Minor in possession of alcohol

This thread is depressing. It seems we are now a nation that feels a young man replying honestly to the police is stupid, and certainly too stupid to ever be trusted with an airplane. Of course he should have kept his mouth shut, but integrity and honesty were traits we used to admire and were essential parts of a good citizen's character.
 
Last edited:
JohnAJohnson said:
This thread is a depressing. It seems we are now a nation that feels a young man replying honestly to the police is stupid, and certainly too stupid to ever be trusted with an airplane. Of course he should have kept his mouth shut, but integrity and honesty were traits we used to admire and were essential parts of a good citizen's character.
Click to expand...

They still are, however as a society, we have adopted a "Zero Tolerance" stance to everything to rid our society of those traits. "Follow the rules, turn in your neighbor."
 
JohnAJohnson said:
Of course he should have kept his mouth shut, but integrity and honesty were traits we used to admire and were essential parts of a good citizen's character.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but we also used to trust that guys who were old enough to vote and to kill and be killed in our military were old enough to be trusted with a beer.
 
Jeff Oslick said:
Yeah, but we also used to trust that guys who were old enough to vote and to kill and be killed in our military were old enough to be trusted with a beer.
Click to expand...

It's funny when our Puritan roots start to show.

Want to join the new crusade kid? No prop go grab you a M16 and get some, but stay away from that bud light, can't be trusting your weak young mind with the devils nectar :lol:
 
James331 said:
Probably what the college kid in question was reading, maybe after booking him they became friends on facebook :lol:


I'm not in the business of making friends with cops and criminals, I'm just interested in protecting me and mine.

A cop might not like me, but I sure as heck won't give him the rope to hang me with.
Click to expand...

Actually, I WANT you to talk to the cops the way you think you should talk to the cops. I just want to watch you do that. :yesnod:

I thought the book might help you with your friendships here. But, I suspect you don't think you need help.
 
retailguy said:
Actually, I WANT you to talk to the cops the way you think you should talk to the cops. I just want to watch you do that. :yesnod:

I thought the book might help you with your friendships here. But, I suspect you don't think you need help.
Click to expand...

Nine times out of ten I'm able to avoid having to talk with the police in that setting, I work with police a bit, I'm friendly with the local guys, but if I'm stopped I'm not playing the friend game, because in that instance they ain't talking to me as a friend.

As for my "friendships" here, first it's the internet, I really don't take it that seriously, second anyone who is offended by my words that deeply, I really don't think we would...well...work out.
 
James331 said:
Nine times out of ten I'm able to avoid having to talk with the police in that setting, I work with police a bit, I'm friendly with the local guys, but if I'm stopped I'm not playing the friend game, because in that instance they ain't talking to me as a friend.

As for my "friendships" here, first it's the internet, I really don't take it that seriously, second anyone who is offended by my words that deeply, I really don't think we would...well...work out.
Click to expand...

Learn the game and use it to selective best advantage.
 
MikeELP said:
Wow...I'm 60 and I don't recall even coming CLOSE to 10 times that I've had to talk to cops in that kind of setting! You must have a lot of encounters with the police. :eek:
Click to expand...

:idea:


nine times out of ten
phrase of nine
on nearly every occasion; almost always.
Powered by OxfordDictionaries · © Oxford University Press
Click to expand...
 
MikeELP said:
Wow...I'm 60 and I don't recall even coming CLOSE to 10 times that I've had to talk to cops in that kind of setting! You must have a lot of encounters with the police. :eek:
Click to expand...

I'm 50 and I can't even track how many encounters I've had.:lol: I guess it all depends on how you live life and what neighborhoods you live in.
 
JohnAJohnson said:
This thread is a depressing. It seems we are now a nation that feels a young man replying honestly to the police is stupid, and certainly too stupid to ever be trusted with an airplane. Of course he should have kept his mouth shut, but integrity and honesty were traits we used to admire and were essential parts of a good citizen's character.
Click to expand...
There is a flip side. LEOs have far less discretion these days than in those "good old days" when police would let the "right people" go with a warning and a "don't do it again" and nail the "wrong people."

