Comments on: State Liquor Commission Conducts Sting in Norwalk & Stamford

By: Driven to Drink | Car Insurance For Young Drivers Nevada

Driven to Drink | Car Insurance For Young Drivers Nevada — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 09:33:11 +0000

[...] State Liquor Commission Conducts Sting in Norwalk & Stamford … [...]

By: Driven to Drink | Budget Car Insurance Tampa

Driven to Drink | Budget Car Insurance Tampa — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 04:14:12 +0000

[...] State Liquor Commission Conducts Sting in Norwalk & Stamford … [...]

By: John

John — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 13:58:22 +0000

I have no problem with the concept. My concern is the cost. Do the fines imposed by the Liquor authority reimburse the cost of police? Are these officers pulled away from their regular duties? Is this an overtime cost to the city?

By: Absolutely Correct

Absolutely Correct — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 01:43:13 +0000

This isn’t the first time minors have volunteered to work with the NPD. They’ve done these type of “stings” many times before. I hardly see what the big deal is. If they are minors, the NPD would have to have permission from their parents for the young people to participate anyway, and if their parents agree with it, then what’s the beef?

By: John Suchy

John Suchy — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 02:57:20 +0000

John:
In order for the liquor control agents to conduct compliance checks with minors, the presence of law enforcement officers is required by state statute. If not for the presence of law enforcement officers, in this instance Norwalk police officers, it would be unlawful for the minors to possess the alcoholic liquor which they purchase. After the purchase is made, the alcoholic liquor is turned over to the agent and is held as evidence. The role of the police officers is critical for the proper conducting of such compliance checks. I hope this helps to clarify this apparent misunderstanding. To learn more about the Liquor Control Division and the Liquor Control Commission, I invite you to visit our website at http://www.ct.gov/dcp .
John Suchy-Division Director of Liquor Control

By: John

John — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 21:22:57 +0000

Notice that no one was arrested, and that they face administrative action from the State Liquor Commission. The Liquor Commission can do these types of inspections without a police presence, since the Police did not arrest anyone nor write tickets. Could they have been out fighting drug dealers instead of standing next to Liquor Commissioners doing their job. I will bet these were overtime assignments where the taxpayers paid the cops to do nothing.

By: Observer

Observer — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 15:53:23 +0000

I’m curious to know what John thinks the police should have been doing, if not enforcing the drinking age laws? Isn’t that part of a cop’s job, to enforce the existing laws whatever they may be?

By: Kurm Udgeon

Kurm Udgeon — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 15:15:45 +0000

John is right. Why waste time paying our law enforcement folks to enforce the laws. Let’s just allow our kids to buy alcohol from any store, at any time, with no enforcement of age rules. That way we can leave our crack law enforcement folks to clean up the drug problems, write traffic tickets, solve our murders, give tickets to store owners and home owners who don’t shovel snow or remove garbage from their properties, crack down on folks who talk on the phone while driving, and so many other jobs which they have done so well in the recent past. Let those kids drink, because it should keep them from doing anything illegal, like driving while intoxicated. I wonder which of those places john owns, or was he lucky enough to not get caught.

By: John

John — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 13:32:30 +0000

What a complete waste of police manpower. Any way to find out if this cost the City overtime?

By: Norwalker

Norwalker — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 02:09:20 +0000

And Trffy’s friends from Fountainhead (you know Fat Cat?).