Colorado has a 2:00 AM closing time but since it is a Home Rule state there are certain things cities can override. Closing time is one that Denver is considering for LoDo as it tends to get a bit rough around closing time, they are considering going to later closing times but alcohol service would stop at 2:00. The area where my office is located is right in the center of the "problem area", when working late I try to be out of there by 10:00.

Has anyone here been to an ABLE commission meeting? They are held monthly at the ABLE Commission's offices and they are open to the public.

Oklahoma ABLE Commission - Commission Minutes (http://www.ok.gov/able/Commission_Minutes/index.html)

Never been to an ABLE mtg., and Lawdy, jus' take me now iffin' I ever end up in any state agency's mtg. ever again. :)

What other states are trying to do for alcohol law reform: States consider changes in liquor, beer, wine laws (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/02/13/stateline-liquor-taxes/5448457/)

A view from Tennessee:

It?s time for wine: How retailers won in Tennessee | Industry Voices (http://supermarketnews.com/blog/it-s-time-wine-how-retailers-won-tennessee)

The problem in Oklahoma seems to be there is not a strong coalition or movement supporting change. People can complain all they want about the liquor laws here but until there is a large voice supporting change, there is likely to be zero progress. There is however a strong coalition supporting keeping the laws the way they are. The religious right and the distributors have money and power and they will stop at nothing to prevent any kind of change to the liquor laws here.

This thread started back in 2010. Some bonded whiskey, that started at the same time, is probably ready to be bottled.

It looks like Arkansas may beat Oklahoma to the punch when it comes to establishing truly progressive, modern laws. It helps that the state has a couple of progressive bastions in Little Rock and Fayetteville - something Oklahoma does not have. It will be interesting to see if this passes. The rural areas of Arkansas in the western and northern part of the state are extremely conservative with a wide variety holding firmly to the idea that all alcohol consumption is sinful and should be banned. Those areas of the state are also where most of the dry counties are.

Arkansas Voters May Get to Decide on Minimum Wage, Alcohol Sales | Arkansas Business News | ArkansasBusiness.com (http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article/99667/arkansas-voters-may-get-to-decide-on-minimum-wage-alcohol-sales)

So, other than Sunday sales, exactly what is it you feel is so horrible about OKs laws? Besides wishing you could buy another bottle of Gentleman Jack on Easter, what life-shattering consumption need is not fullfillable? Plenty of more"progressive" states have odd laws, too.

So, other than Sunday sales, exactly what is it you feel is so horrible about OKs laws? Besides wishing you could buy another bottle of Gentleman Jack on Easter, what life-shattering consumption need is not fullfillable? Plenty of more"progressive" states have odd laws, too.

-Only 3.2 beer in grocery and convenience stores
-Package stores must close at 9PM
-Package stores must sell all product at room temperature
-Package stores cannot sell any items other than liquor (i.e. wine openers)

I honestly don't care about Sunday sales and feel that is actually the least backward part of Oklahoma's system.

-Only 3.2 beer in grocery and convenience stores
-Package stores must close at 9PM
-Package stores must sell all product at room temperature
-Package stores cannot sell any items other than liquor (i.e. wine openers)

I honestly don't care about Sunday sales and feel that is actually the least backward part of Oklahoma's system.

Who is this strong religious right lobby that you say is involved in this? Do they have meetings? Run ads? Name names and explain what they are doing, please. Specifically.

That's a good start. How about brew pubs (on premise) also being limited to 3.2abw. There's a reason why we literally have less than a handful in our entire state.

Breweries can't direct sell anything in excess of 3.2abw. They've only recently been able to even serve samples (12oz max).
Just compare the wine laws versus beer, the inequality there is laughable. There's no coincidence why there are 70 or 80 wineries and only a dozen or so breweries.

Have you read through this thread? I'm sure all the major topics have been mentioned several times over. The "4 tier" system in place here is a real killer and a monopoly and to be quite honest I can't see the brokers or distributors wanting the laws to change much.

That's a good start. How about brew pubs (on premise) also being limited to 3.2abw. There's a reason why we literally have less than a handful in our entire state.

Breweries can't direct sell anything in excess of 3.2abw. They've only recently been able to even serve samples (12oz max).
Just compare the wine laws versus beer, the inequality there is laughable. There's no coincidence why there are 70 or 80 wineries and only a dozen or so breweries.

Have you read through this thread? I'm sure all the major topics have been mentioned several times over. The "4 tier" system in place here is a real killer and a monopoly and to be quite honest I can't see the brokers or distributors wanting the laws to change much.

Agreed. The brewery thing is terrible. Could that be changed without a constitutional amendment the way the winery laws were changed?

