Hopsicles

Radley Balko | June 22, 2007

Rustico is a fantastic little restaurant just a short distance from where I live. It's where I watch most the Colts games in the fall. It has a massive-but-thoughtful beer menu, and really innovative, tasty lunch and dinner menus. Even the bar food is interesting (and delicious).

A few weeks ago, Rustico owner Greg Engert put a St. Louis Framboise in the freezer to chill and forgot all about it. A few hours later, he went back to retrieve the beer and noticed it had frozen solid. He chipped out a chunk, tasted it, and an idea was born: the hopsicle. He quickly moved to put a variety of frozen beer treats on the menu.

Enter the Virginia Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. We can't have people innovating, you know. And we certainly can't have people making alcohol fun or interesting. As it turns out, beer must be sold in its original container, or poured immediately into a glass (though I'm not sure how this accounts for deserts or savory foods made with beer). So the state agency is sending an appropriately official sounding "special agent" to investigate.

Engert was on the Washington Post's local radio station yesterday, sounding appropriately deferential to his regulators, promising to work with them to make the idea legal. Though it's unfortunate he can't call them out for the petty tyrants they are, his sucking up is probably a wise move. Virginia's ABC is pretty notoriously authoritative. Would hate to see Rustico get the Rack 'n' Roll Pool Hall treatment.

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!

Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.

|6.22.07 @ 12:34PM|#

Why does my state government have to be responsible for killing such a good idea?

|6.22.07 @ 12:35PM|#

I think there's a pretty good reason why popsicles made with beer haven't caught on (despite probably thousands of frathouse expiriments), and it has nothing to do with various ABC boards.

|6.22.07 @ 12:36PM|#

Does the VABC just have a room full of twits working to create the most nitpicking regulations imaginable? I mean, that's just crazy. I was shocked when I moved here to discover that you can't buy retail alcohol after midnight. First place I've ever lived with such stupid hours.

|6.22.07 @ 12:37PM|#

Dan T,

I'm sure it would be a lousy idea with Coors, but with a nice, hoppy beer that actually has a flavor, it sounds yummy.

|6.22.07 @ 12:39PM|#

Come on Dan, have you ever actually had a Framboise? It would be absolutely delicious frozen.

"
I'm sure it would be a lousy idea with Coors, but with a nice, hoppy beer that actually has a flavor, it sounds yummy."

Joe, Coors doesn't need to be frozen! Remember, its already the worlds coldest tasting beer!

|6.22.07 @ 12:41PM|#

I'm just saying...if frozen beer was anything but gross, it would already be dominating the market.

|6.22.07 @ 12:44PM|#

Dan T.-

Its frozen Framboise, not frozen Bud-Miller-Coors. You understand the difference, right?

Fluffy|6.22.07 @ 12:51PM|#

|6.22.07 @ 12:51PM|#

I'm just saying...if frozen beer was anything but gross, it would already be dominating the market.

Dan t. you blooming ignoramous, it doesn't the market. If it captures a miniscule portion of the beer market it would be incredibly profitable.

Think. THEN post.

|6.22.07 @ 12:52PM|#

Make that, it doesn't have to dominate the market.

Preview guys and gals, preview.

|6.22.07 @ 12:53PM|#

Dude, trolls don't "think" in the same manner or on the same level that you, I, or a Labrador Retriever does.

|6.22.07 @ 12:55PM|#

Also, Dan T, just because something is #1 in its market doesn't mean its the best. Budweiser is not the best beer in the world, and McDonalds doesn't make the best hamburgers.

There is huge paranoia among the prohibition crowd about "marketing alcohol to children" and this is the sort of thing that predictably sets them off since popsicles are traditionally a children's treat.

In Virginia the Dept of ABC has a monopoly on "package" sales of distilled beverages, which means that to buy a bottle you must go to a state-run store with limited hours (closed holidays and Sundays, of course), uncompetitive pricing, surly overpaid clerks, etc.

Heinlein once stated (I believe) that alcohol regulation was an inverse measure of freedom.

Pêche framboise hopsicles would be super yummy!

|6.22.07 @ 12:59PM|#

McDonalds doesn't make the best hamburgers.

The best hamburgers are made in bars that dont use soap/degreasers on the grill. But everybody knows that.

it would already be dominating the market.

Every once in a while new stuff comes along. You know, first there was the whopper, and then ... the double whopper. Inovation. Anyway, where is the Christian Action League of North Carolina on this sin-sicle? Someone ought to do something, you know.

|6.22.07 @ 1:01PM|#

I've had beer slushies before. Great when made with premium beer, godawful when made with BudMiller.

That Menu looks awesome, I wish there was some place within an hour of here like that.

ABC corruption writ into law.

|6.22.07 @ 1:02PM|#

DAN! Welcome back!

How's your essay coming along?

I hope you aren't putting it off until the last minute?

"I've had beer slushies before. Great when made with premium beer, godawful when made with BudMiller. "

Why would you expect it to taste any better frozen?

Though, I guess if it freezes your taste buds beyond use, that would be a point in favor of a macrobrew slushie.

|6.22.07 @ 1:05PM|#

In Virginia the Dept of ABC has a monopoly on "package" sales of distilled beverages, which means that to buy a bottle you must go to a state-run store with limited hours (closed holidays and Sundays, of course), uncompetitive pricing, surly overpaid clerks, etc.

I don't know of any state that has rational liquor/beer/wine laws. If you've absolutely have to tax it, tax the ethonal in the product and get the fuck out of the business. Because, state leglislatures, you don't know what the hell you're doing.

|6.22.07 @ 1:06PM|#

At least we don't have that stupid "No beer can be greater than 6% ABV" law like many other states. That law should seriously be called the "Macrobrew Protection Law".

ed|6.22.07 @ 1:16PM|#

I had an unintentional 16 oz. Keystone Ice slushie last night.
It made my head hurt.
I deserved it.
That is all.

|6.22.07 @ 1:23PM|#

No one from Delaware on southward has anything to complain about when it comes to liquor laws. At least you can get alcohol (any kind, not just hard stuff) after 8 PM on a friday, or AT ALL on a Sunday. Blue laws suck satan's ass.

|6.22.07 @ 1:28PM|#

There's also a story in the Washington City Paper this week about why Virginia outlaws Sangria at restaurants. The VA ABC outlaws mixing spirits with wine or beer, so restaurants that serve sangria in Virginia aren't allowed to mix brandy with the red wine, as a true sangria should be made.

|6.22.07 @ 1:29PM|#

BTW Radley,
What's the latest on the Rack 'n' Roll? I remember being especially outraged upon reading your stuff a few months ago.

|6.22.07 @ 1:31PM|#

In a land where boilermakers are outlawed, only outlaws will drink boilermakers

The Professor|6.22.07 @ 1:35PM|#

Dan T -

If you saw a hundred dollar bill on the sidewalk would you pick it up?

After all, if it were really there, someone would have picked it up already, right?

DC

|6.22.07 @ 1:38PM|#

Great day for stuff here in H&R. First Jake Boone's game list, now Rustico's menu...

I am pleased. You may continue.

|6.22.07 @ 1:49PM|#

Talk about innovation. Rustico has Guiness cupcakes on the menu!

|6.22.07 @ 1:50PM|#

It would help if I spelled "Guinness" correctly.

|6.22.07 @ 1:51PM|#

You guys are something else. The point is that probably thousands of other folks have tried the idea of beer popsicles. It's yet to catch on, and if you've ever tried one you'd understand why.

|6.22.07 @ 1:53PM|#

Dan T.-

What beer have you tried it with, asshat?

lunchstealer|6.22.07 @ 1:55PM|#

ed | June 22, 2007, 1:16pm | #
I had an unintentional 16 oz. Keystone Ice slushie last night.
It made my head hurt.
I deserved it.
That is all.

No effin' way that's all! As a concerned beer-citizen, I need to know how it can be that one can unintentionally drink sixteen ounces of Keystone Ice.

Although if you think Keystone makes you hurt, don't try those Miller Chills with green flavoring. They market it as lime flavoring, but it's really better described as 'green' flavor, like green lollipops. It is teh suck.

TrappedEastOfTheBigMuddy|6.22.07 @ 1:57PM|#

Virginia's ABC is pretty notoriously ~~authoritative~~ authoritarian.

There. I fixed that for you.

|6.22.07 @ 1:58PM|#

It sounds like Radley is disappointed with this bar owner for not telling the liquor board to go fuck themselves.

