Curry Todd is da man.....

[macville]

Here's a question... do we really want true "bars" in our state? I would love to see the stats on drunk drivers (caught) and where they came from. I am betting that 75% came from these places that are supposed to be restaurants, but are in reality bars.

I have no problems with people drinking (I do so myself), but the amount of people who drink way too much and then drive is astounding. How hard is it to realize if you've had more than 1-2 drinks an hour, your drunk?

Matthew

[Guest HexHead]

How hard is it to realize if you've had more than 1-2 drinks an hour, your drunk?

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

[analog_kidd]

I like this bill. The judge with the agenda thought we were too stupid to figure out what a restaurant is. That was the whole premise of her arguement. This way we use a law that already exists to help clear it up for us numbskulls.

Sometimes the law of unintended consequenses can be a Mother. Restaurants may be getting this lesson.

[Guest TnRebel]

It's simply a retaliatory shut the up bill. It's telling the people who opposed the restaurant carry law that they are vulnerable to legal retaliation for their actions. IMHO the card should have been played when they filed suit against the law. That would have made those A-holes step back a moment and analyze the situation before proceeding. Well, too late for that now, so now they have to stop and say, "Oh ! They're really coming after me now! Maybe I ought to keep my mouth shut if I want to stay in business?"

[Guest TnRebel]

Its like my grandpapy always sead " You F*ck With The Bull , You Get The Horn" Go Todd !

[Worriedman]

Quick, we need an amendment to this proposal, require ALL alcoholic beverages to be included in the audit. Currently under ABC Rules, only those with greater than 5% by weight are accountable.

From the AGENDA FOR THE NOVEMBER 19, 2009 ABC COMMISSION MEETING – PAGE 7

When TABC staff conducts a food service investigation on an establishment to determine the principle business of that establishment, one of the factors considered is the percentage of sales from various sources of revenue. These sources of revenue include the following: food, alcohol sales; concessions; door, etc. Issue: How should the staff treat low alcoholic beer for the purposes of a food audit? Should beer sales be included as part of alcohol and wine sales, or should that be considered as a separate and distinct source of income? It should be noted that, by statutory definition, beer containing less than 5% alcoholic content by weight is not considered to be an alcoholic beverage.

Pretty sneaky methinks, seems that the ABC is employed by the Alcohol Lobby???

http://tennessee.gov/abc/November%20Agenda%202009.pdf

ABW vs. ABV

Since alcohol is lighter than the beer in which it exists, alcohol content that is expressed by weight appears to be lower compared to an alcohol content that is expressed by volume. For example, a beer that is 3.2% by weight is 4.0% by volume and a beer that is 4% by weight is actually 5% by volume. To convert the percentage of alcohol by weight to the percentage of alcohol by volume, multiply by 1.25. Conversely, to convert from volume to weight, multiply by .80.

Percentage of beer by volume.

http://www.realbeer.com/edu/health/calories.php

Edited February 11, 2010 by Worriedman

[jay1313g]

Did anybody see the news about the new bill that Curry Todd introduced that would make serving alcohol from 12am to 8am ILLEGAL?

What a hoot! The news in Memphis went nuts. They were interviewing people on Beale Street about it.

I think this is awesome and will give him a card to play against the restauranteers that are opposing any "guns in restaurants" legislation.

You could almost see him smirking when he said that this was a good law because that's the time that most of the drinkers caused trouble.

I couldn't ever be in politics but I sure can be entertained by it!

[Rightwinger]

Time is relative. I'll sue him with theories from Einstein.

[dwcz]

+1 for sticking it back in their faces.

[Guest stovepipe]

That'll be good for tourism...

[TNRobocop]

That'll be good for tourism...

Oh yeah, drunks are great for tourism...

But back on topic, sounds like he is using this as leverage against the anti-gun turds that helped get it killed the first time.

[Punisher84]

Search. It's what's for dinner.

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/tennessee-politics-legislation/34892-curry-todd-da-man.html

[Rightwinger]

Time for the tribes to merge!

[Almond27]

I don't think this would work honestly.

[TMMT]

Oh yeah, drunks are great for tourism...

Actually they are good for tourism on several fronts, pubs, beer and liquor stores, restaurants, bail bondsmen...

[Guest Drewsett]

I get the frustration that alot of people are feeling about this and I DO think it is a novel approach to solve the "what's a bar, what's a restaurant" question. I DON'T however think that it is particularly helpful to call it retaliatory. To call it retaliatory basically admits that you're being immature...

