TheAgitator.com
I’ll Have a Large Regular Pan With Pepperoni, Hold the Subpeona
Friday, May 28th, 2004Portsmouth, New Hampshire cops are offering a $50 bounty to pizza delivery people and hotel clerks who scope out underage drinkers.
Portsmouth Police Sergeant Mike Schwartz said the program is called the “Booze Bounty.” He said food delivery people and hotel clerks would receive $50 if their anonymous tips of suspicious activity leads to the arrest of a party host.“The message being sent to parents is that it’s not safe for them to host a party,” said Jackie Valley, of the Community Diversion Program in Greenland, which works to keep at-risk youths out of trouble with the law. “This doesn’t change the fact that youths using alcohol is still illegal.”
And it doesn’t change the fact that, privacy concerns aside, this stupid policy will have more teens drinking in places they have to drive home from, or even in their actual cars.
Also, what happens when an overly ambitious delivery guy starts peeping into the windows of houses that didn’t order a pizza?
Link? I’d love to read the whole sick thing.
This is so eerily reminiscent of Soviet-style encouragement to spy on one’s neighbors. And for what — to catch murderers? No, to “catch” 16-year-olds drinking beer.
Beware the Pizza Boy
AP – Delivery People Urged to Rat Out Minors Police in Portsmouth [NH] hope to enlist pizza delivery people and hotel clerks to help cut…
have no fear, troubled libertarians, the free market will intervene against this madness. No self respecting 14 year old will order pizza from a grass. as soon as it gets out that one franchise has taken the thirty pieces of silver, boom! no more orders for them. The “safe” pizza delivery guys will reap the benefits, and probabably sell some pot into the bargain..
Wade is right. This would absolutely kill a pizza delivery company near a college campus. I can’t imagine most owners wouldn’t have a standing policy of firing any drivers moonlighting for the Gestapo.
Damn nazis.
If I know human nature of teenagers, after this happened there’d be some pizzas being delivered down deserted lanes in exchange for a serious ass-kicking.
no drunk kids will have to drive to pick up their pizza.
no =now
Common sense check here, folks:
If that pizza delivery guy passes a guy on the freeway who’s chugging a 40-oz at the wheel, can he call 911 and give the police the license plate? What if Mr. Malt Liquor has kids in his car? Some of my libertarian friends seem to feel their only responsibility is to avoid being the one he runs over.
And as to “privacy concerns”, anyone who hosts a houseful of minors gets his imaginary “privacy rights” trumped by his responsibility to the safety and well-being of those kids. Sorry, but I outgrew romanticizing teenage drinking when I hit about 25.
And your hypothetical pizza-purveying peeper should be arrested… was that so complicated?
Right on top o texas!
When I read threads like this it becomes easier to understand some of the view-points on some of the other threads.
Party-on dudes!
Texas,
Someone who’s drinking and driving should certainly be reported to the police.
Someone who’s drinking in their own home — or a friend’s home — should not be, and the police certainly shouldn’t be providing financial incentives for pizza delivery guys to report suspected “underage drinking”.
Just to give some perspective on what a non-crime “underage drinking” is — when I studied as an exchange student in Germany, my host brother — a 17-yr-old senior in high school — was permitted, along with all other seniors, to drink beer *in the school*. It had to be done in the senior lounge between classes — and no drunkenness would have been tolerated — but there was none to tolerate. The kids drank responsibly. Unlike my binge-drinking American ass.
Underage drinking is benign. Enforcing laws against it are a foolish waste of resources. But I don’t find the laws morally objectionable. Neither do I find this manner of enforcement morally objectionable. In the end, wade makes the best point in that the incentives to get business and good tips far outweigh the measly 50 bucks the Portsmouth police are going to pay out.
