An unfortunate op-ed filled with misinformation was recently published regarding direct shipping in New Jersey. With all due respect to Morris County Sheriff Ed Rochford, the points he raises are completely invalid. In an attempt to scare parents, the piece claims that under-age drinking will increase if consumers in New Jersey are allowed to buy wine from a winery and have it sent to their home. If that was true, then how come the 34 other states with direct shipping haven't seen an increase in under-age drinking?
However, perhaps the best thing about the op-ed are the comments in response to it. Here's a sample:
"Yes, I can see it now. Thousands of teens placing orders for a
Russian River Valley 2004 Zinfandel so they can get drunk on weekends.
This is all about collecting and preserving revenue, "precious
revenue" as the sheriff says. Otherwise, how can we continue paying
their salaries and benefits? Don't think for a second that there is any
public service component to this nonsense." -ggibsco
"35 states allow direct to consumer shipment. Many of these states
require that the winery register and collect sales tax from the
consumer. Additionally sales tax is collected by NJ on transportation
charges. Current face to face regulations imposed on the purchase of
liquor and wine are easily circumvented by having someone of age
purchase the item for an underage person. The NJ wholesalers are in the
forefront of objecting to legislation to allow direct shipment, not
because of moral posture, but because of pure economics. Why should NJ
residents have to pay more for wine than their neighboring states?" -sybcpa
"What a total crock of excrement this article is. "Protect the citizens
of NJ from direct shipment of alcohol"? Give me a break. It is exactly
this kind of disingenous BS coming from a NJ official that gives our
state such a poor reputation as a political cesspool. Make no mistake. This is about money & about political influence of NJ alcohol distributors -- not about anyone's safety. Perhaps if our state & county Govt's did a better job of spending
our tax dollars, instead of wasting them on bloated civil service
benefits, unnecessary vehicles, etc. we'd be less suspicious of the
motives here. NJ's alcohol distributors have a very nice little
monopoly on beverage distribution, and they pay our elected officials
LOTS of campaign money to keep it that way. Shame on you, sheriff for
such a dishonest article." -joiseydude
"In a world where we'reconstantly bombarded with the notion of
globalization we in NJ cannot even buy wine and have it distributed
from another sovereign state. Furthermore polls are not particularly
reliable and I don't see any concrete evidence by reputible sources.
You're really not relying on the media are you? It's easier for the children to raid their parents liquor closet than wait for a delivery from the services. I would strongly agree that it's the lure of extra revenue and not
exactly 'for the children'. I'm from the generation that remembers the
ban on beer and liquor being sold after 10:00 pm and on Sundays when in
fact we could buy 'tainers' and liquor freely in NY or Staten Island.
Get off your high horse and realise that this is just another nanny law or attempt at protectionism." -mickegg