I used to ask myself, "Why don't people fight things like this?" I don't ask myself that any more.

He'd get absolutely nowhere with litigation, so that leaves either Emerson style civil disobedience or John Brown style civil disobedience. The first kind is a short ticket to no more bar, and the second kind is a short ticket to a bullet in the head. Maybe the guy is rolling over because if he wanted those other outcomes he could just save time by closing his bar or jumping off a bridge.

I think the answer really is that sane people above the age of five understand that for society to work, you have to live with and respect the law of the land. If you don't like the law, there are appropriate avenues to getting it changed.

Not to mention that if the dubious legality of frozen beer really outrages you that much, you've probably got other, more serious, problems in your life.

This kind of thread might be the greatest irony of Hit and Run: whining commenters whose lives are so easy here in the police state of America that they seem to seek out things to feign outrage over.

Tomorrow, let's tackle jaywalking laws and the millions they oppress.

|6.22.07 @ 2:03PM|#

Translation: "America: love it or leave you it"

|6.22.07 @ 2:06PM|#

Tomorrow, let's tackle jaywalking laws

Why wait.

Why is it necessary to write a law to prevent stupid people from getting themselves run over?

That is a serious question Dan, not a flipant remark. So I expect a serious reply, not your usual bullshit.

slave|6.22.07 @ 2:09PM|#

you ain't free. no one is.

|6.22.07 @ 2:09PM|#

Dan, are you really this dense, or are you putting us on?

Not to mention that if the dubious legality of frozen beer really outrages you that much, you've probably got other, more serious, problems in your life.

I mean to say, give us one, yes, just one, single reason why this should be prohibited. Really, what is the point?

Are you really willing to be the one who says, "These agents of the state are enforcing this policy in my name and I am totally happy with that."?

|6.22.07 @ 2:11PM|#

Why wait.

Why is it necessary to write a law to prevent stupid people from getting themselves run over?

That is a serious question Dan, not a flipant remark. So I expect a serious reply, not your usual bullshit.

If this is what passes for a serious question, then we're all in trouble.

I guess the short answer is that our system of roadways works best for both auto traffic and pedestrians if a set of rules is understood and followed. And even if only stupid people cross the road at unsafe times, as a driver I don't want to be the one hitting them.

I suppose your line of thinking could apply to any law - why do we need to make murder illegal, since it only serves to protect those stupid enough not to get murdered?

|6.22.07 @ 2:12PM|#

Or, rather, "stupid enough not to avoid getting murdered". You know what I mean.

|6.22.07 @ 2:14PM|#

This kind of thread might be the greatest irony of Hit and Run: whining commenters whose lives are so easy here in the police state of America that they seem to seek out things to feign outrage over.

I'm pretty sure this is a waste, but why do you assume that questioning why a law is written or interpreted a certain is whining? Is your basic position "Society works when people do what their told without question or comment."? You could have a good career with the TSA.

|6.22.07 @ 2:15PM|#

"You guys are something else. The point is that probably thousands of other folks have tried the idea of beer popsicles. It's yet to catch on, and if you've ever tried one you'd understand why."

Dan Troll,

1) "Thousands of frat guys too poor or stupid to afford good microbrew beers" does not equal "every conceivable entrepreneur"

2) Just because some chucklehead like you thinks it isn't a viable business proposition doesn't give government the right to prohibit people from trying to make it work anyway.

3) If it truly isn't a viable business proposition, then why does the government agency in this article have its knickers in a twist about someone trying it?

4) For safety's sake, please run spellcheck before all your posts. The shortcut key for spellcheck is located below the "PgDn" key on your numeric keypad, labeled "Del" (short for Dell Computer, I believe).

|6.22.07 @ 2:19PM|#

The point is that probably thousands of other folks have tried the idea of beer popsicles. It's yet to catch on, and if you've ever tried one you'd understand why.

Fron 1802 thru 1878 thousands of folks have tried the idea of icandescent light bulbs. In 1877 it had yet to catch on, and if you'd ever tried one you'd understand why. Boy was that Edison guy a crackpot or what? Smirk, smirk, nudge, nudge.

|6.22.07 @ 2:24PM|#

If this is what passes for a serious question, then we're all in trouble.

You are showing your limitations. A nice, clear-cut, small problem is one that allows easy application of personal philosophy for the purposes of debate.

