Discussion in 'Beer News' started by Jason, Sep 25, 2012.
Are there any elements to those crimes to which you dispute existing? Did you mean more "than" this?
And while this discussion continues, has anyone noticed that several eBay sellers have graduated to the next loophole? The listing is for a "collectible label" with a "free gift" included.
Yeah, where will I get Ballantine Burton and Bass Corkers? Dang it.
There are many of us that wouldn't think twice about shipping first if we were just doing a locals for locals trade. So in this case we'd be stiffed and the kid could have the beer.
I'd be very hesitant. At least the previous auctions stated it was a full, unopened bottle.
Next person I trade with I am going to request ID
So you are saying equal time should be put toward murder investigations and illegal beer trading? The question is not whether it is illegal, b/c it pretty clearly is, but the real question is why? Why bother?
Sure, understood, it was pretty clear from the beginning that you are either an attorney, law student or maybe even law enforcement. So sorry to bother you with my obviously uninformed and ludicrous opinion
No, you are the only person saying/writing that. I have said no such thing. I have no idea why you would project such things.
Much of what you say (not pertaining to me), I agree with.
The gist of what I'm saying that differs with your opinion (again, I didn't call you uninformed nor ludicrous) is:
1. It would be easy to prosecute
2. Billions of $$$ are spent prosecuting less harmful things than alcohol, so its not outside the realm of possibilities or, well, history.
Why bother? Because there's plenty of, to use a legal term, "dicks" out there in power who justify prohibiting/prosecuting anything to further their own career under the rubric of "its for the children".
I absolutlely could not agree anymore, which is why I worry about such a thing getting stirred up. As for comparing eBay to trading, I guess that really is a pot and kettle situation but it appears that eBay alcohol sales are taken advantage of more for illicit purposes than trading. Especiallty if it's true that people were buying cases of vodka and stuff online just to resell. DISCLAIMER: I have absolutely no knowledge of that sort of thing happening, I just recall having read something along those lines int this thread.
So what this means is that the underagers cannot get their beer by mail to consume in their own hiding place and instead need to go retro and get their alcohol the old-fashioned way...go to stores and bars with fake proof or ask an older sibling or friend. SUPERBAD!!!!!!!!!!
Yes I meant "than" sorry about that. Didn't realize that the grammar police were running around.
Listen, I understand what you are saying but my comment was more directed towards the Nevada issue you proposed. First, I don't know a single cop in this city that would arrest a father for that. You would first have to prove intent. Second, if for some crazy reason you did get arrested for that, a fresh out of law school public defender should be able to get you cleared of any charges. What you propose is just an insane scenario that simply wouldn't happen. Not down here anyways. Just my opinion. Sorry about any spelling or grammatical errors in advance.
There were at least three possible things you were trying to say with "then" instead of "than" . . . I went with the most probable. Wasn't trying to correct grammar, just trying to discern what point you were trying to make. Now to address the substance of your commentary:
1) Every cop I know, work with, work out with, even drink beer with in Nevada (which is literally, hundreds) would arrest someone providing alcohol to minors. Frankly, the ABC producers should get hit with another charge in NV. Check out NRS 202.055(3), it applies to this exact situation: "Every person who sells, gives or otherwise furnishes alcoholic beverages through the use of the Internet shall adopt a policy to prevent a person under 21 years of age from obtaining an alcoholic beverage from the person through the use of the Internet. . . A person who fails to adopt a policy pursuant to this subsection is guilty of a misdemeanor. . . ". So this person would be in violation of (1) for getting the minor alcohol, and (3) for failing to adopt a policy as well.
2) Under what notion would even the greatest defense attorney of all time be able to defeat said charge, with a paper trail showing such a thing (and mens rea/intent) occurred, and confession, like in the story? Don't just make a tautological statement again, please, provide some basis for your opinion.
Was more talking about the child abuse comment.
And also, as a Police Officer, you would have to actually observe the person furnishing liquor to said minor. Otherwise it's just a misdemeanor not committed on his presence and then it's only calls for a citizen arrest or citation. That's neither here nor there, the child abuse scenario just seemed a bit over the top.
