Jerry Brown

Will Jerry Brown Allow Californians to Taste Beer?

|

In honor of three smooth Anchors I had last night at the opening of "A Little Help."

File this under: Good news that it's happening. Bad news that it's stuff like this wot counts as a victory for freedom in 2011. 

California's state senate has voted unanimously to reclassify breweries under the same regulatory apparatus that now applies to wineries with tasting rooms. This would allow brewers to open foodless tasting rooms and avoid restaurant-level regulation. Golden State Liberty hips us to this coverage by Michael Gardner in the San Diego Union-Tribune

Current law bars breweries from opening a tasting room unless the facility meets all of the more-stringent health and safety codes that govern restaurants and food production facilities. Those include cleaning equipment, certain types of flooring, sinks, paint, plumbing and other measures.

If signed into law, the measure would change that so that craft beer makers are exempt as long as food is not served. That also will put breweries on an even keel with wineries, which have enjoyed an exemption from restaurant-style rules since 1985. 

The legislation is awaiting the signature of Gov. Jerry Brown, who as Gardner reminds us "prefers pinot grigio over pale ale." I may read the bill and update later. My main curiosity is how this works with county and city health bureaucracies, which seem to do the real regulatin' in these matters. In any event, cheers. 

NEXT: Daily Caller Interview, Pt. I

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

    1. My new congresswoman, hooray!

      1. I just got redistricted into her district. I’m considering moving; I don’t know if I can handle the shame.

    2. Is that why they didn’t like ME?

    3. I just saw this. Good lord. These folks are officially beyond parody.

      1. Ah, no: this was when they officially went beyond parody.

        1. Another progressive victory against dairy products!

        2. Good thing CA is protecting its citizens from the dairy menace. The regulatory catch-22 is a nice, if unsurprising, bonus.

    4. “I hope someone will say that what it appears to be is not in fact accurate,” said Lee.

      Please allow me. I hereby say, and you may quote me, “What it appears to be is not in fact accurate.”

      1. Sorry, no link, but I was annoyed to see in the paper today that Michael Gerson named about 4-5 people who had refused to sign the FAMiLY pledge and did not mention Paul or Johnson. What a douche!

    5. “I am particularly sensitive to the fact that only this president ? only this one, only this one ? has received the kind of attacks and disagreement and inability to work, only this one,” said Jackson Lee from the House floor.

      Uh…

    6. The sixth hurricane this year is going to be named “Friedchickeniesha”…what more does she want?

    7. Why do you hate Tim’s post so much that you threadjack it with the first comment?

      1. Because FUCK Tim, that’s why.

      2. Or, alternatively, why do you have beer so much that you threadjack a beer-related post with the first comment?

    8. We already knew you were a rapis…oh, that says racist. Honest mistake.

      1. STEVE SMITH NOT RACIST, WILL RAPE ANY COLOR.

  1. Frankly, I’m just stunned that the Legislature actually voted to lighten regulations on something.

    As far as your concern about the local authorities, it’s a fair point, but I’m not worried much. It seems to work smoothly in wine country (personal experience talking). Insofar as many of the counties in question would be dirt-poor without the tourism, the local authorities tend to welcome them.

  2. Like the picture of Anchor. It has a tasting room, but I think it got around the regs because it wasn’t open to the general public, but a part of the brewery tour.

  3. The bill’s amendment appears to be a pretty straightforward copy/paste/replace of the wine tasting section, so the bill itself doesn’t tell you how it interacts with local laws. Presumably exactly the same way that wine tasting ones do.

    Except that you can also serve pretzels (as well as crackers) at a beer-tasting place, while wine-tasting places are restricted to crackers. OMG BIAS!

    I’m glad to know that I’m paying the salaries of people who are writing laws regarding exactly which palate-cleansers you can serve in your alcohol-tasting rooms. Jesus.

    1. my palate cleanser is a ribeye steak. or maybe a porterhouse

      1. It makes the bootlicking a little more palatable I guess?

  4. If I’m going to drink at a brewery I’ll need a train to take me there and back and this legislation doesn’t deal with that. DOES IT Californian politicians!?!?!