Does this mean I agree with Rocketman? Oh geez…
…i lived in Germany for 3 years at the end of the 90′s. although i was in a provincial backwater (so i don’t know if it is universal there) i know that young (15-16 years old) kids drink at bars all the time. it isn’t underage drinking that is really disapproved of there; it is irresponsible underage drinking that is not tolerated. at closing time the discos there have a massive line of taxi’s in front. it is just a part of the culture there that you don’t drink and drive anymore than you would drop your pants in a hotel lobby and take a dump.
of course the Germans are only painfully aware of the fact that ‘Gestapo’ ‘Nazi’ and ‘Stazi’ have been their contribution to universal slang throughout the world for synonyms of oppression of a population through fear and intimidation. (fully one half of the population of the former east germany was in the employ of the stazi…including katerina witt…the ice skater. in fact the german government sealed the stazi files because they were worried that the entire country would decend into a hell of finger-pointing, revenge and recriminations).
one comment that i do remember a german friend of mine making was “You americans talk alot about freedoms, but you don’t seem to have many”.
I’m sure that little comment will cause an involuntary spasm of defensiveness, but living overseas does give you a different take on things.
T ‘o T, Rocketman, et al.,
I’m 26. I look pretty much the same as I did when I was 20 (actually, I’ve lost some weight since then, so I really look a little bit younger). I get carded pretty much everywhere I go. I even get carded for cigarettes. My girlfriend, who is actually a little bit older than me (don’t tell her I told you that) looks even younger.
Unless there is a disincentive for false or groundless reports at work here (and as wade pointed out, there may be), what’s to stop the pizza guy from calling me in when I answer the door with a beer in my hand? He has nothing to lose and he might get $50 out of it. In the meantime, I have a cop showing at my home asking for ID because the pizza guy saw me with a beer.
And you guys don’t see a problem with that???
This is going to have kids buying frozen pizzas while their legal age buddies buy their beer. Then they’re going to go drink and eat pizza as always. The pizza guy is the one who gets hurt.
Although it’s interesting that you get paid $50 for an “anonymous” tip. Wonder how that works?
The free state project folks/members should do something about this sort of thing. Doesn’t sound like a very good idea to me either. I also don’t like seat belt laws or airbags.
While we’re on the subject of pizza, Italy has started regulating “authentic” Italian pizza. Italy’s Agriculture Ministry has issued strict guidelines to protect the real Napoletana pizza from bogus copies.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/05/27/italy.pizza.ap/index.html
The guidelines rule that real Napoletana pizza must be round, no more than 35 centimeters (14 inches) in diameter, no thicker than 0.3 centimeters (0.1 inches) in the middle and with a crust of about 2 centimeters (0.8 inches). “The texture must be soft, elastic, easily foldable,” the guidelines say. The norms also specify what kind of flour, yeast, tomatoes and oil must be used. They recognize only three types of real Neapolitan pizza: Marinara, with garlic and oregano; Margherita, with basil and mozzarella cheese from the southern Apennines; and extra-Margherita, with fresh tomatoes, basil and buffalo mozzarella from Campania, the region that includes pizza’s hometown, Naples. The dough must be rolled out manually and baked in wood-burning ovens that can reach the required temperature of 485 Celsius (905 Fahrenheit).
Brian Hawkins;
Perhaps you missed this part of Radley’s post,
“if their anonymous tips of suspicious activity leads to the arrest of a party host”.
There is no reward if the driver gets it wrong. As for a “dis-incentive”, you don’t think those people at the liquor store or the clerk selling you cigarettes should be punished do you?
Ah, but Rocketman, in those cases you are actually out and about in the act of purchasing the beer. Being asked to show ID at the p.o.p. is entirely different than having the cops show up at your door because the pizza guy thinks you look a little youngish.
Now, if the pizza guy (or gal) is delivering beer with my pizza, I fully expect to be asked to show ID because my doorstep has become the p.o.p. Otherwise, there is no cause for scrutiny or tattling or speculative reports leading to wasted trips to the doors of innocent people.
What a waste of time and resources, making police go to pizza-eating homes to check IDs on the hunch of a pizza-delivering suspicious (or troublemaking) third party. I’d rather they were out on the roads stopping reckless and/or drunken drivers or anything else that actually protects and serves the public safety and interest.
Rocketman,
There’s no disincentive for a pizza delivery guy to not just guess, since there’s no punishment for being wrong.
All of this is probably academic. Kids who are drinking at home will just be a little more careful during the 30 seconds it takes to give the pizza guy his money (i.e. the least drunk kid will hand over the money and they’ll hide all the beer cans in another room). Or they’ll just order the pizza before drinking.
