I forgot number 5 in the Iowa Instructions.

"5. Desertion of family or dependents."

Dave

On Oct 30, 2010, at 11:13 AM, David Trippel wrote:

> Virginia calls banning "interdiction". Here's info from 1995  on  
> the program in Alexandria.
> http://www.popcenter.org/library/awards/goldstein/1995/95-04(F).pdf
> The last paragraph mentions sending out color posters of  
> interdicted people to all licensed alcohol sellers.
>
> In the pre-WWII decade the individual permit states (Iowa, Ohio,  
> Montana, New Mexico, Oregon, Washington, and Utah) probably had  
> interdiction rules limiting/revoking these permits in certain  
> cases. In Iowa at the time, Individual Liquor Permits were tiny 2"  
> x 3 1/2" booklets that had a page with instructions including -
>
> "This permit will be revoked if you are guilty of: 1. Drunkenness   
> 2. Pretending to be intoxicated 3. Failure to support family or  
> dependents 4. Commission of any crime in which liquor contributed  
> 6. Allowing any person other than yourself to use this permit, as  
> it is personal to you and is not transferrable.  Be temperate and  
> obey the law.  [In 1940 they added] If you drive don't drink. If  
> you drink don't drive."
>
> Interdiction may have also held for states that rationed alcoholic  
> beverages during the war. For instance, Virginia's wartime 2" x 4"  
> Sales Permit No.2 Civilian Registrant coupon booklet includes a  
> Certificate of Ownership stating -
>
> "...and that I am legally entitled to purchase alcoholic beverages  
> in Virginia."
>
> and on the Instructions page it says -
>
> "Regardless of a sales permit, the following persons may not  
> legally purchase alcoholic beverages in Virginia: a minor, an  
> intoxicated person, an interdicted person, a ward of the State."
>
> I don't know if or how people were or are able to become un- 
> interdicted.
>
> Dave Trippel
>
> On Oct 29, 2010, at 9:18 PM, jim baumohl wrote:
>
>> the state of virginia had a law similar to ohio's, passed in the  
>> mid-1870s, i believe, and although disused over many years so far  
>> as i know, it was noted (by downtown business owners, i think) as  
>> a potential remedy in an early 1990s debate about homelessness and  
>> public order in richmond.  the conflict resulted in a well- 
>> attended public forum just before the 1992 presidential election.  
>> it was moderated by robert segal of npr.
>>
>> i'm traveling and don't have the article at hand, but i think that  
>> in a paper that robin and i wrote about 25 years ago on the  
>> worldwide history of treatment, we had a lengthy footnote on  
>> individual bans that likely includes a reference or two.  since  
>> robin is the one with the steel-trap memory, i will defer to his  
>> recollection.
>>
>> jim baumohl
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 3:24 AM, Robin G W Room  
>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Listmates --
>>
>>    Below you will find an initiative by the government of the  
>> Northern Territory of Australia to institute a person-specific  
>> bans on drinking.
>>    There is an interesting cross-national piece to be done about  
>> the prehistory of such measures, and I would be interested in  
>> corresponding with ohters interested in this.  In temperance  
>> times, there were various initiatives to "blacklist" heavy  
>> drinkers, often at the call of family members.  It can be seen as   
>> part of the move in the Progressive Era to have the state  
>> intervene in the family on behalf of the weak against the strong  
>> (cf. for the US Tony Platt, The Child-Minders).  The supervisor of  
>> the Temperance Boards in Sweden in 1940 described them as a  
>> defense for the family against "petty domestic tyrants" (quoted  
>> from memory from the Helsinki ICAA conference proceedings).  
>> Margaretha Jaervinen did an article in Contemporary Drug Problems  
>> around 1991 about the Finnish alcohol monopoly sending out  
>> inspectors to investigate where a woman seemed to have been buying  
>> too much alcohol -- but not necessarily cutting her off if it  
>> turned out she was buying for her husband as a way of limiting his  
>> drinking -- i.e., using the wife as an agent of the state's social  
>> control. The book Punched Drunk mentions the LCBO in Ontario  
>> cutting off drinkers (putting them on what was known as the  
>> "Indian list", in an era of Prohibition for nonassimilated  
>> Aboriginal Canadians) in the 1950s at the request of wives and  
>> other family members, although the statistics show clearly that  
>> this request was often not accepted by the LCBO. There are still  
>> US states with state liquor stores (Ohio, as I remember) where it  
>> is theoretically possible for the family to ask the stores to  
>> blacklist drinkers.
>>
>>     Particularly where there had been a period of Prohibition, the  
>> alcohol control laws in the 1920s-1950s often included these  
>> individually-oriented controls, which were abandoned nearly  
>> everywhere in the 1950s-1960s as seeming too much of an intrusion  
>> on emerging standards of "privacy". (Part of the background of the  
>> "purple book", Bruun et al. 1975, was the argument by civil- 
>> libertarian sociologists in a Finnish context that universal  
>> control measures such as price and hours of sale could be  
>> effective without these individual-oriented measures). Now, with  
>> the emergence of ASBOs under Tony Blair and similar individually- 
>> oriented behaviour controls, we are back to the future.
>>     The historically-oriented piece should take a  look at how  
>> effective such measures seem to have been.  One clear signal of  
>> their potential effectiveness is the large rise in cirrhosis  
>> mortality after the abandonment of the Swedish alcohol rationing  
>> system in 1955, studied by Thor Norstroem.
>>           Robin
>>
>> some detailes from the attachedfact-sheet:
>> Individual and Third-Party Referrals to the AOD Tribunal
>>
>> It is anticipated that other people, such as the police, family  
>> members and health workers, will be able to ask
>>
>> the Tribunal to make orders against someone. For example, if one  
>> of your family members has a drinking
>>
>> problem and is causing harm, you would be able to go to the  
>> Tribunal and ask them to make an order banning
>>
>> your family member from purchasing take away alcohol. The AOD  
>> Tribunal would look at what has been
>>
>> happening and your family member would be assessed by a professional.
>>
>>
>> A person with an alcohol problem could choose to get themselves  
>> banned so they can more easily deal with
>>
>> their alcohol or drug problem.
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: CCH Parliament [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>> Sent: Thursday, 28 October 2010 3:33 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Political Alert - Draft Alcohol Bills Tabled in  
>> Parliament (NT)
>>
>> Please find attached:
>>
>> DRAFT ALCOHOL BILLS TABLED IN PARLIAMENT (NT)
>>
>> The Minister for Alcohol Policy, Delia Lawrie, released two key  
>> pieces
>> of draft legislation that detail the most comprehensive alcohol  
>> reforms
>> in the Territory's history. The draft Bills, the Prevention of
>> Alcohol-Related Crime and Substance Misuse Bill and the SMART  
>> Court Bill
>> were tabled in the Northern Territory Parliament.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>