You are incorrect in your reading of the law. Simply put, a business cannot have any alcohol for the purpose of sale. She can give away as much alcohol as she wants to legal age drinkers, provided is not part of any service. The moment it is included in the price, she has to have a pouring permit.

The same applies to a resturant. A resturant can choose to allow patrons to bring their own alcohol and not have a pouring permit.

The question is “Was this a service?”

First, I completely agree this was handled improperly (the wedding store situation), as were the “code violations” at the Atlanta Eagle. Violations of this type should be pointed out to the owner in a civil manner by appropriate authorities. Of course it is outrageous to run an undercover operation and arrest someone over this.

BUT here’s the reason that I am not quite as outraged as others. There are numerous businesses in Atlanta and nearby, that are supplementing their revenue by renting out their space in off hours as an “event venue.” I could give you a list of 20+ that actively solicit this type of business in Atlanta – boutiques and other retail stores, art, recording and design studios, etc. These places are allowing third parties to use their business space, and to serve alcohol on the premises. They are often in violation of zoning laws, occupancy limits, as well as alcohol laws.

There may not be a direct exchange of money for alcohol, but if you pay $10 to attend an event in this type of space, and you get free beer, the State of Georgia clearly considers this selling alcohol without a license, as would most local governments.

I realize this is several steps away from offering a mimosa to clients trying on wedding dresses…but just be aware that it is a slippery slope to situations that really do cross the line and cause unfair competition to those legitimate businesses that have jumped through all the bureaucratic hoops to get licensed to sell and serve alcohol, just to see other businesses regularly skirt the laws with no consequences.

The Columbus city ordinance quoted above states that it is just as illegal for a patron at a restaurant to have a beer. He would be a “person” possessing an “alcoholic beverage” at a “business location” where he “…does not have a valid alcoholic beverage license.” Anyone holding a beer, glass of wine or mixed drink at a “business location” would be just as guilty as Mrs. Wilkinson. Are the fascist Columbus Police Department going to handcuff everyone at every bar in town? The ordinance is poorly written, confusing and obviously selectively enforced.

Wine has a higher alcohol content than beer and to make up for it wine is also typically served in a smaller glass. Hard liquor is obviously much stronger and is either served straight up in very small portions, or is diluted with a non-alcoholic mix.

Not totally relevant here because each state seems to have its own nutty take on how to classify booze.

Oregon gets a Cannabis Cafe, and once again, the East Coast gets ransacked by Conservative nut jobs.