Also, as a restuarant employee...it would really stink to not allow any alcohol to be served from 12-8. I usually get off work around 11 or 12 and then go hang out with some guys from work and have a couple of beers. If they are successful in passing this, I no longer get to go hang out with my friends and have a few beers after work. Oh...and did I mention I SUPPORT the guns in restaurants bill? So now I lose two rights that I value (rights isn't the right word, but you know what I mean).

[Punisher84]

I get the frustration that alot of people are feeling about this and I DO think it is a novel approach to solve the "what's a bar, what's a restaurant" question. I DON'T however think that it is particularly helpful to call it retaliatory. To call it retaliatory basically admits that you're being immature...

Also, as a restuarant employee...it would really stink to not allow any alcohol to be served from 12-8. I usually get off work around 11 or 12 and then go hang out with some guys from work and have a couple of beers. If they are successful in passing this, I no longer get to go hang out with my friends and have a few beers after work. Oh...and did I mention I SUPPORT the guns in restaurants bill? So now I lose two rights that I value (rights isn't the right word, but you know what I mean).

No offense, but I don't recall any right to booze or drinking in public. I work 3rd shift so I never get to go out and drink. Just food for thought.

Have your buddies pick up a 12 pack and go drink at home. Cheaper, safer, do what you want, don't get liquored up and end up coming to see me at 3am after you've wrapped your car around a tree.

[Guest clownsdd]

Oh yeah, drunks are great for tourism...

Supports the local Memphis economy. They are easier to mug.

[Worriedman]

I get the frustration that alot of people are feeling about this and I DO think it is a novel approach to solve the "what's a bar, what's a restaurant" question. I DON'T however think that it is particularly helpful to call it retaliatory. To call it retaliatory basically admits that you're being immature...

Seems to me that "retaliatory" is not only a tool of the immature. I would suggest that our dealings with Japan after Pearl Harbor, and the Battle of San Jacinto fall under that heading as well.

The word means to "repay in kind". I see the proposal of this Bill as a natural step in the progression of the game that is afoot. All the other side had to do was accept HB 0962 and post if they were vehemently opposed to carry on their premises. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Edited February 11, 2010 by Worriedman

[Guest Caveman]

Did anybody see the news about the new bill that Curry Todd introduced that would make serving alcohol from 12am to 8am ILLEGAL?

What a hoot! The news in Memphis went nuts. They were interviewing people on Beale Street about it.

I think this is awesome and will give him a card to play against the restauranteers that are opposing any "guns in restaurants" legislation.

You could almost see him smirking when he said that this was a good law because that's the time that most of the drinkers caused trouble.

I couldn't ever be in politics but I sure can be entertained by it!

[Fallguy]

I could be wrong, but I doubt this bill has much of a chance of passing.

But it may very well serve a couple of purposes.

One, if you think there is a problem with guns and alcohol in the same room, maybe the alcohol is equally the problems as well as the gun. Not that I think either is, but it could make a few think.

Secondly, I wonder if it is just a tool to help the new restaurant carry bill have a smoother track. Don't oppose the new bill and I won't push this bill.

Saw a clip on WBBJ last night with Curry. Had to laugh at a few that said it was their "right" to drink. Not that I disagree, but it's funny how now in TN drinking is seen more favorably that carrying a firearm.

The even contacted the local PD...their take was that more crimes happen after dark, not just after midnight. Now this is the same PD that wanted to charge local "bars" a fee so they could post patrol cars out front at closing because of all the problems.

But anyway...

....and for the record, I do partake of adult beverages.

[Champ198]

I don't have a prob shutting down the drinking at midnight. I also don't have a problem with bars having to be accountable for their status under the law and report food sales. Curry has a point on multiple levels.

Let's be honest, drunk drivers kill more people, cause more property damage, and permenantly ruin more lives than our guns could ever do.

Why is alcohol and bars the sacred cow? I support Curry and I say lets take it to 'em.

[Guest spoolie]

x289374892374982734 Caveman...no one here uses that function.

[Fallguy]

Search. It's what's for dinner.

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/tennessee-politics-legislation/34892-curry-todd-da-man.html

Time for the tribes to merge!

Done

[molonlabetn]

Looks like an attempt to begin creating distinct definitions of 'bar' and 'resturaunt which serves alcohol'.