• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Four Loko going to be banned?

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Ns1 said:
I've never seen a can of soda with warning labels or over 21 labels. Why are we blaming the manufacturer for parental stupidity?
Click to expand...

1. The labels are not obvious. I saw a can on the playground where my 2 year old was playing the other day. They place is perpendicular to all other writing (the ABV%) near the can's seam.

They do not need to do this as obviously with others because they do not make it look so much like a can of Grape Soda.

2. We are blaming the MFR for taking advantage of the parents stupidity. As I said, I am not for holding them responsible for it, but simply their ability to manufacture and market something that obvious.
 
Ninjahedge said:
No, they did.

The same parents that did not know about the violence in GTA.

It was done deliberately to market to the youth AND depend on the ignorance of elders.



That was just plain stupid.



Ah, here we go, the classic "If you don't like 'Mericuh, git out!"

GMAMFB.

Your life is ruined because the guv'ment is making it so that manufacturers can't target minors for liquid crack.

'K
Click to expand...


Dude, I'm not exactly pro America. If you've paid the least bit of attention on this board, I'm probably one of the more vocal detractors of those that have the misfortune of living here. Why misfortune? Because of douchebags like you that don't take responsibility for YOUR actions, and expect the government to hold their flacid little hands, and protect them from every single minor hazard they may encounter through life.
 
BurnItDwn said:
So, 18 and 20 year olds are binge drinking something called "four locko" and now they are being sued by the parents of the tards who drank the stuff. If you are required to be 21 to drink, and less than 21 when drinking it, then clearly, I don't see how the manufacturer can be held liable... but I know it's a sue-happy world we live in.
Click to expand...

Yep.

I'm of the opinion that caffeinated booze can sometimes be good (scotch + Drambuie + coffee can be tasty for example.)
Click to expand...

Yes, but not to this extent. Just too much just for the purpose of abuse.

The only real solution I see ever working is to get rid of a legal drinking age, and have kids learning how to drink safely with their families. Encourage families to share a bottle of wine together every once in a while or something, so that kids have exposure to it, and don't kill them selves with it because they don't know how to handle it.
Click to expand...

Sort-of. I think it is legal for you to serve your minor alcohol, but only in your presence, in your home, under your supervision. I thin more parents should do this.

I intend (I will look up the legality) to do this with my son and spoil him on good shizznit so he is less inclined to binge on cheap crap when he goes away to college (my own personal experience).

If I had had some good stuff by the time I went, I don't think I would have tolerated "Lite"s.
 
lxskllr said:
Dude, I'm not exactly pro America. If you've paid the least bit of attention on this board, I'm probably one of the more vocal detractors of those that have the misfortune of living here. Why misfortune? Because of douchebags like you that don't take responsibility for YOUR actions, and expect the government to hold their flacid little hands, and protect them from every single minor hazard they may encounter through life.
Click to expand...

Flaccid? You are trying to discredit my argument by appealing names like "douchbag" and descriptions like "flaccid" to my form?

You can't protect the youth from everything, but protecting them from things that people deliberately manufacture to take advantage of their naiveté?

If all we had to worry about was keeping Jr away from Grandpa's jug of 'hooch this would be a lot simpler, but that is not the case today. A parent can't "Attica" a kid until they are out, and as such, there needs to be some limit to the sale and marketing of illegal substances to kids of that age.

All they really had to do was change their marketing strategy. Deliberately change the cans, logo and other things targeting the kids and you would have less of an argument here.

the fact that they wanted kids, had a lame excuse like "Irish Coffee" as their defense, meant they were after kids and they knew it. We don't need that crap.
 
seepy83 said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Four_Loko_Beverage_Large_Can.jpg

Looks pretty obvious to me.

Doesn't look very different from Sparks (http://www.sparks.com/) or any other similar product that's been out for a long time.
Click to expand...

Not only does it say the ABV in prominent enough lettering, the phrase "contains alcohol" circle the rim. In fact, those appear to be the only things on the can that are in the normal orientation of the person reading them - making them the most legible things on the can.

Stupid people are stupid.
 
Ninjahedge said:
Flaccid? You are trying to discredit my argument by appealing names like "douchbag" and descriptions like "flaccid" to my form?

You can't protect the youth from everything, but protecting them from things that people deliberately manufacture to take advantage of their naiveté?

If all we had to worry about was keeping Jr away from Grandpa's jug of 'hooch this would be a lot simpler, but that is not the case today. A parent can't "Attica" a kid until they are out, and as such, there needs to be some limit to the sale and marketing of illegal substances to kids of that age.

All they really had to do was change their marketing strategy. Deliberately change the cans, logo and other things targeting the kids and you would have less of an argument here.

the fact that they wanted kids, had a lame excuse like "Irish Coffee" as their defense, meant they were after kids and they knew it. We don't need that crap.
Click to expand...

