ShareThis Page

Smacking a man's Pappy: Bourbon buncombe

| Monday, Feb. 2, 2015, 9:00 p.m.

It once was written that if you give “The State” the power to do something for you, you give it an exact equivalent of power to do something to you.

Witness what “The State” did to some poor schmuck in Pittsburgh last week looking to turn what appears to be an honest buck — not to mention a handsome profit — on a product in high demand.

Thursday last, the Pennsylvania State Police Bureau of Liquor Enforcement arrested a man it has not named for attempting to re-sell a bottle of Pappy Van Winkle 20 Year, one of the hot buttery bourbons of the day. Mr. Unnamed had the temerity to put a bottle of the wheated mash delicacy — retail price, $130 — up for sale on Craigslist for $800.

State gendarmes got wind of the offer — through unspecified complaints — and set up a sting. The of-age seller is being charged with a misdemeanor count of a non-licensed person selling liquor. He faces a $103 fine.

Never mind that this fella first appears to have come by his Pappy legally (nobody's seriously suggesting otherwise), already had paid all applicable (though usurious) taxes for the privilege and that it was his property, “The State” swooped in to extend its control past the original purchase.

Adding insult to its bandittiness, the government also has the power to destroy the Pappy, if it so chooses.

Thus, “The State” yet again lives up to its deserved reputation of being a creature of pillage and plunder.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.