZer0 (138196) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752151)

ssia

Re:Holy moly... (2, Informative)

bgray54 (1207256) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751801)

Utah actually does have "bars" in addition to these private clubs. But the bars can only serve beer and wine. http://www.visitutah.org/liquorlaws.htm [visitutah.org]

Wait... (5, Funny)

xpuppykickerx (1290760) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751569)

Tourism? In Utah?

Bad for what tourism? (2, Interesting)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751577)

I honestly don't mean this as a troll, but seriously, how much non-Mormon tourism is there in Utah? The only place I can think of (of the top of my head) there that might attract tourists is Arches National Park [wikipedia.org] (made somewhat famous in environmentalist circles by Edward Abbey's [wikipedia.org] book "Desert Solitaire"), and it mostly attracts hikers not partiers. But, aside from that, how many non-Mormons actually come to Utah as tourists? And even if you were such a tourist, who the hell goes to Utah to drink?!? Isn't that what Nevada is for?

Re:Bad for what tourism? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751659)

Skiing.

Re:Bad for what tourism? (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751741)

Come on, Colorado's right next door.

Re:Bad for what tourism? (1)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751699)

I honestly don't mean this as a troll, but seriously, how much non-Mormon tourism is there in Utah?

There's Antelope Island, and actually as a non-Mormon I thoroughly enjoyed the architecture, the cleanness and the visitor centre tour of Salt Lake City. Oh, and they have a world-class Ski resort! And coming from the UK seeing a city centre at night that is not full of drunken yobs puking in the gutter was a novelty.

I do agree though, nine out of ten visitors seemed to be Mormons.

Re:Bad for what tourism? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751711)

In Utah there are lots of National Parks there (Zion, Bryce Canyon, Canyonlands, Arches, Capitol Reef), National Monuments, and a National Recreation Area. Between them, they draw in something over five million visitors per year, IIRC. All are big with hikers and nature enthusiasts. Canyonlands and Grand Staircase-Escalante are also big with the mountain biking and off-road vehicle crowd.

Re:Bad for what tourism? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751795)

off the top of my head:
- some of the best skiing in North America (skiers like to drink)
- Sundance Film Festival (people in the film industry like to drink)
- Other national parks, and outdoor areas like Moab (mountain bikers like to drink)

Re:Bad for what tourism? (1)

necro81 (917438) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751957)

and it mostly attracts hikers not partiers

You've never been to Moab, have you? Hikers and partiers are one and the same there.

Beyond Arches, there's also Canyonlands, Bryce Canyon, Capitol Reef, and Zion. Aside from national parks [nps.gov] , there is also some killer skiing up in the mountains, and rivers to run. There's plenty of outdoorsy stuff to do in Utah. And while I'm sure people don't go to Utah specifically to drink, it is a nice thing to do after a long day enjoying the world, and the less hassle involved, the better.

Re:Bad for what tourism? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26752027)

The Sundance Film Festival.

A dozen ski resorts.

Capitol reef.

Bryce Canyon.

Arches natl. park.

Zions natl. park.

Lake Powell.

Goblin valley.

The Great Salt Lake.

Moab.

Canyonlands.

The largest dinosaur museum in the world in Utah county.

The Bonneville salt flats.

Timpanogos cave.

Miles and miles of alpine trails and hundreds of campgrounds.

This is one thing I won't do (1)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751585)

Where I live they like to only license them as 'private clubs' and often need you to 'join' by letting them swipe your driver's license. I walk out when they ask for that. I walk out if they want my driver's license and credit card to open a tab. I walk out if I have to do anything more than someone sitting at a restaurant who has a couple of beers with dinner. So far, I've not suffered for it. But if anyone from Utah is listening, I won't visit Utah if I have to become a club member to have a drink at the hotel bar. If I've been fine not going to a few establishments near my home, I'm pretty damn certain I won't miss anything in Utah. Good luck with attracting tourists.

Re:This is one thing I won't do (1)

YouWantFriesWithThat (1123591) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751797)

so wait, you don't live in Utah but bars near you try to do the same (or similar) membership song and dance? so where do you live, so i can avoid there too?

Re:This is one thing I won't do (1)

yincrash (854885) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751823)

I'm pretty sure most tourists aren't like you.

Re:This is one thing I won't do (1)

kevinT (14723) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751865)

Hmmm - so here we are on a geek web site and you are worried about the stuff in the mag stripe on you license???