Yea, we don't need any of that education here. LAWS! LAWS are what's needed! :^S
 
seepy83 said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Four_Loko_Beverage_Large_Can.jpg

Looks pretty obvious to me.

Doesn't look very different from Sparks (http://www.sparks.com/) or any other similar product that's been out for a long time.
Click to expand...

When you look for it it is.

Look at the logo compared to the info.

Geez, it is pointless to argue about it. They knew what they were doing and pulled the product before they got involved in a bunch of civil suits.

They were not walking the line. They stepped over and waited until someone noticed.

Again, blame for the death? No. But predatory marketing? Yes.
 
Ninjahedge said:
1. The labels are not obvious. I saw a can on the playground where my 2 year old was playing the other day. They place is perpendicular to all other writing (the ABV%) near the can's seam.

They do not need to do this as obviously with others because they do not make it look so much like a can of Grape Soda.

2. We are blaming the MFR for taking advantage of the parents stupidity. As I said, I am not for holding them responsible for it, but simply their ability to manufacture and market something that obvious.
Click to expand...

You are very uneducated on these matters. The placement of warnings is regulated by the ATF. They have to be placed where they are by law. They also used the largest font allowed by the ATF. If thats not enough you really aren't to bright or literate. It is the most obvious alcoholic beverage in a can on the market by FAR!
 
lxskllr said:
Yea, we don't need any of that education here. LAWS! LAWS are what's needed! :^S
Click to expand...

LX, I am not completely disagreeing.

What I am saying is that for a substance like this, OTHERS can be damaged by the idiocy of a few.

Get a kid that feels fine after one into a car to drive his friends to the mall and see what happens.
 
Ninjahedge said:
Flaccid? You are trying to discredit my argument by appealing names like "douchbag" and descriptions like "flaccid" to my form?

You can't protect the youth from everything, but protecting them from things that people deliberately manufacture to take advantage of their naiveté?

If all we had to worry about was keeping Jr away from Grandpa's jug of 'hooch this would be a lot simpler, but that is not the case today. A parent can't "Attica" a kid until they are out, and as such, there needs to be some limit to the sale and marketing of illegal substances to kids of that age.

All they really had to do was change their marketing strategy. Deliberately change the cans, logo and other things targeting the kids and you would have less of an argument here.

the fact that they wanted kids, had a lame excuse like "Irish Coffee" as their defense, meant they were after kids and they knew it. We don't need that crap.
Click to expand...

more subjective blathering. Do you have any substantial objective informational facts detailing how they target kids more than any other alcoholic beverage manufacturer?
 
IceBergSLiM said:
You are very uneducated on these matters. The placement of warnings is regulated by the ATF. They have to be placed where they are by law. They also used the largest font allowed by the ATF.
Click to expand...

I seriously doubt that they use the largest fonts required

They use a font size that is what IS required. They would be stupid to put anything more.

If thats not enough you really aren't to bright or literate. It is the most obvious alcoholic beverage in a can on the market by FAR!
Click to expand...

>sigh<

Again, accusing someone of not being "literate" because they disagree? I suppose reading the Odyssey has EVERYTHING to do with an online discussion on an off topic thread at a tech website about an alcoholic caffenated beverage targeted at teens being pulled from shelves... 🙄
 
Ninjahedge said:
LX, I am not completely disagreeing.

What I am saying is that for a substance like this, OTHERS can be damaged by the idiocy of a few.

Get a kid that feels fine after one into a car to drive his friends to the mall and see what happens.
Click to expand...

ok the result would be the same if they pounded jungle juice, a 40 oz high gravity beer, vodka, rum, etc etc etc etc etc. drinking and driving is already illegal as is drinking under age. Your adding nothing of value with this argument. next.
 
Ninjahedge said:
LX, I am not completely disagreeing.

What I am saying is that for a substance like this, OTHERS can be damaged by the idiocy of a few.

Get a kid that feels fine after one into a car to drive his friends to the mall and see what happens.
Click to expand...

Kids aren't supposed to be drinking it though. If one is, that is the responsibility of the kid, his/her parents, the person who gave it to the kid, and possibly the liquor store that sold it without checking ID.

Also, the can looks more like an energy drink can than a soda can to me.
 
Ninjahedge said:
I seriously doubt that they use the largest fonts required

They use a font size that is what IS required. They would be stupid to put anything more.



>sigh<

Again, accusing someone of not being "literate" because they disagree? I suppose reading the Odyssey has EVERYTHING to do with an online discussion on an off topic thread at a tech website about an alcoholic caffenated beverage targeted at teens being pulled from shelves... 🙄
Click to expand...

implying your illiterate if you don't think the warnings are prominent. And Yes it is the LARGEST font allowed. Which is why if you compare side by side with a 24 oz. can of budlight they will be no where near the same. Members of my family are licensed liquor importers from the ATF I know quite a bit about labeling regulations first hand.
 
