Bootlegging?

Find out before YOU post, dummy, and maybe you won't be insulting people that are providing more correct information than you are.

But ALL of you in this thread, including YOU, are incorrect in either leaving out facts or having facts wrong.

The poster you insulted is a little TOO specific, but he's correct about state control of alcohol. But those who say the "bootlegging" is simply due to Coors policy are wrong in a different way.

Here's the COMPLETE answer for all of you:

1. POLICY - Coors had limited geographic distribution back then due to their brewing/transport policies. That in itself however, did NOT make it ILLEGAL (bootlegging) to transport Coors to states where Coors was not sold.

2. STATE TAXES - ALL states have alcohol sales laws, covering everything from excise taxes to distribution and more. Some states receive shipments to state-owned warehouses, and distribute from there, and other simply require the purchase of tax stamps to be applied to the product before it enters the state. There are various versions of these controls.

3. COORS' DISTRIBUTION - Because EVERY state requires SOME type of licensing/taxation/control over inbound alcohol shipments, beer manufacturers have to set that up in every state they wish to sell beer in - this typically takes money and personnel to administer. Coors' policies for their product dictated that they would not set up shop in states outside their desired distribution area, therefore any Coors product sold in those states would by definition be "illegal".

That is why vacationers would bring back beer from Coors' legal distribution states, or people would send it out of the area to friends or relatives - it was "forbidden fruit". Such small amounts were never considered "bootlegging", because the amounts per shipment were so small.

4. However, when you load up an entire truck trailer shipment of beer, and bring it to a "Non-Coors" state, with out the proper stamps, or through the state facilities, then you are "bootlegging", because that state is not receiving its alcohol excise tax revenue - plus many states control the pricing as well, so people can't just import alcohol illegally and undercut local merchants.

So it's NOT just "Coors Policy" OR "a State-Owned Distributor" issue, is a combination of the policy AND state-taxation that makes the adventure in this movie "bootlegging".

Of course part of the big "appeal" in the bet, is the inference that Coors beer is some kind of "special forbidden fruit" of high quality. In reality, it's an ordinary every day beer (in my opinion) that has never been superior any number of beers that were always available anywhere in the U.S.

Of course, it is kinda funny how the movie exaggerates the whole Coors beer east of Texas thing but it is all true because of the Coors policy of yesterday and/or the ridiculous state laws at the time. (Many of these laws have rolled back but not all.) I grew up in Maryland and was wondering why my Californian Grandfather got to enjoy the forbidden fruit. It really was the expectation that any traveler into Colorado would smuggle back a case in order to create cocktail party talk. Otherwise, any trucker that was pulled over with a truck full of Coors would have been fined and had license suspended. Just like trucker bringing in unauthorized fruit into California.

However, watching the movie today you get the feeling the Southern police were seriously concerned about this 'bootlegging'.