    1. This was my idea for where to start the high speed rail project.

    1. “It is necessary to distinguish the Google search engine from the Google news service,” the article said. “The news editors do not oppose having their content referenced by the Google search engine, they refuse on the other hand for their informational content to be included in Google News,”

      Apparently they want to micromanage how Google works. They should start their own search company.

      1. What a bunch of morons, Google linking to their website is a mutually beneficial relationship and Google doesn’t need them.

      2. Seriously. They fucking sue Google for not paying them for linking to their stories, then get pissed off when Google blocks them? How does Google not pay and not block them? Goddamn mayonnaise-on-french-fry-eatin’ assholes.

    2. Try to focus, threadjacker.

      1. Hey look, it’s some passive aggression from a passive-aggressive little nothing. How about you go fuck yourself?

      2. The Internet. Serious Business.

  5. In other news, all the kiddies in CA schools need to be taught ‘gay history.’

    One tiny step forward, two giant leaps back. Its a loss for gays too, given that they won’t learn anything about gay history anymore than they don’t learn about rest of history. But at least they’ll taste beer at a brewery when they ‘graduate’ and turn 21.

    1. The upside is that they might emphasize Turing’s work and Greek philosophy.

      Oh, who am I kidding, it’s going to be full of pseudo-scientific bullshit and revisionist history.

  6. If history is any guide, er uh something.

  7. Opinions on Taurus Judge for home defense?

    .410/.45

    Thanks

    1. Pure silliness. Get a shotgun, get a revolver, don’t get a shotgun that is a revolver.

      1. I dunno, it’s pretty cool just for the reason that it’s a revolver that fires shotgun shells.

    2. I mean, get one as a toy because it’s awesome, but get something more useful for shooting burglars.

      1. I did actually shoot one the other day and enjoyed it. Smooth and powerful like Sugarfree. Less cumbersome than a long barrel.

        1. Smooth and powerful like Sugarfree

          If you say so. Was is the Astroglide?

        2. You shot a burglar the other day? Cool!

      2. Perhaps a sword?

        (unintentional comedy ensues)

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hfLZozBVpM

        1. That’s not a sword… THIS is a sword.

    3. The .410 fits in the .45 Colt cylinder because the shotshell walls are so wide. But it’s still designed to be shot out of a barrel that’s .410″ in diameter. So there is a .02″ gap between the wad and the walls of the barrel. Besides ruining any pattern, which admittedly doesn’t matter much when you’re shooting burglars, there has to be a lot of gas escaping through that gap, so you lose muzzle velocity. Which also doesn’t matter. Still, it seems decidedly suboptimal.

      1. This kind of thinking is what I am looking for here and to be honest why I brought it up with the only 18 libertarians in the world. I’ve never owned a gun myself so I’m sure there are plenty of things I would not think of when deciding what to get. But many of you have been down this road. before.

        There is also this hilarious version.

        http://www.thefirearmblog.com/…..ge-magnum/

        Be sure and browse the comments.

        1. Yeah, don’t get a Judge as a first gun. Don’t get anything in .454 either. That caliber hurts to shoot.

          If you like revolvers, get something like this as a first gun instead.

          1. That looks like it means business.

            An issue I had with the Judge was the grip. My pinky curled at the end of the grip due to my massive hands. Hands that I regularly use to strangle the weak and oppressed.

            Also I was leaning towards the 3 inch cylinder version rather than the shorter (2.5?) one that initially came out. The difference seemed to be that you could get more punch into the shell.

            1. The Judge is a gimmick. You’re better off getting one of Taurus’ super light .38+P revolvers for about $325. I’m a Kel-Tec fan, because they’re so light for carrying (but they are not fun to shoot).

              Go to a range where you can rent handguns and shoot a bunch. But something like the Judge is goofy, and don’t forget that .45 Long Colt isn’t cheap. If you want to shoot what you buy at the range for fun a lot, get a .38 or a 9mm.

              1. I hadn’t thought about being able to rent guns at a range.

              2. It’s a gimmick, but that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t get one. Gimmick guns are awesome, too.

                He mentioned home defense, so I think the super-light pistols are a bad idea. Honestly, I’d just get a Mossberg 500 or equivalent.