And we’ll have another useless, unenforceable law on the books, and it will lead to other laws like:
$75 for plumbers who notice evidence of smoking in a room where a child may have been!
$100 for carpenters who think they might have smelled weed!
etc.!
Rocketman–
What Bronwyn and MattG said.
you don’t think those people at the liquor store or the clerk selling you cigarettes should be punished do you?
Uh, no. What part of what I said did you manage to twist into that?
Rocketman…the pizzaman is delivering pizza, not beer. I’ve worked in bars and if someone underage tried to get in, we didn’t call the cops…we sent them packing. Since the pizza guys have an incentive, with no disincentive, why not just ‘report’ every party that you deliver to knowing that, in the long run, one party or another will have someone who is underage at it. I can’t remember a single party I went to in college where there wasn’t at least one person there who was under twenty one. I guess I better go turn myself in. Whats next: the cable guy collecting a quick $200 because the label is missing off of your mattress? The meter reader reporting you for improper storage of paint solvent in a mason jar?
…what aspect of a ‘Police State’ doesn’t bother you?
Good ones Moses! How about $250 for census takers who suspect someone may have been engaging in anal sex in one of the states where that’s still illegal? Or $350 for interior designers who think their clients may have illegal cable?
The scary thing is, what’s apparently law now in Portsmouth is getting close to something the Soviets used to do — pay neighbors to rat on each other (“Igor Pavlovich may be unreliable. I heard him complaining about the bread lines the other day at the mailbox”. How far is that, really, from, “Hello, Portsmouth police department? I was trimming my hedges and happened to look in my neighbors window, where I saw someone who may have been around 18 drinking what I think was a beer. Can you come investigate?”)
Not a fun way to live.
Matt, that’s precisely why I will try my best to buy all my future homes on substantially sized lots. I want those hedges far enough from my windows to ensure my privacy.
I prefer to stay unobserved when I walk around the house in my unmentionables (or less), you know?
By the way, that hypothetical neighbor you describe sounds just like my nosy old next door neighbor. Drives me nuts.
mosesmalone says,
“Since the pizza guys have an incentive, with no disincentive, why not just ‘report’ every party that you deliver”
1)the cops don’t like to waste their time either–they would notice the pattern and talk to the drivers causing it, if that didn’t work they would discontinue the program
2)wade pointed out the other disincentive as well customers would notice such an obvious pattern and adjust their buying habits accordingly
As for your oh so clever analogies, if I thought that reporting mattress tag or paint thinner violations had the same potential to protect the lives of the innocent(and not so innocent)I would support those as well.
The state of Oregon has had toll free numbers to report alchohol abuse for years and honest guys, nobody is goosestepping,trimming their mustache funny or wearing swastikas. Try not to panic.
Rocketman,
It is little by little that your freedoms are taken away from you. One drop at a time. Eternal vigilance is required.
Rocketman answeres Brian Hawkins;
This part,”Unless there is a disincentive for false or groundless reports…
A person could honestly believe you to be underage(as you pointed out)that would make his report “false”.
I was merely pointing out that if you wanted some kind of “dis-incentive” for such a person, it would be about as reasonable to provide a “dis-incentive” for a clerk “falsely” assuming you to be underage.
“Or they’ll just order the pizza before drinkin”
No way man…Beer munchies are beer munchies, and more often than not, they overpower everything else.
Rocketman replies to MattG who said,
“It is little by little that your freedoms are taken away from you. One drop at a time. Eternal vigilance is required”.
No argument here, that’s why it’s so important to establish specific criteria for determining what kinds of freedoms to give up when. I can’t have the freedom to drive on whatever side of the road I want to,for example.
You notice I didn’t justify the alchohol abuse bounty on the grounds that the majority supports it. That wouldn’t even come close to a sufficient reason to deprive us of freedoms in my opinion.
What convinces me to support the alchohol abuse bounty is the innocent lives lost such enforcement could save.
Show me enough real life instances of abuse of such bounty laws that would cause us to give up freedom for no saved lives and you’ve persuaded me.
For now, there is no evidence that such laws are being abused. (that I’m aware of)
Rocketman,
You’re incorrect. A clerk in a liquor store gets no money if he busts underage kids trying to buy alcohol in a store. A pizza guy gets $50 — for doing *in someone’s house*.