I'm not sure why any of the pro-wine laws couldn't be modified to give parity with beer.

Who is this strong religious right lobby that you say is involved in this? Do they have meetings? Run ads? Name names and explain what they are doing, please. Specifically.

Have you ever wondered why Utah has the strictest liquor laws in the country?

I'll give you a hint, it's not due to them catering to their Muslim population.

Have you ever wondered why Utah has the strictest liquor laws in the country?

I'll give you a hint, it's not due to them catering to their Muslim population.

I'll give you a hint also. PQ isn't talking about Utah.

I'll give you a hint also. PQ isn't talking about Utah.

I don't see how anybody can look at Oklahoma's legislature and deny the influence of the radical religious right and its desire to enforce its very narrow interpretation of the Bible on the lives of all Oklahomans. Why do you think this state has people like Sally Kern? Why do people like her get re-elected?

Using religion is just a convenient front to argue these type of topics but don't think for a second it's not deeply rooted in money.

What needs to happen is a funded grassroots effort to show those that are unaware how the craft beer explosion going on everywhere isn't happening here because of our laws. There'll be much less talk about religion in these discussions when the real potential of income/jobs are discussed I think.

I don't think it's the religious lobby (if that's what you want to call it) as much as it is the liquor lobby (namely the Naifeh's) and MADD types of groups.

The liquor lobby would be losing a lot of money if OKC all of a sudden allowed sales in grocery stores because then there would be less wine sales at liquor stores since they could get it at the grocery store. Also, bigger companies like Costco, Whole Foods, Trader Joe's, etc would bring their alcohol in from their distributors, not the Naifeh's which would also cause them to lost money.

The MADD types of groups think that just because we can sell cold beer at liquor stores, wine and higher point beer at grocery stores, people will be getting more drunk and it will give them easier access to colder alcohol, which they will in turn drink faster (presumably in their car on the way home from the store) and end up getting someone else hurt. It is an absurd accusation and is just one thing they are trying to hold on to. They use the "what about the children" line to get people to believe their way without listening to the facts or understanding someone else's POV.

Any time any group wants to take away freedom, all they have to say is "it's for the children." Both liberals and conservatives use that tactic.

I don't think it's the religious lobby (if that's what you want to call it) as much as it is the liquor lobby (namely the Naifeh's) and MADD types of groups.

The liquor lobby would be losing a lot of money if OKC all of a sudden allowed sales in grocery stores because then there would be less wine sales at liquor stores since they could get it at the grocery store. Also, bigger companies like Costco, Whole Foods, Trader Joe's, etc would bring their alcohol in from their distributors, not the Naifeh's which would also cause them to lost money.

The MADD types of groups think that just because we can sell cold beer at liquor stores, wine and higher point beer at grocery stores, people will be getting more drunk and it will give them easier access to colder alcohol, which they will in turn drink faster (presumably in their car on the way home from the store) and end up getting someone else hurt. It is an absurd accusation and is just one thing they are trying to hold on to. They use the "what about the children" line to get people to believe their way without listening to the facts or understanding someone else's POV.
Agreed. Btw, finally checked out the family on linked in, good grief they're in EVERYTHING. Good luck going against those guys.

Using religion is just a convenient front to argue these type of topics but don't think for a second it's not deeply rooted in money.

What needs to happen is a funded grassroots effort to show those that are unaware how the craft beer explosion going on everywhere isn't happening here because of our laws. There'll be much less talk about religion in these discussions when the real potential of income/jobs are discussed I think.

Religion is probably still somewhat responsible, but is secondary to the money...

So how do we start a grassroots funded effort to change things? I am not experienced in that kind of thing, seems like there are some out there who are, but how do we get something started? Attempts have been made over the past few years, but they never got much past the start line, I believe.

Have you ever wondered why Utah has the strictest liquor laws in the country?

I'll give you a hint, it's not due to them catering to their Muslim population.

But I wonder why Utah ratified the 21st Amendment, which was prohibition repeal of alcohol. I don't get that.

Religion is probably still somewhat responsible, but is secondary to the money...

So how do we start a grassroots funded effort to change things? I am not experienced in that kind of thing, seems like there are some out there who are, but how do we get something started? Attempts have been made over the past few years, but they never got much past the start line, I believe.
Someone, who is rich, needs to start the ball rolling. I tend to doubt there is enough enthusiasm for alcohol law reform in Oklahoma to come up with enough fired up volunteers working for nothing in the major cities to find around 156,000 signatures during the 90 day campaign allowed.

Someone, who is rich, needs to start the ball rolling. I tend to doubt there is enough enthusiasm for alcohol law reform in Oklahoma to come up with enough fired up volunteers working for nothing in the major cities to find around 156,000 signatures during the 90 day campaign allowed.

