Limits put on daily purchases at Rankin Inlet beer and wine store
Change follows reduced store schedule imposed earlier this month
Daily purchase limits have been put in effect for Rankin Inlet’s liquor and cannabis store. (File photo)
Updated on Sept. 26 at 1 p.m.
More changes are in store for the Rankin Inlet beer and wine store.
There are now limits on how much alcohol customers can purchase per day, the Nunavut Liquor and Cannabis Commission announced Sept. 22 in a news release.
The release says customers can choose from three options for single-day purchases — 12 cans or bottles of beer or coolers; two bottles of wine; or one bottle of wine and six cans or bottles of beer or coolers.
Earlier this month, hours at the Rankin Inlet store were temporarily limited to Monday to Friday from 11 a.m. until 5 p.m., to remain in effect until Sept. 17.
The limited schedule was later extended to last until Sept. 24, and then extended again to remain in effect until Oct. 1.
Note: This article has been corrected to note the new limits on daily purchases remain in effect until further notice.
Just like reading news from another planet. And this is Canada. Daily limits, restrictions, restrictions. Question for someone from another planet would be why are you not like the rest of the country when it comes to drinking?
“why are you not like the rest of the country when it comes to drinking?”
Wow, what a comment.
Are you trying to imply that Nunavummiut, or perhaps Inuit are uniquely flawed or deficient somehow?
Are you serious? Are you living on planet other than earth? You mean you don’t see the misery caused by alcohol in the north? Wake up for the sake of yourself. The lunatic drinkers are far greater than anywhere else on the globe. I didn’t read anything specifically about Inuit thou. You must have those thoughts in your storage somewhere, brought out by a remote suggestion to misunderstanding.. I can tell you this much, the behaviours in the north, are classic of flawed people with the drink black white or Irish green., and anyone saying otherwise are in denial or shamed into a lie. And you tell me and answer the question , if you think you are knowledgeable? But don’t give me this : denial crap. Why the lunatic drinker is seen in great numbers in the north. Political bull aside.
Perhaps a lesson for you here is when discussing difficult topics, careful framing and taking the time to consider the impact of your words is very important.
I suspect you’ll find that a population’s overal economic status is a greater predictor of alcoholism rates than its geography.
One problem with making a declaration based on our intuitions is it might not be true at all. For example:
“Numerous studies have indicated that people with higher socio-economic status tend to consume similar or greater amounts of alcohol than those of lower social-economic status, although the latter group seems to bear a disproportionate burden of negative alcohol-related consequences.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6361426/#:~:text=Numerous%20studies%20have%20indicated%20that,consequences%20%5B3%2C4%5D.
“although the latter group seems to bear a disproportionate burden of negative alcohol-related consequences”
Would you then consider the following as an accurate supposition? If so, that’s quite the nit you’re picking.
I suspect you’ll find that a population’s overall economic status is a greater predictor of rates of harmful alcoholism than its geography.
In Nunavut, alcohol has always been used as a scapegoat for society’s failings. Alcohol was given to us by outsiders so we use it as a means to blame our problems on everyone but ourselves.
John, would you agree it can be both, a scapegoat and a source of harms?
Sometimes yes but not always.
I would agree that alcohol is very often the CAUSE of harms but not necessarily the SOURCE of those harms. Raising alcohol to the position of “the source” opens the situation up to the scapegoating and avoiding accountability I mentioned earlier.
If you ended up drinking because of significant trauma in your past you can’t just address the booze.
Lol, lol. Always someone to blame. It’s either the devil or Jesus or Santa clause. Not me he said to the judge. It was my wife’s fault.
I know the majority of comments are likely to support the laissez faire approach toward alcohol access. Many will likely say things like there are no studies, evidence or data to support the effectiveness of restrictive policies as a deterrent to crime.
Granted, some might acknowledge that link, but also argue that access to alcohol is the right of citizens in a liberal democracy, we should be free to make our own choices and mistakes. Personally, I find the second argument more compelling, yet concede the possibility it will yield worse outcomes both at the individual and community level.
As for the first point, that it does not effect crime rates, there is data showing limits placed on access to alcohol does in fact reduce crime. This should probably not surprise anyone, if it does check out the quote from link below:
“Several scientific reviews have concluded that restricting the hours when alcohol may be sold is an effective strategy for reducing excessive alcohol consumption and related harms.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3712516/#:~:text=Several%20scientific%20reviews11%E2%80%9314,alcohol%20consumption%20and%20related%20harms.
ps, down votes are not data.
Do you have any studies that show the difference between (functionally) prohibition versus rehabilitation?
No problems with alcohol in nunavut? is that why even during covid the GN kept the beer store open to keep the continuously intoxicated residents from rioting in the streets. LOL.
Everyone will want to keep the 12 cans to themselves, one person party 🙂
12 cans is 12 good drunks for some people, and a few nights sleeping under lock and keys.
Daily Limits were already in place before. They reduce the daily limits by 50%
You read the story and think there were never any limits in place before.
Wouldn’t it be great to reduce it again by 25% like have a 6 pack daily? that’s enough to get You a buzz for a night.
Wouldn’t it be great if you were only allowed to buy 6 litres of gasoline a day?
Wouldn’t it be great if you were only allowed to buy 6 bullets a day?
Strict regulations are a slippery slope to dictatorship. But we already got Fidel Trudeau, so… In for a penny in for a pound?
Restrictions on gasoline and bullets are not to be compared to restrictions on alcohol. If you’re a problem when using alcohol, you need restrictions. It’s too bad though that everyone else that are sensible got to be restricted because of problem drinkers.
Anyone who’s spent a half hour researching prohibition in the United States will see the similarities that Nunavummiut faces. Look at Portugal and the legalization of all drugs.
The path to a healthy future is and always has been to reduce stigmatization around drugs (alcohol is a drug) and increase rehabilitation efforts DRAMATICALLY. If you keep arresting the same individuals for the same problems your wasting tax dollars. Send that person to rehab. I and every Canadian would spend far less tax dollars sending people with addiction issues to rehab over and over and over again than we do on police services and ems having to pick up the pieces of their destructive behaviors.
Prohibition is a retroactive reaction to problems that need proactive solutions.
Can we consider this for Iqaluit too? Seems we could benefit from a limit revision.
10% of the population becomes an alcoholic.
To keep the alcohol flowing and to give the illusion as if doing something, the Hamlet and Government drop in daily purchase limits.
Overnight, alcohol has now changed to a daily buy. A must to stock up on.
Works the same way when stores sell something in limited qualities. Only 2 per customer. Gets the customer to go back the next day and next. They probably don’t need it, but when anything is in limited qualities, the fear or running out takes over.
Purchase limits now guarantees bootleggers will spring up. (Though everyone becomes the “good” bootlegger when they help a friend with a case or two.)
Now with a solid bogyman in place, the Hamlet/Government slides to a clean public image. While encouraging the public to focus on and to point their fingers at the bootlegger as the cause of everything alcohol.