Ahern to Use Undercover Kids

Shelflife

A problem arises with this sort of action, how often will each particular store/pub be targetted? will all stores/pubs be targetted or only those where there is "previous".

who determines what age bracket will be sent into these premises?

there is a hell of a difference between a 15yr old spotty boy who cycles there and a 17 1/2 year old girl all made up who drives to the premises.

selling to minors is wrong pure and simple, but the whole entrapment idea needs to be clearly thoght out and fairly emplemented.

if one premises is targetted more often then another then that would be unfair, mistakes can happen and the sanctions can be severe.

the principal behind it is fine, the way it is actually carried out could be problematic.

AnonoBoy

I think everyone is missing the important question here:

What theme tune will these Undercover Kids have?

I propose this beauty:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXgIIp29RJ8

round tower huntsman

Prof.Badass wrote: »

http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/0/3988/333362-laughing_elf_large.jpg

^^ mfw poster thinks garda activites have an effect on the availability of drugs.

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D do you think garda activity will have an effect on underage drinking, thats even more of a joke.

starbelgrade

It seems to me that the only good reason for doing this would be to target the problem of underage drinking in our society. However, teenage drinking - if it is indeed as big a problem as we are led to believe (though I suspect that it isn't) - is a societal problem & one that cannot be readily resolved by a Garda led crackdown on licensed premises.

It could be part of a solution, if it were implemented properly, but as a stand alone action, it will have the same impact on reducing the levels of teenage drinking as shutting down the headshops had on reducing the number of people using recreational drugs ie., very little.

For once, I would like to see Mr.Ahern address the issues head on, rather than simply introducing measures that criminalise people & are ultimately a further waste of Garda resources & which puts further pressure on our court & prison systems.

But then again - to expect that any of our politicians do anything that will have a real, positive effect on people's lives, when they spend their lives living in the bubble that is Irish politics - is probably asking a bit too much.

Eoin

Shelflife wrote: »

there is a hell of a difference between a 15yr old spotty boy who cycles there and a 17 1/2 year old girl all made up who drives to the premises.

But they've said that the kids (who will be 15-17) are not allowed say they're over 18, and must say they've no proof of ID if asked. So, unless I've read it wrong, no matter how much make up is caked on, the proprietor just has to insist on ID and they're fine.

enda1

Is it not entrapment though?
Committing a crime in an attempt to have the other party commit a crime with which to charge them by?

starbelgrade

enda1 wrote: »

Is it not extortion though?
Committing a crime in an attempt to have the other party commit a crime with which to charge them by?

Extortion is when a person unlawfully obtains money, property or services from a person, entity, or institution, through coercion.

I think you mean entrapment. However an act can only be considered entrapment if a person is not ready and willing to break the law in the first instance, but is then coerced into doing so.

So, for example - if an undercover teenager tries to buy booze & is served, there is no issue of entrapment as the seller has willingly broken the law. However, if the teenager coerces the seller by - for example, using a false ID - then there is a case for claiming entrapment.

Either way, I can see it opening up a whole new - and totally unessecary - legal minefield.

Pace2008

enda1 wrote: »

Is it not extortion though?
Committing a crime in an attempt to have the other party commit a crime with which to charge them by?

I think you mean entrapment?

My rudimentary (and possibly fallacious) understanding of the law is that it's only entrapment if the perpetrator is in some way coerced into committing the crime.

Eg. If an undercover policeman gives someone an ounce of cocaine and asks them to sell it off, then another undercover policeman asks to buy coke off the dealer, that is entrapment. But if they simply go up to someone they believe is dealing and buy the drugs off them, that is legitimate.

/baseless speculation

Dravokivich

Sanjuro wrote: »

Me thinks Mr. Aherne has been watching too much 21 Jump Street. Idiot.

Actually... there's been a child awareness group doing this for years... looks like they put forward their results to the Government and now they are checking it out...

I remember seeing job offers on jobs.ie and thinking... fúck i'm too old for this...

enda1

Pace2008 wrote: »

I think you mean entrapment?

My rudimentary (and possible fallacious) understanding of the law is that it's only entrapment if the perpatrator is in some way coerced into committing the crime.

Eg. If and undercover policeman gives someone an ounce of cocaine and asks them to sell it off, then another undercover policeman asks to buy coke off the dealer, that is entrapment. But if they simply go up to someone they believe is dealing and buy the drugs off them, that is legitimate.

/baseless speculation

Opps, yes entrapment

Maybe you're "baseless speculation" is right.
Anyone else know?

AnonoBoy

Pace2008 wrote: »

I think you mean entrapment?

My rudimentary (and possible fallacious) understanding of the law is that it's only entrapment if the perpatrator is in some way coerced into committing the crime.

Eg. If and undercover policeman gives someone an ounce of cocaine and asks them to sell it off, then another undercover policeman asks to buy coke off the dealer, that is entrapment. But if they simply go up to someone they believe is dealing and buy the drugs off them, that is legitimate.

/baseless speculation

So the teenagers will be selling this coke for Mr Ahern where exactly?

mikemac

This always went on.

The only difference now is a garda will observe the teenager attempting to buy the alcohol.
The garda will then testify in court.
The benefit here is that you don't have teenagers having to go to court to testify, they are spared from that.

