I can't express in words how stupid this whole situation is. I really can't. At least not without delving into a black pit of streaming ranting and profanity, which is not me.
There's that. But my point is more about the idea of banning things because people are stupid.
Alcohol is legal and obtainable.
Caffeine is legal and obtainable.
People have been combining the two for a LOT longer than this junk has been around, and will continue to do so for a long time to come.
As with most things that people find desirable, banning/limiting access only changes the channels toward which people will turn to obtain it, which is a dangerous road.
I think the difference here is that they're packaged nicely together in one drinkably-sized portion that will get you shitfaced faster than you're used to while simultaneously leaving you feeling fine.
I'm fine with Darwinism and all anyway, just wanted to point out that there's not really a precedent for this, and the fact that so-and-so existed before doesn't really cover it here.
Jager Bombs are very conveniently provided in a drinkably-sized portion (in fact, even moreso, since it's done shooter-style), and have been around for many years.
The problem with this whole situation is that a couple of stupid people got stupid drunk and did stupid stuff.
If they had been drinking anything else, people would be looking at banning that, as well.
Jager Bombs are very conveniently provided in a drinkably-sized portion (in fact, even moreso, since it's done shooter-style), and have been around for many years.
Yeah but a Jager bomb doesn't contain your daily max recommended intake of alcohol in a single serving.
Then again neither does a four loko, the 12%/23.5oz ones are about 3 days worth.
This is the real crux and the non-precedent. The package doesn't say - obviously - about how much alcohol you are about to consume.
If putting the %ABV on the can isn't enough, then how come beer, wine, and liquor manufacturers can get away with just that.
In seriousness, at 12% (I would have expected around at least 20% considering all the hubbub), it sits squarely between a craft brew (there are many in the 8-9% range) and wine (typically around 13-15%). Even the weakest shooter-type drinks are well in the >20% range.
The OMGSOMUCHALCOHOLINASMALLPACKAGE argument is a ridiculous straw-man (that has probably been propagated by MADD).
I agree with your assessment about the straw-man, but I guess it goes back to the amount of caffeine and amount of alcohol contained in "one" drink. Beer, wine, and liquor don't have added caffeine (I think it was 4 cups worth of coffee, but I could be wrong) that impairs your ability to feel how much alcohol you have consumed. Personal responsibility is a lofty ideal, but the reality is that there are tons of stupid kids who would drink this in widely irresponsible ways ... but that is getting into the realm of why we have lots of irresponsible drinking.
I agree with your assessment about the straw-man, but I guess it goes back to the amount of caffeine and amount of alcohol contained in "one" drink. Beer, wine, and liquor don't have added caffeine (I think it was 4 cups worth of coffee, but I could be wrong) that impairs your ability to feel how much alcohol you have consumed. Personal responsibility is a lofty ideal, but the reality is that there are tons of stupid kids who would drink this in widely irresponsible ways ... but that is getting into the realm of why we have lots of irresponsible drinking.
Right... At that point, you're dealing with a cultural issue (which is caused by abolitionist groups and a ridiculous drinking age limit) that encourages binge drinking and extreme consumption, rather than moderation.
I still don't think that's a cause to ban anything just on the merits of its contents when both primary contents are legal to obtain through other means.
Because four loko/joose/etc are an easier target for politicans who are deeply in the pockets of abolitionist organizations.
After all, they have to be seen to do something, they need activity. It is their substitute for achievement, and the only way they get their share of that sweet MADD money.
There was nothing enjoyable about any of those stories.
That was my point. Serving the equivalent of 4 cups of coffee and 4 or 5 drinks in a single can will result in disaster. Either way, I find it funny reading about people making asses of themselves.
Those stories, hah! Great stuff, but notice they all drink 2 cans (at least) along with other alcoholic drinks. Some of those people had close to 30 drinks in 4-5 hour spans. No wonder they black out and do crazy stuff.
I have a fuzzy and incomplete memory after 1.25 cans of the stuff, I can't imagine what more would be like.
Comments
There's that. But my point is more about the idea of banning things because people are stupid.
Alcohol is legal and obtainable.
Caffeine is legal and obtainable.
People have been combining the two for a LOT longer than this junk has been around, and will continue to do so for a long time to come.
As with most things that people find desirable, banning/limiting access only changes the channels toward which people will turn to obtain it, which is a dangerous road.
I'm fine with Darwinism and all anyway, just wanted to point out that there's not really a precedent for this, and the fact that so-and-so existed before doesn't really cover it here.
The problem with this whole situation is that a couple of stupid people got stupid drunk and did stupid stuff.
If they had been drinking anything else, people would be looking at banning that, as well.
Yeah but a Jager bomb doesn't contain your daily max recommended intake of alcohol in a single serving.
Then again neither does a four loko, the 12%/23.5oz ones are about 3 days worth.
This is the real crux and the non-precedent. The package doesn't say - obviously - about how much alcohol you are about to consume.
If putting the %ABV on the can isn't enough, then how come beer, wine, and liquor manufacturers can get away with just that.
In seriousness, at 12% (I would have expected around at least 20% considering all the hubbub), it sits squarely between a craft brew (there are many in the 8-9% range) and wine (typically around 13-15%). Even the weakest shooter-type drinks are well in the >20% range.
The OMGSOMUCHALCOHOLINASMALLPACKAGE argument is a ridiculous straw-man (that has probably been propagated by MADD).
Right... At that point, you're dealing with a cultural issue (which is caused by abolitionist groups and a ridiculous drinking age limit) that encourages binge drinking and extreme consumption, rather than moderation.
I still don't think that's a cause to ban anything just on the merits of its contents when both primary contents are legal to obtain through other means.
Because four loko/joose/etc are an easier target for politicans seeking to score moral guardian points.
After all, they have to be seen to do something, they need activity. It is their substitute for achievement.
FTFY
Just thought I'd bring some love into this thread.
Enjoy
In fact, it only serves to give credence to the idea that people have gotten about them being banned.
People acting retarded: Ruining good things for everyone else since the dawn of time.
If only that were still true today.
That was my point. Serving the equivalent of 4 cups of coffee and 4 or 5 drinks in a single can will result in disaster. Either way, I find it funny reading about people making asses of themselves.
I have a fuzzy and incomplete memory after 1.25 cans of the stuff, I can't imagine what more would be like.