# License to buy alcohol **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 13, 2015, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/license-to-buy-alcohol/737480 "2015-11-13T17:02:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![glowacks](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/glowacks/32/5548_2.png) [@glowacks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glowacks)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2015, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/license-to-buy-alcohol/737480/21 "2015-11-14T02:57:20Z")
> [@GreasyJack](#): > > Courts already do take away peoples’ right to drink very frequently in the form of “no alcohol” being a condition on virtually every probation or parole arrangement. DUI’s and pretty much any other minor crime that’s even vaguely alcohol related also usually come with a lengthy court-ordered “no alcohol” restriction. Sure, there’s no real enforcement to make sure they never have a drink ever, but it makes it way easier for those folks to get sent to jail (or back to jail) if they’re not drinking responsibly. This is good to know. As to enforcement, I expect it to be much like checking ID right now at bars, and for private parties, the same issue there is with driver licenses. You only get it checked when you do something wrong and a LEO notices. And if you happen to not have a license to do it, it gets much worse. Like another poster, I don’t see why it couldn’t be a check-box on a previously issued state ID if we decided to do it. Again, I don’t think it will ever happen, and I’m not going to actively advocate for it beyond just opening this thread and expressing my opinion. But it’s a thought I’ve had that I’ve wondered about the general level of support for. ---
**Author:** ![glowacks](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/glowacks/32/5548_2.png) [@glowacks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glowacks)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2015, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/license-to-buy-alcohol/737480/22 "2015-11-14T03:04:28Z")
> [@silenus](#): > > You mean like enforcing laws against domestic battery, drunk driving, disturbing the peace and the like? You offer a solution in search of a problem. Law enforcement’s end goal is the prevention of crimes, not the prosecution of offenders. Reduction in crime is a goal that everyone should be happy with. I’m offering a tool to help the state reduce crime by helping to limit one causative element. It’s not a blanket attempt to prevent people from drinking, but a message to people that alcohol is a dangerous substance whose use is tolerated by the authorities only when its use does not cause harm to others. I suspect that for the vast majority of people, such a licensing system would have absolutely no effect. Yes, every state having different liquor laws makes things problematic. I didn’t say this was a practical idea. It’s just a theoretical concept that I think would help society if by some miracle it happened to come into existence. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Niply\_Elder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8e8cbc/32.png) [@The\_Niply\_Elder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Niply_Elder)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2015, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/license-to-buy-alcohol/737480/23 "2015-11-14T04:40:40Z")
> [@glowacks](#): > > This is good to know. > > As to enforcement, I expect it to be much like checking ID right now at bars, and for private parties, the same issue there is with driver licenses. Wait what? I’m not understanding how you would address this issue raised with private parties. ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2015, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/license-to-buy-alcohol/737480/24 "2015-11-14T14:40:23Z")
While I love alcohol and am in favour of more liberal laws in general (lower drinking age, legalize public consumption, etc.), I actually kind of support a system like this. Alcohol’s effects on people (and effects of many other drugs) are too individualized and idiosyncractic for a blanket policy (prohibition, legalization, tolerance, moral disapproval etc.) to work all that well, so some more fine tuned system would work better. Licensing individuals to be allowed to drink would work well in America, I think. (The other alternative is give the government discretionary powers to arrest people for generalized non-criminal misbehavior, like Cuba does. Which would obvious never fly in a liberal democracy). ---
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2015, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/license-to-buy-alcohol/737480/25 "2015-11-14T14:45:34Z")
> [@scabpicker](#): > > Well, it doesn’t really require a lot of investment, smarts or special ingredients to make alcohol, (good alcohol can be another story). So, I’d imagine the unlicensed would just brew at home. I’ve known more than one kid who did it in their closet in high school. All you need is some sweet liquid that yeast can eat, yeast, appropriately sized plastic bottles, and a balloon. Nasty stuff, but if you wanted to get drunk real bad, it was there. You don’t even need that. I enjoy fresh apple cider every fall. But often, a half gallon sits in my fridge too long and gets fizzy. That’s a weak apple beer, but it’s booze, and it doesn’t taste half bad, and it takes zero special equipment. ---
**Author:** ![glowacks](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/glowacks/32/5548_2.png) [@glowacks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glowacks)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2015, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/license-to-buy-alcohol/737480/26 "2015-11-14T18:09:27Z")
> [@The\_Niply\_Elder](#): > > Wait what? I’m not understanding how you would address this issue raised with private parties. When you get in your car and drive on the public roads, who is checking to make sure you have a driver license and insurance? No one. It’s only when the police pull you over that you need to offer proof of those things. So the only time they would be checked would be at the time of purchase (which obviously the host only needs the license), and then if the police get called because of something that merits their attention, if they determine that alcohol was a factor in the disturbance, they will ask for licenses for those involved. I don’t know the exact details would be, and perhaps you’re looking for exactly who I would hold accountable in terms of provider vs. consumer with respect to loss of licensure. I can’t say that I’ve thought it through completely to give a satisfactory answer there, but presumably there would be a framework in place detailing who is responsible and what the ramifications are for the parties for certain actions. This framework would be known to people who get licensed in the same way that consequences of driving infractions are theoretically known by those licensed to drive. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2015, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/license-to-buy-alcohol/737480/27 "2015-11-14T18:46:48Z")
> [@glowacks](#): > > Really, banning alcohol would be perfectly reasonable in light of our other drug laws, but I think that a better solution in all cases is to allow people licenses of some sort for the purchases of drugs that are known to be a problem. I think they tried that [once](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_States). Didn’t really work out all that well. ---
**Author:** ![GreasyJack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/df705f/32.png) [@GreasyJack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreasyJack)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2015, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/license-to-buy-alcohol/737480/28 "2015-11-14T21:10:44Z")
I actually just remembered that my city tried to implement something somewhat similar to this a few years ago. They tried to get the local stores to voluntarily refuse to sell alcohol to a list of problem drunks in the downtown areas. The problem was that invariably all the problem drunks were homeless people and most of them were Native Americans, so the program didn’t really sit well with local homeless advocates. Which kind of gets to one of the problems with the license and “point system” you’re proposing. Like I mentioned earlier, if you do anything really egregious while drunk like assault someone or (thankfully these days) drive drunk, the legal ramification of that crime will almost always include being forbidden from drinking for some period of time. So having the whole licence and point thing would be redundant there. What that leaves are more minor crimes. Things like disorderly conduct, public urination, open containers and things like that. The problem is that people who rack up a lot of those tend to do so because they’re homeless and don’t have a private place to get drunk, not because they’re necessarily the worst-of-the-worst drunks (although obviously alcoholism and homelessness often go hand in hand.) Just like the blacklist in my town, I think it would be very difficult to have your “drinking license” not end up just being another de facto way for the legal system to punish people for being homeless. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2015, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/license-to-buy-alcohol/737480/29 "2015-11-14T21:38:24Z")
> [@GreasyJack](#): > > Just like the blacklist in my town, I think it would be very difficult to have your “drinking license” not end up just being another de facto way for the legal system to punish people for being homeless. They could get a license for “allowed to drink out of a brown paper bag.” ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2015, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/license-to-buy-alcohol/737480/30 "2015-11-15T03:30:30Z")
> [@cochrane](#): > > How would you enforce it? Would clerks be required to check for a license at the point of sale? Also, it would probably require a constitutional amendment since each state has its own set of liquor laws. I would imagine it can be based on our driver’s licenses, and work much the same way as the controls on methamphetamine precursors. I don’t think I can get behind the whole idea in the first place, though. OTOH, perhaps it would be good for cannabis if the trend towards legalization continues. ---
