Oklahoma liquor laws

[jerrywall]

But I thought if 792 passes and makes 3.2% beer go away, then the remaining beer is higher point, subject to the higher alcohol tax in which 3.2% beer was not subject to. Why do you think beer in bars costs more in Dallas than in Oklahoma City? If 792 passes, then how can there be any more 95 cent draws for happy hour? Or a dollar for a can of beer?

TBH part of the intent of the two year implementation is to work out some of those details. Rules blocking happy hours and beer specials are ABLE rules and can be changed without a vote of the people. A lot of 792 is clearing the slate and making room for a rewrite of much of our rules.

[Bill Robertson]

OK. Wait. I might have missed something. Is there a possibility that my Coors Original special pricing at my two favorite haunts will go away with passing of 792. If so that might change my vote.

[Urbanized]

^^^^^^^
It won't go away, but it will likely eventually be strong beer rather than watered-down 3.2, which is likely to be eliminated altogether in the state. While most people - myself included - think that's a good thing, strong beer is subject to an additional 13% liquor tax that does not apply to 3.2 beer. So, it won't go away, but it will be (plus side) a better product and at the same time (minus side) cost a little bit more.

[Laramie]

They are. But it doesnt mean us voters get to pass unconstitutional things. Very similar to the whole Sharia Law ban state question from a few years back.

Im beginning to like 792 less and less. Partly based on these potential unconstitutional aspects of treating two groups differently. I also believe we are going to see increased prices on many items if this passes.

You bet, You're going to see increased prices on everything from insurance (auto/home/health), gasoline, food and basic services (utilities, tv etc.,).

It's called FEED THE GREEDY CEOS . . .

Take extra caution when you purchase or update/upgrade these items especially insurance. It'll be tough times for all; retirees won't see revenue increases to the tune that you will see expenses skyrocket. Save what you can now--it's not extra income because you will need it later.

Reminder: Lock you vehicle; don't leave anything of value visible to be a temptation for thieves.

[jerrywall]

OK. Wait. I might have missed something. Is there a possibility that my Coors Original special pricing at my two favorite haunts will go away with passing of 792. If so that might change my vote.

Currently, you're not allowed (as a bar) to have coin beer, dollar beer, happy hour, or any sort of drink specials on full strength (over 3.2) alcohol beverage. That doesn't mean some don't (although I don't know of any), but if they do, they're not allowed to. Basically, they have to keep pricing consistent all the time. Now, like I mentioned, there is an opportunity for the legislature or ABLE to change that, I believe. So it's not a sure thing either way.

[Bill Robertson]

Currently, you're not allowed (as a bar) to have coin beer, dollar beer, happy hour, or any sort of drink specials on full strength (over 3.2) alcohol beverage. That doesn't mean some don't (although I don't know of any), but if they do, they're not allowed to. Basically, they have to keep pricing consistent all the time. Now, like I mentioned, there is an opportunity for the legislature or ABLE to change that, I believe. So it's not a sure thing either way.

So for my regular beer, Coors Original, I'm definately going to pay 13.5% more and possibly more, possibly double, at certain times. All for 1% more alcohol. I'm getting wishy-washy on this one.

[baralheia]

13.5% is honestly not much. A $2 beer would then cost $2.25. A $4 beer would be $4.50. That additional tax money should help state revenues though. And keep in mind that 792 is about much more than just more alcohol content in the beer.

[OKCRT]

So for my regular beer, Coors Original, I'm definately going to pay 13.5% more and possibly more, possibly double, at certain times. All for 1% more alcohol. I'm getting wishy-washy on this one.

Also you won't have to drink as much to get that buzz on. So it will prob. save you money.05 - 06 point is much better than .3.2 real beer taste so much better than the water down 3.2

[HangryHippo]

And keep in mind that 792 is about much more than just more alcohol content in the beer.

Exactly. Softail's post seems a little short-sighted considering the other things that 792 addresses.

[riflesforwatie]

Also you won't have to drink as much to get that buzz on. So it will prob. save you money.05 - 06 point is much better than .3.2 real beer taste so much better than the water down 3.2

3.2 ABW (Oklahoma low-point beer) is equivalent to 4.0 ABV. "High point" light domestics sold in other states and such are 4.2 ABV (i.e. Bud Light, Coors Light, Miller Lite, and the stuff you'd actually see for coin beers and cheap specials). A 12 oz. "high point" bottle of light beer sold in another state is essentially equivalent to 14 oz. of "low point" light beer sold in Oklahoma. Put another way, 7 "Oklahoma light beers" have an equivalent amount of alcohol to 6 "high-point light beers". Taste is another matter, of course, and is highly subjective. But in terms of the amount of alcohol involved or the "buzz" you get, the difference between low-point and high-point beers when discussing light domestics is fairly trivial.