It’s all kinds of wrong.
Well Rocket, once laws are on the books, it’s a real bitch to get them off, no matter how bad they are. And invasive laws like this one pave the way for even more invasive laws; once you’ve established that a person who just might be in the vicinity can get a reward from the police for reporting possible underage drinking, we can justify all kinds of further intrusions. We’ve already seen massive state intrusion into the body and the home — it’s time to draw a line at the front door!
Portsmouth is gonna have to change all the names of its “Chuck E Cheese” (if there are any) locations to “Chuck E RAT”
This is small potatoes.
Anyone remember Ashcroft’s TIPS program.
Kind of the same, but on a national scale using postal workers, phone techs. and cable guys.
They were to report “suspicious” activities that may be terror related.
You know like that guy has a beard, prayer beads, and God forbid, maps.
No wait, he probably really is a terrorist. We need these neighbor spy programs to help us guarentee our health and saftey.
Right on Rocketman.
It really comes down to a question of, do you want all these laws to be enforced? If the technology existed, would you really want everyone who smokes pot or uses cocaine going to prison? Would you want everyone who goes 12 miles per hour over the speed limit to get a ticket? Would you want to pay for every prostitute and john to stay locked up?
No, you wouldn’t. Companies who are now able to test hair for marijuana are uninterested in doing so — unlike the urine tests, which test THC presence only in the past few weeks, THC stays in hair for a couple of months. But companies don’t care which of their employeed smoke joints — they just want them to do their jobs, and if they do, then fine.
Why do we have underage drinking laws? What 16-year-old hasn’t had some alcohol, and what 16-year-old shouldn’t be learning how to drink responsibly, especially with adult supervision?
If you’re a pizza delivery guy, why don’t you just call in every house? Eventually the cops will find some underage drinking, someone with a bench warrant, or maybe even a terrorist in hiding. All the while you collect your fifty bucks say, once or twice a week.
Rocketman replies to Bronwyn(Jesus did I stir somethin’up or what-when oh when will I EVER learn to shut my mouth–prob’ly never!)
Bronwyn said,
“Being asked to show ID at the p.o.p. is entirely different than having the cops show up at your door because the pizza guy thinks you look a little youngish”
Point well taken but surely there would be SOME things you would think the pizza delivery guy could report. What if he noticed someone wanted by the police for whom a reward had been posted? The fact that most wouldn’t consider that a violation of privacy to report demonstrates that there’s more to consider here.
I think this is really more about our attitude towards the threat of alchohol abuse to the general welfare than it is about privacy concerns.
Convince me that the gains made in protecting innocent lives taken due to underaged alchohol abuse are outweighed by the hurt feelings of a few twenty-five year olds and I’ll reverse myself.
This is about balancing equities in the real world not solely about–(angels break into song accompanied by violins)LIBERTY.
Hey, that’s a good one — the police can set up a hotline, and if citizens see someone not wearing a seat belt, they can call and split the $50 fine with the state!
And if someone sees someone giving a child food that may have trans fats, they can call the police’s Fatstoppers unit at 1-800-STOP-FAT and report the offending citizen.
No joke, Rocketman — that’s where were headed. Each little intrusion by the state paves the way for another little intrusion.
Was anyone here ever deterred from underage drinking by the prospect of getting caught? Or did you just learn to hide it better? I think that most kids who drink are going to continue doing so, regardless of what the pizza spy does, and as somebody already said will just be stealthier about it.
Just hope that this law doesn’t manage to chase them out of homes with adult supervision into alleys, parking lots, and fields in the boonies where they’ll do all the things unsupervised drunk teenagers do. I’d rather have an adult watching them, myself.
The one above – 03:55 – was me. The new guy forgot to put his name down. G
Rocketman answers “all”
Geez did I stir up some poop or what?
I think that the post to
MattG
Posted by: Rocketman on May 28, 2004 03:05 PM and the post to
Bronwyn Rocketman on May 28, 2004 03:29 PM answers most of the arguments brought up.
Save all the “mattress tag” arguments etc.
