[The Gazette]

An investigation into convenience stores in Sumter County selling alcohol to minors has revealed multiple stores violated state law, including three stores in The Villages. The Sumter County Sheriff’s Office was prompted to launch a special investigation after receiving multiple complaints of underage alcohol purchases from convenience stores throughout the county. In an effort to

More...

[retiredguy123]

What a waste of time and money. Who thinks that enforcing illegal sales to minors will stop underage drinking?

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

What a waste of time and money. Who thinks that enforcing illegal sales to minors will stop underage drinking?

Won't stop underage drinking but will reduce it.

Taking the position that enforcing laws won't stop people from committing crimes anyway so why waste time and money to enforce them in the first place seems like a bad idea.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Won't stop underage drinking but will reduce it.

Taking the position that enforcing laws won't stop people from committing crimes anyway so why waste time and money to enforce them in the first place seems like a bad idea.

I agree, but the money could be better spent enforcing speeding and drunk driving, both of which are not enforced enough.

[ElDiabloJoe]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

I agree, but the money could be better spent enforcing speeding and drunk driving, both of which are not enforced enough.

Speeding and DUI are probably not enforced enough because the money could be better spent enforcing assault, burglary, robbery, and murders, all of which are not enforced enough. Your personal preference of speeding and DUI enforcement falls under the "Safety and quality of life" umbrella similar to underage drinking. FWIW, these decoy sting operations are usually funded by a state or federal grant, so they are not spending much money there that "could be better spent enforcing" something else.

[MrFlorida]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

I agree, but the money could be better spent enforcing speeding and drunk driving, both of which are not enforced enough.

So you think a 16 year old that just bought a 6 pack is not going to drive ?

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by MrFlorida

So you think a 16 year old that just bought a 6 pack is not going to drive ?

Maybe, maybe not. But, spending money to prosecute a convenience store clerk for selling beer seems misguided. A 16-year old has no problem getting beer.

[tophcfa]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

I agree, but the money could be better spent enforcing speeding and drunk driving, both of which are not enforced enough.

The better way to make the roads safer would be to strictly enforce and penalize people for driving while starring at their cell phone.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

What a waste of time and money. Who thinks that enforcing illegal sales to minors will stop underage drinking?

I'll use the same logic to come to a different conclusion.

We should get rid of drunk driving laws, traffic violations, drug possession crimes, unarmed robbery, non-violent crimes of all types, including illegal immigration. Why? Because the time and money can be better spent on violent crimes.

Hm - that seems like it's not a good idea. Maybe we should just continue enforcing what we enforce, and try to enforce more of what we should enforce.

[retiredguy123]

My comment was about wasting time and money. The same laws were in effect when I was a teenager, but they never prevented me from drinking beer. I don't believe that law enforcement has made any progress in this area in the past 60 years. But, they continue to waste taxpayer money. My opinion.

[ThirdOfFive]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

What a waste of time and money. Who thinks that enforcing illegal sales to minors will stop underage drinking?

I think it is called contributing to the delinquency of a minor.

[Win1894]

I think a more effective approach would be to have the underage booze purchaser spend a week or so in jail, especially if they committed fraud by using a fake ID to make the purchase. That could be more effective than punishing the seller.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by Win1894

I think a more effective approach would be to have the underage booze purchaser spend a week or so in jail, especially if they committed fraud by using a fake ID to make the purchase. That could be more effective than punishing the seller.

I agree, but they have been doing the same thing for at least 60 years and it doesn't work. They are just ripping off the taxpayers. Conducting a "sting" is ridiculous. If anyone thinks a teenager cannot get beer, I have a bridge to sell them.

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

What a waste of time and money. Who thinks that enforcing illegal sales to minors will stop underage drinking?

It will probably reduce it some and who knows might even save a life or two.

[jimhoward]

In Tennessee, where I am from, they scan everyone’s license on every alcohol purchase. In Florida and particularly in the villages they don’t seem to do that. The clerk uses their judgement. An obvious villagers retiree does not get asked for ID. But it only takes a few seconds to scan the IDs. If all purchases have a birthdate on them then underage sales are reduced because the clerk can’t just look the other way, they have to actually enter a fraudulent date.

I wish they would just scan licenses 100%.