|
| |
| |
 |
|
|
 |
News Room |
|
| |
Lawmakers look to
ground new "Party Toy" before it takes off
By Amy Lambiaso
STATE HOUSE NEWS SERVICE
amy.lambiaso@statehousenews.com
STATE HOUSE, BOSTON, NOV. 22, 2005…..Lawmakers are
trying to prevent the Massachusetts bar scene from
becoming clouded with the same alcohol vapor that
has swept through clubs in Europe and Asia as the
result of a new party toy.
A bill introduced here Monday bans any bar or
restaurant from offering their customers the use of
an alcohol vaporizer, or what is known as an Alcohol
Without Liquor (AWOL) machine. Similar bills have
been introduced in 17 states and in Congress.
Officials from the Alcoholic Beverages Control
Commission (ABCC) say investigators have not
encountered any bars offering the device to
customers, but lawmakers say it is a pre-emptive
measure aimed at a product that is being actively
promoted on the Internet.
“This encourages the abuse and misuse of alcohol,”
said Rep. John Quinn (D-Dartmouth), who is
co-sponsoring the bill with Sen. Mark Montigny
(D-New Bedford). “We don’t have any knowledge of it
being used in Massachusetts, but it’s certainly a
lot better to prevent it from coming here than to
learn about it after the fact.”
Under the bill, establishments with liquor licenses
would be prohibited from selling, delivering or
giving away any alcoholic beverage intended for use
in an alcohol beverage vaporizer. The bill would
also make it a crime to purchase or possess an
alcohol vaporizer, punishable by up $200 or up to
six months in jail.
According to information from Spirit Partners Inc.,
which holds the exclusive license to market and sell
the machine in the United States, an AWOL machine
works by attaching an oxygen generator to a handheld
vaporizer. Liquor is poured into the vaporizer,
mixing with oxygen to produce a mist that is inhaled
through the mouth, resulting in a quick “high.”
Spirit Partners, on its web site, describes the AWOL
as the “wildest way to party” and the “ultimate
party toy,” with photos of young men and women using
the device at bars and with others, describing the
effect as a “mild euphoria.”
Marketed as a low-calorie, low-carbohydrate,
hangover-free way to enjoy alcohol, the device has
caught the attention of advocates working to prevent
drunken driving, and public officials, who claim it
could lead to more underage drinking because it
could be seen as a drinking game.
David DeIuliis, spokesman for the Massachusetts
chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, said the
group is concerned that a person could become
intoxicated via a vaporizer but not register as
being drunk by a Breathalyzer test. Inhaling the
fumes also gives the alcohol a straight path to the
brain and bloodstream, without being processed and
broken down through the stomach and liver. Such a
path to the brain could be dangerous, DeIuliis said.
“It all comes down to people making responsible
decisions before they go out drinking,” DeIuliis
said, noting MADD does not have a formal position on
the bill. “And this just adds a whole new dynamic to
the debate.”
Natasha Dunker, state outreach coordinator for the
ABCC, said the commission is also concerned about
vaporizer users achieving the immediate drunken
feeling. There could also be legal implications for
offering the machine to customers at a bar, since by
law, servers are not supposed to provide alcohol to
already intoxicated customers, Dunker said.
Quinn said he too is concerned with how fast the
alcohol is absorbed into the consumer’s body, which
in some cases can be up to 10 times as fast as
drinking normally, he said.
“It hits you a lot quicker,” he said. “The
absorption rate here is critical.”
Representatives from Spirit Partners did not return
calls seeking comment.
In a press release announcing the product last year,
company officials said alcohol inhaled through a
vaporizer would register on a Breathalyzer and would
have the same effect, and in some cases milder, than
traditional drinking.
Last year, lawmakers in Westchester County, N.Y.
introduced a legislative ban on alcohol vaporizers
after news that a New York City club planned to
begin offering the vaporizers to customers. Donna
Greene, assistant communications director for
Westchester County Executive Andrew Spano, said the
bar opted against offering the machines after
extensive negative attention and concerns from
public officials.
“They were scared away,” Greene said in an e-mail.
The Senate referred the bill on Monday to the Joint
Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional
Licensure.
- END -
Need background about policy issues and the history
of current news stories?
http://www.IssueSource.org
www.statehousenews.com
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