So replace it with "Mickey Mouse" born -- whenever you feel like (as long as its 21 years ago or more).

With people sliding their cards, the bouncers are going to be less likely to actually look at the license!

(Just don't pass it to the police officer that pulls you over with the reader in his car!)

Re:This is one thing I won't do (1)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751981)

shhhhhhh damnit! You'll give the secret away. So far, in Texas, they haven't figured it out yet.

Religion, not adulthood (4, Insightful)

mbone (558574) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751607)

This is not about legislating adulthood, it is about legislating religion. There is a difference.

Re:Religion, not adulthood (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751929)

I see that this was tagged "mormonic", which seems to be a portmanteau of "mormon" and "idiotic". I think a better tag would be "puratanellian", a combination of Puritan [wikipedia.org] and Orwellian [wikipedia.org] . Sin Free + Government Control.

Funny, my captcha was 'spooky', which is how this article makes me feel.

Re:Religion, not adulthood (1)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752049)

This is not about legislating adulthood, it is about legislating religion. There is a difference.

Well, love it or hate it it's perfectly constitutional:

The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.

The states are free to regulate liquor as they see fit. If you don't like how Utah does it then convince enough like minded people to move to Utah to change the state political balance. Personally I'll take this system over the Federal Government any day of the week -- imagine if we had something similiar for cannabis?

meanwhile in London, UK.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751611)

Something we have to do in the city of London, well if visiting Shuntz anyway.

welcome to the year 2009 (0, Redundant)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751629)

theocracy is alive and well

alcohol and marijuana are viewed as evil demonic scourges

being gay is seen as a moral disease

no, we're not in tehran

we're in utah

fucking pathetic

Re:welcome to the year 2009 (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751873)

Being gay is not a moral disease. It's a mental, and therefore treatable disease.

Texas (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751631)

Not being an American, I had to visit the US for the first time a few years back on a work trip. Texas to be exact. I could not believe that I had to show photo ID/fill out a form every time I wanted a beer, no matter what kind of establishment or time of day it was. Asking why, I was told it was to track drink drivers or some such tripe. For sure it all went into some database somewhere...

Re:Texas (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751851)

You're either making that up or went to the most bizarre place in Texas ever. Its practically the capital of cheap beer consumption in the US.

Re:Texas (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26752139)

Not making it up: I was in Amarillo, Texas... maybe that was the only city that did it . I don't know was there for work and did not have time to visit other cities...

Out of curiosity (2, Interesting)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751645)

I checked out a database on violent crime broken down by state. Utah's overall violent crime rate is less than half that of the nation, and murder rate 1/3 of that of the nation as a whole.

So while I don't like the "big brother" mentality, the moral code does have concrete benefits.

Re:Out of curiosity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751687)

It would be nice if correlation implied causality, wouldn't it?

Re:Out of curiosity (1)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751811)

It would be nice if correlation implied causality, wouldn't it?

I think in this case it does. If you look at Geography, Utah is far below its neighbors. There may be other factors, but I'd be willing to bet that Mormonism plays a big part on this.

In fact, if you look, rape is actually above the national average. I'd bet this has something to do with Mormonism's views toward woman as well.

Re:Out of curiosity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751731)

Correlation is not causation.

Re:Out of curiosity (4, Funny)

rmadmin (532701) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751761)

I disagree. They obviously don't have time to commit crimes when they have 20 wives nagging at them.

Re:Out of curiosity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26752149)

Click on his id yourself and find out: excellent karma.

Re:Out of curiosity (1)

IndustrialComplex (975015) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751765)

So while I don't like the "big brother" mentality, the moral code does have concrete benefits.

Living in a sparsely populated large western state tends to have that effect as well. No need to be a Mormon or view alcohol as 'sinful'.

Re:Out of curiosity (4, Insightful)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751915)

Nevada is less dense population wise yet has twice the murder rate of the nation and violent crime as well.

http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/tables/09s0297.pdf [census.gov]

(And in its infinite wisdom, Slashdot is now making me wait at least five minutes between posts. in my prior experience, this will become ten and then fifteen. It happens as soon as I get one downmod. I love Slashdot where the GNAA can post as much as they want, but with positive karma, I get effectively censored.)

Re:Out of curiosity (1)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752087)

And in its infinite wisdom, Slashdot is now making me wait at least five minutes between posts. in my prior experience, this will become ten and then fifteen. It happens as soon as I get one downmod. I love Slashdot where the GNAA can post as much as they want, but with positive karma, I get effectively censored.