That's what I figured, thanks... I would so love to change so many of the things here (or at least start the ball rolling, as Bunty says), but it takes $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ to do so, and I only have $$. Very frustrating to see things in need of change, and possibly know how to change them, but not having any/enough money to do so.

What would be a good way to do it (and I am not the one to organize it, so please don't ask me) is to couple it with a craft brew festival like the one done in May. At least, that would be a great place to get a ton of signatures.

I don't think it's the religious lobby (if that's what you want to call it) as much as it is the liquor lobby (namely the Naifeh's) and MADD types of groups.

The liquor lobby would be losing a lot of money if OKC all of a sudden allowed sales in grocery stores because then there would be less wine sales at liquor stores since they could get it at the grocery store. Also, bigger companies like Costco, Whole Foods, Trader Joe's, etc would bring their alcohol in from their distributors, not the Naifeh's which would also cause them to lost money.

The MADD types of groups think that just because we can sell cold beer at liquor stores, wine and higher point beer at grocery stores, people will be getting more drunk and it will give them easier access to colder alcohol, which they will in turn drink faster (presumably in their car on the way home from the store) and end up getting someone else hurt. It is an absurd accusation and is just one thing they are trying to hold on to. They use the "what about the children" line to get people to believe their way without listening to the facts or understanding someone else's POV.

This is wrong and right. Religious lobby has actually stayed mostly out of this.
Naifehs do control the industry. however if wine becomes available in grocery it will still go through central liquor. The 4 tier system is in the state constitution, good luck changing that.

First if you allow wine and grocery you will see a massive lawsuit right off the bat. For 50 years liquor have been allowed to own 1 store, must be a sole proprietor, and be a resident of the state for 10 years and then one day you change all the rules on them.

Second there is a lot of very very powerful companies who really like the system the way it is. Budweiser loves it. They can go direct, sell cold, and have 5 extra hours to sell. No way they're signing off on cold beer in liquor stores. The liquor stores like it. They don't have to compete against chains, there is no bulk discounts, and they don't have to compete against grocery stores. The brokers like the system. All they have to do is rep the products and move the paperwork. The wholesalers like it. (Naifehs)

Third if you support local business and claim to be a local business adovcate and you support putting wine in grocery your either ignorant about how the oklahoma system actually works or you are a massive massive hypocrite of epic proportions. The system oklahoma has in place might be the most local business friendly system in the entire country.

The distillers aren't local.
The brokers are local/national. You have the majors RNDC, Glazers, Gallo but you also have many local brokers. Thirst, premium, select, etc. (Coop Ale works) actually self brokers)
Wholesalers- central, jarboe, action and sterling. All local.
Liquor stores- Every. Single. Store. Is locally owned and operated.

OR we can be "progressive" and go to a Texas system
Distiller-not local
RNDC, southern, Glazers, Gallo are the distributors and will have 90% market share in any given area. They are all multi billion dollar corporations.
Wal Mart, Target, etc.- obviously not local.
Specs and others are massive Texas chains with a few locally owned liquor stores.

Btw there are more wine sku's available in state of oklahoma with its 4,000,000 people then in Texas with its 30,000,000. Think about that. It's an unintentionally brillaint that needs some tweaks.

Someone, who is rich, needs to start the ball rolling. I tend to doubt there is enough enthusiasm for alcohol law reform in Oklahoma to come up with enough fired up volunteers working for nothing in the major cities to find around 156,000 signatures during the 90 day campaign allowed.

Aubrey freaking McClendon tried to take on the Naifehs to get the laws changed and failed. Let that sink in. It's going to take someone with power not money. And in the words of frank underwood I pity the man who doesn't know the difference.

Indiana cold beer battle.

Cold beer battle heats up in Indiana - Jul. 17, 2014 (http://money.cnn.com/2014/07/17/smallbusiness/cold-beer-battle/index.html?iid=SF_SB_River)

Most reputable breweries suggest that their product be refrigerated as it is, in the final analysis, a food product. Sort of like liquid bread. I wonder if there could be a "public health and safety" angle here . . . hmmmmm.....

Indiana cold beer battle.

Cold beer battle heats up in Indiana - Jul. 17, 2014 (http://money.cnn.com/2014/07/17/smallbusiness/cold-beer-battle/index.html?iid=SF_SB_River)

I would love it if Oklahoma had laws like Indiana's current laws. At least they can sell cold beer in liquor stores. They trust their citizens enough that they won't buy it and chug it in the car before driving in front of a liquor store, or they at least know if they are going to do that, the beer being warm isn't going to make a difference. Somebody said Indiana needs to get out of the dark ages in the article. If Indiana is in the dark ages, Oklahoma is in the stone age.

