Opponents: Council didn’t look at all costs of Sunday alcohol sales
Published: August 26, 2008
Updated: August 27, 2008
It’s been nearly two weeks since Florence City Council voted to allow a referendum regarding Sunday alcohol sales to appear on the ballot in November.
The referendum will allow voters to decide “whether or not to authorize temporary permits for the sale of alcoholic beverages on Sunday in the City of Florence,” according to a city ordinance.
The issue is expected to generate plenty of controversy during the next few months, from supporters and opponents alike.
Jim Crooks, who serves as pastor at Southside Baptist Church in Florence, said he was against Sunday alcohol sales.
“I don’t understand why people can’t eat a meal one day a week without drinking liquor and having a beer with their meal. I don’t understand that. It doesn’t make sense to me,” Crooks said.
Crooks added he wasn’t just against the issue for personal moral reasons, but he also was against the issue for reasons relating to public safety. He said he didn’t think city council members took into account all the costs Sunday alcohol sales could cause the community.
“I know they want to balance a budget, but I’m wondering who’s going to do the study as to the costs of police, fire, EMS, hospitals ... .” Crooks said.
According to Crooks, he and others opposed to the referendum are setting up a Web site, votenoflorence.com, to spread their message. The Web site is still under construction, but a short paragraph is available on the site to describe its purpose — which is to encourage “citizens to vote no” in November.
“There is an ever-growing group of concerned Florence citizens who believe that Florence is a great place to live and raise a family and who do not want to see a few benefit while the entire city is endangered by the sale of alcohol on Sunday,” according to the Web site.
Crooks said he worries if the referendum to allow Sunday alcohol sales by the drink passes, other changes could be next.
“I will also say that I think this is the first step toward a whole lot of other monsters. I think they’ll sell it in restaurants now … blue laws will be next.”
The general election will be held Nov. 4.
— Staff writer Charles Tomlinson contributed to this report.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
Hello PHTanner,
I respect you opinion and I too have lived in the Marion-Florence area for 49 years now and believe me, i know the ‘dark’ side of the county along with Dillon and the Myrtle Beach area. I agree that people will get Alcohol if they have their sights set on that, but I also know that making it easier to get will increase the negative effects in our County/community- I live in Scranton by the way. Those facts include any drinking and note that those were from 2000, the statistics are higher now unfortunately. I know the minister in the article personally as well and know he is ‘tuned’ into the details of our area as much as most in our area that would ‘vote’ on the issue. I don’t see this as a crusade, I do see this as an opportunity to help our community see the dire circumstances surrounding the possibility of infusing more readily available Alcohol into our community. I do Christian Counseling in this area and meet people all the time that have wrecked lives because of Alcohol abuse. I commend you for where you are with you family now, and celebrate with you on your enjoyment with your 20 month old daughter. As for statistics, I would hope people would see the importance and wisdom in the math, sadly, I agree that many won’t, but for those who do, progress will be made. I also am trying to make our county safer for my family, and others including your wonderful daughter and your family. It is a struggle, and as you said, not a new one either. I do see progress in that the law is by far less tolerant, especially with the ‘zero tolerance program’ for driving under the influence. I would hope we could hear from some EMT, Fire, Law Enforcement on this issue given their everyday encounters with Alcohol related issues. I wish you much enjoyment and success in life and family PHTanner!
One cannot help but admire your deep conviction to this subject matter. Unfortunately, you’re not privy to the factual basis from which the “PIRE” statistics upon which you rely were drawn.
Let me enlighten you.
Alcohol has been sold illegally in Florence County, since time immemorial. Everyone, who is anyone, knows this indisputable fact.
Thus, statistics mean nothing to life-long residents of Florence County, who are well-versed in the tragedies surrounding alcohol.
When I was a senior at Southside High School in 1970, I kept a quart bottle of whiskey under the front seat of my car along with my pistol. Anyone could buy bootleg whiskey for a dollar. Moonshine whiskey was available to anyone who wanted something with a stiffer bite to it.
