Tennessee First State to Require Everyone to Show ID for Beer

[BMT (RIP)]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,287546,00.html



BMT

[82ndtrooper]

"A computerized scanner" ??? Seems to me that could be used to establish intent, and motive if one is charged with a DUI offense in the state of Tenn.

Time, location, and even amount of beer may be available if the court so orders a warrant for the computerized information. They could also establish a pattern of drinking habits through this system. I see some potential abuse with this sort of system. No pun intended.

[The Reaper]

I thought the same thing.

Big Brother is watching in TN.

Doesn't apply to liquor or wine sales though. Curious.

TR

[Sweetbriar]

Read carefully. The scanner part seems to be an initiative on the part of Mr. Rollins at his store only, not the state. The law just wants age verification before sale.

[Tubbs]

Originally Posted by Sweetbriar

Read carefully. The scanner part seems to be an initiative on the part of Mr. Rollins at his store only, not the state. The law just wants age verification before sale.

Yes, but how long before someone sees that he uses it and says "Hey that's a good idea, scanners should be mandatory in all establishments that sell beer."?
Before a law is ever enacted it should be thought of in the worst possible context of use by the worst possible people because that is what it will come too.
I could see this escalating and in a few years all of a sudden decent law abiding citizens start getting their liscenses revoked because of a consistent pattern of beer buying. You know as a preemptive measure before they can get a DUI.
TR is right, Big Brother indeed.

[The Reaper]

Statistically, I am sure that there is a very high correlation between people buying beer in a convenience store after 2200 hours and driving under the influence.

I am just not sure that I would like to have a database of what I bought and when, but those who use shopping and VIP cards already have that tracking implemented.

TR

[sf11b_p]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Statistically, I am sure that there is a very high correlation between people buying beer in a convenience store after 2200 hours and driving under the influence.

I am just not sure that I would like to have a database of what I bought and when, but those who use shopping and VIP cards already have that tracking implemented.

TR

I also see a correlation between 2200 hours and 2nd shift workers.

I've never filled out a VIP card with my real name or address.

[Tubbs]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

I am just not sure that I would like to have a database of what I bought and when, but those who use shopping and VIP cards already have that tracking implemented.

TR

That's why I only have an Albertson's card. I think that I am pretty safe until buying their tasy and delicious fake crab dip and bakery doughnuts becomes equated with sponsering terrrorism.

[The Reaper]

Originally Posted by Tubbs

That's why I only have an Albertson's card. I think that I am pretty safe until buying their tasy and delicious fake crab dip and bakery doughnuts becomes equated with sponsering terrrorism.

You do realize that insurers are already talking about charging people who have unhealthy lifestyles.

I wonder if the grocers share your eating habits with the health insurance industry?

If not, how long before they do?

Just curious.

TR

[82ndtrooper]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

You do realize that insurers are already talking about charging people who have unhealthy lifestyles.

I wonder if the grocers share your eating habits with the health insurance industry?

If not, how long before they do?

Just curious.

TR

Something like the "Twinkie Tax" ?

Former Ambassadar Alan Keyes writes "If we are going to tax so called sins, such as tabacco and alcohol, then we must enforce taxation on those other sins that force the tax payer to foot the bill on poor lifestyle choices"

Ambassadar Keyes goes on to say that merely taxing tobacco and alcohol will only scratch the surface of what the Clintons see as the definition of sins. I dont believe anyone here will debate that obesity and a high BMI are responsible for more overweight related illness than merely tobacco and alcohol. I'd like to see the numbers on various illness, treatment methods, and any correlations and causation factors. I'm willing to bet that obesity related diabetes and heart disease have close ties statistically. Causation may be inferred, but if I remember correctly Statistics 101 taught me that "correlation does not necessarily prove causation" Or simply put, the "Cause and effect" factor.

If you are a single or divorced male, with no children living in your house hold, then your insurance company quotes are most defintley going to be higher than if you were married with two children and gainfully employed. Insurance company's are not stupid. They have actuaries crunching these correlations every day of the week and I suspect that being single or divorced and with no children living in the house hold that these company's have found a strong correlation to drinking, driving, and ultimatley, accidents. Some assumptions are probably made, but they back up their assumptions with strong statistical evidence to anything the contrary. It may not be fair to someone like myself, but my guess is, is that the insurance company's prove their models day in and day out.

