Ten Batavia businesses pass underage alcohol sales check

do they ever do these stings for tobacco..

All the time Ted

It's nice to know that our tax dollars are being spent trying to entrap people.

I heard that Billy Goats serves under age drinkers. Don't know how true this is.

Mr. Waite, in all fairness to the owner of Billy Goats, I suggest that you back up your accusation with some evidence or retract your post.

I don't support the use of students (minors in the case of tobacco sales) for sting operations. Vigorously prosecute those who sell alcohol or tobacco to minors but let's get out of the entrapment business. Sometimes I wonder how we ever let our government spin so far out of it's orbit. I dont remember ever going to my state or local politicians and saying "what we really need here in Batavia is a good old fashioned sting operation to entrap our neighbors when they make a mistake."

The entrapment debate is interesting although I am curious if there is equal disdain for all forms i.e. Dateline To Catch a Predator.

How do you compare someone who sells beer to a 20 year old to a predator pedophile?

Dave, I wadn't comparing those. I was referring to the concept of entrapment. Is it a black and white issue or does it depend on the situation? Speed traps, roadblocks, undercover drug buys, bait cars, and adults posing as minors on the Internet. All are forms of entrapment.

Jeff; to me (and The Free Dictionary) entrapment is: The act of government agents or officials that induces a person to commit a crime he or she is not previously disposed to commit.

Therefor yes, it is black or white. If a person, say intentionally sells alcoholic beverages to a person they know is a minor and is observed doing so, that would not be entrapment to me.

off subject ; For the record, I think 18 or 19 should be the legal age for all substances.

Geez Dave, please read my posts! I was referring to the concept of entrapment as a law enforcement tool, not the definition. Is the appropriateness of its use black and white, or is it situational depending on the potential offense?

I know that Jeff, maybe you should read mine. I thought I explained my position. I do not agree with using entrapment as a tool for the police. I also don't like "law enforcement" in general, I prefer a restitution based, victim's rights, justice system, rather than the authoritative law enforcement model we live under.

So Dave, we can come full circle, do you disagree with the To Catch a Predator model of getting pedophiles apprehended?

I confess, I've only seen it once, quite a few years ago, so my opinion of that particular show's methods would be weak, but I think I understand the model and of course I want pedophile predators off the street. So if they are catching people who are intending to do what predator pedophiles do, then no I have no problem with it. If they are entrapping innocent people, I'm against it. As far as I understand, that's not what they are doing by chatting or whatever online in a racy manner with someone who represents themselves as a child and arranging to meet privately, I personally feel that guy is intending to carry through, therefor not entrapment.
As to how this relates tot he above article, selling beer to a 20 year old is infinitely a lesser issue than predator pedophiles

I guess as soon as you said "I also don't like "law enforcement" in general", the point of debate was moot, if you don't like law enforcement then debating their techniques is an exercise in futility.

That's fair Jeff. I'd like to ask you a question if I may; Using the definition I used, Do you support entrapment as a means of law enforcement?

Mark, yes they do run tobacco stings.

Dave, to be perfectly honest, I am not 100% sold on it either way. Getting pedophiles off the street by almost any means works for me while speed traps and roadchecks are bothersome...situational ethics. However, at any given point in time an individual has the choice of obeying a rule or breaking it therefore are responsible for the outcomes of their choice. Getting back to the original article, the owner of an establishment that serves alcohol is well aware of the law regarding sale to minors. The punishment of losing their license or worse being held culpable in a wrongful death suit should be incentive enough to strictly ensure that every customer is of legal age. If that owner chooses to roll the dice on someone who "looks" old enough, then that is a choice that they consciously make knowing their livelihood is at stake when doing so. No one "mistakenly" sells alcohol to a minor therefore the entrapment claim is tenuous at best.