The”slippery slope” arguments work both ways guys. All I have to do is come up with one instance where we all agree that a bounty was a good thing. Now my argument is that if we reject the alchohol abuse bounty then we are in danger of losing the kind of bounty that contributes to the general welfare in a way most of us would find valuable.
It’s not that easy in the real world. The fact is that we will have to abridge some freedom for some benefits. No one in this discussion would begrudge a pizza delivery driver a reward for turning in a child abductor he spotted at a customer’s house, even if doing so would “violate the customers privacy”.
If someone wants to make a case against ALL rewards in ALL situations then I would at least listen to what that person had to say. To the rest of y’all, it’s a matter of weighing the costs and gains. I think we should be honest about that and discuss ways of making those judgements rather than climbing on high horses and proclaiming our idealistic devotion to individual liberty.(let’s HAVE that devotion, just be real-world about it).
Rocketman answers MattG’s May 28, 2004 03:16 PM
Actually, I think the best way to get rid of a crummy law is it’s rigorous enforcement.
If it’s on the books-it should be enforced. If it shouldn’t be enforced it shouldn’t be on the books.
Sad sad sad…
Interestingly, in New York State there is absolutely no law whatsoever against underage drinking. The law says that one cannot PROVIDE alcohol to a minor, but any minor can in fact legally POSSESS and CONSUME alcohol (excluding of course open-container laws).
And the NY law against providing alcohol to a minor has two very important exceptions: (1) a parent may supply alcohol to his/her children, (2) alcohol is permitted at bona fide educational programs (which explains why Cornell’s Hotel School’s wine tasting course is so popuilar and so legal). (I presume somewhere there is a religious exemption as well.)
Word up, G!
I’m sorry, I just had to say it :-)
And to answer your question, no I wasn’t deterred one bit – and I had the threat of deportation (for myself) and prison time (for my dad who was usually asleep in his bed when I snuck out to drink at the beach). I wasn’t deterred, I just learned to bring an extra bottle for the security guards.
Then again, I wasn’t ever in any danger of driving drunk, considering the fact that I was on a teeny compound with nothing but my feet for transport. Well, that and my golfcart :-)
Maybe I’m not such a good example.
And rocket, I see where you’re coming from. But (you knew there’s be a but, right?) I do see a difference between your wanted poster example and the issue in question. Maybe it’s a fine line, but I think it’s a different matter to positively identify a known wanted person than to try to deduce what a person may be doing.
If I’m delivering a pizza, a drunk man answers the door and behind him is a small child screaming with a bruised and bloody face – or some other obvious immediate injury – I may be more inclined to do something about it than if simply heard an argument inside.
The difference is immediacy. It is more clear in one case that people are in danger, right? Similarly, a delivery person will have no idea whether the underage drinkers (we’ll assume that the driver has actually come across some) are in the home to stay the night or if they all plan to head out the door to their cars in the immediate future. Even then, the driver doesn’t know whether or not a designated driver has already been – well, designated – among the group.
I’m sure my examples are not quite as clear as I’d like them to be, but use your imaginations and maybe you’ll see the distinction I’m trying to make.
Gee Bronwyn, I think we agree here let me just repeat a part from one of my last posts
“it’s a matter of weighing the costs and gains. I think we should be honest about that and discuss ways of making those judgements rather than climbing on high horses and proclaiming our idealistic devotion to individual.
liberty.(let’s HAVE that devotion, just be real-world about it)”.
The only thing I want to add is that it is the presumption built in to the law that teen drinking is sufficiently dangerous to prohibit in and of itself. Hence the law is against teen alchohol consumption not consumption and other behavior. The pizza driver isn’t making any judgements and neither is any government body paying the bounty. That judgement is made by the duly elected legislature in a given state. The means is available to change that judgement and if such were done(even though I wouldn’t personally agree with it) I would certainly agree that such a bounty would be unreasonable for the reason you state.
I would also agree that such a bounty would be unreasonable in New York state assuming Kip is right about state law there.
mosesmalone
Make a case of sufficient danger to public welfare and other things are subject to state power. Would you be opposed to state power zoning the manufacture of explosives? Probably, if you could be convinced of sufficient danger.
