Senator Russell Olson (R-8/Wentworth) enjoyed his beer in his youth. he evidently doesn't want to make it any harder for today's kids to party with a few cold ones, either. A couple weeks ago, he voted with his fellow GOP leaders to kill Senate Bill 94, which would have made it a Class 1 misdemeanor to host a party where kids drink alcohol. Hosting a beer party for 18–20-year-olds would have been a less serious Class 2 misdemeanor.
This morning, Senator Olson gets another chance to fight for your right to paaaa-arty: SB 94 prime sponsor and State Affairs committee member Sen. Larry Lucas (D-26/Mission) brings Senate Bill 225, which does pretty much the same thing as SB 94. The language of SB 225 is shorter and more straightforward:
Section 1. ...Any person who keeps or maintains a place which is resorted to by persons under the ages of eighteen to illegally consume any alcoholic beverage is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.
Section 2. ...Any person who keeps or maintains a place which is resorted to by persons between the ages of eighteen to twenty to illegally consume any alcoholic beverage is guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor.
That's tougher than SB 94, which aimed penalties at folks who act as "social hosts"—i.e., the folks who open the door and say "Party here!" SB 225 appears to impose liability on any property owner where a party happens, whether or not the owner played any role in making that party happen. If you're a farmer, and your land includes a slough out in the CRP acres, and those darn kids sneak out there for the senior kegger, SB 225 nails you.
That may sound harsh, but social host laws appear to work. States that penalize adults for facilitating youth drinking also have less drunk-driving and heavy drinking.
Science and restrictions on alcohol: Senator Olson hates that! Senator Olson wouldn't vote for SB 94; he won't vote this morning for SB 225. Party on, kids! Russ has your back!
I agree that South Dakota needs to get tougher on this issue, but I'm not sure how to word it properly. I've heard of where a 20 year old is hosting the part where people are under 21 and gets into trouble because of it. Also situations where the parents are gone, out of town, etc. Those are situations that I'm not a fan of. But at the same time I see it way too often where the parents are buying the beer and then letting them drink, and then not giving a damn when they drive home. So I agree with you that a tougher law needs to be passed, I'm just not sure if this is the right one, or what the wording should be on the right one.
Joe, I'm not sure you get better wording than SB225. You're responsible for making sure your property isn't use for illegal active activity. If you can't keep kids from resorting to your property to throw a beer party, you're not taking proper care of your property or the kids whom that illegal activity threatens.
But as expected, Russ and the GOP leadership put easy beer for kids above responsibility. SB 225 died in committee this morning, vote 6 to 3. http://legis.state.sd.us/sessions/2013/RollCall.aspx?Vote=904
" If you're a farmer, and your land includes a slough out in the CRP acres, and those darn kids sneak out there for the senior kegger, SB 225 nails you."
This is just crazy. Holding someone responsible for something that you have no knowledge of in the first place. Boooo bad bill.
I've always thought that a social drinking class would have much more effect then all the laws on the books. Remember that these kids are products of generations of people that have done the same thing, party. Yes I have read the statistics and have come to this conclusion. The rate of consumption has dropped because the kids are playing video games, getting fatter, staying home and not socializing, becoming more and more unable to communicate with anyone other then those like themselves. These are the same kids that don't understand real life and the consequences of their actions.
I laugh every time I see people try to tell everyone that there is a problem like it never existed before. And yes I know some of these people and they were some of the worst partiers in their generation. Read this very carefully. I know who you are and I know what you did when you where young.
Now I'm not saying that there isn't a problem, there is. what I am saying is that there are already laws that deal with these problems. Closing loopholes will only have unintended circumstances.
The Blindman
http://grooveshark.com/s/Teach+Your+Children/30yivF?src=5
http://www.salon.com/2013/02/04/can_magic_mushrooms_help_cancer_patients_partner/