eBay Begins Removing Alcohol Listings After '20/20' Report on Teen Buyer

Discussion in 'Beer News' started by Jason, Sep 25, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. SteelersX

    SteelersX Savant (1,106) Jan 30, 2011 New York
    Trader

    Next person I trade with I am going to request ID
     
    RyanMM, BreakingBad and cfh64 like this.
  2. biga7346

    biga7346 Zealot (686) Jun 19, 2010 Michigan
    Trader

    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 :wink:
     
  3. Beerandraiderfan

    Beerandraiderfan Initiate (0) Apr 14, 2009 Nevada

    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".
     
  4. biga7346

    biga7346 Zealot (686) Jun 19, 2010 Michigan
    Trader

    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.
     
  5. otispdriftwood

    otispdriftwood Initiate (0) Dec 9, 2011 Colorado

    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!!!!!!!!!!
     
  6. VegasHopHead

    VegasHopHead Initiate (0) Jun 21, 2012 Nevada

    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.
     
  7. Beerandraiderfan

    Beerandraiderfan Initiate (0) Apr 14, 2009 Nevada

    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.
     
  8. VegasHopHead

    VegasHopHead Initiate (0) Jun 21, 2012 Nevada

    Was more talking about the child abuse comment.
     
  9. VegasHopHead

    VegasHopHead Initiate (0) Jun 21, 2012 Nevada

    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.
     
  10. VegasHopHead

    VegasHopHead Initiate (0) Jun 21, 2012 Nevada

    Again, sorry for errors, damn phone
     
  11. drabmuh

    drabmuh Initiate (0) Feb 7, 2004 Maryland

    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.
     
    JavaNoire, mattarata, Mavajo and 2 others like this.
  12. Beerandraiderfan

    Beerandraiderfan Initiate (0) Apr 14, 2009 Nevada

    And the grammar cop v. discernable communication issue is resolved in favor of discernable communication.:slight_smile:

    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."
     
  13. VegasHopHead

    VegasHopHead Initiate (0) Jun 21, 2012 Nevada

    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.

    Cheers.
     
  14. HopsintheSack

    HopsintheSack Initiate (0) Apr 17, 2012 California

    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.
     
  15. Beerandraiderfan

    Beerandraiderfan Initiate (0) Apr 14, 2009 Nevada

    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.
     
  16. emannths

    emannths Initiate (0) Sep 21, 2007 Massachusetts

    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....
     
  17. beernut

    beernut Initiate (0) Jun 6, 2008 New Jersey

    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.
     
  18. beernut

    beernut Initiate (0) Jun 6, 2008 New Jersey

     
  19. Jason

    Jason Founder (0) Aug 23, 1996 Massachusetts

    What freedom? Buying from unlicensed sellers?
     
    cavedave likes this.
  20. Jason

    Jason Founder (0) Aug 23, 1996 Massachusetts

    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.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.