Do you think times have changed? No! The only thing that has changed about Florence County is the population.
For instance, Pastor Crooks came to Florence County from Georgia. His knowledge surrounding past occurrences of alcohol consumption in Florence County is a matter of hearsay.
The point is that while you offer a commendable argument against alcohol sales and the purported aftereffects of same, in reality, your arguments are untenable, precisely because everyone who is anyone knows that the issue is a foregone conclusion.
If the people want legal alcohol sales, they’ll vote for the same. If the proposal fails, they’ll just go back to buying alcohol on Sunday from the bootlegger and wait for the next chance to vote.
Now, since you are a fan of honesty, be honest with yourself and admit that this issue will resolve itself.
But, I do admire your conviction! And for your personal edification, I no longer consume alcohol. I’m to busy watching my 20 month old little girl grow!
Good luck on your crusade!
As I have said before, the issues are much deeper than most are posting on. As for the personal attacks on me, I’m not surprised since personal attacks always follow when the attacker has a lack of substance to debate with, so they resort to personal attacks. Let’s not forget those that feel their self professed accreditations/educations/degrees that they so liberally seek to use as a solid basis for their post, actually may only be internet pretenders which is usually the case with those that dangle such diplomas, extensive job accomplishments etc……most that have such accomplishments don’t feel the need to use them in their posts, they would actually use ‘facts’ that relate directly to the post, which is why I included links in my post. Gosh, I actually did some research instead of just posting opinion. That would be considered good and proper journalism. Homework, facts, presented in open debate that was not blacken with such personal attacks that don’t even related to the issue at hand nor the facts.
Now, so that hopefully some things are clarified:
Do the math, using statistical forecasting and you will see that adding another day for sales can only add to the problems. It is simply a mathematical fact….do your homework and not just opinion especially if you want to seriously evaluate the issues on society. Sure, police are on duty, ambulance/fire are on duty, but if they don’t go out, the costs are obviously less than if they respond more often. It’s simply statistical forecasting.
Now, dewstain, I believe that what I am presenting actual directly relates to the issue of Alcohol sales on Sunday since it puts that much more potential for negative effect on society. If only sales in restaurants is at hand, that could change the argument, but it is not. It’s sales across the board. I’m not changing the argument, just expounding on the depth of the issue at hand. And, phtanner, obviously you have had quite negative results related to Alcohol. Your experiences make my argument for me, thanks for your honesty. That’s exactly what I am talking about. Such human suffering so needlessly. And if my attitude is caustic, how does yours compare? Not fear either, just common sense. I know where I’m going when I die and I look forward to that once I have finished my time on this earth. I just don’t want some drunk person to cut my time short in an fatality accident, which by the way would land the drunk in jail for the death of a person. How many lives devastated needlessly because of Alcohol. My point is simply this, another day of sales equals just that much more consumption equals obviously that much more tragedy in the making.
“bwhite,“ please forgive me for overlooking your post.
You are correct; I do not know Pastor Crooks, and I see how my generalization about “preachers” could be construed as a specific reference to Pastor Crooks.
To say that I did not mean it in that way would be an insult to your intelligence.
It was not my intent, however, to demean the Pastor in any way.
I am not a fan of organized religion, and oftentimes, I express my thoughts in ambiguous ways.
I promise you I’ll work on my shortcoming, and thank you for the invitation to attend the Pastor’s church, but I’ll respectfully decline.
HBCINSC, you have an interesting method for de-constructing the written word. If it weren’t for the sting that you deliberately injected into your writing, I would ignore your post.
But I’m not impressed with your method of deconstruction, for in truth, it smacks of emotion, fear and immaturity. Your use of statistics to bolster your argument is equally unimpressive.
I’m been involved in four vehicle accidents involving drunk drivers. I collected the insurance money, and I’m patiently waiting for the fifth. My funds are running short.
