Sunday, April 22, 2012
Prohibition in Manhattan Beach
"If certain people cannot drink, then no one should drink". So goes one line of reasoning regarding the Upcoming Centennial Celebration in Manhattan Beach. The conflict between individuals with money and those who want to save their income for sober purposes certainly do not deserve to be punished for choosing not to drink in a sequestered section of the beach.
However, prohibiting alcohol on the beach was a matter of civil and civic opinion long before an exception was considered.
Alcohol consumption contributes to community dysfunction if left unchecked. If a group of party-goers are willing to shoulder the cost of alcohol consumption, then so be it.
However, I believe that they should have their fun somewhere else. I have witnessed unchecked alcohol consumption and abuse. Individuals under the influence have no place in public during a community celebration.
Of course, the community has already denounced alcohol on their beaches – and the will of the voters must be respected. The City of Manhattan Beach belongs to everyone who lives in that city and pays taxes to maintain its pristine coastline .
Prohibiting alcohol on the beach is not an untoward prohibition. The Manhattan Beach City Council did not attempt to create a dry city.
I definitely second the sentiment of Manhattan Beach councilmember – people can have fun without drinking. People who insist that they cannot have any fun unless they have a drink can party at home – why go to the beach if you just want to drink your day away?
If the city had voted against it, then the city as a whole must approve lifting the ban. Whether a vocal minority or majority, the law must be respected in the community. No one has a right to overturn the legislated will of the city for one gala event.
Posted by Arthur Christopher Schaper at 3:21 PM