It should not be the role of government to mandate the size of containers that products come in. Liquor companies package their products in small containers because there is a demand for them. The arguments for banning nips are misguided. The proponents of using the government to prohibit these products point to the behavior of some people that use them. Empties are often disposed of improperly, which is littering, which is already illegal. I’ve heard it posited that nips increase DUI, another illegal activity. I’m skeptical. We can’t change people’s drinking habits through prohibition; it’s been tried.
It’s likely that some nip enthusiasts suffer from a drinking problem, and find the small size containers convenient for hiding their drinking from prying eyes. Banning these products won’t help them. It may help to bring back the hip flask, a tried and true method of concealment. Perhaps the pint bottle, which is curved to nicely fit in the pocket, will see a resurgence in sales.
I went to a Christmas party last week at which the hosts offered a wide selection of nips. It was displayed nicely in a rack, presumably made for that purpose. It was both a conversation piece, and serving method. The hosts were able to offer alcohol without buying large bottles of each of those brands and flavors. It was a real hit. People’s drinking habits have changed, and [they] may enjoy higher end cocktails, and less quantity. Nips can help facilitate that.
Let’s not use the heavy hand of government to attempt to change the behavior of a few bad actors.
We believe that journalism as a public service should be free to the community.
That’s why the support of donors like you is critical.
Thank you to our sponsors. Become a sponsor.