Sting the main source of youth accessed alcohol
Pub Date: 9/1/2005
By Mark Staples
MTA Attorney/Lobbyist
Across the State of Montana, adult beverage retailers have been "stung" by operations seeking to evidence sales to minors.
Although many jurisdictions are logging compliance (where minors are turned away) rates of 70, 80 and even 90 percent or more of the retailers checked, others still have a ways, or even a long ways, to go.
But retailers are in fact dealing with the issue, taking responsibility, trying to improve, training servers and firing bad ones, adding new age-checking technologies and policies. This is especially true of on-premise licensees, whose compliance record is lately generally outstanding, but is often brought down in news reports by being lumped together with the compliance record of off-premise stores, which is not as good as the on-premise percentages, but is also improving with a real emphasis by their owner/managers.
Meanwhile, we have to ask… why is all this money, time and attention being focused almost solely on the retail sector? Two recent studies suggest this emphasis is misplaced and a poor application of resources.
In one study, conducted by the Century Council, of the minors who did drink within the last 30 days (19 percent), only 7 percent (that' 7 percent of 19 percent, or 1.33 percent of the 1,000 minors polled) got their alcohol from a store or bar that did not check their ID.
Meanwhile, of the 19 percent of minors who drank within the last 30 days, 65 percent said they got the alcohol from an of-age family member or friend.
Critics might argue that the Century Council, financed by America' leading distillers, is inclined to see things in a slanted light. But, not only has the Century Council earned a reputation for straight shooting (even to the point of squaring off with the retail sector over .08 and other issues), but their survey is substantially confirmed by an even more recent study by--yes, you're reading this right--the American Medical Association (AMA), which has no affinity for the alcohol industry and has repeatedly denounced what it believes is the industry' marketing to minors.
On August 8 of this year, the AMA released the results of two polls "that reveal how underage youth obtain alcohol, as well as how easily and how often."
Their "disturbing findings" show that "policies and law enforcement efforts to stop minors from obtaining alcohol are important, but this data reveals how easily avoided those policies and laws are when legal-aged buyers are the leading source of alcohol for children."
The study demonstrated that 76 percent of parents with children 12-20 years old "think it is likely that teenagers get alcohol from someone' parent--and they knew about it," according to the AMA press release, which also reports "that within the last six months, "27 percent of teens attended a party where youth were drinking with parents present," and "21 percent attended parties where the alcohol was provided by someone else' parents."
J. Edward Hill, MD, President of the AMA, concludes, "While it is of great concern to see how easily teens, especially young girls, get alcohol, it is alarming to know that legal-age adults, even parents, are supplying the alcohol."
So what are we doing in Montana? During that last year, Butte police have conducted three waves of retail sales compliance checks. They recently secured a second grant of $18,269 to "extend the program" another year. According to the Montana Standard, the "program has, so far, consisted of minors, recruited by police, attempting to buy alcohol" and "uniformed officers have also walked through bars checking patron' IDs." Sheriff John Walsh, again according to the Standard, says "… if everyone would check IDs, we would reduce underage drinking to almost zero."
And this story repeats itself statewide, with grants--and retail stings--proliferating, while rational minds have to ask, "what' wrong with this picture?"
The retail sector is not asking to be allowed to shirk its responsibilities to curb underage drinking. Far from it. Nor are they asking that the "stings" be stopped. Butte' Sheriff, Walsh is a very good, fair man, and a fine, balanced peace officer, as are his counterparts across Montana. But, with all due respect to them and others supporting these stings, the time has come, as Sheriff Walsh is reported to acknowledge, to place emphasis on "diversifying the program."
Given what the surveys have confirmed, we do indeed need to "diversify" these efforts and place more resources on "stinging" adults who buy alcohol or otherwise provide alcohol for minors, while making penalties for doing so enough to discourage the practice. Also, the penalty for a minor' purchasing--or trying to purchase--alcohol must be such that he or she has as much to lose as the seller does.
Retailers accept being part of the focus on minors' alcohol use, but resent being singled out, particularly in light of studies that confirm what we've long known: retailers are not the crux of the problem.
Yes, retailers should check IDs--without fail--and are willing to and do pay the price if they don't. But when nearly 100 percent of the resources are spent on a small fraction of the problem, that skewed approach may well be the problem.
Source: The Montana Tavern Times, Sept, 2005, published monthly by Continental Communications, 125 W. Granite St., Suite 102, Butte, MT 59701.