On the other hand, I’ve been in only one accident as a drunk driver. The two people in the vehicle that I struck collected the hundred grand from the insurance company and said forget it. They didn’t even show in court.
I know, it’s just one example, but I don’t kowtow to fear. I don’t give a damn about insurance rates, and I’m not a fan of organized religion.
Try living without the fear of death; it just might calm your caustic attitude.
Dear HBCINSC,
Actually, he used the term “responsible.“ Since you cannot spell (that was not your only error), and he can, I value his opinion over yours. Also, your sentence structure is so incorrect that I am not sure I can decipher your intent.
As a person with a degree in journalism, I must agree that the article is poorly written and one-sided. I feel that is furthering the anti-alcohol on Sundays agenda, and, therefore, bad journalism.
As a law student, I must agree that the law is unconstitutional. It is contrary to the goals and values of the first amendment of our precious constitution, which is applied to the states through the fourteenth amendment. Perhaps your state’s utter disregard of this valuable document is why you have such problems with education, etc.
I am sorry, because once again I have to point out that your facts have absolutely no direct involvement with the actual issue, which is the ability to buy alcohol on Sunday. And, I highly doubt you will find any facts relating to the issue, as only states such as South Carolina have such archaic laws still on the books.
That is not to say that I don’t agree 100% that drinking and driving is bad, however the assuption that if you drink outside of the house you will drive drunk is one of absolutely no logic. There are these things called Designated Drivers, or DD for short. They are charged with being the responsible adult for a night of partying with friends, etc. I don’t necessarily disagree with your total distrust of the public in general, I sometimes feel that people are absolutely dumb, but I have to point out that your argument is clearly based on your own experience.
My main points are that not everyone drives drunk and there is a such thing as responsible social drinking, and that neither one of those has any bearing on the issue of purchasing alcohol on Sundays. I want to be able to buy a drink on Sunday because I feel that my rights as an American allow me to, plain and simple.
Dewstain, you are the one that should be sorry since I obviously only included one portion of the drain on society by alcohol abuse. Sure some drink responsibly, however common sense easily presents the more consumption, the more the abuse rate goes up as sales volumes go up. Also, to answer the other person, if everyone buys on Saturday, then there is no need for Sunday Sales…..also, I was speaking to the way the minister was so violently ripped by the anti-religion zelots who think that clergy only want Sunday for the offering plate. Same mindset that says all drinking is a blight on society, even to use the term ‘responsable’ drinking. Responsable, is that stay at home drinking since most pp can’t drink one glass of wine or beer or have a mixed drink without imparing their driving. The last statement is fact by the way. And by the way, the monster is alcohol, I have been in two wrecks, hit from behind by you guessed it, a drunk driver. I have a zero tollerance for those who want to deny the terrible negative effects on society. To accept the ‘painful, yet ever needful’ change, jeeeze, ok let’s say cars have to have a breathalizer before you can start them as standard equipment, how about that ‘painful, yet every needful change’.
It really doesn’t matter if people are able to purchase alcohol on Sundays or not because those that really want to consume alcohol on Sunday will continue to buy it on Saturday.
Sorry buddy, that’s a really poor argument, especially since I used the same site to find that New Hampshire has the following stats:
Crash costs in New Hampshire averaged:
· $4.20 per mile driven at BACs of .10 and above
· $1.80 per mile driven at BACs between .08-.09
· $0.10 per mile driven at BACs of .00
New Hampshire is a state that not only allows alcohol to be bought on Sundays, but actually has state run package stores along their highways boardering neighboring states that used to have unconstitutional blue laws.
The fact is that you’re drawing a correlation between DUIs and the ability to buy (read: BUY, not drink) alcohol on Sundays. It seems to me that the info you gathered would better be used to form an argument against drunk driving, because what I’m taking away from your post is that you are accepting that people will drink and drive. That is, of course, never ok. However, there is a such thing as DRINKING RESPONSIBLY, which once again is not directly related with the ability to purchase alcohol.
Advertisement