Newest Threads

**olllllo** · 09-08-2010, 04:16 PM

I moved some of the debate content to the Debate Forum. It should be easy to find.

I don't think there will be very much substantive information anytime soon since the brewer has legal counsel now, but perhaps members of his club will keep us updated here.

NorCalAngler · 09-08-2010, 04:35 PM

I tried searching for news articles online and came up empty handed. I searched for all combinations of Alabama, Kade, homebrew, still, whiskey, etc. Has anyone found a news article?

**sudbuster** · 09-08-2010, 04:44 PM

I did the same and came up empty handed also except for an article about the same thing happening a couple years back.

cimirie · 09-08-2010, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pwndabear

HOLD ON ONE SECOND HERE:
The main issue I am seeing here is thatFederal Law supersedes all state laws as every individual state is part of the federal government. That's just how the system works:
If a state law is in conflict with a federal law, the federal law overpowers the state law. In this instance, when Carter made it legal to homebrew in the United States of America, any law that previously stated that it was illegal was made null and void.

This is basic knowledge of government workings here. So, with that in mind, this man is 100% innocent of his "crimes" in homebrewing beer.

If he had in fact distilled, however, he could face penalties as distilling is indeed illegal. For that, as stupid as it is, he is guilty all be it on THAT CHARGE ALONE and not in any way, shape, or form of homebrewing.

This needs to be seriously examined more closely...

Stupid Alabama old prickface sherrif in that picture needs to get his clock cleaned for turning something relatively harmless into a massacre of RIGHTS of the US Citizen.

Not entirely true. Federal law supercedes state law only when the federal law poses a stricter standard. And in fact, what Carter signed into law was a bill allowing homebrewing on a federal level - in essence opening the blockade imposed from Prohibition. The bill explicitly states that states and municipalities have the right to restrict or prohibit the production of alcohol in any way they deem right.

Bane · 09-08-2010, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cimirie

Not entirely true. Federal law supercedes state law only when the federal law poses a stricter standard. And in fact, what Carter signed into law was a bill allowing homebrewing on a federal level - in essence opening the blockade imposed from Prohibition. The bill explicitly states that states and municipalities have the right to restrict or prohibit the production of alcohol in any way they deem right.

Cimirie is exaclty right this why there are still allowed to be dry counties and why Oregon is allowed to have a law only allowing home brew to be drank in your home.

hoppymonkey · 09-08-2010, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bane

Cimirie is exaclty right this why there are still allowed to be dry counties and why Oregon is allowed to have a law only allowing home brew to be drank in your home.

Yup. The law here in ga is stricter than the federal law as well. Only allowing 50 gallons per year.

Sigafoos · 09-08-2010, 07:13 PM

It's also, FWIW, why NYS doesn't have a law specifically allowing brewing. It's been tried a few times, but if there's some opposition (ie 'Hey, you can do that? Maybe we should ban it') it's allowed to wither and die.

Daybis · 09-08-2010, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoppymonkey

Yup. The law here in ga is stricter than the federal law as well. Only allowing 50 gallons per year.

Is this for one or two adults in the household?

**Airborneguy** · 09-08-2010, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sigafoos

It's also, FWIW, why NYS doesn't have a law specifically allowing brewing. It's been tried a few times, but if there's some opposition (ie 'Hey, you can do that? Maybe we should ban it') it's allowed to wither and die.

I never knew this, so I looked it up after reading your post. I'm sure we are good though, since my job, which has an obvious interest in the legality of its members' hobbies (NYPD), questioned me on it in 2006 and let it die. they must have determined I wasn't doing anything illegal.

Shackled · 09-08-2010, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daybis

Is this for one or two adults in the household?

Its per Head of Household based on Tax purposes

§ 3-5-4. Production of malt beverages by a head of household for consumption within own household

(a) A head of a household may produce 50 gallons of malt beverages in any one calendar year to be consumed within his or her own household without any requirement to be licensed for such purpose. No malt beverages produced under this subsection shall be sold or offered for sale. Malt beverages so produced shall not be subject to any excise tax imposed by this chapter.

(b) For purposes of this Code section, a single person who is not a dependent of another person for purposes of Georgia income taxation shall be considered a head of a household.

HISTORY: Code 1981, § 3-5-4, enacted by Ga. L. 1993, p. 537, § 1.