Are places getting caught selling alcohol to kids getting posted anywhere?

They should be posted on the internet, along with the names and addresses of individuals who provide underaged kids with alcohol.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Personally, I wish they would just provide more things for teens to do on a Saturday night besides parties.

That's a major disadvantage of living in the car-dependent suburbs.

That is not what my friends in DC tell me. Their kids are drinking and driving all the time. Metro does not go past midnight and they actually have friends that don't live on the metro line. The buses don't run all night and UBER is UBER expensive. Crossing the street drunk is a huge risk and drunk kids don't like to walk to crosswalks.

Also, they have more access to alcohol, the enforcement of underage purchases or is not as strict in parts of DC, besides the old trick is just to get a homeless guy to buy it for you.

Anonymous wrote:Of the many many ways and places teens find to drink alcohol, drinking in a house with parents present is the least common. By far. And of those few times, the parents don't "serve" the kids alcohol. The kids sneak alcohol into the house or take it from the parents' garage fridge.

Lock up your alcohol. How hard is that?

Of the many many ways and places teens find to drink alcohol, drinking in a house with parents present is the least common. By far. And of those few times, the parents don't "serve" the kids alcohol. The kids sneak alcohol into the house or take it from the parents' garage fridge.

Anonymous wrote:

Personally, I wish they would just provide more things for teens to do on a Saturday night besides parties.

That's a major disadvantage of living in the car-dependent suburbs.

Maybe the families/friends of the dead students will be able at some point to advocate for more effective laws. That would save more young lives from such tragic waste.

Anonymous wrote:Any changes to the law would have to go through the Judiciary committee in Annapolis. Reportedly a senior member is a criminal defense attorney so it is unlikely there will be stiffer penalties in this area any time soon.

It's not "reportedly". Delegate Joseph F. Vallario, Jr., is a criminal defense lawyer and the chair of the judiciary committee in the House of Delegates.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/ethics-complaint-questions-vallarios-dual-roles-as-legislator-and-lawyer/2013/08/03/16177b82-f9c9-11e2-8752-b41d7ed1f685_story.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is called Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor (but 18 is not a minor... so there is that)

But as you can see, most likely MoCO is not going to charge this, maybe, but most likely not.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/03/AR2007070302331.html

The idea of putting people in jail for non-violent offenses (like giving alcohol to a minor, or selling drugs) is not the way the tide is turning... see http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/07/13/obama-inmates-freed_n_7786126.html

I guess we have to wait until it's the child (or close friend) of someone with political power to curb teen drinking and driving.

Personally, I wish they would just provide more things for teens to do on a Saturday night besides parties. The movies and going out to eat... that is it. There is NOTHING for a teen to do on a Saturday night. A teacher in MoCo tried to start a "safe" party with dancing and MoCo parents posted picture of kids dancing which looked a little provocative, they called and complained and threatened to sue and he shut it down. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Too bad, it's a shame.

I know schools go to great length to provide a safe party after proms but 1/2 the kids don't go and the ones that don't go make fun of the kids that do. They go to the dance for 1 hour and then go party, that should should not be allowed.

Anonymous wrote:
You are apparently new on this thread. Why are you against consequences for deadly crimes?

When did you stop shoplifting from the grocery store?

That's the same kind of question.

Any changes to the law would have to go through the Judiciary committee in Annapolis. Reportedly a senior member is a criminal defense attorney so it is unlikely there will be stiffer penalties in this area any time soon.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is called Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor (but 18 is not a minor... so there is that)

But as you can see, most likely MoCO is not going to charge this, maybe, but most likely not.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/03/AR2007070302331.html

The idea of putting people in jail for non-violent offenses (like giving alcohol to a minor, or selling drugs) is not the way the tide is turning... see http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/07/13/obama-inmates-freed_n_7786126.html

I guess we have to wait until it's the child (or close friend) of someone with political power to curb teen drinking and driving.

Legal experts on underage drinking say civil penalties are more effective than criminal penalties. Civil ordinances, which are handled administratively, allow police to respond to complaints, break up the ever-larger drinking parties and hit parents quickly in their pocketbooks.

"We don't believe that locking up mom and dad is the answer," said Michelle Blackstone of the Underage Drinking Enforcement Training Center, based in Calverton. "Research suggests that going after the purse strings is much more effective."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/03/AR2007070302331_2.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's not a lynch mob mentality. We want to keep our kids safe (and other people's kids!). Why do you feel like it's ok to deflect the blame? The whole point is they broke the law. People died.

You're right -- it's not a lynch mob mentality, because nobody (so far) has proposed getting a crowd of people together, marching over to the house where the party was, and stringing up its owners. But all of this JAIL TIME NOW! stuff doesn't show a concern for our children, in my opinion. It just shows a desire for punishment.

What's more, nobody has said that it's ok to furnish alcohol to minors at a party. NOBODY.

You are apparently new on this thread. Why are you against consequences for deadly crimes?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lynch mob wants everyone else to list the names, report the people, make sure everyone pays, etc. How about just parenting your OWN kids first? Try that. Talk to them and find out what it going on. It's what I do and it works.

What's that you say... you're kids won't tell you or will lie to you? Perhaps you should do less internet finger wagging and more talking to your kids, listening to them, treating them like autonomous human beings, giving them opportunities to make decisions in the first place. How about that?

It's not a lynch mob mentality. We want to keep our kids safe (and other people's kids!). Why do you feel like it's ok to deflect the blame? The whole point is they broke the law. People died.

Because the truth is ... what you are suggesting won't keep your kids safe, they will drink and smoke pot, it will just be at the Canal, or on a lot that has not been built on yet, or at the park down the street.

and the other truth is... that "hypothetically"... the alcohol was not drank at that party, it was drank after they left, after they got home, checked in and pretended to go to sleep and left the house through a window, without their parent permission.

Anonymous wrote:It is called Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor (but 18 is not a minor... so there is that)

But as you can see, most likely MoCO is not going to charge this, maybe, but most likely not.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/03/AR2007070302331.html

The idea of putting people in jail for non-violent offenses (like giving alcohol to a minor, or selling drugs) is not the way the tide is turning... see http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/07/13/obama-inmates-freed_n_7786126.html

I guess we have to wait until it's the child (or close friend) of someone with political power to curb teen drinking and driving.

Anonymous wrote:

It's not a lynch mob mentality. We want to keep our kids safe (and other people's kids!). Why do you feel like it's ok to deflect the blame? The whole point is they broke the law. People died.

You're right -- it's not a lynch mob mentality, because nobody (so far) has proposed getting a crowd of people together, marching over to the house where the party was, and stringing up its owners. But all of this JAIL TIME NOW! stuff doesn't show a concern for our children, in my opinion. It just shows a desire for punishment.

What's more, nobody has said that it's ok to furnish alcohol to minors at a party. NOBODY.