I'll be surprised if Oklahoma's overall liquor laws are changed within our lifetimes given how difficult it is to get a proposal on the ballot in this state and how most of the population is generally apathetic about the current laws. In 2050, Oklahoma grocery stores will likely still be selling 3.2 beer and you'll likely still have to go to a liquor store for anything with higher alcohol content. However, there are three things I would really like to see and it would drastically make life easier for the consumer in this state without changing the laws too much. Colorado is one of the best beer states in the nation yet their laws, while more liberal than Oklahoma's, aren't much so.

-Brewpubs can sell high-point beer on site
-Liquor stores can sell cold beer
-Liquor stores can stay open to at least 10PM and on Sunday

Doing these things alone would make the current laws much easier to deal with. Question is, what are the chances of those things ever happening? Can they be done without a constitutional amendment?

I'll be surprised if Oklahoma's overall liquor laws are changed within our lifetimes given how difficult it is to get a proposal on the ballot in this state and how most of the population is generally apathetic about the current laws. In 2050, Oklahoma grocery stores will likely still be selling 3.2 beer and you'll likely still have to go to a liquor store for anything with higher alcohol content. However, there are three things I would really like to see and it would drastically make life easier for the consumer in this state without changing the laws too much. Colorado is one of the best beer states in the nation yet their laws, while more liberal than Oklahoma's, aren't much so.

-Brewpubs can sell high-point beer on site
-Liquor stores can sell cold beer
-Liquor stores can stay open to at least 10PM and on Sunday

Doing these things alone would make the current laws much easier to deal with. Question is, what are the chances of those things ever happening? Can they be done without a constitutional amendment?

80% chance
25% chance
45% chance

Brewpubs have been pushing to get this done and eventually will be able to.
Most liquor stores can't hold a big cooler and its a good chunk of overhead and cost. So they aren't exactly screaming for it. Main problem would be Bud/Miller/Coors, they would fight like hell against it, as it eliminates one of the advantages they have selling 3.2 beer.
Selling on Sundays is slightly less then 50/50. MADD and the Baptists won't like it, but those who are powerful in the liquor industry would. I just don't know if the political will power is there.

I'll be surprised if Oklahoma's overall liquor laws are changed within our lifetimes given how difficult it is to get a proposal on the ballot in this state and how most of the population is generally apathetic about the current laws. In 2050, Oklahoma grocery stores will likely still be selling 3.2 beer and you'll likely still have to go to a liquor store for anything with higher alcohol content. However, there are three things I would really like to see and it would drastically make life easier for the consumer in this state without changing the laws too much. Colorado is one of the best beer states in the nation yet their laws, while more liberal than Oklahoma's, aren't much so.

-Brewpubs can sell high-point beer on site
-Liquor stores can sell cold beer
-Liquor stores can stay open to at least 10PM and on Sunday

Doing these things alone would make the current laws much easier to deal with. Question is, what are the chances of those things ever happening? Can they be done without a constitutional amendment?

80% chance
25% chance
45% chance

Brewpubs have been pushing to get this done and eventually will be able to.

Most liquor stores can't hold a big cooler and its a good chunk of overhead and cost. So they aren't exactly screaming for it. Main problem would be Bud/Miller/Coors, they would fight like hell against it, as it eliminates one of the advantages they have selling 3.2 beer.

Selling on Sundays is slightly less then 50/50. MADD and the Baptists won't like it, but those who are powerful in the liquor industry would. I just don't know if the political will power is there.

Brewpubs have been pushing to get this done and eventually will be able to.

Most liquor stores can't hold a big cooler and its a good chunk of overhead and cost. So they aren't exactly screaming for it. Main problem would be Bud/Miller/Coors, they would fight like hell against it, as it eliminates one of the advantages they have selling 3.2 beer.

Selling on Sundays is slightly less then 50/50. MADD and the Baptists won't like it, but those who are powerful in the liquor industry would. I just don't know if the political will power is there.

Hopefully brewpubs can get this done sooner rather than later. The market is ripe and it would be great to see Oklahoma have the kind of brewpub explosion places like Colorado are experiencing. As for cold beer, with Budweiser entering the Oklahoma market with strong versions of their products, wouldn't there be less opposition from them to selling it cold? My guess is most opposition would come from religious and MADD groups who would be against anything that would make purchasing alcohol easier on the consumer. Likewise with late-night and Sunday sales.

Hopefully brewpubs can get this done sooner rather than later. The market is ripe and it would be great to see Oklahoma have the kind of brewpub explosion places like Colorado are experiencing. As for cold beer, with Budweiser entering the Oklahoma market with strong versions of their products, wouldn't there be less opposition from them to selling it cold? My guess is most opposition would come from religious and MADD groups who would be against anything that would make purchasing alcohol easier on the consumer. Likewise with late-night and Sunday sales.