**Author:** ![Claverhouse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/13edae/32.png) [@Claverhouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Claverhouse)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2015, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/license-to-buy-alcohol/737480/31 "2015-11-15T04:24:49Z")
It wouldn’t be that difficult to enforce. You would institute agents, modeled on the Saudi Morals Police and Tsar Ivan’s Oprichnina with the investigatory powers granted by the Local Committee system of the English, American and Russian Revolutions together with the informatory systems of the Calvinistic churches and the GDR Stasi. Recruit only from true believers to cut the natural corruption of 1930s Prohibition ( schoolchildren can be your best allies, since they deal in moral absolutes, and need little incentive to report their own families if persuaded a cigarette or whisky is _evil_ ). Blanket the media with messages of how _awful_ disapproved stuff is and how people selfish enough to enjoy such things will eventually die; set out licenses good for one month with a limited number of units to be struck off in that time ( the units can be alcohol/tobacco/snuff/hash/sex/whatever else is to be collectively regulated for people’s own good ); set severe penalties for lighting up or drinking etc.; have the morals police patrol town centres and have full powers to enter any house and check if smoking or drinking etc. has occurred, and fine/imprison the naughty. The cost of the agents could be covered from the fines and their own satisfaction in stopping wickedness. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2015, 6:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/license-to-buy-alcohol/737480/32 "2015-11-15T06:08:19Z")
> [@glowacks](#): > > I believe that much like driving a car, people should be licensed in order to buy alcohol. If people can be shown to have a history of misusing the alcohol that they buy, whether personally or through their distribution to others who misuse it, they can have their license revoked. Most estimates are that 15-30% of the drivers on the road are driving illegally (license revoked/suspended, never had license, no valid insurance, no valid registratiom, etc.). Yet they still are driving. People under 21 are not legally able to buy alcohol in any US state. But they continue to obtain alcohol and drink it, and get into trouble. How will any of these things be changed by requiring an ‘alcohol purchase license’? ---
**Author:** ![Antonius\_Block](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/51bf81/32.png) [@Antonius\_Block](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antonius_Block)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2015, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/license-to-buy-alcohol/737480/33 "2015-11-16T00:06:20Z")
> [@glowacks](#): > > I believe that much like driving a car, people should be licensed in order to buy alcohol. Currently, international tourists spend more money while visiting the US than any other country (France receives more visitors, but their overall spending is less: “[_International visitors spent more than double in the U.S. than they did in France in 2012 – $126.2 billion, compared to $53.7 billion, according to the U.N.'s World Tourism Organization_](http://www.cbsnews.com/news/france-learns-to-speak-touriste/)”). I cannot quickly find an estimate of the amount of this spending that pertains to alcoholic drinks, but it’s a fair bet that it is in the $billions/year. Most International visitors to the US do not rent a car; mostly they are in cities and rely on taxis or public transportation, or take tours via train or coach. If they **do** want to rent a car, there exists the [International Driving Permit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Driving_Permit) (IDP). This is fairly straightforward to obtain, since most tourists to the US come from countries with an equivalent to US states’ [DMV](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_of_Motor_Vehicles), so there is a clear paper trail back to a test showing the ability to safely drive a vehicle. However, no country has an equivalent “alcohol permit” to the one proposed by the OP. So, OP, I am a British tourist, and I walk into your bar in San Francisco and ask for a pint of [Anchor Steam](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchor_Brewing_Company). Will you serve me? If so, **why** _(given that I certainly will not have one of your “permitted to be served alcohol” licences)_; and if not, **why not** _(given that I am an upstanding citizen of my own country, with no alcohol-related offences to my name – but I have no way of proving that to you)_? _[n.b. If your answer is to be “we will not serve alcohol to foreign tourists” then you have just demolished a large part of the US tourist industry. It’s not that foreign tourists come to the US specifically to drink, but adults on vacation expect to be able to drink, and already carry ID to prove their age]_ ---
