It’s lawful to make up to 200 gallons of beer or wine per year for your and your family’s consumption, at least under federal law (I’m not sure about all the states). So why, just over seventy years after the Twenty-First Amendment became effective, is it still a federal felony to distill alcohol for consumption without obtaining a license and enduring all sorts of federal red tape? I can understand why commercial production would be regulated, but if the government condescends to allow us to make our own beer and wine, why not our own whiskey and vodka, too? (Disclosure: I am a former homebrewer — of beer — with occasional aspirations of getting back in the game. But I have no aspirations of making my own booze. I so very rarely drink the hard stuff that the opportunity cost of making my own would be prohibitive.)

Sure, distilling liquor is more dangerous than making your own wine or beer. There’s more that can go wrong if you’re stupid, including a real danger of fire. But so what? It’s not the government’s problem if I burn my house down, or poison myself by using lead-based solder in my still. That’s between me and my insurance company. (Of course many would argue that yes, it is the government’s problem, because the government has chosen to offer various services upon which my stupidity might place demands. I have little sympathy for such arguments; they strike me as bootstrapping. I contend that if the service is too expensive the proper solution is to stop providing it, not to curtail my liberty because of it.)

And the law as it stands likely has perverse effects, in that it’s probably partly responsible for the fact that moonshine is sometimes dangerously adulterated. Since the feds are entitled to know every detail about anyone who purchases a commercial still, a wise moonshiner has no choice but to make his own. This no doubt partly explains why some moonshiners “brew their liquor in old fuel drums and car radiators, and seal their pipes with lead solder.”

Of course the real answer to all this, as usual, is probably money. Government derives substantial tax revenue from distilled spirits–excise taxes, corporate and occupational taxes on manufacturers, etc. etc.–which would certainly drop off if people could make their own booze. And I’m sure I know where the liquor companies’ lobbyists stand on this issue, since home-distilled liquor can be as cheap as one-fifth to one-tenth the price of the commercial stuff. There’s nothing like a government-granted monopoly, backed by criminal penalties, to make a business profitable!