                1. My advice is to buy many guns, but, well, that’s what I do so I’m biased. If you buy a semi-auto shotgun you can use it for home defense and to shoot skeet and trap (make sure it has variable chokes). If you buy a handgun, get something that is also fun at the range.

                  Or be like me and buy lots of guns that fit all situations: home defense, target shooting, skeet and trap, concealed carry, what have you.

                  1. Also, get a C&R license and fill your house with surplus firearms. If you do it right, you can build furniture out of stacked ammo cans.

                    1. a.k.a. female repellent.

                      This is why we have 1% of the vote.

                    2. What the hell is a C&R license? Is that some stupid Ohio thing, you derivative buttmuncher?

                    3. Curio & Relic.

                      Basically war trophies from World War Dos.

                    4. Collectors of Curio and Relic (C&R) Firearms

                      A special type of FFL is available to collectors of curio or relic (C&R) firearms. C&R firearms are defined in Title 27, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 478.11 as those “…of special interest to collectors by reason of some quality other than is associated with firearms intended for sporting use or as offensive or defensive weapons.” An application for a C&R FFL is filed using ATF Form 7CR.
                      To be recognized by ATF as a C&R firearm, a firearm must fall into at least one of the following three categories:
                      Firearms manufactured more than 50 years prior to the current date, not including replicas
                      Firearms certified by the curator of a municipal, State, or Federal museum that exhibits firearms as curios or relics of museum interest
                      Any other firearms that derive a substantial part of their monetary value from the fact that they are novel, rare, bizarre, or because of their association with some historical figure, period, or event. Proof of qualification of a particular firearm under this category requires evidence of present value and evidence that like firearms are not available except as collector’s items, or that the value of like firearms available in ordinary commercial channels is substantially less.
                      C&R firearms include most manually-operated and semi-automatic firearms used by a military force prior to 1946. This includes most firearms used by the warring nations in World War I and World War II. However, the firearm must normally also be in its original configuration to retain the C&R designation. So, for example, an unaltered Mauser Karabiner 98k rifle used by the German Army in World War II is a C&R firearm?but the same rifle “sporterized” with a new stock and finish is generally not considered a C&R firearm. There is an ambiguous point in how the license is currently administered, in that some firearms altered by the militaries that issued them have been confirmed by the BATFE to retain C&R status, though whether this applies to all such conversions (the examples given by the BATFE were the Spanish M1916 Guardia Civil, FR-7, and FR-8 Mausers) also remains ambiguous. However, as long as the receiver (the part of the firearm that is regulated by the BATFE) is over 50 years old (was manufactured before 1961) the firearm qualifies as a Curio & Relic ? the BATFE states explicitly that, in addition to newer firearms it individually approves, firearms automatically achieve C&R status upon turning 50. Certain automatic weapons have been designated as C&R firearms, and although a C&R FFL can be used to acquire these as well, they are also subject to the controls imposed by the National Firearms Act of 1934. ATF maintains a current list of approved C&R firearms on its website.
                      Licensed collectors (who have been issued a C&R FFL) may acquire C&R firearms in interstate commerce, e.g., via mail or phone order or the Internet, or in person. (This is especially important for collectors of pistols and revolvers since they may not otherwise be acquired outside a collector’s state of residence.) However, the selling FFL dealer or collector must have a copy of the buyer’s C&R FFL before the C&R firearm can be shipped to the licensed collector. Licensed collectors are not considered to be FFL dealers and have no special privileges concerning non-C&R firearms, nor may they “engage in the business” of regularly selling C&R firearms to persons who do not have an FFL. The purpose of the C&R license is to enable a collector to acquire C&R firearms for his/her personal collection and not to become a firearms dealer.

                      You half-educated buffoon. You’re probably a Pixies fan, aren’t you?

                    5. You’re probably a Pixies fan, aren’t you?

                      You’re really going below the belt now, aren’t you, you blithering fartknocker schmuck?

                      I have no interest in C&R weapons, other than my SKS. I am a handgun and shotgun guy, really.

                    6. When my toting license cleared I really wanted to get a C&R just so I could buy (and trade and sell)old guns out of state and mail order.I’ve held off because I don’t need the extra steady cash outflow.I’ll never get a nice Greek military Mannlicher-Schoenauer rifle w/o one though.