“I agree when you are talking about behavior’s, the effects of which are visited exclusively on the individual.(though even most libertarians will at least consider the use of state power to protect minors from themselves. Also-16 is the age of consent in Germany if I remember correctly so I’m not sure your analogy is perfect in any case) IMO Teenage consumption of alchohol does not qualify as such behavior.
I’m happy Germany doesn’t have that problem though I wonder if it isn’t more because of the relative lack of teenagers having access to automobiles as anything else. In any case, WE do have such a problem and it is reasonable and really unavoidable that the same kinds of judgements made in zoning explosives manufacturing, be made in other areas as well.
MattG is indeed right a line must be drawn in the sand, no one argues with that. Where in the sand is subject to debate between reasonable people who can disagree and still claim to prefer as much individual freedom as REASONABLY possible.
Darn it! Please insert the word “not” after probably in the third sentence.
…I get the feeling that things are slipping ever so slightly off topic. I obviously believe the government has every perogative to do things that protect public safety. Naturally I don’t want to buy a car that detonates when someone on a cell phone rear-ends me or drink water from the tap that is half dioxin.
What bothers me about this is the assumption that the state can start a spy campaign using citizens who are not law inforcement officers to report “suspicious behavior”. This sets a precident for the policing of an enormous set of behaviors that may or may not be dangerous to the population in general. Drunk teenagers are not inherently dangerous (weren’t you one once?). Drunk teenagers driving cars are. I, for one, am not really that keen on the concept of extending the reach of the law into some sort of “pre-crime” scenario in order to “save lives”. This seems to extend the idea of public safety to the point of saying:
Gun are dangerous.
Most people who get shot were standing in front of a gun when it happened.
All people with guns could shoot someone and should be arested.
A second, but not insignificant point comes from the concept of ‘posse comitatus’ in which (rightfully so) the U.S. military is not allowed to engage in policing U.S. citizens: this is left to law enforcement…if the U.S. military isn’t allowed to be involved in policing us, then why should a pizzaboy?
mosesmalone:
I’m glad you agree that promoting public safety is a legitimate use of state power. If I recall it was you that brought it up first(improper storage of solvents etc.)not I.
Let me answer your last question first,
“if the U.S. military isn’t allowed to be involved in policing us, then why should a pizzaboy”?
My answer is that any citizen not only can but should report criminal activity if they become aware of it.
I believe the rest of your objection is answered with this post, Posted by: Rocketman on May 28, 2004 04:03 PM
I’d like to suggest that, rather than retyping it, you just look there and then get back to me.
I’m only vaguely familiar with what’s going on in Oregon(and not at all familiar with what’s going on in other states) but I can tell you we’ve had hotlines to report alchohol abuse for years. It is regularly advertised on the radio. This would qualify as your “citizen spy campaign” I believe and nobody’s singing “Deutchland Uber ales yet”.
There is also a 1000.00 “we tip”reward for turning in the whereabouts of people with felony arrest warrants out for them. So far, no goosestepping or funny mustaches. Just citizen involvement in law enforcement.
Portsmouth is doing the state motto an injustice!
“Live free or die.”
Actually, when I was in high school in southern NH, we used to party at a friends house while her parents were away. Her grandfather was still there, but he couldn’t do stairs, so we’d party in the basement without him knowing. Other parents would allow drinking etc so long as we didn’t go anywhere.
I actually preferred tracking down to the Merrimack River to enjoy a night of underaged drinking. Nothing like being on the waterfront drinking cheap beer and philosophizing about life and other important matter. Those were good times, I wouldn’t trade my best legal bar trip/tour for the memories of those times.
Hey guys, Just so y’all know, of course it goes without saying that the Rocketman NEVER did any underaged drinking or drugs or nothin’ like that.
I swear on the honor of John Kerry’s war medals!
I thought I’d pop in here and clear a few things up:
1. For the most part (I didn’t check through every state, but as a general rule) it is legal for parents to provide their own children with alcoholic beverages.
2. Rocketman, you said, “If someone wants to make a case against ALL rewards in ALL situations then I would at least listen to what that person had to say.”
