Teenage Girls thumb their nose at the Law

[Steff]

I have to admit.. I don't quite understand the the drinking age limit all the time. Some may be ready to handle the responsibility earlier.. and then there are the morons that are never ready. But there's got to be a bar set... and that's where they set it. It's not like everyone doesn't know this... So it all comes down to if you want to play... be sure you have enough $$ in the bank to cash the check you're writing.

[NorthSideSox72]

Yeah, well they didn't hurt anyone.  You don't punish people for crimes they could possibly commit.  As it was they didn't hurt anyone.  Victimless crime; and if you want to relate it to "yourself", how would you like it if you were drinking underage, didn't hurt anyone, and you still got 2 weeks in jail?

 

By your definition, the following crimes are victimless (in that no one was hurt) and should be allowed to be ignored:

 

DUI

Assault by threat to life

Sexual assault - peeping "tom"

Distribution of child pornography

Purchase or possession of a gun by convicted violent felon

Aggravated assault - threatening someone with a gun

 

Shall I go on?

 

The "victimless" crime defense, along with the "everyone does it" defense, are childish at best.

 

I am not sure 21 is such a magic age, but clearly, most high school kids (like these buffoons) don't have enough responsibility to make good judgement while sober. They are downright dangerous, to themselves and others, when drunk.

[BHAMBARONS]

Yeah, well they didn't hurt anyone.  You don't punish people for crimes they could possibly commit.  As it was they didn't hurt anyone.  Victimless crime; and if you want to relate it to "yourself", how would you like it if you were drinking underage, didn't hurt anyone, and you still got 2 weeks in jail?

 

 

Possession of narcotics is a victimless crime as well, yet it could turn into a serious problem. It really depends on if you want the law to be proactive or reactive.

[RockRaines]

Steff good facts and links. Def good research. But alot of those points as well are from skewed statistics. Of course alcohol plays a part in many bad deeds that are committed, as well as many injuries. But you have to consider the type of person that was drinking in that situation. There is alot of factors that contribute to many of those examples, and being that they were mostly taking off of a anti-alcohol site, you have to consider the source of the research.

[RockRaines]

They didnt drink one time and get caught, they got caught twice, and they shoved it in the law's face.  I love how you like to point out that it is a victimless crime BECAUSE someone didnt get hurt, but you refuse to admit that alcohol COULD get these kids killed.

 

What would have happened if these kids would have gotten through prom without getting caught, went to a post prom party at one of their houses, partied some more, and then drove home and plowed into a tree?  Wouldnt be so victimless then, would it?  You cant even begin to determine what these cops prevented, because you are so hell bent on trying to prove that these cops and the judge were somehow sore-asses and mean and carried vendettas because they followed the law.

You cant play what ifs in this situation. We drank at our after prom party, and we stayed at a place where there was no driving, with adults nearby in case of emergency. Nobody got hurt, and everyone had a great time. Were we still wrong?

[Steff]

Steff good facts and links.  Def good research.  But alot of those points as well are from skewed statistics.  Of course alcohol plays a part in many bad deeds that are committed, as well as many injuries.  But you have to consider the type of person that was drinking in that situation.  There is alot of factors that contribute to many of those examples, and being that they were mostly taking off of a anti-alcohol site, you have to consider the source of the research.

 

 

 

Research is always going to be skewed.. mainly because it doesn't apply specifically. I'm assuming Spiff isn't irresponsible. My point wasn't to say the he, or most of the under 21 posters here, are.. but to say that many others are.

On the point of the type of person... let's look at the kids in the situation that started this... straight A honor students. The type you'd think would be so stupid...?

Yes, they were taken from an anti-alcohol site. But the facts are the facts. There were that many crashes and deaths by those in that age group. Those don't change no matter where the stats come from. Sadly...

[Steff]

You cant play what ifs in this situation.  We drank at our after prom party, and we stayed at a place where there was no driving, with adults nearby in case of emergency.  Nobody got hurt, and everyone had a great time.  Were we still wrong?

 

 

Slightly different situation. You were RESPONSIBLE. You didn't show up to the prom s***faced.

 

Yes.. you were still wrong.

 

[Spiff]

They didnt drink one time and get caught, they got caught twice, and they shoved it in the law's face.  I love how you like to point out that it is a victimless crime BECAUSE someone didnt get hurt, but you refuse to admit that alcohol COULD get these kids killed.

 

What would have happened if these kids would have gotten through prom without getting caught, went to a post prom party at one of their houses, partied some more, and then drove home and plowed into a tree?  Wouldnt be so victimless then, would it?  You cant even begin to determine what these cops prevented, because you are so hell bent on trying to prove that these cops and the judge were somehow sore-asses and mean and carried vendettas because they followed the law.