What's your karma at? I've never run into that problem and I've collected my fair share of troll/flamebait mods (as tends to happen with opinionated assholes like myself). My karma has always been at 'excellent' though and I've never had to wait more than the standard two minutes (less under the new system) to make posts.

Re:Out of curiosity (2, Informative)

Zenaku (821866) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752093)

Nevada is only less-dense population-wise when you are looking at everything from a statewide level. Nevada is essentially one very densely populated urban area, surrounded by abandoned desert. I'm sure Utah's population isn't evenly spread out either, but this sort of crime-per capita statistic is really only valuable if you break it down by county or township.

Re:Out of curiosity (1)

Zenaku (821866) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752173)

Wow. I had a lot of unnecessary hyphens in that post. I don't know what came over me. I'd like to apologize to any grammar Nazis who were offended.

Re:Out of curiosity (1)

guruevi (827432) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751869)

Well, who is there to kill in Utah? You have basically groups of mormons - 50% of the population - who (when living in religious communities) like to keep that type of things under covers among their elders or are told not to report so no official reports exist of rapes and abuse unless somebody finds (or is honest enough to report) a body much like the Amish. There is otherwise nothing or nobody in Utah to commit crimes for (it's mostly empty).

Re:Out of curiosity (1)

kae_verens (523642) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751897)

I think crime would be much lower if people were required to fill in a registration every time they left their houses.

This whole thing is stupid. let adults do what adults do.

If they hurt someone, then punish them. Otherwise, leave the hell alone.

Re:Out of curiosity (5, Insightful)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751935)

You mean this site? [disastercenter.com] Overall, murders are very rare.

USA: 5/100,000 people
Utah: 2/100,000 people
Iowa: 1/100,000 people

Iowa has more people than Utah and doesn't have such draconian moral restrictions. In fact, they're much more liberal than Utah. Does that mean liberalism has concrete benefits in terms of murder rates?

Re:Out of curiosity (1)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752111)

Does that mean liberalism has concrete benefits in terms of murder rates?

Not if you look at New Orleans or Baltimore.....

Re:Out of curiosity (5, Funny)

mbone (558574) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751965)

Hmm. I was curious too. From the most recent data I could find :

Murder rate, 2007, Utah, per 100,000 : 2.2
Murder rate, 2004, Germany, per 100,000 : 0.98
Murder rate, 2002, Saudi Arabia, per 100,000 : 0.92

So, clearly Utah is either too religious, or not religious enough. Or something.

Re:Out of curiosity (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26752037)

So while I don't like the "big brother" mentality, the moral code does have concrete benefits.

And yet the murder rate in state of Utah is still almost twice that of say, the province of Quebec in Canada, which has one of the most liberal societies in North America

In 2007 the murder rate in Utah was 2.2 per 100K people in Utah versus 1.2 per 100K in Quebec. For comparison, Quebec has three times the population of Utah.

Re:Out of curiosity (3, Funny)

FredFredrickson (1177871) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752097)

Here's one that gets thrown around alot on /. - Correlation does not imply causation.

The legislated morality may have very little to do with the crime rate. I mean, it's not a coincidence that Utah's overall violent crime rate is low- AND there's a ton of salt in their lake!

A briliant idea (-1, Flamebait)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751653)

They could tie it in to your home address and then automatically book some "missionaries" to call and tell you about the evils of drink.

Combine with RealID and... (5, Interesting)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751671)

"The idea of requiring bar patrons to swipe their drivers licenses as proof of age is still on the table, though. "

Say what?!?!?

Ok...this is really getting scary. Why should I have to swipe my drivers license (remenber, it was given as proof of driving certification, tax..etc) to get a drink? And why the hell should anyone know when I go to a bar (or anywhere else for that matter)?

Now...I'm thinking...if the RealID thing does finally come to fruition, well now...this national database would have some good data to throw in it. Let's cut benefits on (possibly coming) your national healthcare. Since you drink, and are exposed to smoke (well, you still can at most bars I go to)...you are a health risk and we the govt. won't pay as much for you. Or even with private insurance, I'm sure they'll get ahold of this sooner or later.

Amd..once the populace accepts swiping for bar entry...well, I'm sure they won't mind swiping for entry into drug stores, that would help gather your meds usage. How about grocery store for purchases, that way we can track your unhealthy eating habits.

And then of course...no need for EZPass...your nifty new drivers license will have RFID...so, that will make it easier for you....we can track your travels.

Ok, some of this sound far fetched? It might not be....the govt. lawnakers start small enough, but, pretty much every law passed has been expanded or abused.

In discussions yesterday, I recalled that when they first started passing seatbelt laws, they stated emphatically that the cops could NOT pull you over for not wearing one, but, if they pulled you over for something else, like running a stop sign, and saw you weren't wearing one....they could cite you.

Well, a few years later, once that was agreeable....they changed it, to being able to pull you over if they see you without one.

Re:Combine with RealID and... (1)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751751)

Now...I'm thinking...if the RealID thing does finally come to fruition, well now...this national database would have some good data to throw in it. Let's cut benefits on (possibly coming) your national healthcare. Since you drink, and are exposed to smoke (well, you still can at most bars I go to)...you are a health risk and we the govt. won't pay as much for you.

Go ahead and laugh but this is one of the reasons that I'm leery of UHC. You just know that some jackass is going to use it to expand the war on vice. They started with cigarettes and alcohol -- next it will be soda [nydailynews.com] or fast food. Sure am glad that we have a nanny state to fret about us though -- otherwise we could get hurt.

Re:Combine with RealID and... (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752013)

Anybody know the technical side of RealID enough to know if a single scanner for "all RealID compliant licenses" is available?

Looking at my Oregon ID, I see the following items that could be used: bar code of license number, 2D dot code of all information. But no mag strip....and I've got to think that 2D dot code may be unique to the state.

Re:Combine with RealID and... (1)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752193)

"Anybody know the technical side of RealID enough to know if a single scanner for "all RealID compliant licenses" is available?"

I'm not so sure about the tech on RealID, but, if they use the same stuff they are using on Passports, and I'd guess that would be a realistic thought...then you can be scanned at distance. This guy made a rig [engadget.com] where he could go wardriving and gather RFID found on passports.

Re:Combine with RealID and... (1)

Rycross (836649) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752125)

How is swiping your license different than them carding you? I Mean, I suppose they could add you to their private database, but I'm not really seeing the risk here.

a drivers license in a wallet will be very hard to (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752143)

a drivers license in a wallet will be very hard to read like a I-pass / EZ-pass that can be blocked by some types windshields and needs to be mounted in the right place.

Dear Utah (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751677)

Go fuck yourself.

Sincerely,
Freedom Loving Citizen

A serious question... (1)

east coast (590680) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751721)

If you have to belong to a private club to drink outside of your home how does this cause a problem for tourism? What tourists are joining these clubs just to have a few drinks during their visits to the state? Maybe the "private club" concept is different in Utah than PA but around here if you had to join a private club to get a drink it just wouldn't happen in the matter of a week or two.

Re:A serious question... (1)

WamBam (1275048) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752067)

I believe that a lot of the so called 'private clubs' in Utah allow you to purchase temporary or short term memberships. So, when I was out there last I had to pay a couple dollars to become a 'member' which wasn't any more then most bars elsewhere charge for a cover. It's not as bad as people make it out to be but I do wonder if it hurts revenue in that there are tourists that are too intimidated by Utah's laws to go to a bar in the first place.

I also live in PA and I love our private club system. I have memberships to clubs all over Philly! But don't get me started on our draconion State Stores or our inability to purchase wine and beer in the super market.

Re:A serious question... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26752141)

>If you have to belong to a private club to drink outside of your home how does this cause a problem for tourism?

Clearly it would reduce tourism from tourists that expect that their fine hotel will have a bar that they can "just order" a gin and tonic from.

People who expect that on their holidays are actually quite common, explaining exactly why most high-end hotels have a bar.

I suppose you could make membership to the hotel's "club" part of renting the room, beats me, I just know I won't bother going to Utah and dealing with such stupidity.

Now Utah's govenor (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751747)

"has called that idea "almost Orwellian," adding that "it's very difficult to legislate adulthood,""

Tell that to the people who have been running the war on (some) drugs for the last 70 years. Oh wait, we already know they won't listen to reason and logic.

A funny story about private bars (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751767)

This story is at least 3rd-hand...

Back in the mid-20th-century, Houston, Texas, was dry. Hotels could have "members only" bars for their guests.

Well, a Baptist preacher was staying at a hotel with a bar. Back in those days Baptist preachers were anti-alcohol, and this preacher was no exeption.

For reasons I don't remember, another person, let's call him Joe, asked him why he was a member of a private bar.

Well, the preacher was incensed. He would never do something so un-Christian as to join a private booze club.

Joe said "I'll prove it" and had the hotel bar show the preacher the membership list. His name was on it.

The Reverend was fit to be tied. He demanded that his name be stricken from the book immediately.

There was one slight problem:

By law, the bar membership list included everyone on the hotel registry. He was a guest at the hotel.

I heard this story decades after it happened. It's still funny.

Some counties in Texas... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751779)

already require this. In Denton, Texas (at least between 2000 & 2005 when I was there), you had to swipe your driver's license at every bar you entered. After signing a receipt your first visit, you were then a member of the private club.

But... (1)

carp3_noct3m (1185697) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751789)

Who wants to bet that somehow there is some club owners association that oversees the "clubs" and the association has to pay a fee or percentage to someone somewhere in government there. It's always about the damn money and/or control people! I'm just a disappointed idealist, you can call me a cynic.

DB Bar u say? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751827)

I'll have a Martini....truncated not deleted!!!...damn watermarks...

Ontario (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751889)

And I thought Ontario was bad, with the LCBO having a monopoly over liquor sales in the province; and our provincial legislators all too willing to buy into MADD's hysterics every time someone dares to suggest that maybe, just maybe, grocery stores should be able to sell beer and wine.

Some Texas cities already have this (5, Informative)

BlueNoteMKVI (865618) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751913)

In Texas, cities can decide to be wet or dry. In a "dry" city, a restaurant that serves alcohol must be a "private club." It's not so much a "private club" in that there are significant membership requirements, anyone can join if they're of age and there's no membership fee or ongoing responsibilities. I'm sure it's just another way for the city to tax the restaurant - how much does it cost to get a "private club" permit?

So if you're eating out and you want to have a beer, you must present a club membership card. Most restaurants have signed up with a company called Unicard. If you sign up at one Unicard restaurant...er..."private club" then you are automatically a member everywhere that takes Unicard. Years ago you actually got a separate membership card. Now it's associated with your driver's license number. When I was waiting tables the computer would refuse to let me input a drink order until I swiped a customer's Unicard (or driver's license). I'm sure that the computer was checking with the Unicard database to make sure that the person was actually a member. Was it tracking them? I have no idea. Probably so, in case the restaurant needed to look back and prove that a certain customer was in fact a member of the club when they bought that drink. Aside from the inherent lawsuit risks of serving alcohol, the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission is known for being ruthless and handing down VERY expensive fines to the restaurant and the waiter for any infraction.

A significant difference here is that Unicard is a private company, not a government entity. I'm sure they'll be quick to share their database if asked by a court, especially if it involves "terrists" or kiddie porn.

Disclaimer: IANAW (any more). I haven't waited tables for several years and I rarely drink when I'm out. Things may be different now.

Solutions (4, Insightful)

CompMD (522020) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751939)

Got an RFID tag in your drivers license? Throw it in the microwave for 2 seconds.

Got a magstripe on your drivers license? Rub it with a magnet a few times.

Got a barcode on your drivers license? Use a little fine grit sandpaper on a few blocks.

Oh, that's funny, I wonder why your reader can't read my license. Must not be working right.

Re:Solutions (5, Insightful)

shock1970 (1216162) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752153)

Which is all fine and dandy until you can't get served at a bar because of it!

YvOU FAIL IT (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751991)

canS can become

Alcohol vs other light drugs (1, Offtopic)

jbssm (961115) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752035)

I don't think there is so much tourism in Utah, the idea is bad cause it's an offence to civil liberties.

Still, by an academic point of view, it's strikes to me so strange on why do you accept the sale and consumption of alcohol, but you don't accept of other light drugs (cannabis for instance).

Most countries, with the notable exception of Holland (where both sale and consumption is legal) and some other European countries were consumption is legal, allow alcohol while they don't allow other light drugs.
Now my question is, have you ever seen a drunk guy in comparison to a guy that smoke some joints? Or what do you think it's the percentage of heavy alcohol consumers that destroy their life vs heavy cannabis smokers that destroy their lives? Or worst, have you noticed how violent some people that drink alcohol get vs cannabis smokers?

It's somewhat hypocrite that we accept alcohol consumption for cultural reasons, but that we don't accept cannabis (as an example). Why can understand that people drink wine or even beer as an acquired taste, but when you drink vodka or rum, well, you do it to get drunk.

I just think that we are all adults and so we can choose what to do or not with our lives. Just ban any publicity to light drugs but allow people to make their own choice about consuming then or not.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?