[jerrywall]

Exactly. Softail's post seems a little short-sighted considering the other things that 792 addresses.

Yeah. We wouldn't want to forget giving the ability for out of state corporations to buy into the distributors. And the ability of manufacturers to sign exclusivity agreements with distributers removing the low pricing posting with ABLE, and the movement of Budweiser into liquor stores pushing craft beers to the back, and of course, all the money that will shift from local owners to Wal-Mart et al. Oh, and the reducing of the penalties for selling to a minor, and the fact that the corporations will have no personal liability for such illegal actions. Also the elimination of the availability of beer at street events and festivals such as Heard on Hurd in Edmond.

I know there are positives like cold beer and the ability to buy wine at the back of a grocery store (although I've never find walking 10 feet into a liquor store that much of a convenience), but there are tons of consequences.

[Bill Robertson]

Exactly. Softail's post seems a little short-sighted considering the other things that 792 addresses.

It is shortsighted. But I believe most people look at how something affects their pocketbook first and how it affects other things second. I'm all for modernizing OKs laws but not when it costs me hard earned cash. Besides, I said I'm wishy-washy not that I'm voting against it.

[king183]

Yeah. We wouldn't want to forget giving the ability for out of state corporations to buy into the distributors. And the ability of manufacturers to sign exclusivity agreements with distributers removing the low pricing posting with ABLE, and the movement of Budweiser into liquor stores pushing craft beers to the back, and of course, all the money that will shift from local owners to Wal-Mart et al. Oh, and the reducing of the penalties for selling to a minor, and the fact that the corporations will have no personal liability for such illegal actions. Also the elimination of the availability of beer at street events and festivals such as Heard on Hurd in Edmond.

I know there are positives like cold beer and the ability to buy wine at the back of a grocery store (although I've never find walking 10 feet into a liquor store that much of a convenience), but there are tons of consequences.

Jerry, can you please show me where you got that?

There is nothing whatsoever in 792 or SB383 that eliminates beer at street events and festivals such as Heard on Hurd.

[HangryHippo]

It is shortsighted. But I believe most people look at how something affects their pocketbook first and how it affects other things second. I'm all for modernizing OKs laws but not when it costs me hard earned cash. Besides, I said I'm wishy-washy not that I'm voting against it.

Delete

[jerrywall]

Jerry, can you please show me where you got that?

There is nothing whatsoever in 792 or SB383 that eliminates beer at street events and festivals such as Heard on Hurd.

Because only 3.2% beer is legal at most of those events. The only way they could do it with liquor is if one of the owners of the parking lots in downtown Edmond obtained a liquor license and roped off the area, designated it as a bar (and possibly limited it to over 21), and required all drinks to be consumed in that private space.

So like, in Bricktown, on St. Patricks, what Tapworks does in the lot next to their building.

[king183]

Because only 3.2% beer is legal at most of those events. The only way they could do it with liquor is if one of the owners of the parking lots in downtown Edmond obtained a liquor license and roped off the area, designated it as a bar (and possibly limited it to over 21), and required all drinks to be consumed in that private space.

So like, in Bricktown, on St. Patricks, what Tapworks does in the lot next to their building.

That might be true if SB383 didn't provide for a process to serve beer at these festivals. But it does, so to say there can't be beer ("eliminated") at festivals is simply not true.

[jerrywall]

That might be true if SB383 didn't provide for a process to serve beer at these festivals. But it does, so to say there can't be beer ("eliminated") at festivals is simply not true.

I'd love to have someone point out that language to me. The only thing I found is "Sell beer at public events such as trade shows or festivals;" which isn't really any different than the laws now regarding wine. I see nothing repealing the laws prohibiting public consumption of alcoholic beverages.

[Bill Robertson]

I'd love to have someone point out that language to me. The only thing I found is "Sell beer at public events such as trade shows or festivals;" which isn't really any different than the laws now regarding wine. I see nothing repealing the laws prohibiting public consumption of alcoholic beverages.

