DURHAM, N.C. — Dozens of Duke University students spent time Tuesday in court after being cited in August for underage drinking.
Durham police and Alcohol Law Enforcement (ALE) officers cited 175 Duke students for underage drinking during the first week of classes after officers raided three parties at houses off-campus in the Trinity Park area.
Let’s see: underage drinkers partying off campus in Durham. Busted. I’ve been there a few times. And I do not mean Durham in this case.
At the same time, (Susan) Wasiolek (assistant VP for Student Affairs at Duke) said the university is concerned about students’ rights.
"What this has created for the students is a real fear that ALE might be lurking around every corner," she said.
Guess what, Susan? They are. That is part of their job. Same for the NC State Police, Durham Police, campus police, Sheriff’s office, heck, even the DMV police. In case you missed the memo, it is illegal to drink in the State of North Carolina if you are under 21.
For many of the students, the punishment was a $200 fine and 50 hours of community service. They must also write a five-page paper about the effects of alcohol on the body.
Might be excessive. I got much less. Heck, we got less for joy riding in a golf cart that wasn’t ours. And sure didn’t have to write a paper. However, da law is da law.
Now, here it comes:
Some students, however, did not plead guilty, believing their constitutional rights were violated. Their attorneys will argue that point in a hearing set for Oct. 27.
Please. Explain how. See, my sources tell me:
§ 18B‑300. Purchase, possession and consumption of malt beverages and unfortified wine.
(a) Generally. – Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, the purchase, consumption, and possession of malt beverages and unfortified wine by individuals 21 years old and older for their own use is permitted without restriction. (there are no exeptions)
and
§ 18B‑301. Possession and consumption of fortified wine and spirituous liquor.
(a) Possession at Home. – It shall be lawful, without an ABC permit, for any person at least 21 years old to possess for lawful purposes any amount of fortified wine and spirituous liquor at his home or a temporary residence, such as a hotel room.
State law takes precedence over any law passed by any County or Municipality. Ergo, drinking underage, while certainly fun, I will not deny, is illegal. Furthermore, the US Constitution and Laws take precedence over State law, and nowhere can it be found that people under 21 have the Right to drink.
Just another case of 1. people not taking responsibility for their actions, and 2. making up bullshit Rights to cover #1. Progressives in the making.
Wow…when we got caught, all the Campus Police did was make us pour it out on the street – and as this was the first of several cases, this process took a very agonizingly long time. Needless to say, we still drank and voilated the law, we just did it in Frat House off campus. Good luck to the Dukies. When they lose, they should receive more punishment than a fine and a HS paper for wasting the court’s time for rights claimed, as you said, that do not exist. Great Post – Great Blog!
Lunch: 10/12/2005
Try one of these specials with your lunch: WuzzaDem watches the news. Kobayashi Maru is losing a family member. [via The Florida Masochist] Feisty Republican Whore goes all White Trashy. Redneckin’ finds business as usual in Sin City. Pirates’ Cove
Lunch: 10/12/2005
* Pirates’ Cove has figured out where they come from.
* Iowahawk issues a correction … and more.
* WuzzaDem watches the news.
* Kobayashi Maru is losing a family member. [via The Florida Masochist]
* Feisty Republican Whore goes all White Trashy….
At CU Boulder every year they have a ‘marijuana rights protest day’. The students openly smoke pot on campus. I say let them smoke, the last thing we need is CU students with functioning brain cells.
Dang it, I can’t remember which blog I read that outlined our Constitutional Right To Drink…sounds like something Contagion would say…
And when the students lose, they should be fined for the cost of the entire court case.
Found it:
http://miasmaticreview.mu.nu/archives/102782.php
Hmm, very interesting. Miasmatic Review has some good points. And, I agree with you, make them pay everything.
I’m sure Ward Churchill would be the first one at that party :)