umm imho <t>The kid was popped for a minor infraction, he will face public humiliation for doing what nearly 90% of all kids his age will be doing...or are doing, right now.<br/> <br/> These old regulations are based in jackassery and prohibition.. Clausen's actions were not sinister... They were, however, illegal and he will pay his debt to society.<br/> <br/> Whereas, a grown ass man took 'news' that took place in June and waited until a few weeks before kickoff to 'break' the newsflash in an attempt to make a name for himself on the national news wires (because he couldn't possibly do it with his own name and talents). The sheer fact that they waited 3 months to 'break' this story tells me all I need to know about this bit of small town gossip.<br/> <br/> Interesting...the actions of two people, one malicious and the other not. Yet one is illegal while the other is worthy of a pat on the back by his comrades. We're a interesting species like that sometimes.</t>
Note to moderators: I hereby nominate Corey's word "jackassery" be entered into the official SkyBox dictionary. 8)
So, Clausen was cited just because he was sitting in the vehicle into which the 23-year old placed the liquor and beer that was legally purchased .... and the other minor was not????? So what happens if the 40 year-old parent stops at a liquor store and picks up beverages and he has his 17-year old son and 13-year old daughter in the car with him? Do they all get cited under this same law? I don't see what Clausen did wrong but the 23-year old should be penalized for buying .... "a case containing 30 cans of Natural Light beer". C'mon, Natural Light??????????????? :shock:
Gaterz it seems like a silly law to me, but apparently in Indiana you can be the driver of a vehicle where the passsenger buys alcohol and be underage as long as the passenger was related to you. So it's ok to drive your mom to the liquor store for smokes and a 1/5 of vodka. Being a passenger is ok. Terry
It's a legitimate law with a legitimate purpose, regardless of what you ultra-liberal commie pinkos like Terry may think. :lol: :lol: I don't look at it like trying to entrap under-21s. I see it as a proactive way to protect the innocent drivers who are the potential victims of the drunk underage drivers. Isn't protection of the innocent basically the intent of all liquor laws? As I mentioned earlier, my son-in-law is an Indiana Excise officer in the Indianapolis area. I talked to him about this incident. He was well aware of it. He also happens to be an avid ND fan and like me was disappointed in Clausen's poor judgement. He pointed out that Clausen's offense is on the lowest rung of the ladder of possible offenses and that it's intended to give normally good young people who make mistakes a chance to learn from those mistakes without having a permanent blot on their record.
Sid, Lets hope he recognizes his mistake and learns from his mistakes. We have had like infractions here in Buckeye Country and some have learned and others have not. Troy Smith is a good example. No college or university is exempt from this type of publicity. Don
Hell Don, I seem to remember a RB that got popped using counterfete bucks in that one strip club (no Terry it wasn't the one we wnt to :wink:
Help me here with the violation .... did Clausen commit a crime because he was simply in the vehicle or because he was the driver?
Because he was the driver. Being an underage passenger is ok. As JO'Co said this whole enterprise was bungled from the start, the last error was Clausen not giving his keys to the 23 y/o to drive to and from the liquor store.
I agree Sid <r>that Clausen's actions are illegal, regardless of how silly or technical the application of prohibition style laws... I never conteded anything different.<br/> <br/> People jaywalk every day too. Some of them walk in front of moving cars. We could play this game forever. I get your point and agree. Clausen is getting what he deserves. I dont agree that his judgment in question...<br/> <br/> Hell, my response to that is... at his age, what judgement does he really have? he just gained a little perspective that's for sure.<br/> <br/> But back to my real point... how about that hack job who sat on a story for 3 months before breaking it just shy of kick off...<br/> <br/> To me, one was not drinking and driving... In fact, you can't even prove he intended to drink... Now THAT is a silly ass law. You busted him for transporting someone who was going to purchase booze...Laws like this gave us the GD Kennedy family!! <E></E><br/> <br/> The other action was intentional and designed to slander character (read the first paragraph of that bitter, nasty article again) while promoting one's personal fame at the alleged 'poor' judgment of a teenage kid.<br/> <br/> That writer can go f*** himself.</r>
Hmmm, that's some law. IMHO there's no way he should be further disciplined for this ridiculous "violation".
Well, Coach Weis has spoken, and it looks like my old school approach to this matter is not the color of the day:
Good for Chuck. I may not agree with his position on cheeseburgers but we agree on this matter. It's a BS law which should not be enforced .... and repealed by the "good folks of Indiana".
Gaterzfan, Total agreement on the repealed ASAP part. There are still laws governing how a horse should be hitched to a wagon in some states. However, until a law is repealed, it must be enforced by law enforcement officials. I most certainly don't want officers of the law picking and chosing what they feel to be the right laws to enforce. The legislative branch of the government is the correct body to determine which laws to pass/repeal and the police whould enforce all laws. Just my opinion.