There is nothing illegal about this, it's been tested in the High Court. And Dermot Ahern and the Garda Commissioner know what they are doing.
On Matt Cooper, the Union of Students of Ireland and the representative body for newsagents (over 3 thousands members) welcomed it.

Prime Time named and shamed off licences in Swords on national TV for selling to underagers and there was no issue on it.

Realy, it's just making something that already exists more efficent.

A lot of you shouting entrapment are watching too much American television

enda1

feelingstressed wrote: »

A lot of you shouting entrapment are watching too much American television

I was not shouting entrapment.
I asked a question.

mikemac

Did I refer to you? I would have quoted you if so

More the six pages before you, don't get defensive

monkeypants

How much are the "kids" getting paid for it?

I must say that I have no objection to it in principle. It's a lot better than some of his other recent work, such as the blasphemy law and the proposal to charge law abiding people to access their money because others want to get theirs through kidnap and robbery.

Stompbox

starbelgrade wrote: »

So is the death penalty.


(Waits for "how can you compare this to the death penalty?" replies, while smiling wryly!)

The death practice is not standard practice in the US. It happens yes but it's not how most cases are eventually resolved. What's the issue here?

Stompbox

Pace2008 wrote: »

I think you mean entrapment?

My rudimentary (and possible fallacious) understanding of the law is that it's only entrapment if the perpatrator is in some way coerced into committing the crime.

Eg. If an undercover policeman gives someone an ounce of cocaine and asks them to sell it off, then another undercover policeman asks to buy coke off the dealer, that is entrapment. But if they simply go up to someone they believe is dealing and buy the drugs off them, that is legitimate.

/baseless speculation

Correct. I think there's something like three rules of entrapment, one being that the authority cannot implant the idea of the law-breaking into the offender's mind, not sure what the other ones are.

Pace2008

monkeypants wrote: »

How much are the "kids" getting paid for it?

I must say that I have no objection to it in principle. It's a lot better than some of his other recent work, such as the blasphemy law and the proposal to charge law abiding people to access their money because others want to get theirs through kidnap and robbery.

When I was about 16, a few of my mates were caught with weed on them. The cops let them off on condition that they did a sting on the small-time dealer who'd sold the wares.

Maybe they'd implement something similar here, thought to be honest, I don't know if that kind of thing is really by the book.

AnonoBoy

monkeypants wrote: »

How much are the "kids" getting paid for it?

They're volunteers I think.

Pace2008

AnonoBoy wrote: »

They're volunteers I think.

I'd say they party hard.

dardevle

.....

as a parent i have to say i'm not sold on this idea at all...while i acknowledge the problem of underage drinking, the chances of me allowing any of my kids to "volunteer" for a sting operation like this are ZERO!
just wondering how other parents feel about this?


......

flash1080

Owwmykneecap wrote: »

Volunteer or not it is using kids.

You mean forcing. and I referenced the coercion of small time crims in my post about rachel hoffman.

If a 16 year old got some pub closed down, destroyed a business and all that goes with it, (perhaps even end a marriage!)

You don't think that some mad **** out there might resent that?

Nah they'll be "it's a fair cop gov'ner." ...


Being the guy who got a pub closed down could haunt a person for years, regardless of the legality of it, people don't forget scabs and they don't forget rats.

That's a lot to potentially put on a 15 year old's shoulders.



Whatever about using adults, old enough legally and hopefully mentally to account for their decisions using children strikes me as low.

Imagine how embarrassing it would be for the person who broke the law by selling alcohol to children, and destroyed either their own or their employers business.

monkeypants

AnonoBoy wrote: »

They're volunteers I think.

So what's in it for them?

dardevle

.....

^^^^^

quote:
"participation in test purchasing operations does not constitute employment and, accordingly does not attract any remuneration. however, necessary expenses arising from the test purchaser's involvement in a test purchase operation may be paid by the Garda Siochana"



....

AnonoBoy

monkeypants wrote: »

So what's in it for them?

I dunno.

Pride?

Free training to be narcs?

Wertz

Can't see the problem with this myself. Ahern is still a divv though.

It would probably be a lot more effective if these kids stood around outside and asked passers by would they buy them drink since this is as much if not more a problem than kids going into offies themselves.
Probably be entrapment though.

There is a huge problem with underage drinking in this area. Heroin is a problem too, but nowhere near this scale and not within the same age groups. Alcohol is the real gateway drug, despite what the anti-drug bodies would have you believe...tackling kids drinking may well reduce the numbers of people progressing on to heroin later on, nevermind the heakth implications.

Celly Smunt

monkeypants wrote: »

So what's in it for them?

they get to keep the beer

monkeypants

AnonoBoy wrote: »

I dunno.

Pride?

Free training to be narcs?

Nothing good I'm sure. Who'd trust you with anything ever again? Also, what'll the other kids do when you help shut down their alcohol supply?

Sounds like a lot of risk for no reward.

colly10

starbelgrade wrote: »

For once, I would like to see Mr.Ahern address the issues head on, rather than simply introducing measures that criminalise people & are ultimately a further waste of Garda resources & which puts further pressure on our court & prison systems.

But then again - to expect that any of our politicians do anything that will have a real, positive effect on people's lives, when they spend their lives living in the bubble that is Irish politics - is probably asking a bit too much.

What would you suggest they do to tackle these issues "head on"?

Snowie

whast he playing on paying them with orieos and gummy bears ?