I think Roughtail is brewing some 3.2 for their tasting room. So some are adjusting for now.

Why give away any market advantage that they have? They can sell warm strong beer and cold 3.2 beer. Selling warm strong beer isn't going to hurt 3.2 sales, but selling cold strong beer would. There would be some that go from cold 3.2 to cold strong bud but they'd still lose some business from it.

The laws are what they are here. Liquor laws are very difficult to change, not just here, everywhere. We'll continue to see some tweaks but overall the setup will endure.

I don't know when the official start dates but being able to doggy bag wine has been a nice change. I hear they are getting close to allowing bottle service in clubs. That will be helpful as well.

How about letting the free market decide.

How about letting the free market decide.

You can't. It's a product that kills people. All products that kill people have high regulation.

Using religion is just a convenient front to argue these type of topics but don't think for a second it's not deeply rooted in money.**

What needs to happen is a funded grassroots effort to show those that are unaware how the craft beer explosion going on everywhere isn't happening here because of our laws.* There'll be much less talk about religion in these discussions when the real potential of income/jobs are discussed I think.

So this grassroots thing is happening, check it out at*localok.org*and also on Facebook.* They are modeling the effort after a couple of others that have been successful in getting laws relaxed/changed in other states.* If you want in on an organized effort and really want to see changes happening, follow and support these guys!



Most liquor stores can't hold a big cooler and its a good chunk of overhead and cost. So they aren't exactly screaming for it. Main problem would be Bud/Miller/Coors, they would fight like hell against it, as it eliminates one of the advantages they have selling 3.2 beer.*


The liquor store owners that are unwilling to add in refrigeration or they could care less either way are the jackasses in the business to solely make money and I'd rather not give them any of mine.* If they cared enough to understand or at least do some research on the detrimental effects of storing product at room temp over refrigeration has in terms of staling they'd want at least a little refrigeration, specifically for some of their beer.**


I think Roughtail is brewing some 3.2 for their tasting room. So some are adjusting for now.



Roughtail Brewing, COOP, Prairie Artisan Ales (Tulsa), and Mustang Brewing all have 3.2 beers in the past or are currently selling.* If you've ever been out to an open event (like H&8th) the COOP trailer is there selling their 3.2 beer.* In fact, COOP is actually about to start canning all three of those beers very soon.* They'll be available in grocers just like Mustang did with their Session 33, 3.2 beer they had out last year.* With 3.2 beer the brewer can self-distribute as well as sell directly at the brewery, not to mention the laws regulating the sales of 3.2 alcohol is way less regulated...which is what the real slap in the face is for me.* To lay a definition (an absurd prohibition era definition at that) out there defining alcohol as "non-intoxicating" <now called "low-point"> or "intoxicating" is so dumb.* I really believe that if those guys were familiar with how/what/why of those terms they'd agree it's far past time to update, change, or do away with laws that reference alcohol content, at least anything on the lower "low-point" end.

At any rate more of the breweries are working 3.2 beers into their lineup.* This allows them to justify pushing forward with tasting rooms where they can serve pints of beer and sell growlers directly with hopes that one day soon it won't be restricted.**

What's wrong with folks in business, investing their money, solely to make money. I thought that's why anyone got into business. Did you think they invested 100k+ and the time it requires to get licensed out of charity?

BTW - Good beer doesn't need refrigeration. Good beer improves with storage and age. Only crap beer water needs "born on dates" and refrigeration.

Sorry, duplicate post. Tap a talk isn't working for me, I can't access via my works fire wall and can't figure out how to delete from the mobile version...

If it was about the money, liquor stores should want refrigeration because that would negate advantage the grocers have being able to sell cold 3.2 beer. They would also widen their selection as numerous brewers will not sell in Oklahoma due to not being able to store refrigerated. I don't buy for one moment that liquor stores are responsible for the law requiring beer being sold at room temperature. That blame falls directly with MADD groups and Baptists who think they are preventing people from chugging beer in liquor store parking lots.

What's wrong with folks in business, investing their money, solely to make money. I thought that's why anyone got into business. Did you think they invested 100k+ and the time it requires to get licensed out of charity?

BTW - Good beer doesn't need refrigeration. Good beer improves with storage and age. Only crap beer water needs "born on dates" and refrigeration.

Not caring about their product enough to do the research and realize that YES, beer should be refrigerated. No, not all of it has to be but premature staling is happening to all off it, certain beers will develop nicely by storage at room temp but for many beers (especially IPA, the most popular of craft beer styles) it's a killer. Don't take my word, do your own research, ask any brewer they'll tell you the same.

