Kelly the Dog Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 I just came across this thread and am amazed that it took 63 posts in this thread for this to be mentioned. Its good to see someone realize that Gurtler could have found himself in a HUGE heap of trouble had one of those kids got into an accident afterwards. The point people have been making in the above 62 posts about that very topic is implicit. If you have a responsible home party like that, there is MUCH LESS chance of a kid getting in a fatal car accident because he is drunk because they are drinking in a house and not in a car, where they go to drink when they don't have a house. I'm just amazed at what some people here think 18 year old kids actually do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SF Bills Fan Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 I blame the silly drinking age. Thank you Elizabeth Dole. Someone needs to allow states to decide what the legal drinking age should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 The point people have been making in the above 62 posts about that very topic is implicit. If you have a responsible home party like that, there is MUCH LESS chance of a kid getting in a fatal car accident because he is drunk because they are drinking in a house and not in a car, where they go to drink when they don't have a house. I'm just amazed at what some people here think 18 year old kids actually do. Where was it stated that this was a "RESPONSIBLE" home party? Did Gurtler have plans for all 40+ underage kids to stay the night? Did Gurtler get the okay of all the parents to serve alcohol to their minor children? Furthermore, it's not what people think 18 year old kids are up to, it's what are they up to with the help of adults. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 I blame the silly drinking age. Thank you Elizabeth Dole. Someone needs to allow states to decide what the legal drinking age should be. While you're blaming people, blame the Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill, who rammed through in secret, the draconian drug laws about crack cocaine, because he was miffed about President Reagan taking the limelight away from Democrats about being tough on crime. He also was motivated to act the big man after the Celt's #1 Len Bias croaked. Then his Senate majority passed it, and presented it to Reagan. A classic trap - if Reagan vetoed the piece of crap, he would have been excoriated by the press and the babbling tongues of the congressional Dems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Jack Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Wow... kind of like gettuing pulled over for doing 56 in a 55...What'd he do to piss the cops off? WTF is wrong with what he did? It's right in the article.... Upon checking the area, police said they found loud music that could be heard from "a block away," and teenagers were seen pouring beer from several kegs in the yard. He had the music to loud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerjamhead Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 It's right in the article....He had the music to loud. I must have glanced right over that bit of information. Suddenly the arrests make sense... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLiveRalph Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 If snorting blow off the prom queen's ass is wrong, I don't want to be right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotton Fitzsimmons Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Wow... kind of like gettuing pulled over for doing 56 in a 55...What'd he do to piss the cops off? He was doin fitty fiiii in a fitty fooooo... he gots 99 problems but a *BEEEP* ain't one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPicc2114 Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 You cant have 80 kids spend the night at your house if they get too drunk to drive.. hence, he was allowing drunk minors to drive as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 You cant have 80 kids spend the night at your house if they get too drunk to drive.. hence, he was allowing drunk minors to drive as well. That's some shaky logic. 80 present therefore 80 drinking? 80 drinking therefore intoxicated? Intoxicated therefore driving? Ouch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 That is the biggest load of crap I have ever seen - the dude provides a safe place for the kids to go after the prom and ends up busted and embarrassed. God only knows what those kids would have been doing otherwise... Way to go deputies... Maybe some day you will get a life... C'mon boom. Cops don't make laws. Most bans of this sort are handed to the police by white "liberal" politicians. For instance, if this guy was handing out cigarettes, he might be facing life in prison. I have a 20 year old daughter, and I wouldn't have a party of this sort in a million years. Not because I am being judgemental mind you, but because I am not going to spend the night chasing after kids, perhaps issuing breathalyzer tests, and ripping cigarettes out of their mouths. They could have booze (or cigarettes) in their car, and it would suddenly become my fault in civil, or even criminal court. Bans like this don't go away either. If a politician wanted to do away with this, he or she would be accused of being for underage drinking. As for the cops, they have to worry, despite their personal misgivings, about douchebags like Buffalo Denney, a squirrel of a man, reporting them for not enforcing this kind of nonsense. The bans will continue and they will increase in number boom. Sad but true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 C'mon boom. Cops don't make laws. Most bans of this sort are handed to the police by white "liberal" politicians. For instance, if this guy was handing out cigarettes, he might be facing life in prison. Of course, one could bring up the point that the guy giving 18 year olds cigarettes would be perfectly legal... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanInRochester Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 I guess I would be in favor of dropping the drinking age to 18. But, if it has to stay at 21, then allow kids over 18, but under 21 to drink under adult supervision. You could add another clause that says the guardian/supervisor is responsible for the kid's drinking and actions. So if he gets in a car and drives, the guardian is also fu$%ed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stussy109 Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 So why not hand them out and offer bedrooms to them, it's the same as a "safe" drinking party. Drinking a miller lite doesn not produce another human being nor transfer any of the disgusting STD's. Drinking a miller lite is more similar to say taking allergy or cold medicine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stussy109 Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 I don't understand graduation parties in the first place. Graduation from high school is expected. Parents - good ones at least - knuckle down on their kids for a long time to ensure this. I don't see why such has to be cause for a particular celebration, or an occasion for gifts. Most 18 year-olds already operate under the false impression that they are hot sh*t. Why encourage that? heck, why throw a birthday party then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Drinking a miller lite doesn not produce another human being nor transfer any of the disgusting STD's. Drinking a miller lite is more similar to say taking allergy or cold medicine. I dunno...i'm convinced from the 1 time i had miller lite that it is entirely possible to get an STD from that nastiness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Drinking a miller lite doesn not produce another human being nor transfer any of the disgusting STD's. Drinking a miller lite is more similar to say taking allergy or cold medicine. Drinking a Miller Lite produces a "drunk Driver" who will kill innocent people Thats a closer comparison if you want to paint with such a broad brush. First of all, he said to hand out condoms to make it a "safe" sex party, just like having an adult present makes it a "safe" drinking party. Wearing a condom is supposed to stop you from getting most STD's and pregnancy, just like having a parent/guardian/shaparone present is going to stop over drinking/alcohol poisoning/drunk driving and make it safe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts