justnzane Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Welcome to the residual effect of M.A.D.D. What was once a right of passage is now a "serve time" offense. we can also thank the Reagan highway spending bill. If you can get your leg shot off, you should be able to get a drink Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 You're thinking it, I'm writing it. If this clown served drinks to children in his home and left them for dead and can't even step up and take responsibilty for his actions a day later, when the shock has worn off, he should be imprisoned. No question about it. If he's protecting someone, he is at the very least a pariah in the community and doesn't belong with this franchise. It's not worth it, IMO. This is not a victimless crime or a domestic issue, underage alcohol is the real deal in terms of sh*tting on child abuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Someone call Marv back! He leaves and the place just goes crazy now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Unless you consider a person's soul more important than his wallet, which I do. "What's best for him" in my world is doing what will square it with his Creator, not his attorney. And I don't need you telling me the world isn't perfect, believe me. But "what's best for him" in the long run - read "eternity" - would be to tell his LAWYER to shut up, and do what he knows to be right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Gurtler is pretty stupid if he didn't think hosting a loud party with 80 teenagers wasn't going to draw the attention of the authorities and potentially get him arrested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 You're thinking it, I'm writing it. If this clown served drinks to children in his home and left them for dead and can't even step up and take responsibilty for his actions a day later, when the shock has worn off, he should be imprisoned. No question about it. If he's protecting someone, he is at the very least a pariah in the community and doesn't belong with this franchise. It's not worth it, IMO. This is not a victimless crime or a domestic issue, underage alcohol is the real deal in terms of sh*tting on child abuse. There were 80 minors there. Each and everyone of them have been scarred for life. He needs to call at least 240 press conferences and publicly apologize to each individual minor, each of their mothers, and each of their fathers. That would be the moral thing to do. He can't just hide behind one charge either. He did it. It doesn't matter what the law says, he has to face his maker. He forced every single one of those kids to get drunk by putting booze in front of them, by basically holding their hair back and shoveling a beer bong down their throats. They could have been killed, how did he know they weren't? He needs to leave the city. There is no place or room in Buffalo for a guy who gives away booze. On a separate matter, he would likely have gotten away with it if he didn't announce over a loudspeaker every single kid that ran through the door before the party and bother the neighbors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 There were 80 minors there. Each and everyone of them have been scarred for life. He needs to call at least 240 press conferences and publicly apologize to each individual minor, each of their mothers, and each of their fathers. That would be the moral thing to do. He can't just hide behind one charge either. He did it. It doesn't matter what the law says, he has to face his maker. He forced every single one of those kids to get drunk by putting booze in front of them, by basically holding their hair back and shoveling a beer bong down their throats. They could have been killed, how did he know they weren't? He needs to leave the city. There is no place or room in Buffalo for a guy who gives away booze. On a separate matter, he would likely have gotten away with it if he didn't announce over a loudspeaker every single kid that ran through the door before the party and bother the neighbors. You are misunderstanding. All 80 of the underage kids were involved. They all knew what they were doing was wrong, and are all equally guilty of serving alcohol to minors. Sure, some of them didnt actually serve any alcohol, but since they were at the party, they were involved, and should therefore be arrested. All of them need to stop being unaccountable and stand up and confess to the police. You cant trust unaccountable people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Teenagers are going to do dumb things, but parents shouldn't be encouraging it. The fear of getting our ass kicked by our parents may be the difference between being alive or in the ground. But as a parent with a teen, I also have to trust that when he's at a friend's house, they're going to act like parents and not be enablers and make the peer pressure harder to resist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 You are misunderstanding. All 80 of the underage kids were involved. They all knew what they were doing was wrong, and are all equally guilty of serving alcohol to minors. Sure, some of them didnt actually serve any alcohol, but since they were at the party, they were involved, and should therefore be arrested. All of them need to stop being unaccountable and stand up and confess to the police. You cant trust unaccountable people. You're probably right. Those minors should tell the police every single bad thing everyone of their friends ever did, whether it was illegal or not. If it's bad it's bad. And if it may be bad it's bad, and maybe worse. Then they should post it on the web for everyone to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Teenagers are going to do dumb things, but parents shouldn't be encouraging it. The fear of getting our ass kicked by our parents may be the difference between being alive or in the ground. But as a parent with a teen, I also have to trust that when he's at a friend's house, they're going to act like parents and not be enablers and make the peer pressure harder to resist. It's prom night. Kids are going to drink. As many as want to drink are going to drink. It's much better and much safer to be in a house with a parent than in a park or a car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 I think this proves what we have all long suspected. Orchard Park needs more real crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 You're probably right. Those minors should tell the police every single bad thing everyone of their friends ever did, whether it was illegal or not. If it's bad it's bad. And if it may be bad it's bad, and maybe worse. Then they should post it on the web for everyone to see. Plus, we don't even know what the witness testimony is. We know it's been reported as "people saw them drinking". Witnesses being what they are, it could be five people in the back yard saying "Yeah, we saw him get the beer," which is NOT the same as seeing him drinking - which police detectives and criminal lawyers know, but your average message board posting schmuck does not. Quite simply: we don't know what we don't know. We only know what was reported...and we don't even know that reliably, reporters being who they are (i.e. more akin to message board schmucks). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCBoston Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 SKATE RACE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 It's prom night. Kids are going to drink. As many as want to drink are going to drink. It's much better and much safer to be in a house with a parent than in a park or a car. Prom night does not give kids a license to drink, and parents shouldn't give them that license. Yes some kids will drink, or toke, or have sex. So why stop at booze? Why didn't they hand out safe joints with no PCP and condoms too if it's safer to supervise them. Part of parenting is teaching kids that just because you want to do something doesn't mean it's the best choice. They have enough to deal with from peer pressure without the additional problem of parents acting irresponsibly and enabling the wrong choices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stussy109 Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Well it is a crime. Not that I agree with it, but the law is the law. Like doing 56mph in a 55mph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Prom night does not give kids a license to drink, and parents shouldn't give them that license. Yes some kids will drink, or toke, or have sex. So why stop at booze? Why didn't they hand out safe joints with no PCP and condoms too if it's safer to supervise them. Part of parenting is teaching kids that just because you want to do something doesn't mean it's the best choice. They have enough to deal with from peer pressure without the additional problem of parents acting irresponsibly and enabling the wrong choices. In fairyland, that's a damn good idea. If your child chooses to drink at 18, teaching them and their friends to drink responsibly is one of the best things you can do for them, and you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Prom night does not give kids a license to drink, and parents shouldn't give them that license. Yes some kids will drink, or toke, or have sex. So why stop at booze? Why didn't they hand out safe joints with no PCP and condoms too if it's safer to supervise them. Part of parenting is teaching kids that just because you want to do something doesn't mean it's the best choice. They have enough to deal with from peer pressure without the additional problem of parents acting irresponsibly and enabling the wrong choices. You do realize that handing out condoms to host your own 18 yr. old sex party is legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berndogg Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 In fairyland, that's a damn good idea. If your child chooses to drink at 18, teaching them and their friends to drink responsibly is one of the best things you can do for them, and you. Absolutely. It's been said a bunch of times already, but it can't be emphasized enough. High school kids will drink, no laws or punishments will prevent this. So when the cops make parents afraid to provide a safe environment where kids can stay over, drink, and not drive home, they encourage kids to find an unsupervised place to drink where driving, fighting, using hard drugs, etc are 900% more likely to occur. The drinking age should be 18, but if its not, at least there should be exceptions made for parties where there is adult supervision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 In fairyland, that's a damn good idea. If your child chooses to drink at 18, teaching them and their friends to drink responsibly is one of the best things you can do for them, and you. Teaching them isn't the same as encouraging them. And it doesn't take much for someone who isn't used to drinking to get drunk. Just a couple weeks ago in Syracuse a bunch of kids had a drinking party at a parent's home (who weren't home), and a drunk girl put her face up to the family dog to kiss it and the dog ripped her face up pretty bad. Cops came, the girl's now disfigured, and the senior boy who had the party faces charges and got kicked off his playoff lacrosse team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heels20X6 Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Absolutely. It's been said a bunch of times already, but it can't be emphasized enough. High school kids will drink, no laws or punishments will prevent this. So when the cops make parents afraid to provide a safe environment where kids can stay over, drink, and not drive home, they encourage kids to find an unsupervised place to drink where driving, fighting, using hard drugs, etc are 900% more likely to occur. The drinking age should be 18, but if its not, at least there should be exceptions made for parties where there is adult supervision. Reading this report the only thing that pops into my head is "don't these cops have any 'real crime' to fight?". It just seems like a bunch of sour puss keystone cops that heard wind of a party and decided to break it up. No complaints from the neighbors, no LEGITIMATE (I know in Canada that if supervised, underage drinking is permitted to some degree) criminal activity. It doesn't seem like these teens were bothering anyone in a controlled environment but the cops decided to be buzz kills anyway.... I think back to my grad (I was 17) and the SCHOOL provided a rented ball room at a hotel that we could drink in and celebrate our graduation in overnight. Of course the drinking age here is 18, but the law is the law right? I don't recall police officers busting down the door and charging my principal with corruption of a minor... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts