Home Distiller

"Anyone who would trade freedom for security, deserves neither." (can't remember the author)
Ben Franklin I believe. About freedom and liberty.
Up in never land here, I can not see home distillation becoming legal. 'ell, to do it commercially is almost impossible without major financial backing.
It's all about money here.

Perhaps I am overly optimistic, but I would rather try something and fail then sit around and poo poo the efforts of someone else. Benjamin Franklin earned the right to say the things he said because he was trying to change things, not because he was being a paranoid recluse warning others of doom and gloom. I'm not trying to antagonize anyone here, and I'm certainly not saying I'm any better so far, but why are some of you so anxious to declare retreat before a battle has begun? Will our tombstones read, "Here lies some guy. He was smart enough to not bother 'cause he knew he'd lose anyway."?

Would it hurt us to do as Snuffy has suggested and network a little amongst ourselves on a local level instead of just over the internet? I'm guessing many of you are lucky enough to have a small circle of friends involved in the hobby to talk about it with. Not so with me. If I get lucky enough to establish a small circle of such friends and you carefully make your circles a little wider... Who knows where it will end? Like the guy said, we're talking years here, not a march on the capitol tomorrow. I don't want to antagonize any powers that be or get myself in trouble, either.

I don't think anybody is arguing that legalization would be a bad thing or that nobody should take a shot at it. Just how much work it will be and how long it might take.

Meetups are fun even if nothing came of it but drinking each other's booze.

while I dont exactly agree with it. you can surely see where the legislators are coming from. even ignoring any connection to lobbyists etc.

while its as safe as operating a gas stove for competent well-informed adults, you cant ignore that it quickly becomes dangerous as hell for anyone trying to cut corners or is mis-informed. not only are you dealing with explosive/flammable liquids near heat sources, you also have the whole issue of poisoning yourself through heads or plastic contamination.

the general public, at least at this point in time, are extremely ignorant of how to actually distill safely. just hve a quick look through "distilling" "how-to" videos on you tube et. all. youll see everything from plastic bottles and ducktape to garbage bags and caulk! worst thing is the comments underneath asking the O.P. for more information on how to make thier own.

and its not even just dumb kids messin' with half a liter of wash... even most of the "professional" type set ups that clearly cost a good chunk of change either incorporate plastics or dont make head-cuts etc.

I think that if/when it becomes legal, that it shouldnt be just a full out free-for-all. there should be some sort of tiered certification or licence that allows you to make your own for personal use at home without extra taxes. then another one for starting a micro-distillery and selling etc.
its very much like a drivers licence. driving is no problem for 99% of us who have been tought correctly and have to follow simple traffic laws. but some yahoo 14 year old or people who dont know what they are doing can seriously hurt themselves and others.

I think at this point solid scientific education of folks through word of mouth is the best thing. logically address any concerns folks have and show them how safe it can be. show them you not a "moonshiner" simply running rotten corn through a car radiator.

you have to be realistic. it IS much more inherently dangerous then say home-brewing. but that dosent mean it has to be outright banned.

I don't think I made myself clear Shroud. What I was trying to say was, beware of tossing sticks at the Rottweilers while you've got a steak tied to your ass. Throw the sticks if you like, but you'd better be ready to run. I also see where Eternalfrost is coming from in that the general public needs to be well informed and the idiots weeded out through proper training or natural selection. You should have to get a home distillation license but it should be a negligible fee for it and no taxes as is with home brewing. The question is for me, where to start? I've already began to educate those who come around and ask. Well informed people are much more comfortable with it. My soapbox comments were more toward a over reaching government who "take" the liberty of limiting what we are allowed to do and not allowed to do.

Yes sir, I believe it was Ben Franklin now that you jogged my memory.

I don't like the license idea. If it was the only way to get it legalized, then sure, I'd submit to the yoke for the greater good. However, I think writing the law so that distilling can only be done in certain types of stills, with a fire extinguisher handy, etc, etc, would be enough. Maybe a little certification that says you've passed a course similar to a "hunter's safety course" would be enough. After all, if a simple course makes it safe for me to run around the woods and shoot at things with a gun, it should be enough to make it safe for me to make shine.

Also, and I know this will lose me friends on the forum, I am one of the believers that certain types of rubbers and plastics are safe. I don't want someone forcing me to adhere to their views of what a good still is. Don't worry, I'll return the favor. I would never support a law saying that a still must have a rubber gasket for sealing purposes instead of a flour paste!