The decision whether or not to speak when being investigated by law enforcement can sometimes be pretty nuanced. But the decision to not respond to questioning by a LEO under circumstances where you (a) create a problem for yourself that didn't exist or (b ) have no realistic chance to make it go away on the spot (so rare in the criminal context as to be virtually non-existent) is hardly a sign of lack of either integrity or lack of honesty.

But, no it's not a sign of immense stupidity either. The impetus (need) to explain oneself is pretty innate in all of us. It's one of a number of traits that make us, for better or worse, human.
 
JohnAJohnson said:
This thread is depressing. It seems we are now a nation that feels a young man replying honestly to the police is stupid, and certainly too stupid to ever be trusted with an airplane. Of course he should have kept his mouth shut, but integrity and honesty were traits we used to admire and were essential parts of a good citizen's character.
Click to expand...

I would shift that a bit. It's not the nation that feels that way, only it "rulers". And most of them are just bureaucrats looking for ways to justify their chosen careers with an ample helping of CYA. So if the kid has an alcohol related offense on his record -- keep him/her out of the cockpit and the apparatchik can point to a job well done and gets to work another day until secure retirement. If the kid has nothing on their record, well you can't blame the FAA -- how were they to know?

So everyone looking out for their own best interest, it become incumbent upon the young would-be many things (including, perhaps, pilot) to keep a clean record to keep the most options open to themselves. And goal is furthered by not talking to the cops.
 
steingar said:
Actually, I hope the kid gives up airplanes to pursue something else. I don't want anyone stupid enough to admit to committing a crime to the police in the left seat of an airplane. Too many ways that can go wrong.
Click to expand...

Could be dumbest post ever on POA(ok..ok.ok...that's overstated)...but love the entertainment....keep the ignorant comments coming....it's what makes this site soooo entertaining. I chuckled awhile with this one!!:rofl:(hope it was tounge n cheek)

He was honest with the LEO...for better or worse won't hurt his future. Its really not a big deal.
 
Last edited:
TEFLONSEAN said:
Could be dumbest post ever on POA(ok..ok.ok...that's overstated)...but love the entertainment....keep the ignorant comments coming....it's what makes this site soooo entertaining. I chuckled awhile with this one!!:rofl:(hope it was tounge n cheek)

He was honest with the LEO...for better or worse won't hurt his future. Its really not a big deal.
Click to expand...

Exactly, I find it hilarious that a Minor in Possession would have such an effect. When I was in the 16-21 age group, everyone got MIP tickets, they were $15 infractions with a mail in envelope citation. Nobody got too bent out of shape, but Anheuser Busch was also the neighbor as well as big employer of the neighborhood.:lol: The attitudes on all this stuff has altered drastically since the War on Drugs, Thanks Nancy. Now we have zero tolerance of anything that one may learn from or experience outside what you are to be tested on.

I have no problem being friendly with a cop. Heck, I'm bald enough and wear readers, and have a grey beard; I can just hitch my pants up around my nipples and start ranting about damned criminals and kids and stay under the radar if I was holding.:lol:

But I sure know what I'm NOT going to be telling a cop.:rofl::rofl::rofl:
"Have you been drinking?" "Oh no sir! I would never think of it." As long as you are friendly, they aren't going to press it.

If you're stupid enough to hand it to them and hang yourself, well that changes the equation. You have one chance left to save you the little ticket, make them laugh. Making a cop laugh has been my most effective route out of trouble. I've got a Beaudreaux and Thibideaux as State Trooper joke that's gotten me out of a few tickets.
 
Matthew said:
It wasn't all that long ago that A/B stopped serving beer in the employee cafeteria.
Click to expand...

The Busch family sold to a European conglomerate a couple years back as well. I grew up down the street from Grant's Farm. That tour was always good for free beer.
 
Henning said:
The Busch family sold to a European conglomerate a couple years back as well. I grew up down the street from Grant's Farm. That tour was always good for free beer.
Click to expand...
Yeah - I've been on a few A/B brewery tours over the years. Back in the day, Busch Gardens gave out free beer (within certain limits) but I don't know if they still do that.

--

A buddy of mine in our glider club grew up in Germany and worked at a local brewery when he was in high school. Their perk on Friday was that everyone got a free case of beer or bottled water (something else they produced). He thought that was a pretty good deal for a teenager.
 
beestforwardspeed said:
Now THIS is the most useful comment of this entire thread!!
Click to expand...