 

I love this "what if they had hurt someone?" crap. If they hurt someone then they would be convicted of that crime, just like any other situation ever. But they didn't, and you can't hang them for what might have happened. You deal with what did happen. Yes, alcohol can get people killed, so can alot of things. Too much cough medicine can get people killed.

 

And to the guy who said child porn is a victimless crime, uh where the hell do you get that? Seems like there are victims to me.

 

The drinking age is 21 because when Nancy Dole was secretary of transportation she wouldn't give the states funding for highways unless they went along with her. That's IT. It's f***ing stupid, and people who defend it have no f***ing clue.

[NorthSideSox72]

You cant play what ifs in this situation.  We drank at our after prom party, and we stayed at a place where there was no driving, with adults nearby in case of emergency.  Nobody got hurt, and everyone had a great time.  Were we still wrong?

 

Of course we can play "what ifs". If we couldn't, there wouldn't be DUI laws, and drunk drivers wouldn't be arrested until they hurt someone. There are all sorts of laws on the books to prevent dangerous activities because of the likelihood of something bad happening as a result. That's a "what if".

[Kyyle23]

I love this "what if they had hurt someone?" crap.  If they hurt someone then they would be convicted of that crime, just like any other situation ever.  But they didn't, and you can't hang them for what might have happened.  You deal with what did happen.  Yes, alcohol can get people killed, so can alot of things.  Too much cough medicine can get people killed.

 

And to the guy who said child porn is a victimless crime, uh where the hell do you get that?  Seems like there are victims to me.

 

The drinking age is 21 because when Nancy Dole was secretary of transportation she wouldn't give the states funding for highways unless they went along with her.  That's IT.  It's f***ing stupid, and people who defend it have no f***ing clue.

 

sad. There is no arguing this anymore, you dont get it.

[Steff]

I love this "what if they had hurt someone?" crap.  If they hurt someone then they would be convicted of that crime, just like any other situation ever.  But they didn't, and you can't hang them for what might have happened.  You deal with what did happen. Yes, alcohol can get people killed, so can alot of things.  Too much cough medicine can get people killed.

 

The drinking age is 21 because when Nancy Dole was secretary of transportation she wouldn't give the states funding for highways unless they went along with her.  That's IT.  It's f***ing stupid, and people who defend it have no f***ing clue.

 

 

Which is what the judge did. He gave them a slap on the hand.. they agreed to probation, violated it, and then paid the price.

 

So what's your solution..? No drinking age..? 18..? So we can have Natalie Holloway cases all over the US..? The links I provided above prove that not even 21 seems to be high enough. Even if the legal age was 18 idiots still get drunk and die or kill others. JMO.. but if it was legal under 21 the crashes and deaths would increase greatly.

[RockRaines]

Of course we can play "what ifs".  If we couldn't, there wouldn't be DUI laws, and drunk drivers wouldn't be arrested until they hurt someone.  There are all sorts of laws on the books to prevent dangerous activities because of the likelihood of something bad happening as a result.  That's a "what if".

We might as well wrap our children in bubble wrap before they leave the house, because something bad could happen to them then as well. Thats also a what-if

[RockRaines]

Slightly different situation. You were RESPONSIBLE. You didn't show up to the prom s***faced.

 

Yes.. you were still wrong. 

 

Who knows if it was different or not? Fact is, I still had a GREAT time.

[WilliamTell]

I'm 20 and I've never dranking a full can of beer before, I've only had sips which was a long long time ago. I've only had wine in church and have never even tasted anything else. I don't feel sorry for them one bit, 21 does mean 21. I can wait another 8 months, it's not a big deal to me. I did go to a few parties that served beer and other stuff but I always sad no and people were cool with that. I know some have a hard time with peer pressure and it's understandable, but I never did. I think a good number of the people who drink underage do it just because they're underage.

[SpringfieldFan]

WilliamTell - I applaud you (even though it doesn't look like you need the applause to be your own man).

 

I think the very fact that there is even a debate about this issue is - quite frankly - sad.

 

SFF

[RockRaines]

I'm 20 and I've never dranking a full can of beer before, I've only had sips which was a long long time ago. I've only had wine in church and have never even tasted anything else. I don't feel sorry for them one bit, 21 does mean 21. I can wait another 8 months, it's not a big deal to me. I did go to a few parties that served beer and other stuff but I always sad no and people were cool with that. I know some have a hard time with peer pressure and it's understandable, but I never did. I think a good number of the people who drink underage do it just because they're underage.

I had my first beer when I was in Amsterdam before i was a freshman. I drank at parties throughout high school, including dances, prom, special occasions. I had a great time with great friends, I would do it again in a heartbeat. I also graduated near the top of my class, played 3 sports and was a member of many clubs and an assistant in the dean's office. I went to a great college, drank with my fraternity brothers, friends, and sometimes professors. I didnt turn 21 until I was a senior, and I definatley didnt drink just because it was against the law. I had a really great time drinking socially and bonding with my friends. I would love to go back and experience college again, as it is truly the best time of your life. I now have a great job, am a homeowner, car owner, and a reputable member of society. I feel like my in my path I have chosen to be myself and make the most of everything i have done.

 

There are two sides to every coin.

[Controlled Chaos]

It's interesting they even went to court. I was busted underage drinking in Chicago and Indiana and both times my parents just had to come to the police station and pick me up. I never had to go to court or anything. I did however have to listen to my dad b****, moan and yell the whole way home for having to come to Indiana at 1:00 in the morning.

 

I don't have a problem with what the judge did, I was just wondering why I never had to go to court or anything. Especially in Indiana, I was giving the cops so much s***. I was telling them they are just pissed cause the Bulls won the championship and the Pacers sucked...and they're taking it out on us cause we're from Chicago. I told them this is bulls***, they're just suppose to take our beer away or pour it out, not arrest us.....and I was hitting on the lady cop who was smoking hot from what I remember. Even so I only got a ticket and my parents had to pick me up. I did have some friends that were 18 though and they did go to jail and had to post bound. ahhh ding dong...the bell just went off in my head. Was that the case here?? These kids were 18?

[Flash Tizzle]

The interpretation of the law, in this instance, is essential. You can suggest, "OH, he's just being a flippen hardass!!11;" and you'd be absolutely correct, but he has every right within the teenagers' sentencing to enforce harsh punishments.

 

In case anyone isn't aware, two people can commit the same crimes and receive--get this--different punishments. Law Enforcement, and particularly the entire legal system, isn't precise.

 

In Illinois, you could be issued a speeding ticket for exceeding the posted speed limit by 1 mph. Everyday of your life prior to such a scenario, you may have driven 5 above. Hell, the other motorists may have been traveling faster than you. But guess what? It doesn't matter. You were caught disobeying a law--one that's broken practically everyday by every commuter. Does this change anything? You were obviously the victim of a disgruntled police officer profiling you, your vehicle, or possibly fulfilling a quota. Tell that in court and you'll be in traffic school before you know it.

 

These teenagers may not have deserved it, but OOPS--they received jail time anyway. Don't violate court ordered probation next time.

Edited February 3, 2006 by Flash Tizzle

[BHAMBARONS]

The interpretation of the law, in this instance, is essential. You can suggest, "OH, he's just being a flippen hardass!!11;" and you'd be absolutely correct, but he has every right within the teenagers' sentencing to enforce harsh punishments.

 

In case anyone isn't aware, two people can commit the same crimes and receive--get this--different punishments. Law Enforcement, and particularly the entire legal system, isn't precise.

 

In Illinois, you could be issued a speeding ticket for exceeding the posted speed limit by 1 mph. Everyday of your life prior to such a scenario, you may have driven 5 above. Hell, the other motorists may have been traveling faster than you. But guess what? It doesn't matter. You were caught disobeying a law--one that's broken practically everyday by every commuter. Does this change anything? You were obviously the victim of a disgruntled police officer profiling you, your vehicle, or possibly fulfilling a quota. Tell that in court and you'll be in traffic school before you know it.

 

These teenagers may not have deserved it, but OOPS--they received jail time anyway. Don't violate court ordered probation next time.

 

Right on, next time they sign a probation agreement they should read the conditions before they have their fun.

[RockRaines]

Right on, next time they sign a probation agreement they should read the conditions before they have their fun.

Or just give me a call, and come over.

[WilliamTell]

WilliamTell - I applaud you (even though it doesn't look like you need the applause to be your own man).

 

I think the very fact that there is even a debate about this issue is - quite frankly - sad.

 

SFF

 

Thank you SFF.

 

As for RockRaines, that's your own decision. I obviously don't agree with it but that's ok. Spending time with your friends is one of the greatest things around, and if you guys liked to have a few drinks underage, so be it. You're over 21 now.

[Kyyle23]

Or just give me a call, and come over.

 

LOL, we know you like em young.

[Nokona]

Drinking and bonding with friends is something that we as teenagers will never be able to do. Sure we might be able to do it in our mid-20s but so much will have changed by then. Getting drunk and enjoying the time with your child hood friends in such an awkward tiem should be experienced by everyone at least once.

 

And we can always go back to the old "If i can die for my country and vote for my president, i ought to be able to drink."

[RockRaines]

LOL, we know you like em young.

You know it, but im not exactly an old man.

Plus, they were legal.

[Spiff]

i'm not saying the judge didn't have legal precedent, i just think it's stupid that he did and the law itself is stupid.