I know this is off topic, and I don't want to start an argument over a hot-button issue, but I feel the need to add a short qualifier to the above, then I will fall silent on the issue. I asked three different professionals with chemistry experience. I was paranoid. Someone suggested I use a laboratory grade rubber stopper to keep my thermometer where I wanted it, but I had read too many arguments against them. All three of these people said the same thing, even after I had given them all the counter arguments. As long as you use the right kind of rubber, you're fine. Even after arguing the point incessantly, all three said that even if anything might find its way into your alcohol, it would be in such small parts per billion that it just couldn't be worried about. One put it this way, "If you've ever smoked even one cigarette, then you've consumed billions times more of the exact things you're worried about than what you could get from distilling with neoprene for the rest of your life."

That being said, I'm trying to redesign the details of my still so that it doesn't have anything but metal touching any ethanol, but it's for aesthetic reasons, not fear. I just don't want someone telling me I can't do something because they are afraid it's bad for me, yet have no evidence. Like I said, I'm not trying to pick a fight, but think about it this way eternal frost, are you in favor of outlawing tobacco, which everyone knows is harmful? Then why would you be in favor of outlawing laboratory grade materials in stills because you think they might be harmful?

This was way too long. Sorry.

Yup, this is a long term project. It could easily take a decade to start getting results. But if we don't start working on it properly, it will never get done, nobody else is gonna do it for us.

We have to collect and organise the evidence and arguments carefully, and co-ordinate between ourselves, including with other forums, to present a united front. One of the worst things we could do is appear to the general public and authorities as an ornery feuding disorganised hillbilly rabble, the stereotype of old style moonshiners. No offence against those folk, but times have changed, we gotta move on from that image, (while still acknowledging it as an important part of our history).

eternalfrost makes some good points about safety. But we already have a very good rebuttal to the 'it's unsafe' retort. New Zealand. They have been legal for well over ten years now and do not require licences or exams or still inspections, etc, and as far as I know there have not been any real problems with folk getting poisoned or burnt or blown up. We would have heard about it if there had. Clearly it can be done safely without any serious regulatory oversight.

I am not convinced that some kind of exam to establish that the prospective stiller understood the basics would make any practical difference to the safety side. Many stillers will just ignore it, just like we ignore the current laws. I think it will just be a bit of superficial paperwork, a bureaucratic rubber stamp to keep the authorities happy. But if that is the price we have to pay, so be it. I am not going to seriously argue against it (as long as the cost is low, and you only have do the exam once).

Also agree that educating the public about what we do is important. Though that is already starting to happen with various articles that have appeared in the press in recent years, such as the one in Wired magazine, and of course with forums like this one. One thing that could help a lot is for us to keep an eye on places like YouTube and leave critical but constructive comments on the bad videos about what they are doing wrong, and directing people to the real forums to learn how to do it properly. It does not have to be much, just say something like 'This is not a good way to do this, go check out homedistiller.org/forum to learn the how to do it properly and make some really good stuff'.

Besides addressing safety concerns, we also have to convince the authorities that we are in this purely for personal interest, just as a hobby, that there is no commercial side to it (ie that we ain't selling and avoiding tax).

The New Zealand experience, (plus the solid work done by the various forums), gives us most of the evidence we need on safety issues, and on the lack of negative effect on the commercial distilleries. Like I said before, we already have evidence and logic on our side, we just gotta market it properly to the right people.

••••••••••••••••••

Shroud, that was not too long. You make your points well. Those are some of the issues we have to deal with for legalising.

Where we are Hookline, as long as the current rants about binge drinking are on going, regardless of all the previously typical safety issues, I can't see what we are doing becoming legal. They are trying to significantly increase the tax of store bought drink to combat binge drinking, why would they then turn around and ok the personal production?

There ain't a single lawmaker out there who could convince me that my best interests are anywhere in their passing a tax down to me. Do me a favor and next time you lose a loved one to old age, call your legislators and see if they give a shit. They're just doing what they have to do to keep their cushy jobs and wield their power and influence over someone else.

Shroud I think the course idea would be a good one, but what do you get at the end of the hunter safety course to prove you've taken and passed it?

The best answer now is education, education, and more education of the general public. All it takes is explaining heads and fores to folks and why they get a hangover and headache drinking commercial stuff. Hook's right, we have to get past the stereotype of a Deliverance character and a still on the side of a mountain. I can't believe the people that I've talked to or given some of my product to that the first thing out of their mouths is, "what proof is it, real shine needs to be 180 proof". My first words back to that are, "no I like you too much to kill you" it's human consumption proof not degreaser. That's the first indication that they're too ignorant to give any or any more to.