I agree. Never had a problem with a cop that I didn't deserve , ( speeding) they always lowered the speed to avoid a real bad ticket. Several times I was let go, twice while in the service, on my way home. I always addressed them as SIR, no mouth and thank you sir. Their job has gotten much tougher in the past thirty years, little respect, quite dangerous. In this case a good lawyer would have solved this song without end.
 
Hey folks-

I’m a pilot and also a university faculty member and happen to serve on my schools student discipline committee so I thought I would share my insights.

First, discipline is and should be from a schools perspective – educational, not punitive. However, that doesn’t mean we won’t do something to you punitive to get you to see the educational value in not doing something again! Importantly, the ultimate goal is to get you to see things from an “educated” perspective.

Now on to the alcohol issue, we are caught in a real liability and student care catch 22 with underage drinking. In particular our university police struggle with what to do with obviously inebriated (potentially dangerously so) underage students. So let’s say you are underage and a university cop stops you. Question 1 is have you been drinking? If so, then blow into one of these portable breathalyzer gizmos and if you are not to drunk and the university cop thinks your OK you get a ride home and a note to see the dean of students later. Later on you likely hit my committee and get a specified university punishment and are good to go - no interaction with the legal system. If you blow a high level or the university cop is concerned for you then they call an ambulance off to the hospital you go – later receiving the same university sanction.

Now let’s shift gears – let’s say you do not cooperate with one of our university cops (i.e., don’t answer their questions). They are sworn and they can write you a city ordinance ticket - and the students know this. So basically if the kids are honest they know the university cops will automatically “divert” them from the normal judicial system to our university system. This is the carrot we are using to try to get these kids who are dangerously drunk to fess up and help us so we can help them.

Now here is what really screws things up – local police don’t want to deal with drunk college students so they pretty much avoid opportunities to find them on campus – as they say they let the university cops babysit the students. What really irks me though (and I suspect our university cops) is the state police where I am –as most places – have jurisdiction everywhere and they have these state task forces that love to swop in and bust college kids for underage drinking. Suppose it makes good headline –it’s like shooting fish in a barrel. So the state police come in and ask a kid if he has been drinking – kid knows thing to do is be honest – and boom he’s know got a (big $$$$) state ticket. State police head off to there next “important law enforcement opportunity” and we are stuck getting the kids back into cooperative mode. Everybody would be much better off if they let the university police handle college students on campus. Stop picking on college students!

As an aside (of which I’m very proud), I’ve helped a few kids out by throwing the book at them in terms of university punishment. I’ll do just about anything next to expelling someone in most situations to get the point across – and you’d be amazed at the punishments we can impose. You usually don’t have to expel someone because most of the time the things you would expel them for ( felony type issues) probably already have them locked up so it’s kind of a moot point in that case. However, in the most serious cases - borderline felony cases- a severe university punishment gives a defense attorney something to work with in pleading for sentencing mercy from a judge or negotiable prosecutor.

Hope this has been of value to you all.
 
Yep. The problem with "rule of law" is we have turned it into a revenue generating system. It's not about producing results, it's about increasing revenues.
 
Unregistered said:
Hey folks-

I’m a pilot and also a university faculty member and happen to serve on my schools student discipline committee so I thought I would share my insights.

First, discipline is and should be from a schools perspective – educational, not punitive. However, that doesn’t mean we won’t do something to you punitive to get you to see the educational value in not doing something again! Importantly, the ultimate goal is to get you to see things from an “educated” perspective.

Now on to the alcohol issue, we are caught in a real liability and student care catch 22 with underage drinking. In particular our university police struggle with what to do with obviously inebriated (potentially dangerously so) underage students. So let’s say you are underage and a university cop stops you. Question 1 is have you been drinking? If so, then blow into one of these portable breathalyzer gizmos and if you are not to drunk and the university cop thinks your OK you get a ride home and a note to see the dean of students later. Later on you likely hit my committee and get a specified university punishment and are good to go - no interaction with the legal system. If you blow a high level or the university cop is concerned for you then they call an ambulance off to the hospital you go – later receiving the same university sanction.

Now let’s shift gears – let’s say you do not cooperate with one of our university cops (i.e., don’t answer their questions). They are sworn and they can write you a city ordinance ticket - and the students know this. So basically if the kids are honest they know the university cops will automatically “divert” them from the normal judicial system to our university system. This is the carrot we are using to try to get these kids who are dangerously drunk to fess up and help us so we can help them.

