A legislative answer for that extra wine

Frugal Kansans who also like a little wine with dinner are getting some special legislative attention this session. Senate Bill 555 would let diners take half-finished bottles of wine home with them under certain conditions — such as that a bottle be sealed in a tamper-proof transparent bag for transport in a vehicle, to bar against drinking and driving. The “doggie bag bill” won Senate approval last week and sounds like common sense, as long as diners don’t actually share these leftovers with their dogs.
Posted by Rhonda Holman

11 Comments

  1. CrusaderX
    Posted February 27, 2006 at 12:15 am | Permalink

    I’ll be taking some Courvoisier home tonight! Woo hoo!

  2. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted February 27, 2006 at 9:54 am | Permalink

    They do this in Texas, other than the sealed bag provision. It didnt seem to cause any real problem, but then, Texas also trusts its citizens to buy real beer and wine in the grocery stores. Restaurants can sell wine on a beer license. I guess the wholesale liquor lobby isnt as strong there.

    I wonder who owns the company that produces the sealed bags? A political donor perhaps?

  3. CrusaderX
    Posted February 27, 2006 at 11:11 am | Permalink

    Can you steal some V.S.O.P. for me Ks?

  4. OneShot
    Posted February 27, 2006 at 12:23 pm | Permalink

    Based on Rhonda’s post I’m led to believe that today you cannot take any of the wine home with you. Which of course would cause or encourage patrons to drink all of the wine before they leave. Do ya think this just maybe leads to drunk driving?

    The “legislative answer” should be to remove the existing law and let the adults assume responsibility for their own actions.

  5. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted February 27, 2006 at 12:30 pm | Permalink

    Well you know what we always say, one shot. Kansans will vote dry as long as they can stagger to the polls.

  6. Ian Santiago
    Posted February 27, 2006 at 12:33 pm | Permalink

    KS,

    Being drunk helps to ease the pain of having to vote for a demorat or a republiscum!

    V.L.R.B!!

  7. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted February 27, 2006 at 12:51 pm | Permalink

    LOL Ian, pass the bottle.

  8. Todd
    Posted February 27, 2006 at 6:11 pm | Permalink

    I will certainly be glad when these backward ‘thumpers are finally overruled on Sunday liquor sales.

  9. Marvin Reality
    Posted February 27, 2006 at 9:39 pm | Permalink

    Marvin,

    Sunday liquor sales are legal in Kansas. I think that each city has to put it up for a vote. Some cities have voted against and some are selling liquor on Sunday.

    In Topeka it was not so much the legislators as it was the liquor stores that did not want to be open on Sunday.

  10. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted February 28, 2006 at 8:00 am | Permalink

    Why is “Marvin” replying to “Marvin”?

    Multiple personality posting again?

  11. Marvin Reality
    Posted February 28, 2006 at 11:03 am | Permalink

    KSFarmGrrl,

    Mistakes happen.

    I was actually responding to the comment made by Todd. I was just letting him know what had been going on.

    You seem to take things so personal. It’s not all about you!!