McMaster restricts SC alcohol sales to slow spread of COVID-19 among young people

In an effort to slow the spread of the novel coronavirus among younger people, South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster is restricting when bars and restaurants can serve alcohol.

Starting Saturday, establishments will not be able to serve alcohol past 11 p.m. under McMaster’s new order. Bars and restaurants caught serving alcohol past 11 p.m. face suspension of their liquor licenses.

“We know that young adults who are rapidly contracting the virus and spreading it into our communities frequently congregate in late-night atmospheres which simply are not conducive to stopping its continued transmission,” McMaster said. “This measured, carefully tailored approach will lessen the opportunity for South Carolinians to put themselves and their loved ones in harm’s way.”

“This is a mandate, this is an order that the state can enforce,” said McMaster who has said it would be impossible to enforce a statewide mask mandate.

Disease Mitigation Measures in the Control of Pandemic Influenza THOMAS V. INGLESBY, JENNIFER B. NUZZO, TARA O’TOOLE, and D. A. HENDERSON

Cancelling or postponing meetings or events involving large numbers of people. Intuitively, this would appear to be a helpful adjunct to reduce contacts among people and so mitigate the effects of the epidemic. However, individuals normally have a great many contacts throughout the community on a daily basis: shopping in stores, attending church, traveling on public transport, and so on. Recognizing that the spread of influenza is primarily by person-to-person contact, any one individual, even in a large gathering, would have only a limited number of such close encounters with infected people. Thus, cancelling or postponing large meetings would not be likely to have any significant effect on the development of the epidemic. While local concerns may result in the closure of particular events for logical reasons, a policy directing communitywide closure of public events seems inadvisable. Quarantine. As experience shows, there is no basis for recommending quarantine either of groups or individuals. The problems in implementing such measures are formidable, and secondary effects of absenteeism and community disruption as well as possible adverse consequences, such as loss of public trust in government and stigmatization of quarantined people and groups, are likely to be considerable.

Screening passengers at borders or closing air or rail hubs. Experience has shown that these actions are not effective and could have serious adverse consequences; thus, they are not recommended. An overriding principle. Experience has shown that communities faced with epidemics or other adverse events respond best and with the least anxiety when the normal social functioning of the community is least disrupted. Strong political and public health leadership to provide reassurance and to ensure that needed medical care services are provided are critical elements. If either is seen to be less than optimal, a manageable epidemic could move toward catastrophe.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.