                    7. The Mossberg looks good. And more towards what I originally had in mind. A scatter gun that I could put bird shot in for the first round or two then the business rounds since the burglar will likely be interrupting business time with the wife. I’m in a apartment so I don’t want to kill my neighbors kid.

                      I had mentioned my desire for a shotgun to my father in law who is a collector and avid user of guns. He happened across the Judge and got a deal on it.

                      Also what is a C&R license?

                    8. I see the C&R post now. Thanks.

                    9. Pump shotguns suck balls for sport shooting. You want an auto or a side by side or over-under. They can still be used for home defense, but also work for sport. I have a pump (Winchester 1300) in my closet for home defense, and a side-by-side and a Weatherby semi-auto for skeet and trap. And when we sell our startup for a zillion dollars, I will buy a Citori.

                    10. be interrupting business time with the wife.
                      Lol, is that what you call doing the dishes?

                    11. When you grow up you will see why they call them business socks.

                    12. A scatter gun that I could put bird shot in for the first round or two then the business rounds since the burglar will likely be interrupting business time with the wife. I’m in a apartment so I don’t want to kill my neighbors kid.

                      Anything that will get adequate penetration to kill, stop the bad guy, will also march right through apartment walls. If it won’t go through walls, it won’t penetrate deep enough on the intruder. Unfortunately.

                      Are you planning on getting a CHL for the handgun? If not, get something you’ll enjoy shooting at the range too. The S&W 686 looks great for that.

                  2. Make a mental note: next time I tell epi to get my coffee say Get my fucking coffee please

  8. http://www.theagitator.com/201…../#comments

    Yep, the government of Rankin county can no longer be tolerated. Start handing out the weapons to the citizens and spill some blood.

    1. Not a terrible song, but I prefer Pixies being Pixies over Pixies being Talking Heads.

      1. Well I promised to post 100 songs, so I’m going to have to reach into the covers obviously.

        1. Or you could just give up and stop that crap.

  9. the pathetic thing is that without knowing a damn thing about this issue, i can guarantee you the biggest opposition to this law, and the little bit of freedom it would provide, is coming from the wineries…. they don’t want the comeptition. As always in anticapitalist america, the favorite way of avoiding competition and denying free markets is buying legislation that outlaws, or otherwise greatly hinders, one’s competition. The breweries should fight back and accuse the wineries of being filthy, unclean, roach-infested pits of slime that are exempt from all health inspector visits. Doesn’t matter if it’s true… slander is the only way to fight anticompetitive antitrust violations.

  10. The good news is that, after rolling over and playing dead about the wars, the dispensary raids, the indefinite detentions, the drone attacks, and all that, there is still an issue liberals will withdraw support for Obama over.

    The bad news? Read for yourself.

    A liberal group upset over potential cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security delivered pledges Friday to President Barack Obama’s national campaign headquarters threatening to pull its support.

    About a dozen people representing the Progressive Change Campaign Committee delivered what they said were 200,000 pledges from people who will refuse to donate or volunteer for Obama’s re-election campaign if he cuts the entitlement programs.

    1. The irony is that reform (or CUTS of some sort) is the only way to continue the entitlement programs. Means testing and all the such.

      You would think that progressives would support reforming the system to give to those that need it the most…

    2. Dude, you missed the best part:

      “It’s not a question of who they’re going to support for president, they’re going to vote for Barack Obama. It’s a question of where their time and money is going to go,” spokesman T. Neil Sroka said.

      I don’t think that these people quite understand how to threaten politicians. There is a way to do it, and it is through votes.

      1. These must be the dildos who paid Obama $5,000 each to sing to him. I’m going to love calling the Obama supporters “war mongers” and watch them flail.

    3. Also, looking at the comments: JESUS FUCKING CHRIST!!! You do not “pay in” to Social Security or Medicare. You directly transfer your current dollars to current beneficiaries. Furthermore, the US Supreme Court has ruled that the government has no contractual obligation with regard to those programs.

      WHY THE FUCK IS THIS SO GODDAMN HARD TO UNDERSTAND?

  11. Fuck Sheila.

  12. OK wow that makes a LOT of sense dude.

    http://www.complete-privacy.us.tc

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.