Liquor licenses

Kudos to the Boston Herald clearly pointing out in a recent editorial (Boston Herald, “Competition at core of liquor license move,” Feb. 12) that the real purpose in allowing convenience stores to sell beer and wine is to allow competition and consumer choice.

The initiative to allow the voters a chance to vote on this issue was certified by the Attorney General’s Office and is now being appealed to the Supreme Judicial Court to stop any changes to existing state law. A coalition of liquor store owners thinks the idea is a bad one. Reasons stated for opposing a law change seems silly. Opponents talk about cheap booze encouraging illegal sales and drunkenness. It is being called a public safety issue.

Sometimes I think it is just deja vu all over again. Remember when there was a similar move to stop supermarkets from the opportunity to sell beer or wine? Did anything bad happen after folks starting buying their beer or wine with their groceries? Not that I heard of.

Clearly the more competition the better for consumers. As for talking about public safety, what about all those Massachusetts communities up near the border of New Hampshire where those tax-free state liquor stores attract a booming Bay State business? As the Boston Herald stated New Hampshire “hasn’t crumbled from drink-induced debauchery.”

Changing the law is all about competition. Not about turning Cumberland Farms into the boogeyman. We live in a free society. Liquor stores still have the monopoly on hard liquor.

— Sal Giarratani, Boston