That’s just begging the question. It’s saying something should be illegal because there’s a law against doing it.
Where’s the school board in all of this?
[withdrawn]
I haven’t seen it explained how the school found out. Does the police department report to the school district on all of the minors it deals with?
I’d still like to see how you could draft a law that makes that a crime. How is it different than my 19 year old sitting in a restaurant surrounded by tables of people drinking wine with dinner? She’s supposed to check IDs? Being around people who are committing a crime is not a crime, without assistance of some kind.
From the court summons. It seems there is an arrangement where the court reports all minors to the school.
Are you suggesting that it should be legal for kids to have parties with alcohol, since some of them might be designated drivers?
I don’t mean to put words in your mouth, but I don’t know how to parse that based on what assumptions you have.
You’re over thinking this. It might or not be a crime depending on the details. But I assure you, there is no hope for the foreseeable future that it will be legal for kids to have house parties. What happened here seems very reasonable from a police and court standpoint. When I was a kid they would just take everyone into “Protective Custody” and release them to their parents who had to come and pick them up. This sounds pretty similar for the non-drinkers at the party.
Cops arrested everyone drinking, which was about a dozen people. Everyone else got a summons, which was about 15 people.
She’s not in legal trouble, since she wasn’t drinking. But she’s in trouble with the school since their policy is you don’t go to parties with alcohol, which she did.
I’d be with her if she stayed outside and had her friend come out. But she went in. That’s against the rules.
The difference is that at a restaurant, access to alcohol is controlled by the restaurant staff. It’s not freely available to the underage.
However, I think the school is run by morons. Even the police agreed she was there to pick up a friend and wasn’t involved.
The girl had come from work, easy enough to establish when she left and the time it would take to get to the party.
No, kids shouldn’t have parties with alcohol. And kids shouldn’t drink alcohol. And nobody should be driving when they’ve been drinking alcohol.
But Erin Cox didn’t do any of these things. She went to a party where alcohol had been served to pick a friend up and drive her home. Are you suggesting that nobody under the age of 21 should even be allowed inside the same building as alcohol? Because that seems to be the law that Cox broke.
There are a lot of situations somewhat similar to this, in which someone is doing something that is clearly harmless, but they get punished due to a zero tolerance policy. For instance, someone who is upstairs in their room playing video games while a party is going on downstairs with drinking.
Those situations are stupid enough.
But this one is made far worse by the fact that the person getting victimized not only wasn’t doing anything wrong, but was actively doing something RIGHT. Punishing someone for doing a good deed just makes it less likely others will do good deeds in the future. What happens next time some teenager calls a friend for a ride, and that friend heard about this incident?
All of that said, we’re all taking the story as related at face value… do we have any evidence that corroborates the “went into find a friend and was going to leave immediately” side of things? It’s pretty easy to imagine that was-going-to-leave-immediately turned into hung-around-chatting-for-five-minutes which is a VERY different kettle of fish.
This is a good point. I can even see a teenager who stood around talking for half an hour still feeling like they were “just there to pick up a friend” because they spent the whole half hour planning on leaving any minute, and because they never *meant *to go/stay. For those of you who feel this whole thing was terribly unjust, would that change your mind?
I also want to point out that when a member of a school sport does something cruel or dangerous, people are quick to accuse the school and team of not controlling their members, or creating a sense of entitlement in them. When it comes to voluntary extracurricular activities, behavior contracts are very normal, and I don’t have a problem with that. I am not a fan of blindly applying rules, but I don’t object to the principle here.
No, your example wouldn’t change my mind, Manda. She wasn’t drinking. She was still there as a designated driver upon request of her friend. And, most importantly, it has nothing to do with school or school activities.
Also, the school district lawyer lied in court.
Sounds to me that the school system is quickly setting itself up to fund Cox’s higher education.
Friggin morons. At the very lease I see their E&O insurance going through the roof in the future.
I guess I am just wondering why people still send their kids to schools. Schools are obsolete. Homeschooling is such a beautiful option nowadays.
Except for that pesky need to work. Plus, most people have neither the knowledge or the capability to teach.
It is a great option for so many. When school just wasn’t working for my son, I homeschooled him for second and third grade. After that, he was ready to go back to school and we found a great local public school. Now he is in a charter prep school (6th - 12th) that we love.
Many people do not have the option though.
You don’t need the knowledge or capability to teach. There is such a vast assortment of teaching materials available now. The Khan Academy for one.
After reading some of your other posts, it occurs to me that your parents might have believed the same thing.