**Author:** ![glowacks](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/glowacks/32/5548_2.png) [@glowacks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glowacks)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2015, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/license-to-buy-alcohol/737480/34 "2015-11-16T01:00:42Z")
> [@t-bonham@scc.net](#): > > Most estimates are that 15-30% of the drivers on the road are driving illegally (license revoked/suspended, never had license, no valid insurance, no valid registratiom, etc.). Yet they still are driving. > > People under 21 are not legally able to buy alcohol in any US state. But they continue to obtain alcohol and drink it, and get into trouble. > > How will any of these things be changed by requiring an ‘alcohol purchase license’? I expect there will be no changes to the actual availability of alcohol to those that are truly interested in drinking it but are not theoretically allowed to by the state authority in the same way that people drive without licenses and there is no way to effectively stop them if they don’t cause trouble. If they don’t cause trouble, then there’s no problem. If they cause trouble, it’s something else that we can throw at them, and the threat of it would theoretically be a deterrent from causing trouble. The threat of going after the supplier of the alcohol would also theoretically cause them to be more cautious with whom they provide alcohol to. I expect it to work something like how it does now with prescription drugs, just without a doctor’s required approval. If one is serious about keeping scheduled drugs out of common people’s hands, why should one make a distinction with alcohol just because of current ubiquity? My idea is not a practical one but a theoretical one only. I probably cannot say enough times that I know that it has absolutely no chance of becoming reality. I also don’t mean to suggest that it will stop all problems of alcohol use; the same is true for driving in that licensing drivers does not prevent fatal car crashes but no one seriously advocates not licensing drivers. People seem to think that government control over certain drugs is perfectly fine, but others are not, and to some extent this is a practical problem, but that is not my concern. I’m just saying that theoretically, given our framework for how we deal with similar things, we should be licensing alcohol buyers. If I implied or directly stated otherwise, I’m sorry. ---
**Author:** ![glowacks](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/glowacks/32/5548_2.png) [@glowacks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glowacks)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2015, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/license-to-buy-alcohol/737480/35 "2015-11-16T01:19:23Z")
> [@Antonius\_Block](#): > > international tourists The practical problem you present is real and is part of the reason I don’t think it would ever happen. If we were living in an alternate dimension in which governments throughout the world had decided that alcohol purchasing needed to be licensed in the same way that drivers of cars did, then we’d be using the same sort of rules when it comes to letting international tourists drive cars. Additionally, saying that you can automatically use whatever drug you used to use in another country because it should be the same everywhere is not a particularly valid argument. [Khat](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khat) is banned by most western countries that allow alcohol and tobacco which are much worse for one’s health. If khat was indigenous to the Americas and tobacco to Africa/Arabia, I suspect that the situations would be reversed. Yes, I understand what the economic impact would be in the current environment, but I’m not talking about practicalities. If it wasn’t for the complete reliance large sections of our economy have on alcoholic beverages being freely purchasable, and if alcohol had somehow not been discovered until the same time as heroin, I suspect they would be considered similar substances. From a theoretical standpoint, there is no reason why we schedule some drugs and allow others without any system of screening, especially as we have a system for screening for some of those drugs that we already schedule. I fully realize that you can make alcohol in your home. But from what I understand you can also cook meth in your home, yet that does not stop us from scheduling it and dealing legally with people who break laws regarding its distribution. > [@Claverhouse](#): > > It wouldn’t be that difficult to enforce. You would institute agents, modeled on the Saudi Morals Police and Tsar Ivan’s Oprichnina with the investigatory powers granted by the Local Committee system of the English, American and Russian Revolutions together with the informatory systems of the Calvinistic churches and the GDR Stasi. Recruit only from true believers to cut the natural corruption of 1930s Prohibition ( schoolchildren can be your best allies, since they deal in moral absolutes, and need little incentive to report their own families if persuaded a cigarette or whisky is _evil_ ). > Blanket the media with messages of how _awful_ disapproved stuff is and how people selfish enough to enjoy such things will eventually die; set out licenses good for one month with a limited number of units to be struck off in that time ( the units can be alcohol/tobacco/snuff/hash/sex/whatever else is to be collectively regulated for people’s own good ); set severe penalties for lighting up or drinking etc.; have the morals police patrol town centres and have full powers to enter any house and check if smoking or drinking etc. has occurred, and fine/imprison the naughty. > The cost of the agents could be covered from the fines and their own satisfaction in stopping wickedness. Just like with methamphetamines, right? ---