Thought I might chuck in a few cents from NZ here about binge drinking. In this country we have what they refer to as a 'binge drinking epidemic'. Kiwis are notorious pissheads, we tend to drink too much and do stupid things. This aside, I don't really see stilling contributing to the problem. Why? Distilling is an art, a craft. People who just want to get drunk will buy the cheapest bottle of paint-stipper-like vodka from the bottle store, and be happy with that. I walked into a shop off the street and purchased my still, and I don't see many folks in there who seem like binge drinkers. They are universally old men. I feel like a little boy walking into my brew shop. What I'm getting at is that although people may say that distilling will simply lead to more binge drinking, this is not really a hobby that encourages alcoholics. *takes long look at self and decides 'not an alcoholic'*

Another (good?) aspect of legalization is that people don't make their own stills as much. For the amount of effort involved in actually building something, most folk (and I know this will go against the grain of this forum) will simply shell out a couple of hundred bucks and buy one. This has very real safety benefits. If you're concerned about people distilling in car radiators, I think that's a lot more likely to happen without legalization. Though I must concede, my still came with a plastic collection tube

Anyway, back to my point, There is this perception that when something is made legal, EVERYONE will do it. I don't know anyone else with a still. Why? This is a craft that takes time, effort, intelligence and dedication to make it worthwhile to the stiller. And as such, it works just fine here without registration, licensing, and inspections.

Just my thoughts.

I wish you all the best in trying to legalize this wonderful hobby.

shroud aint sure how long you been cookin but they will lock your ass up son. you ever seen the scales of justice. its a lady holdin to scales equaly balanced an she is bindfolded.think it meanin she aint parshall. but the best these ole boys seen is that lady peeks.
if yall doin this yall best set up legal defence fund that folks can donate to anonmusly cause they gonna be comein after you. you got the county the state the feds all with diferent laws all comein from diferent angles.
shroud how do you earn the right to a opinion an ill see if i qualify.

Hi,

Only way I can see this becoming legal is hopping on the coat-tails of the micro-distilleries.

In Aus we have small-scale wineries and micro beweries that sort of legitimise the home scale use of each. We need enough micro-distilleries to start changing the laws (taxation) to give legitimacy to home-distill, just like home-brew. It will take time and many more 'micro-distilleries'; commercial, legal ones.

goose eye - I'm not questioning your right to an opinion. Why are you questioning my right to mine?

Hookline, Trthskr, others - All good points. To answer a question. I have no idea what you get at the end of hunter's safety courses. I'm not a hunter. I'm actually a vegetarian! (Don't worry, in true form I don't want to take away anyone's rights or guns. Let me be happy with my diet and I'll let you be happy with yours. I'm not a preachy one.) I think you get a little card or something signed by the DNR (Department of Natural Resources for out of country friends) official that teaches the course. Maybe it's not even a DNR official; I don't really know.

vicbill - I can certainly think of worse ways to support a movement than patronizing micro-distilleries! In fact. If some kind of movement ever becomes more organized, I'm thinking that would be a great place for meetings.

wont it you that said ben franklin earnded the right.

Goose eye is absolutely right that a legal defense fund would be necessary. Look at the history of the NAACP and you'll see how it got us Thurgood Marshall. Who has to be the outstanding US jurist of the 20th Century. Not that we need aspire that high, but you only shoot low if they're riding ponys.

I suggest that the essential target is federal law and the state laws will fall in line only after the federal goal is reached. Notwithstanding, state microdistilling reform is a good ally.

Books of quotations were my bedtime reading companions for many years. Now we have http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

I think opinions should be judged by their influences and effects; and if a man holds none that tend to make him less virtuous or more vicious, it may be concluded that he holds none that are dangerous, which I hope is the case with me.

o Letter to his parents (c. 1728) as quoted in Benjamin Franklin: An American Life (2003) by Walter Isaacson

Research, education and organizing are the three legs of the tripod that supports any viable movement. Research to support the argument with irrefutable facts and counter the disinformation. Education to spread knowledge, communicate the position and unify the philosophy. Organizing to translate knowledge into action.

Can you tell I've done this before?