Now here is what really screws things up – local police don’t want to deal with drunk college students so they pretty much avoid opportunities to find them on campus – as they say they let the university cops babysit the students. What really irks me though (and I suspect our university cops) is the state police where I am –as most places – have jurisdiction everywhere and they have these state task forces that love to swop in and bust college kids for underage drinking. Suppose it makes good headline –it’s like shooting fish in a barrel. So the state police come in and ask a kid if he has been drinking – kid knows thing to do is be honest – and boom he’s know got a (big $$$$) state ticket. State police head off to there next “important law enforcement opportunity” and we are stuck getting the kids back into cooperative mode. Everybody would be much better off if they let the university police handle college students on campus. Stop picking on college students!

As an aside (of which I’m very proud), I’ve helped a few kids out by throwing the book at them in terms of university punishment. I’ll do just about anything next to expelling someone in most situations to get the point across – and you’d be amazed at the punishments we can impose. You usually don’t have to expel someone because most of the time the things you would expel them for ( felony type issues) probably already have them locked up so it’s kind of a moot point in that case. However, in the most serious cases - borderline felony cases- a severe university punishment gives a defense attorney something to work with in pleading for sentencing mercy from a judge or negotiable prosecutor.

Hope this has been of value to you all.
Click to expand...

Why are the university cops stopping students and questioning them to begin with if they're not tripping over their own feet or endangering themselves or others? Why not simply leave them alone? Where are your probable cause or exigent circumstances to so much as talk to them?

For that matter, what about the inherent absurdity of "minors" being liable for criminal prosecution for an act to which the law considers them too young to consent, anyway? If the law considers them too young to make a competent decision to drink, then why are they old enough to be prosecuted for that decision? Isn't that a bit bizarre in itself?

And what kind of "help" do these kids need, anyway? The only "help" most of them need is a few years' maturity. High school and college kids have been drinking for as long as there have been high schools and colleges. Most survived, believe it or not.

I started college when the drinking age was still 18. We even had a rathskeller on campus (and a damn good one, at that). Although I was older, having already served in the military, most of the students around me were 18 and 19. And yes, they drank themselves stupid drunk from time to time. But amazingly, students weren't dropping down dead around me. They learned their lessons in the form of killer hangovers. And believe it or not, almost all of them somehow survived to graduate.

I've even spent time in countries where the drinking ages were as low as 14 for beer and wine, and 16 for hard liquor. Believe it or not, most of those kids survive, too.

Rich
 
RJM62 said:
Why are the university cops stopping students and questioning them to begin with if they're not tripping over their own feet or endangering themselves or others? Why not simply leave them alone? Where are your probable cause or exigent circumstances to so much as talk to them?

For that matter, what about the inherent absurdity of "minors" being liable for criminal prosecution for an act to which the law considers them too young to consent, anyway? If the law considers them too young to make a competent decision to drink, then why are they old enough to be prosecuted for that decision? Isn't that a bit bizarre in itself?

And what kind of "help" do these kids need, anyway? The only "help" most of them need is a few years' maturity. High school and college kids have been drinking for as long as there have been high schools and colleges. Most survived, believe it or not.

I started college when the drinking age was still 18. We even had a rathskeller on campus (and a damn good one, at that). Although I was older, having already served in the military, most of the students around me were 18 and 19. And yes, they drank themselves stupid drunk from time to time. But amazingly, students weren't dropping down dead around me. They learned their lessons in the form of killer hangovers. And believe it or not, almost all of them somehow survived to graduate.

I've even spent time in countries where the drinking ages were as low as 14 for beer and wine, and 16 for hard liquor. Believe it or not, most of those kids survive, too.

Rich
Click to expand...



Well said :yes::yes::yes:
 
I think it's worth adding that university "discipline committees" as of late haven't exactly shown themselves to be bathed in glory.
 
