Is this evidence of a larger problem? [lawsuits and personal responsibility]

[Magiver]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

I think this lawsuit could potentially have merit dependent on two very specific facts: whether the store owners/operators were aware that their goods were being smuggled onto the reservation, and whether there was anything they could have done to prevent it.

Certainly owning an establishment in a high risk area alone could not be the basis for liability. To hold otherwise would effectively allow the reservation to control the use of neighboring land.

That doesn’t make sense. It’s not illegal to consume alcohol which makes the sale not only legal but it would be discriminatory to withhold it.

This isn’t aimed at stores, it’s aimed at a product and the producers of the product.

[UltraVires]

@Zeriel

I said start an investigation, if suspicious quantities are being moved.

If said investigation turns up normal customers buying normal amounts of beer, all good.

If said investigation turns up shady customers buying larger-than-legal amounts of beer out the back door/warehouse door, then that’s another thing.

Is anyone alleging that these stores are selling to front men who are taking cases of whiskey and peddling it on the street corners of the reservation? I’m not being snarky; I just didn’t get that impression.

The impression I got was that these stores are so close to the reservation that customers are driving there, buying a bottle or two and then taking it home.

I think that in the first case, you definitely have a civil if not a criminal case. In the second, which I think is the real dispute, I don’t see one.

[Grey]

Pineridge reservation Population - 28,700 (per Wikipedia)
Whiteclay Population - 14 (per Wikipedia Pine Ridge)
Beer sold - 5 million 12 oz cans (1.77 Million Liters)

It’s fairly obvious that the store(s) in Whiteclay knowingly sold 1.8 Million liters of beer to the residents of the reservation and not the local population. Given local knowledge and understanding of the context of the ban does this constitute enabling an obviously criminal activity? I’m not sure but it doesn’t strike me as a wildly unreasonable legal avenue to take if you have few options.

A better question would be how the hell do you fix the underlying social issues that drive the alcoholism in the first place. I personally don’t think maintaining a reservation system is the answer but that’s a bigger question than “are we all irresponsible cry babies now days?”

[Zeriel]

@jtgain

Is anyone alleging that these stores are selling to front men who are taking cases of whiskey and peddling it on the street corners of the reservation? I’m not being snarky; I just didn’t get that impression.

The impression I got was that these stores are so close to the reservation that customers are driving there, buying a bottle or two and then taking it home.

I think that in the first case, you definitely have a civil if not a criminal case. In the second, which I think is the real dispute, I don’t see one.

I don’t really think we have enough information one way or another to make an actual assessment, personally. I think we have more than enough information to warrant someone looking into it, given the numbers Grey posted.

Given the numbers Grey posted, seems like it’d be damn cost effective for the reservation to post a car inspection checkpoint on that road, though.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@Magiver

That doesn’t make sense. It’s not illegal to consume alcohol which makes the sale not only legal but it would be discriminatory to withhold it.

This isn’t aimed at stores, it’s aimed at a product and the producers of the product.

What “isn’t aimed at stores”?

[Justin_Bailey]

@Zeriel

I don’t really think we have enough information one way or another to make an actual assessment, personally. I think we have more than enough information to warrant someone looking into it, given the numbers Grey posted.

Assuming all of the beer sold at the stores is only sold to citizens of the reservation, that’s only three beers per person per week. That’s not exactly an epidemic.

[Zeriel]

@Justin_Bailey

Assuming all of the beer sold at the stores is only sold to citizens of the reservation, that’s only three beers per person per week. That’s not exactly an epidemic.

I was thinking more about the poor souls in Whiteclay, who must (since it’s illegal to bring beer onto the reservation) be drinking something like 6,900 beers per week each to keep up with those numbers.

In all seriousness–if the store owner is selling a case or two to some random guy every week or so, that’s fine. If they’re moving it out the back door in pallets (as in, obviously not just some guy buying beer, but rather a smuggling-esque scenario) that’s probably not.

[Cheesesteak]

@jtgain

But that is always going to happen in any border area with restrictive alcohol laws.

So what do you do? Have a policy of checking licenses and refusing to sell to residents of the dry county? Why?

Diplomacy. Respect. It’s why, even though the law may say that it’s OK to fire up my chainsaw at 6am Sunday morning, I don’t do it.

If you want to have good relations with your neighbors, helping their residents to break the law in large numbers isn’t a great way to accomplish it. Especially when the law being broken contributes to the miserable standard of living within the reservation.

[Mighty_Mouse]

@Cheesesteak

Diplomacy. Respect. It’s why, even though the law may say that it’s OK to fire up my chainsaw at 6am Sunday morning, I don’t do it.

If you want to have good relations with your neighbors, helping their residents to break the law in large numbers isn’t a great way to accomplish it. Especially when the law being broken contributes to the miserable standard of living within the reservation.

Is it legal in Canada to refuse to sell something to someone based on their membership in some ethnic group?

If a white guy comes in, you sell him a case of beer, or two or three or four cases. If an Indian guy comes him, he has to prove he is not a resident of a reservation that prohibits alcohol consumption or he only gets a six pack a day.

I imagine if either one came in falling down drunk, you might refuse to sell to them, but regardless of their race/ethnicity/nationality.

I don’t think this would be legal in the US, but we do sometimes recognize that Canada is a separate countries, so maybe it is legal up there. Any Canadopers want to help.

It’s probably not legal for you to fire up your chainsaw at 6am, unless there is some kind of emergency. In most jurisdictions I have lived in at least (again in the US, maybe the Canadians are more individualistic in their outlook)

[Whambulance]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

Your grandparents notwithstanding, your thesis is bunk. People have been suing corporations for harm caused in part by their own problems at least since well before “the WWII generation”.

I get your point, but I’d like to see the per capita numbers on that though .. now versus then.

[Odesio]

@jtgain

But that is always going to happen in any border area with restrictive alcohol laws. If you own a liquor store at the border of a dry county, you know damned good and well that you are selling a bunch of booze to people who live in the dry county.

There’s a difference between a dry county and the Indian reservation. In most dry counties, it is only illegal to purchase or sell alcohol while possessing and drinking it are okay. If I buy alcohol in a wet county and drive the stuff to my home in a dry county and drink it I am acting within the bounds of the law. In contrast, it is completely illegal to possess and drink alcohol on the reservation in question. Complicating matters is that Indian Reservations have a certain level of autonomy. There may be treaties or laws in respects to commerce that I’m not aware of. Then again, maybe not. If there was an actual crime being committed I don’t know if they’d bother with a civil suit.