Alright goose eye, Let's bury this sharp stick before it becomes a hatchet. We surely have lots of common ground here. I'm assuming that we would both like to see the hobby of home-distilling be made legal, to be practiced safely, and to see it grow into a publicly accepted pastime. I understand that you are quite a bit more skeptical about the chances of that happening than I am. Maybe you're right and it will never be legalized. Maybe the feds are on their way to my house right now to confiscate my guns and smokes (well, I don't have any, but maybe they'll search my place anyway). Maybe I'm too naive for my own good. Don't fear, however. I am smart enough not to stick a sign out in my front yard saying, "Honk if you support home distilling!"

The legal defense fund does sound like a great idea, but it's a little premature, isn't it? I think someone would have to emerge as the public leader of an actual movement before people would send any money. Sort of like Jack Herer is to pot. We would need a NAAHD (National Association for the Advancement of Home Distilling, of course!). Right now we're just a bunch of guys hanging out making shine in our basements, sheds, and garages. That's couple years away, I think. On the other hand, maybe now I'm being the skeptical one.

I actually think that the generation of people in charge of making laws (current average age of politicians in the US) is slightly too old at the moment, give it another round or two of elections and that will change, lawmakers seem to getting younger. Obviously stilling is already slightly more socially acceptable than it was or this site wouldn't exist unmolested.

The lobbyists on the other side will include the usual stakeholders ; ultra conservative religions, MADD (same thing I suppose), liquor and beer conglomerates and my Mom. Their planks are the real ones to keep an eye on.

Canada is different, different social pressures and political structures but also much the same in some ways. In typical fashion, everyone will do as they please and they'll get around to changing the law to reflect that fact later, it's like governing by consensus. Man we're lazy on the political front compared to our US cousins.

Shroud wrote: I have no idea what you get at the end of hunter's safety courses.

Can't get a hunting license without a certification card in any state that I know of. So at the the end of the safety course you get "a license". They got ya either way.

Ugly wrote:I actually think that the generation of people in charge of making laws (current average age of politicians in the US) is slightly too old at the moment, give it another round or two of elections and that will change, lawmakers seem to getting younger. Obviously stilling is already slightly more socially acceptable than it was or this site wouldn't exist unmolested.

You are right. And because this will take some time to organise properly and get the momentum up, that is why we should start working on it soon, so that we can catch that generational transition.

This is a long term project.

Look at how long the pro-legalising cannabis movement has been organising and lobbying, and they are only starting to get results now (though obviously they have a fair way to go). But we could learn a lot from their experience, and avoid a lot of the problems they have had.

We also need to actively and strongly support the one or two politicians who try to get bills for legalising home stillin through the political system. They are currently out there on their own. Think there was one not too long ago in the USA.

Shroud wrote:I think someone would have to emerge as the public leader of an actual movement before people would send any money. Sort of like Jack Herer is to pot. We would need a NAAHD (National Association for the Advancement of Home Distilling, of course!). Right now we're just a bunch of guys hanging out making shine in our basements, sheds, and garages.

Lot of truth in what you say. We need to move onto the next level. To use a dirty word, we probably need a good lobbyist/advocate who is not directly involved in the hobby, so they can publicly argue on our behalf without the risk of prosecution.

Goose's scepticism is partly legit. We should not kid ourselves this will be easy, or quick. It will almost certainly be a long, hard, and frustrating process. There are going to be setbacks, and failures, and in some countries it might not happen for decades, if ever (at least, not within our lifetimes). But we gotta start somewhere. Nothing good, especially changes to the law, was ever achieved by sitting around complaining about how unfair or hard it is.

We gotta get organised and smart about how we do this, and very persistent.

how would you guys suggest going about spreading a personal "fan-base" locally?
because the general rule of thumb i go by and the default answer of folks on this forum is to stay tight lipped about the hobby.

how to balance the need for discretion with the need to spread the word is something to keep in mind.

Start with affinity groups. These are people who you know, trust and are willing to go to bat for and vice versa. Start small and use common sense.
Take advantage of meetups on this and the other home distiller boards.

No distillers around? Get to know the homebrewers in your area. You will have to make some beer to maintain your cover.

Set annual goals and ones you are sure you can hit.

Read up on people who worked under adverse conditions. Deacons for Defense and Leopold Trepper come to mind. Not that I'm saying anything other than these were people who did organizing work under the most horrible conditions imaginable. Simon Wiesenthal, too. Talk about nothing to work with and carrying it through. Makes this sort of situation look downright luxurious.

Cool related article here:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/b ... uor10.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

Note some of the comments.

That is a very good artical. Now if all the other states would come on board, we could get something done.