You guys are giving me an undeserved hard time. I wouldn't do what I do if I wasn't an advocate for young people. But times have changed and universities are now held responsible (rightly so or not) for their students behaviors and its consequences. I was a college fraternity president and well understand and appreciate the university of yesteryear - however, those days are gone. Some kids today drink pretty hard and they can get in lots of trouble while doing it. Since I've been around we've had one fall into a street and get run over - a couple choke on their own vomit - and one set his room on fire (accidentally) and burn his roommate to death. As a society we are likely responsible for this indirectly as a consequence of the 21 year old drinking age which creates sort of a "forbidden fruit" mentality around alcohol on college campuses which perpetuates and perhaps motivates excess drinking among students.

Lastly, on the issue of student discipline committees - don't necessarily disagree with your assessment their as it pertains to Title IX issues - however, thank Uncle Sam for that mess. Otherwise, I think we do a pretty good job.
 
Unregistered said:
Hey folks-

I’m a pilot and also a university faculty member and happen to serve on my schools student discipline committee ...
Click to expand...

Informative. But doesn't this all preceed from an assumption that drinking at 20 in r pess is harmful? And that you're "helping" kids by kicking the can down the road until they're 21 or older?
 
MIP doesn't count. Don't sweat it. We'd have far fewer pilots if it did. Still, fight it and get it dismissed one way or another. In my own case, in Texas, I did deferred adjudication and kept my nose clean for 6 months and they dismissed it. Done. That was like 17 years ago.
 
Well, today was court day. Pre-trial diversion for 6 months, basically it's probation, 30 hours of community service, and a substance abuse evaluation. After he completes the program, it the record will be expunged, only available to law enforcement. It is not a conviction as long as he completes the program. He's not overly happy, but he understands the consequences of his actions and will fulfill the requirements and move on, without a conviction of any sort. :)


petrolero said:
MIP doesn't count. Don't sweat it. We'd have far fewer pilots if it did. Still, fight it and get it dismissed one way or another. In my own case, in Texas, I did deferred adjudication and kept my nose clean for 6 months and they dismissed it. Done. That was like 17 years ago.
Click to expand...
 
TEFLONSEAN said:
Could be dumbest post ever on POA(ok..ok.ok...that's overstated)...but love the entertainment....keep the ignorant comments coming....it's what makes this site soooo entertaining. I chuckled awhile with this one!!:rofl:(hope it was tounge n cheek)

He was honest with the LEO...for better or worse won't hurt his future. Its really not a big deal.
Click to expand...

How hard is it for people to understand that YOU DO NOT TALK TO THE POLICE. Very little good can come of it. Yeah, maybe some are understanding and will try and do the right thing. Not most of the LEOs I've met. I think one should at all times be respectful, but you don't have to make things easy for them. The constitution allows you to remain silent, why not do so?

As far as universities, mine is more populous than the metropoli in which many of you reside. Bad things will happen in a gathering of young people this size. The difference is the university can be held liable for much if not all of it. This puts universities in a very delicate situation, from which you see lots of policies with horrible unintended consequences.
 
steingar said:
The constitution allows you to remain silent, why not do so?
Click to expand...

"I had the right to remain silent, but not the ability."

-Ron White


If you have to be sober to consent to sex, shouldn't you have to be sober to consent to talk to the police?
:rolleyes:
 
Unregistered said:
Well, today was court day. Pre-trial diversion for 6 months, basically it's probation, 30 hours of community service, and a substance abuse evaluation. After he completes the program, it the record will be expunged, only available to law enforcement. It is not a conviction as long as he completes the program. He's not overly happy, but he understands the consequences of his actions and will fulfill the requirements and move on, without a conviction of any sort. :)
Click to expand...

Is his lawyer sure it won't be on his record as a conviction, because that could really screw up his life.
 
Yes, it is a pre-trial diversion, as long as he completes the program it isn't a conviction, if he for some reason doesn't complete the program the charges are still pending and he will have to plead guilty or not-guilty in front of the judge and have a hearing/trial. Then it would be a conviction or guilty plea.

Anthony said:
Is his lawyer sure it won't be on his record as a conviction, because that could really screw up his life.
Click to expand...
 
Anthony said:
Is his lawyer sure it won't be on his record as a conviction, because that could really screw up his life.
Click to expand...

This. Even if it is expunged, a conviction will be very problematic (even a misdemeanor).

Because of liability and other concerns, there's very much a one-strike attitude these days. That's not just the US, but also border crossings into Canada, Australia, and other countries.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top