Again, sorry for errors, damn phone
I have a better idea. How about all of these laws against personal freedom of responsible consumption be lifted rather than fine eBay and every other retailer? Oh it is probably just easier to paint the big bad ebay as the monster here rather than the underlying laws of a nanny state. MORE TAXES AND LAWS PLEASE PROTECT ME FROM THE EBAY!!!!! Boo hoo.
And the grammar cop v. discernable communication issue is resolved in favor of discernable communication.
I disagree. You're only talking about arresting the person, not prosecuting the person, which was the topic at hand. And that "in the presence" language only applies between the hours of 7pm and 7am (NRS 171.136(2)), and even then, has many exceptions other than those I list below.
And even then, re: arrest, that's assuming he doesn't go forward on the allegation of child abuse, which is not a misdemeanor. And assuming no exigent exceptions apply like community caretaker, destruction of evidence, hot pursuit would apply to the scenario.
Futhermore, not all misdemeanors call for such personal presence. A woman who says she got the shit kicked out of her by her boyfriend 20 minutes ago, yeah, he gets arrested when police get there 10 minutes later, despite the offense not being committed in his presence.
You want over the top? How about charging the guy (ABC producer) with burglary, since he did enter a house/room/building with the intent to obtain property by false pretense? If he had a firearm (CCW) on him while ordering the alcohol, its the bigger burg too, 2-15 NDOC.
But I will offer you one thing you will like: unless the child gets shitfaced and injured, will prevent the child abuse charge from happening (I have seen child abuse charges for furnishing alcohol just so you know):
"Paragraph (a) of subsection 1 does not apply to a parent, guardian or (my favorite) physician of the person under 21 years of age."
So ironically, if a dad "sells, gives or otherwise furnishes alcohol to his kid," he is ok. But if he, subsection (b) "leaves or deposits any alcoholic beverage in any place with the intent that it will be procured" by his kid, or gives him money to get the alcohol," he is still guilty.
So, the gist of what I've said in other posts, it could happen, especially in the rurals, where a certain church has lots and lots of DAs and judges who believe alcohol is a sin and should be prohibited and punished to the fullest extent of the law.
I fully understand where you're coming from. Its absurd. But its what the law says. My favorite quote kind of sums it up:
"this is a court of law young man, not a court of justice."
I love this. I hope craft beer sellers continue to find loophole after loophole. First of all, as it's been said millions of time, who cares? If you don't like the insane prices, don't buy. If you can afford it, more power to you, you're more at fault for the outrageous prices than the seller is. If you're a brewer who is pissed about not being able to capitalize on the market for your own beer, raise your prices. If you think you can tell me I have no right to sell your beer due to legal reasons, but are completely ok with me illegally trading your beers across various statelines while telling UPS/FedEx the package contains kitchen products, car parts, etc, then you have an entitlement issue much moreso than a moral issue. At the end of the day, who really cares? It helps way more people than it hurts...
You are correct when you say there are instances when you can arrest for misdemeanor's not committed in your presence. You are right when you are talking about DV being one of them. There are a few more, but you are wrong in the sense of only being the case between 7pm-7am. That's just simply not correct. It can be noon and if joe punches larry in the face I personally am not allowed to arrest him. Citizen citation, or citizen arrest (usually not done more at the discretion of the officer's). However there are laws regarding warrant service only between the hour's of 7am-7pm which you could be thinking of.
I literally have no idea about the ABC stuff you are talking about. I know what you are saying in rural area's. Still seems over the top. Anyways, As far as ebay not selling alcohol, its whatever to me. I don't agree with not believe there should be laws regarding distribution of alcohol after it's already been purchased by a whole seller. It is what is and I certainly will not be able to fix it.
Is there a federal law prohibiting the transportation of alcohol across state lines? I see some states have laws against this, but mostly dealing with ABV content and not all alcohol in general. I get UPS/Fedex have rules, but their rules are not laws.
I don't want to get involved with the Ebay/Trading thing, just curious about road trips with a cooler full of beers.
I doubt it, otherwise, why would places ship across state lines? I doubt a super successful place like Cascade would risk having a medical marijuana type ATF federales raids.
Plus, the 21st amendment repealed the 18th amendment, which was necessary to prohibit alcohol, since the federal government doesn't have police powers (textually speaking in the Constitution, which, is neutered by the expansion of the commerce clause frankly). . . they had to pass the 18th to ban it, and when they repealed it, there was a subsection which left alcohol regulation up to the states in the 21st. But, in reality, there is not a single aspect of life that the government doesn't regulate anymore, regardless of the notion of limited and specific enumerated powers, so anything is possible.
Anyways, I don't know is my answer.
Nearly all states have laws that effectively outlaw the importation of alcohol into the state without a license. This often includes alcohol for personal use--here in MA, technically you must obtain a license if you're moving to MA and want to bring your cellar with you. I imagine that some states have more liberal "personal use" exemptions, but they probably require you to personally transport the booze and I highly doubt they would allow you to use a common carrier like UPS/FedEx.
Enforcement, as traders on this site are well aware, is a different matter entirely....
So basically the 20/20 producer purchased the alcohol? He helped the 13yr old, i'm sure it was funds provided by 20/20. Our freedom is slowly being taken away from us.
What freedom? Buying from unlicensed sellers?
Our security does not miss a step, they know what fake IDs look like ... eBay has know about unlicensed sellers and selling to minors for a long time, this is nothing new.
eBay knew that people were selling beer for consumption on their site. It is common sense, tons of people were selling six packs of fresh new beer. Usually when you sell something as a collectable it doesn't come in a six pack from your local liquor shop.
As a 13 year old, I find this all very disheartening.
If I remember correctly, they said that the parents were present, and it was the parents whose credit card was used for the purchase. It was simply the kid who got online and likely created the account which was used to make the purchase. The point being that if a kid got their parents cc#, they could do this too.
ok, so the parents gave their kid their cc to purchase the hooch.
I'm sorry, I shouldn't have taken your word for it
All I had to do was type in vodka on the search bar, click one button and it can send it to my house," Xander told "20/20." (A "20/20" producer paid for the purchases.)
I wouldn't expect you to say that you know about it but you are fooling yourself if you think it doesn't happen.
Basically yes. I guess I'm in the minority in a beer community when I say that alcohol sales in this country are far too heavily regulated. Liquor licenses are just another hidden tax passed onto the consumer and a means for some bureaucrat to interfere with free commerce, plain and simple. Having a license endows that establishment with the ability to sell alcohol but doesn't really require anything other than a fee and a piece of paper to do so. What else do you feel is under taxed?
Regardless my stance of taxes (for the record: there is too much BS and it should be made simpler / less taxes), the point is what we have in place now and the legalities behind it. Just because someone does not agree with it or does not care if there are laws does not give them the right to break them. I am all for changing them though.
Nope. I was definitely off on that one. Interestingly, I wanted to go back and watch the segment, since they did say something about the parents involvement, but every segment from that episode BUT that one seems to be available on their web site.
There are still listings there some they just changed the name a bit or used part of the name found at least 4 different ones you may have to search several times
Woah, this thread got interesting quickly.
Everyone watch and learn, history always repeats itself. Soon there will be an assault on more of your beer rights. Its only a matter of time until the long arm of Uncle Sam reaches BA. The funny thing here is that the breweries who started this shit are no better than beer police and prohibitionists. When the snow ball starts going down hill it is impossible to stop and who knows what unintended consequences will happen. Only a brewer would hate free publicity, other people hyping there beer and distributing it (where they can't) for free around the country. Soon Craft Beer will hit another bubble (I personally think its just around the corner) and the breweries that started this mess (I am personally boycotting them) will hit hard times because they pissed off so many people. Breweries should remember that Dark Lord Day did not become such an event because of a great plan of marketing or advertising it grew because of the hype of people drinking the beer and part of that was being able to get it on ebay. Some people just never learn, this is America Land of the free and home of the brave. (and soon to be sober) Think its impossible, many a quiet man through out history believed this and look at the results
Liqour taxes are the oldest taxes in our history as a nation. You don't like it, then raise your issues with Washington and Lincoln. Oh, if you really have a problem with them, you can always choose to stop drinking. To the guy above, hey, take a breath.
I live in the middle of friggin' nowhere TN. Want to point out all those locals to me?
Separate names with a comma.