IceBergSLiM said:
ok the result would be the same if they pounded jungle juice, a 40 oz high gravity beer, vodka, rum, etc etc etc etc etc. drinking and driving is already illegal as is drinking under age. Your adding nothing of value with this argument. next.
Click to expand...

You just proved it.

That would require a concious effort on the part of the imbiber. It is not a one-shot deal.

They deliberately put enough in one can, a device that is not generally known for "sharing" or dispensing, to get you buzzed and flying.

That is where they crossed the line.

Anyway, have fun kids. You seem to think that this is somehow a fight for rights and will defend it online until your fingers bleed.

you may try doing something like, I dunno, writing your congressmen or organizing a protest?

Oh, that would require too much effort for a tween buzz drink.

'K
 
Ninjahedge said:
No Ice. They sell Loco in cans to look like soda.

Point not moot.

Parents have actually mistaken it for soda. I have not seen the same for ANY of the ones you have pointed out (and cannot be accessed at work).

You keep asking me to split hairs when you know that there is a difference and they crossed the line.

Now people are all crying "civil liberties" when they are just looking for a cheap fruty buzz.

Waa. Drink a fruit "martini" and pop a no-doze ya wuss.
Click to expand...

You're a toolshed. The cans are clearly marked saying WE ID, Contains Alcohol, 12&#37; People should be allowed to drink what they want and learn to take personal responsibility, especially dumbass parents.
 
Ninjahedge said:
You just proved it.

That would require a concious effort on the part of the imbiber. It is not a one-shot deal.

They deliberately put enough in one can, a device that is not generally known for "sharing" or dispensing, to get you buzzed and flying.

That is where they crossed the line.

Anyway, have fun kids. You seem to think that this is somehow a fight for rights and will defend it online until your fingers bleed.

you may try doing something like, I dunno, writing your congressmen or organizing a protest?

Oh, that would require too much effort for a tween buzz drink.

'K
Click to expand...

I think it's rather funny when people get the attitude that if someone doesn't agree with me, they must be a stupid kid that offers nothing of value. The fact is, this is a perfectly legal beverage. It doesn't use any advertising tactics that aren't used by almost every alcohol manufacturer/distributer.
 
Ninjahedge said:
You just proved it.

That would require a concious effort on the part of the imbiber. It is not a one-shot deal.

They deliberately put enough in one can, a device that is not generally known for "sharing" or dispensing, to get you buzzed and flying.

That is where they crossed the line.

Anyway, have fun kids. You seem to think that this is somehow a fight for rights and will defend it online until your fingers bleed.

you may try doing something like, I dunno, writing your congressmen or organizing a protest?

Oh, that would require too much effort for a tween buzz drink.

'K
Click to expand...

lol what are you talking about.
 
Ninjahedge said:
You just proved it.

That would require a concious effort on the part of the imbiber. It is not a one-shot deal.

They deliberately put enough in one can, a device that is not generally known for "sharing" or dispensing, to get you buzzed and flying.

That is where they crossed the line.

Anyway, have fun kids. You seem to think that this is somehow a fight for rights and will defend it online until your fingers bleed.

you may try doing something like, I dunno, writing your congressmen or organizing a protest?

Oh, that would require too much effort for a tween buzz drink.

'K
Click to expand...

I hope you live in New Zealand where they make douche bag laws like you're suggesting in spades.

They don't even sell this drink where I live, I couldn't care less about it. Its not this drink, its the principal of constantly slapping laws on everything and the "big brother" attitude that you think is appropriate.
 
Ninjahedge said:
LX, I am not completely disagreeing.

What I am saying is that for a substance like this, OTHERS can be damaged by the idiocy of a few.

Get a kid that feels fine after one into a car to drive his friends to the mall and see what happens.
Click to expand...

But that's not the governments place. The laws currently in effect are sufficient. Because a few retards huff gold paint, it doesn't mean gold paint should be banned. Because a few use a computer for hacking networks, it doesn't mean computers should be banned. 99&#37;+ of the people drinking Four Loko know exactly what it's about, and are aware of it's reputation. If they haven't been educated on the dangers of alcohol poisoning, it's their own fault for not being awake during the previous ~18 years, and to a lesser extent, their parents, and educators fault for not giving proper instruction on the dangers AND benefits of alcohol/drug consumption.

I think the can looks cheezy, as do all energy type drink cans, but someone likes it, and it's more than kids. Just because something appeals to children, it doesn't mean it can't appeal to adults also. If tastes good, it tastes good, and if it looks good, it looks good. It's not age dependent, and it's pretty obvious to me who they're targeting. The same people RJR was targeting with Joe Camel. They're going after college kids who are generally of legal age to consume alcohol and tobacco. It's just like all the other alcohol/tobacco companies that go after the same demographic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top