I guess the short answer is that our system of roadways works best for both auto traffic and pedestrians if a set of rules is understood and followed. And even if only stupid people cross the road at unsafe times, as a driver I don't want to be the one hitting them.

A good start. One could argue that there are ramifications beyond injury or death of the stupid pedestrian. Therefore, the state has reason to intervene. Libertarians would argue that those secondary ramifications could be better addressed by market forces or civil litigataion after-the-fact as opposed to prohibition.

I suppose your line of thinking could apply to any law - why do we need to make murder illegal, since it only serves to protect those stupid enough not to get murdered?

And here is where you prove your complete lack of rudimentory reasoning. Saying that eliminating laws banning self-inflected injury undermines laws prohibiting malicious acts against unwilling individuals is evidence that you don't really understand the fundamentals of the libertarian philosphy.

|6.22.07 @ 2:50PM|#

So, Dan, now that you've explained a reason for jay-walking laws (and I applaud you - it made sense) I eagerly await your equally logical reason for the prohibition of "beer-sicles".

I know you can.

Can't you?

Robert|6.22.07 @ 2:56PM|#

Should it be legal to run over pedestrians who fail to yield the right of way as & where required?

|6.22.07 @ 3:01PM|#

I am ASSuming that the VABC is concerned that a child might see a beercicle and want one. So the VABC et al propose a law to prevent the production or sale of a product, because a child might want one.

So what happens when a child sees me drinking a rum and diet Coke, on ice and decides he wants one of those too? Another law? Banning diet Coke? We already have laws that make it unlikely that anyone would give a child a beercicle. Why another law? Is the VABC paid by the word?

CB

Billy Beck|6.22.07 @ 3:06PM|#

"You guys are something else. The point is that probably thousands of other folks have tried the idea of beer popsicles."

And if it's such a rotten idea, then who needs the commissariat stepping on it?

(Why hasn't anyone else here called him on this point yet?)

You really are a thoroughly disgusting individual.

|6.22.07 @ 3:09PM|#

Margaritas and daquiris. Those look totally appealing to kids. They look like fancy slushies.

In fact, all girl drinks* look appealing to kids. Heck, I bet even straight whiskey would look more appealing to kids with a little umbrella in it.

You know what this means: we need to ban little drink umbrellas.

*denotes anything with a little umbrella in it.

|6.22.07 @ 3:11PM|#

If you don't like the law, there are appropriate avenues to getting it changed.

Dan is calling for violent overthrow of the government! Awesome!

VM|6.22.07 @ 3:14PM|#

Smacky -

what about all of those drinks served in Martini Glasses that have more sugar than ... than... (thinks quickly) ... a cake.. cup... cupcake. yeah. that.

*swigs Shirley Temple with tremendous, if not desperate, gusto

|6.22.07 @ 3:14PM|#

(Why hasn't anyone else here called him on this point yet?)

Because we're used to him. He's just a troll, trying to get a rise out of everyone here. He's previously stated that he doesn't really believe the stuff he posts; he just wants everybody to dance to his tune.

Fluffy|6.22.07 @ 3:53PM|#

Dan -

The roadways are the property of the taxpayers. If they want to make a rule that I can't jaywalk, that's their right.

That's a lot different than establishing categories of contraband, including the absolutely fucking absurd category of a substance that's legal in liquid form but illegal if I freeze it.

I'm definitely not feigning outrage. I think you're feigning the belief that this regulation makes sense.

By the way, since we're on the subject, Dan:

"I think the answer really is that sane people above the age of five understand that for society to work, you have to live with and respect the law of the land. If you don't like the law, there are appropriate avenues to getting it changed."

It's really not that simple, Dan. I think the question of whether there's a moral obligation to obey unjust laws, even if they're on trivial subjects, is hardly a settled one. And in the absence of a moral obligation to obey the law, pretty much ALL avenues to change become potentially appropriate ones [or, at least, it could be productively argued that this is so].

|6.22.07 @ 4:15PM|#

After a very long and very drunken party I woke up to a freezer full of frozen - and tragically busted - beer bottles. No real point; just a thing that happened.

Reason Magazine

Get Reason E-mail Updates!

Site comments/questions:

Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:

Editorial & Production Offices:

advertisements