Should those who drink alcohol pay a special tax to cover the damage it causes

[indykid]

I will say it again for those missing it:

Purple, purple, purple, PURPLE.

I got it immediately, hence my remark about flaming purple.

 

[steveh_131]

I think they should bring back alcohol prohibition and not repeal it till all the safety nets are removed for these drunk drivers.

Exactly. If a gun unintentionally goes off and kills someone you bet you will get serious charges. Nobody forces you to drink and drive. Should be tried as a standard murder in my opinion.

Murder is the unlawful killing, with malice aforethought, of another person, and generally this state of mind distinguishes murder from other forms of unlawful homicide (such as manslaughter).

 

[Yellowjeep]

I missed the question, I was driving trying to read this on my phone and some guy stopped all of a sudden and made me spill my beer.

 

[indykid]

I missed the question, I was driving trying to read this on my phone and some guy stopped all of a sudden and made me spill my beer.

Thanks for the laugh, rep'd!

 

[atvdave]

Why stop at drunk drivers? What about taxing more on cellphones?, Books?, Food?, other drinks?, Radio's?, MP3 devices?, Prescription drugs?, Illegal drugs?,



The list can go on, and on... All the above have caused auto crashes in the US.

and yes..... I know is a purple post... just adding to the list.

 

[CHCRandy]

Should those that shoot guns pay a special tax to cover the damage it causes?

There is a special tax for ammo already, and guns, and hunting license. You are already paying a special tax to shoot guns....

 

[CHCRandy]

I argued a few years back that taxes on booze should be raised in Indiana.....when the cigarette tax was raised. Booze in Indiana is taxed by the gallon. 1 gallon of beer has 11.5 cents of Indiana excise tax and a gallon of whiskey is $2.68........compared to a pack of cigarettes that has .995 or almost $1 of excise tax per pack!!!

Indiana collects around $ 40,000,000 per year total on alcohol excise tax collected.
Indiana collects around $700,000,000 per year in cigarette excise tax.

A can of beer has 1 penny in tax a pack of smokes has $1........I just don't understand that. Been a while since I heard of a smoker killing innocent bystanders.

 

[Mackey]

Yes. All those who drink should pay BIG TIME. The fee cannot be high enough.

You see ... I don't drink. So why should I care.

 

[Whosyer]

The first problem to be addressed, is the packaging of beer. Nobody needs a 30 pack. Even the standard case of 24 is excessive. The largest quantity of beer purchased, should be a 10 pack. Except in NY, in which case, it should be limited to a 7 pack. ( this should apply to LEO also) It's only common sense. Think of the children.

 

[IndyDave1776]

The first problem to be addressed, is the packaging of beer. Nobody needs a 30 pack. Even the standard case of 24 is excessive. The largest quantity of beer purchased, should be a 10 pack. Except in NY, in which case, it should be limited to a 7 pack. ( this should apply to LEO also) It's only common sense. Think of the children.

Absolutely, and you should have to have special licenses to possess beer and carry it in public. Registration should be required, varying by state.

 

[Carmelbythecorn]

Alcohol-related auto crashes alone totals more than $51 billion annually and that's not counting the rest of the harm to society. A $1 per % of alcohol in the product will go to a common pool to pay for that damage so that we who don't drink don't have it come out of our pockets.

This would add $5-6 per can of beer, $4-20 dollars per bottle of wine, and $50 or more to whiskey, rum and others. It will also encourage the manufacturers to not make such potent, dangerous products.

If you don't agree with this then you are on the side of the drunk drivers who kill innocent people. You have their blood on your hands.

Personal responsibility is now officially dead.

 

[CarmelHP]

Should those that shoot guns pay a special tax to cover the damage it causes?

What damage does it cause? And i think you may have missed the gist of the OP.

 

[Gshedd]

I hate taxes

 

[Shadow8088]

It can be a smaller tax... say ten cents per percentage point. That will only raise the cost of a bottle of rum by about ten dollars and a can of beer by 50 cents. Who needs more than a couple of cans of beer at a time anyway?

I see what you did there....

 

[jamil]

Alcohol-related auto crashes alone totals more than $51 billion annually and that's not counting the rest of the harm to society. A $1 per % of alcohol in the product will go to a common pool to pay for that damage so that we who don't drink don't have it come out of our pockets.

This would add $5-6 per can of beer, $4-20 dollars per bottle of wine, and $50 or more to whiskey, rum and others. It will also encourage the manufacturers to not make such potent, dangerous products.

If you don't agree with this then you are on the side of the drunk drivers who kill innocent people. You have their blood on your hands.

Your point would be better made with pictures. How about one of ugly toothless people drinking cheap bear in one car, on an apparent collision course with another car with smiling, toothy, pretty parents (not necessarily the same sex) with pretty children in the back holding puppies, unaware of their fateful course.

 

[Zoub]

I am against sin taxes but we should serialize all beer cans.

 

[cmj]

I don't know if this is mentioned, but a fee on hard alcohol is to drinkers as an NFA stamp is to gunowners! Something to think about when all the leftist's get together for their cosmo's.

 

[BogWalker]

But what about high capacity alcoholic beverages? I mean really, who need 40 ounces in a single bottle. The only reason for that is they want to get drunk and run over children! If you don't support limiting beers to 10 ounces that means you like killing children, don't you?

 

[sharkey]

So what would the tax be on E85? What percentage of your "alcohol-related auto crashes" do the alcohol-fueled cars make up?

 

[JettaKnight]

It can be a smaller tax... say ten cents per percentage point. That will only raise the cost of a bottle of rum by about ten dollars and a can of beer by 50 cents. Who needs more than a couple of cans of beer at a time anyway?

You see, this is the kind of common sense measures we can all agree on. There's no infringement on anyone's right to get likker'ed up.

If it saves just one life, it's worth it.