Just give it time, we'll see tax incentives for losing weight, eating fewer sugar laced foods, and documenting your exercise regimen with a witness to sign and or intial your tax return. Alan Keyes warns us of this in his book.

[Five-O]

IIRC....Aetna gives each member a $150.00 refund if you document (sign in card) you have gone to the gym at least 150 times during a calender year. I know of an LE agency that gives a $500.00 bonus for every year an officer does not not use sick time.

[The Reaper]

Originally Posted by 82ndtrooper

Something like the "Twinkie Tax" ?

Former Ambassadar Alan Keyes writes "If we are going to tax so called sins, such as tabacco and alcohol, then we must enforce taxation on those other sins that force the tax payer to foot the bill on poor lifestyle choices"

Ambassadar Keyes goes on to say that merely taxing tobacco and alcohol will only scratch the surface of what the Clintons see as the definition of sins. I dont believe anyone here will debate that obesity and a high BMI are responsible for more overweight related illness than merely tobacco and alcohol. I'd like to see the numbers on various illness, treatment methods, and any correlations and causation factors. I'm willing to bet that obesity related diabetes and heart disease have close ties statistically. Causation may be inferred, but if I remember correctly Statistics 101 taught me that "correlation does not necessarily prove causation" Or simply put, the "Cause and effect" factor.

If you are a single or divorced male, with no children living in your house hold, then your insurance company quotes are most defintley going to be higher than if you were married with two children and gainfully employed. Insurance company's are not stupid. They have actuaries crunching these correlations every day of the week and I suspect that being single or divorced and with no children living in the house hold that these company's have found a strong correlation to drinking, driving, and ultimatley, accidents. Some assumptions are probably made, but they back up their assumptions with strong statistical evidence to anything the contrary. It may not be fair to someone like myself, but my guess is, is that the insurance company's prove their models day in and day out.

Just give it time, we'll see tax incentives for losing weight, eating fewer sugar laced foods, and documenting your exercise regimen with a witness to sign and or intial your tax return. Alan Keyes warns us of this in his book.

Forcing health insurance companies to underwrite people with unhealthy lifestyles (like gay men, or heroin addicts, for example) has played a large part in escalation of health costs.

This would be akin to requiring auto insurers to give the same rates to a 17 year old with multiple DUIs and chargable accidents, as a 50 year old housewife with no moving citations, or life insurance at a flat rate to everybody from 10 to 100.

It is funny that they can charge more for some types of insurance because of risk factors, but not necessarily health insurance. Cost sharing, in this case, is again socialism. You won't stop smoking, engaging in unprotected gay sex, or shooting smack, so I have to pay higher rates as a member of the group because we are in the same system.

There ain't no justice.

TR

[Ret10Echo]

[82ndtrooper]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Forcing health insurance companies to underwrite people with unhealthy lifestyles (like gay men, or heroin addicts, for example) has played a large part in escalation of health costs.

This would be akin to requiring auto insurers to give the same rates to a 17 year old with multiple DUIs and chargable accidents, as a 50 year old housewife with no moving citations, or life insurance at a flat rate to everybody from 10 to 100.

It is funny that they can charge more for some types of insurance because of risk factors, but not necessarily health insurance. Cost sharing, in this case, is again socialism. You won't stop smoking, engaging in unprotected gay sex, or shooting smack, so I have to pay higher rates as a member of the group because we are in the same system.

There ain't no justice.

TR

You got that right !!

Group health is wonderful for the unhealthy or those that choose poor lifestyles. Most group health rates do in fact increase each year. Guess why ? Yep, the number of claims of the specific company that is purchasing the group plan. Who has the most claims ? Smokers, heavy drinkers, over weighters, and drug abusers, and generally speaking the all night partiers.

Alot of company's with group health plans are now instituting healthy life style incentives to it's employee's. I'd like to think that these decisions are based on the ethical good will of the management, but the management is investing in time a resources to enforce better lifestyle changes to lower their premium costs. Gyms, cash and bonus prize incentives are starting to be part of the standard company benefit plan. At the very least it's better to have employee's on the treadmills after hours than in the bars and clubs. Let's not demonize the corporations just yet.