>>I think the lawsuit is without merit - like how you gonna sue someone for selling you a beer when you're the one who wanted to buy it?
>>
>>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46329414/ns/business-retail/#.TzR1kxxA9fA
>>
>>...and if I ever decide to open a liquor store I know where to do it now.
>
>- The Pine Ridge reserve has been dry since 1832. Alcohol legally banned
>
>- In 2010, beer companies supplied 5 million cans of beer to liquor stores in a town on the reserve's border that has only 12 residents
>
>Maybe the beer companies had "no idea" where those 5M cans were going, but if so it's only because they didn't want to know. Looks like a pretty solid civil tort to me.
>
>I hope you're kidding when you say you think that would be a good place to open a liquor store.

A couple of years ago my AA group got evicted by the landlord. (We weren't causing any problems; they just found someone who could pay a higher rent). The new location is in a strip mall next to a liquor store. You can bet there were lots of comments about that. One of the wise men of the group, sober for around 30 years now, said "If you are determined to be sober it doesn't matter if there is a liquor store next door. And if you want to drink you can always find it."

Another time the same guy spoke up when one of the newer (struggling) members asked for advice on going to a retirement party at a bar. "Well, this may just be me, but I don't go into bars. I've got no business being there. It's like they say -- if you go to the barber shop often enough, sooner or later you're going to get a haircut."

It's odd that the Indians (I consider "Native Americans" the height of political correctness) think this is some new problem created by the liquor stores. It's no secret that alcoholism has been a big problem for them for a long time. Don't get me wrong, I know they have legitimate grievances, but it's no excuse for one's own behavior.