So, two points on bounties/rewards: (1) When a bounty is offered, the influx of calls comes with anyone trying to collect. Police are inundated with fraudulent phone calls and false leads (this, of course, depends on the amount of the award offered). (2) There’s a difference between offering a reward for finding or giving information regarding a known felon and reporting someone who isn’t being sought by the police. Even if you say there isn’t (which is a valid argument), see point 1, and why there shouldn’t be rewards at all. When did the words “civic duty” become all about money? My thoughts on the matter are simple: If members in a community don’t care enough to report a crime or criminal without an incentive, then that says that they don’t care about that criminal or crime.
3. Retailers who remove the mattress tags are–as far as I could find–committing a misdemeanor, which carries a penalty of up to one year in jail and/or up to a $5,000 fine. (Read all about it here: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/15/ch2schV.html)
Regards,
John
My personal position is that I don’t want anyone ‘spying’ on me at all, for any reason. Ever. The provisions protecting privacy were not put into the constitution to allow us the opportunity to engage in illegal or publicly unsafe activities. These guarantees are in place because the drafters knew the potential for corruption and abuse of power inherent in positions of authority.
Here is the type of scenario that I’m alluding to: Cable guy gets offered a reward to report suspicious activity. Cable guy is installing my cable and sees “How to fly the Big Jets” on the bookshelf right next to my annotated large-print copy of the Koran. Calls into the tip line and I get a free all-expenses paid trip of indeterminate length for interrogation. Turns out that I am an airline pilot who majored in theology.
Minor inconvenience?
If a lost job repossessed house and destroyed reputation are small prices to pay in service of the concepts of â??civic safetyâ??.
The point of all this is that the pizza guy is not getting a reward to report a crime that he knows with reasonable certainty is going on (unless he is empowered to check the Ids of party-goers, he hasnâ??t a single shred of evidence)…this is distinctly, distinctly different from a citizen reporting a crime which he knows to be occurringâ?¦pizzaboy is getting a reward for reporting activities that are in his financial best interest to be illegal and supplying the authorities with a false case for probable cause. The police are using the pizza boy or the cable guy to engage in an activity that they themselves (as well as the Military, FBI and CIA) are prohibited from doing; collecting intelligence on US citizens without probable cause (ordering a pizza is not probable cause to investigate underage drinking anymore than how young the people at the party look). This is an end run around constitutional rights that were put in place just for these sorts of situations.
For my part, at least, this has nothing to do with a bunch of acne-challenged punks with a half rack of black label or the laws that they may be breakingâ?¦been there, done that.
Yes, mosesmalone, I too would be opposed to a bounty for “suspicious activity”. Such a bounty would be way too vague and open to much abuse.
If you feel your point is so well made, why not use the behavior of topic, simple possession of alchohol?
Pizza boy is not making an end run around the constitution, BECAUSE YOU HAVE INVITED PIZZA BOY IN!
I would also remind you that in our free and open society YOU ARE AWARE of the bounty law and that is a vastly different situation then it would be if such an arrangement were secret.
Personaly I don’t invite strangers into my home for the reason’s you cite as well as others.(meet pizza boy on the porch-you wouldn’t be the only one doing that)
You fail to similarly indict such bounties for things as turning in child abductors.
Please be honest here(most importantly with yourself)and admit that you are opposed to this bounty simply because you don’t regard the threat to general safety caused by teen alchohol abuse as serious enough to warrant such a tactic.
Such an argument is worthy in itself. Of course it would be subject to a cost gains analysis and I find it telling that you are desperately attempting to avoid such an analysis.
If you insist on using some other behavior besides teen alchohol abuse to make your point–replace alchohol with possession of dynamite.
NOW, make your point.
Yeah, that’s what I thought.
End your denial please.
….”cost-benefit analyses?”…i would guess lynch mobs are the cheapest form of justice going…maybe we could get busy-body volunteers to sift through trash: sort of a thousand points of light shining into our lives.
lovely.
Perhaps we should return repatriated children to abductors to right the “wrong” of bounties-lovely.
Hi all
I know I am still a newbie here but I found these really great sites that I feel every one would appreciate, check them out:
– Scuba Diving Sydney *** http://www.scuba-diving-sites.com/scuba-diving/scuba-diving-sydney.php – Car Hire Search *** http://www.car-hire-search.com Scuba Diving Koh samui *** http://www.scuba-diving-sites.com/scuba-diving/scuba-diving-koh-samui.php
Thanks all