That's amazing, because even in states with refrigeration, beer is shipped, warehoused, and stored warm before being placed in refrigeration. Someone should tell someone about that.

And I only owned a liquor store, and am active in the local craft beer/home brew groups. I know nothing.

Light affects beer, but not temp (unless we're talking extreme warmth). However, cheep lagers such as Bud will be affected by temps, but crap turned to crap is still crap.

Now long term (as in, after you bought it) refrigeration can be good for preserving IPA's (especially west coast IPAs). But the amount of time product is on the shelves at liquor stores shouldn't be a factor (unless turnover is SUPER slow, which is a whole other issue).

My big complaint though is the implication that those retailers who don't fight for refrigeration don't care or don't deserve your business. Liquor retail is an extremely small profit industry, and most shops are just focused on staying in business. I know the liquor retail association is all for allowing cold beer, and I know retailers who've tried tricks (going as far as keeping their shops at 50 degrees - something ABLE said "no" to), so folks do care. But they can't invest much effort, money, or time into it.

That's amazing, because even in states with refrigeration, beer is shipped, warehoused, and stored warm before being placed in refrigeration.* Someone should tell someone about that.

And I only owned a liquor store, and am active in the local craft beer/home brew groups.* I know nothing.

Light affects beer, but not temp (unless we're talking extreme warmth).* However, cheep lagers such as Bud will be affected by temps, but crap turned to crap is still crap.

Now long term (as in, after you bought it) refrigeration can be good for preserving IPA's (especially west coast IPAs).* But the amount of time product is on the shelves at liquor stores shouldn't be a factor (unless turnover is SUPER slow, which is a whole other issue).

That is true, for most beer anyway.* There's some craft that is stored/shipped refrigerated, that stuff isn't cheap and it's hard, nearly impossible for a brewer to get an agreement that their beer is kept cold once it reaches a distributor...it's hard enough for most of these guys to get their beer on the shelf as it is.* Regardless, just because it isn't done doesn't mean they wouldn't prefer it if/when possible.**

I'm familiar with you owning a liquor store; I remember that from a previous post (perhaps in this thread) and I respect and envy the amount of knowledge you have in terms of dealing in the business.* That said, I'm also very much involved in the craft beer and homebrew communities, I am a homebrewer, and I'm here to tell you that staling is factual regardless how few people actually know or understand it.* Light, oxygen, and temperature all have effects on beer, most of it is negative.* You can certainly do your own experiments but here's something to ponder: for every 10°C (18°F) staling occurs twice as fast.* Considering that, a beer kept at room temperature will stale roughly four times as fast as one kept refrigerated (~35F).*

Categorizing Bud as "cheap" has nothing to do with its susceptibility to temperature.* I'd also argue against calling it cheap but that's another topic altogether.* I will agree that many of those macro brewed light lagers are pasteurized and for those beers that are, the freshest you can get it the better as all of their staling/aging properties will not affect the beer in a positive way.

You can't. It's a product that kills people. All products that kill people have high regulation.

The problem is the current regulations do nothing to save lives. Adding refrigeration in liquor stores, letting them open on sundays, allowing wine in grocery stores...these things wont kill more people. The current regs exist for establishment protection and because no one seems to care enough to make change happen.

Would be nice if one or two legislators made this a big issue and pushed for it. Its not like they are tackling more important issues all the time.

The problem is the current regulations do nothing to save lives. Adding refrigeration in liquor stores, letting them open on sundays, allowing wine in grocery stores...these things wont kill more people. The current regs exist for establishment protection and because no one seems to care enough to make change happen.

I agree with you except the grocery stores part. There have been multiple studies that show a direct correlation between increased availability and drunk drive and alcohol abuse.

Now whether these type of restrictions/limitations are the best way to affect those issues, is a whole other matter.

That is true, for most beer anyway.* There's some craft that is stored/shipped refrigerated, that stuff isn't cheap and it's hard, nearly impossible for a brewer to get an agreement that their beer is kept cold once it reaches a distributor...it's hard enough for most of these guys to get their beer on the shelf as it is.* Regardless, just because it isn't done doesn't mean they wouldn't prefer it if/when possible.**

I'm familiar with you owning a liquor store; I remember that from a previous post (perhaps in this thread) and I respect and envy the amount of knowledge you have in terms of dealing in the business.* That said, I'm also very much involved in the craft beer and homebrew communities, I am a homebrewer, and I'm here to tell you that staling is factual regardless how few people actually know or understand it.* Light, oxygen, and temperature all have effects on beer, most of it is negative.* You can certainly do your own experiments but here's something to ponder: for every 10°C (18°F) staling occurs twice as fast.* Considering that, a beer kept at room temperature will stale roughly four times as fast as one kept refrigerated (~35F).*

Categorizing Bud as "cheap" has nothing to do with its susceptibility to temperature.* I'd also argue against calling it cheap but that's another topic altogether.* I will agree that many of those macro brewed light lagers are pasteurized and for those beers that are, the freshest you can get it the better as all of their staling/aging properties will not affect the beer in a positive way.