I agree. It sounds to me like "allowing" sales would mean like the Festival Of The Arts does now. It has to be consumed within the confines of the tent or roped off area.

[jerrywall]

Also, alcohol over 3.2% is not permitted in Oklahoma State Parks. Also on the Illinois River.

[Urbanized]

^^^^^^^^^
Actually, only wine, cocktails and STRONG beer must be consumed inside designated area. But when you buy from one of the beer tents in the food court, you are buying 3.2 beer and you can walk anywhere with it; even away from the festival and down the street. Besides selling in grocery stores, this is one of the main reasons Oklahoma brewers created 3.2 product; they could not easily support events and sell (or even in some cases give away) strong beer, but 3.2 is a snap because it is subject to entirely different restrictions. This is certainly one of the things that needs to be worked out with ABLE if this law passes, as it could be tough on festivals like Live on the Plaza, Heard on Hurd, Festival of the Arts, etc.

[FighttheGoodFight]

^^^^^^^^^
Actually, only wine, cocktails and STRONG beer must be consumed inside designated area. But when you buy from one of the beer tents in the food court, you are buying 3.2 beer and you can walk anywhere with it; even away from the festival and down the street. Besides selling in grocery stores, this is one of the main reasons Oklahoma brewers created 3.2 product; they could not easily support events and sell (or even in some cases give away) strong beer, but 3.2 is a snap because it is subject to entirely different restrictions. This is certainly one of the things that needs to be worked out with ABLE if this law passes, as it could be tough on festivals like Live on the Plaza, Heard on Hurd, Festival of the Arts, etc.

I've always wondered this. What about college football games? Are police just turning a blind eye on game days?

[OKCRT]

3.2 ABW (Oklahoma low-point beer) is equivalent to 4.0 ABV. "High point" light domestics sold in other states and such are 4.2 ABV (i.e. Bud Light, Coors Light, Miller Lite, and the stuff you'd actually see for coin beers and cheap specials). A 12 oz. "high point" bottle of light beer sold in another state is essentially equivalent to 14 oz. of "low point" light beer sold in Oklahoma. Put another way, 7 "Oklahoma light beers" have an equivalent amount of alcohol to 6 "high-point light beers". Taste is another matter, of course, and is highly subjective. But in terms of the amount of alcohol involved or the "buzz" you get, the difference between low-point and high-point beers when discussing light domestics is fairly trivial.

3.2% VS the so called 6% sure does taste different to me.

[Urbanized]

I've always wondered this. What about college football games? Are police just turning a blind eye on game days?

No, if you're buying it on the street and walking around without it, 100% chance that it is 3.2 beer. The state essentially considers it a non-intoxicating food product and does not regulate or tax it, beyond regular sales tax. Different counties have different rules for it, but in OK County, for instance, there is a county permit of something like $300 per "bar location," which could mean a bar, a horse trough, whatever. A tavern could have multiple "bars," meaning you could buy 3.2 at the regular bar, a satellite bar, and the scantily-clad girl on the patio twisting caps, and each would need a $300 permit, but no state liquor license.

Many beers in Oklahoma have both 3.2 and strong versions available, especially those owned by AB/InBev, because they can masquerade as strong beer but be subject to looser regulation and less tax. Bud, Coors, Miller don't even try to play the strong beer game and are only 3.2. That is likely to change if this law passes.

[Bunty]

TBH part of the intent of the two year implementation is to work out some of those details. Rules blocking happy hours and beer specials are ABLE rules and can be changed without a vote of the people. A lot of 792 is clearing the slate and making room for a rewrite of much of our rules.

That might mean Oklahoma will have to go to the polls by 2018 to make trivial sounding changes in alcohol laws. It had to do that in order to allow liquor stores to return to operating at regular hours on election days. Maybe, first, a vote needs to be taken to remove Oklahoma alcohol laws and regulations from the constitution. The state constitution should not spell out the details for specific laws and regulations. That's what statutes are for.

[jerrywall]

That might mean Oklahoma will have to go to the polls by 2018 to make trivial sounding changes in alcohol laws. It had to do that in order to allow liquor stores to return to operating at regular hours on election days. Maybe, first, a vote needs to be taken to remove Oklahoma alcohol laws and regulations from the constitution. The state constitution should not spell out the details for specific laws and regulations. That's what statutes are for.

That's what a lot of this is. For good or ill. Because it means we're voting without truly knowing the end result b