**Author:** ![Raining\_Facts](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e95f7d/32.png) [@Raining\_Facts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raining_Facts)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2015, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/license-to-buy-alcohol/737480/36 "2015-11-16T02:11:55Z")
> [@Omar\_Little](#): > > Would be a huge waste of government resources, with very minimal impact. And generally a dumb idea. Complete prohibition was a failure, this partial regulatory solution would be an even bigger failure. > > More people die of heart disease from obesity related conditions than alcohol related diseases. How about a license to purchase carbs? SMOKING is the number one cause of preventable diseases and premature death, followed by obesity. Cigarettes should not be confused with, and spoken of in the same context, as recreational tobacco smoking and here is why: Phillip Morris and RJ Reynolds had chemists on staff to make a brew to add to the tobacco to make it extremely addictive. When ignited the chemicals cause a reaction much like freebasing. Yet there is talk about the FDA banning vaping. I wonder if big tobacco is behind that. CARB LICENSING. New York banned sodas over a certain size, and of course it was eventually overturned. [http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/27/nyregion/city-loses-final-appeal-on-limiting-sales-of-large-sodas.html?\_r=0](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/27/nyregion/city-loses-final-appeal-on-limiting-sales-of-large-sodas.html?_r=0) Businesses selling the sodas were clearly the ones making the biggest fuss about this rule, and of course they holler about civil liberty. I am not saying the rule was valid to begin with; but isn’t it likely that if Pepsi, concession stands, fast food, and the like were not up in arms then it likely would not have been overturned so quickly if at all. ALCOHOL. I am not saying people should be allowed to drive inebriated, but it’s clear the war on drunk driving became a money grab. Statistics were exaggerated to influence the law making. For example, if a person had any amount to drink and was in an accident then alcohol was a factor. Several major cities have had to overturn old DUI convictions due to the equipment never being calibrated. NEVER! When the manufacturer said it was necessary for accuracy to be calibrated annually. Between DUI lawyers, interlock fees (a franchise by the way), court costs, DMV costs, and so on; how does the penalty match the crime? The original premise is a license to buy alcohol to prevent or control crime as related to consumption of alcohol. We all have one and it’s called a driver license or state issued ID showing age. You see what happened with prohibition and all the govt. officials dispatched to battle booze. Since govt. seldom downsizes, after prohibition they were turned on marijuana and drugs. Forget it is the polite way to put it in this forum ---
**Author:** ![Raining\_Facts](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e95f7d/32.png) [@Raining\_Facts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raining_Facts)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2015, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/license-to-buy-alcohol/737480/37 "2015-11-16T02:25:00Z")
> [@t-bonham@scc.net](#): > > Most estimates are that 15-30% of the drivers on the road are driving illegally (license revoked/suspended, never had license, no valid insurance, no valid registratiom, etc.). Yet they still are driving. > > People under 21 are not legally able to buy alcohol in any US state. But they continue to obtain alcohol and drink it, and get into trouble. > > How will any of these things be changed by requiring an ‘alcohol purchase license’? I have seen with my own eyes illegal immigrants buying licenses at MVA. I wish I had a video. It was so obvious. They met out front with a lady with a folder who called names off, and they all went in and had a special line for all of them with a particular person from MVA. Interestingly it was actually behind closed doors ---
**Author:** ![Antonius\_Block](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/51bf81/32.png) [@Antonius\_Block](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antonius_Block)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2015, 4:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/license-to-buy-alcohol/737480/38 "2015-11-16T04:33:48Z")
> [@Raining\_Facts](#): > > I have seen with my own eyes illegal immigrants buying licenses at MVA. Would I be correct in assuming that this was in Maryland? _[Your use of MVA suggests the [Motor Vehicle Administration](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_of_Motor_Vehicles) Division of the [Maryland Department of Transportation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryland_Department_of_Transportation) – apologies if I am incorrect in this assumption.]_ If so, it’s because Maryland is one of the [12 States (+DC)](http://www.ncsl.org/research/immigration/states-offering-driver-s-licenses-to-immigrants.aspx) that permit “unauthorized immigrants” to obtain driver’s licenses via an entirely legal process. In this case, despite their problematic immigration status (incidentally, how did you know that they were “illegal immigrants”?), once they are in possession of such a driver’s license they are fully authorized by the State to operate a vehicle, so would not be “driving illegally” in the sense used by **[t-bonham@scc.net](mailto:t-bonham@scc.net)** _(“license revoked/suspended, never had license, no valid insurance, no valid registration, etc.”)_. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/license-to-buy-alcohol/737480.md?page=1)