Like I said, temp can be important for preserving long term as it can affect the length of time for staling. However, at the retail level, beer is typically not stored long enough for this to be a concern. Even at the grocery level (or in states with refrigeration allowed in liquor stores) refrigeration is a matter of convenience to the customer, not storage. Most places still store their back stock at room temperature, and merely shelf in the cold displays as available.

Travis County (Austin area) has no beer/wine sales in grocery stores on Sunday before noon and liquor stores are not open on Sunday, even Spec's. Every state has some screwy liquor laws that make no sense.

If the idea that drunk driving and alcoholism increases with availability was true, as proponents of these laws say, then Oklahoma should have the lowest rate of drunk driving and alcoholism in the nation, followed closely by Utah and Pennsylvania. Is that the case?

And sorry bluedogok, while I agree that every state has weird laws, there is no comparison between Texas' laws in Travis County and Oklahoma's system when it comes to impact on the consumer.

The 3 Best and 3 Worst States in America for Drinking | TIME.com (http://business.time.com/2013/12/05/the-3-best-and-3-worst-states-in-america-for-drinking/)

The Worst

1. Utah: Many of the restrictive drinking laws around the country derive from a religious skepticism of alcohol, and Utah’s strong religious culture has helped motivate the passage of sundry drinking restrictions. Only beer with less than 3.2% alcohol by weight can be sold in grocery and convenience stores or on tap. Like a strong drink? You’re out of luck in Utah, as cocktails can only contain 1.5 ounces of a primary liquor, while alcohol can’t be purchased in restaurants without food. Oh yeah, keggers are out of the question too, as keg sales are prohibited.

2. Massachusetts: Massachusetts is well-known for its many colleges and universities, but the state’s laws seemed aimed at preventing these students from having very much fun. Out of state drivers licenses aren’t acceptable proofs of age under state law, meaning that out-of-state visitors can get turned away from bars. Bars are also prohibited from allowing drinking games on their premises, and perhaps worst of all, happy hours are banned state wide.

3. Pennsylvania: If you’re not from the Keystone State, stocking up for a party can be a pretty confusing task. All wine and liquor sold in the state are done so by state-owned liquor stores, which don’t sell beer at all. If you want a six-pack of brews, you would think that a “beer distributor” would be the place to go, except that those establishments are only allowed to sell cases. For anything less you have to go to a restaurant with a liquor control board-issued license. Got all that? Me neither. Who needs a drink?

I believe the outcry over our liquor laws/regs is vastly overblown. Other than not being able to get New Belgium products, the laws on the books are not that much of a burden. I also find the prices at Byrons to be cheaper than the same product at a Texas Wal Mart.

Travis County (Austin area) has no beer/wine sales in grocery stores on Sunday before noon and liquor stores are not open on Sunday, even Spec's. Every state has some screwy liquor laws that make no sense.

Isn't that "curfew" spread throughout all of Texas?* To my knowledge it runs 12hours starting at midnight on Sunday and running until noon.* Sure it's more drastic than OK's curfew but I'd argue for relaxing/changing several other aspects of the law there (or here) before I'd worry about the curfew.**


If the idea that drunk driving and alcoholism increases with availability was true, as proponents of these laws say, then Oklahoma should have the lowest rate of drunk driving and alcoholism in the nation, followed closely by Utah and Pennsylvania.* Is that the case?

And sorry bluedogok, while I agree that every state has weird laws, there is no comparison between Texas' laws in Travis County and Oklahoma's system when it comes to impact on the consumer.

Agreed.* While Texas certainly has some dumb laws pertaining to alcohol (all states do!) they have been actively changing them and I'm sure they'll continue to do so through their "Open the Taps" movement.* Other states have similar programs like "Free the Hops" in Alabama which has made recent progress as well and believe me, if you know anything about changing laws related to booze in that state you know it's not easy.* Alabama representatives are something else...look up Alvin Holmes.

My point is our state's current restrictions are directly affecting growth within the market, supporting jobs, etc.* Moreover, if other states can make changes so can we but it's going to take time, patience, a lot of support and money.

The 3 Best and 3 Worst States in America for Drinking | TIME.com (http://business.time.com/2013/12/05/the-3-best-and-3-worst-states-in-america-for-drinking/)

The Worst

1. Utah: Many of the restrictive drinking laws around the country derive from a religious skepticism of alcohol, and Utah’s strong religious culture has helped motivate the passage of sundry drinking restrictions. Only beer with less than 3.2% alcohol by weight can be sold in grocery and convenience stores or on tap. Like a strong drink? You’re out of luck in Utah, as cocktails can only contain 1.5 ounces of a primary liquor, while alcohol can’t be purchased in restaurants without food. Oh yeah, keggers are out of the question too, as keg sales are prohibited.

2. Massachusetts: Massachusetts is well-known for its many colleges and universities, but the state’s laws seemed aimed at preventing these students from having very much fun. Out of state drivers licenses aren’t acceptable proofs of age under state law, meaning that out-of-state visitors can get turned away from bars. Bars are also prohibited from allowing drinking games on their premises, and perhaps worst of all, happy hours are banned state wide.

3. Pennsylvania: If you’re not from the Keystone State, stocking up for a party can be a pretty confusing task. All wine and liquor sold in the state are done so by state-owned liquor stores, which don’t sell beer at all. If you want a six-pack of brews, you would think that a “beer distributor” would be the place to go, except that those establishments are only allowed to sell cases. For anything less you have to go to a restaurant with a liquor control board-issued license. Got all that? Me neither. Who needs a drink?

I believe the outcry over our liquor laws/regs is vastly overblown. Other than not being able to get New Belgium products, the laws on the books are not that much of a burden. I also find the prices at Byrons to be cheaper than the same product at a Texas Wal Mart.

Vastly overblown? I disagree sir! Just because we didn't hit the top three doesn't mean were doing OK. There's no parity between wine and beer in our state, that alone makes very little sense. Consider this, you can go to a winery in OK and sample as much as you want and then buy wine directly from them. If you go to a brewery you are limited to 12oz worth of samples (>3.2abw) and if you find anything you like you're going to have to hit up a liquor store. Not only can wineries self-distribute as of just recently they can now ship direct to customers.

That's merely scraping the surface but fixing those gross variances would be a huge help to our local craft breweries.

Quote Originally Posted by onthestrip View Post

The problem is the current regulations do nothing to save lives. Adding refrigeration in liquor stores, letting them open on sundays, allowing wine in grocery stores...these things wont kill more people. The current regs exist for establishment protection and because no one seems to care enough to make change happen.


I agree with you except the grocery stores part. There have been multiple studies that show a direct correlation between increased availability and drunk drive and alcohol abuse.

Now whether these type of restrictions/limitations are the best way to affect those issues, is a whole other matter.

If (and that is a big if as you can make studies say what you want them to just by changing parameters) availability increases drunk driving then you should also be against liquor stores being open on Sunday as that also is increasing availability. Of course, being open on Sunday helps a liquor store and selling wine in a grocery store hurts a liquor store.

If (and that is a big if as you can make studies say what you want them to just by changing parameters) availability increases drunk driving then you should also be against liquor stores being open on Sunday as that also is increasing availability. Of course, being open on Sunday helps a liquor store and selling wine in a grocery store hurts a liquor store.

I would agree that opening on Sunday would also increase availability. As for making studies say what I want... Well, there are quite a few studies out there and they all agree that increased availability (and Sunday sales was one of the criteria) has a direct correlation to alcohol abuse and drunk driving. You can feel free to dismiss them, much like folks dismiss climate change reports.

If you truly support small local business, you shouldn't support wine in grocery.

If you truly support small local business, you shouldn't support wine in grocery.

What if the grocery store is Native Roots?

What if the grocery store is Native Roots?

Yeah thats one. How many local small business liquor stores does that contrast with?

Pennsylvania is one that is commonly overlooked due to the fact they don't have to deal with 3.2 beer there, but their laws are very archaic. They are also the one single example of a "liberal" state that has laws that rival Oklahoma's in restrictiveness. I would have definitely placed Oklahoma second behind Utah instead of Massachusetts. Mass. liquor laws aren't that bad as long as you live in the state.

The logical next step in Oklahoma is to bring brewery laws in line with what the wineries currently enjoy. This needs to be done sooner rather than later so Oklahoma can take greater advantage of the current craft-beer craze.

If you truly support small local business, you shouldn't support wine in grocery.

Huh? Twice now you have made head scratching posts. Homeland, Buy For Less, Reasors...these are all Oklahoma based and owned grocers. With wine sold in grocery stores, we would still be supporting local businesses and the customer would have much better options. Oklahoma should be more free market and talk less about being free market.

And if liquor store owners dont like grocery stores being allowed to sell wine, the easy and fair thing to do is allow liquor stores to sell ice, mixers, cigarettes, bottle openers, etc...