<p>"In most states, you're allowed to have alcohol in a private setting. "</p>
<p>Wrong.</p>
<p>Kayleigh_9109
Be careful at IU, according to a news article the Excise Police made more arrests in Bloomington than in any other county in Indiana!</p>
<p>They frequent liquor stores, grocery stores, bars, and raid many parties.</p>
<p>Thanks, I've heard similar things from friends who graduated last year. That basically IU may be a "party" school but not to go there to party because you end up in jail. That another Indiana school (that happens to be in Muncie) is the one where most people get away with partying.</p>
<p>At least it is in California and New York, even if you're under 21. In NJ you can have alcohol in a private setting (such as at home) if you're with your parents.</p>
<p>What are they gonna do, bust you for having a glass of wine with your dinner, in the privacy of your own home, no less?</p>
<p>Thanks, a dad who knows :) Am I still OK if it's a party where the guys pay to be admitted but the girls don't? What if it's a BYOB party?</p>
<p>I hope this thread is helping other people, too :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
"In most states, you're allowed to have alcohol in a private setting. "</p>
<p>Wrong.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No Hunt, you're wrong. Although it's illegal in some states, in many states it's perfectly legal to serve someone under 21 alcohol in your own private home. A glass of wine with dinner for example. There are multiple aspects to alcohol laws... laws regarding purchasing, laws regarding commercial sale, laws regarding transport/possession and laws regarding consumption. These laws are different in every state including the age one needs to be to perform each of those functions.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Although it's illegal in some states, in many states it's perfectly legal to serve someone under 21 alcohol in your own private home. A glass of wine with dinner for example. There are multiple aspects to alcohol laws... laws regarding purchasing, laws regarding commercial sale, laws regarding transport/possession and laws regarding consumption.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Didn't we just cover this in another thread? I think many people made it clear that each state is different. Maybe Hunt should visit that thread.</p>
<p>
[quote]
MADD's point of view is quite understandable...I and my family have been fortunate enough not to have dealt with drunk driving fatalities, and I certainly do not want to begin now. It is a little irksome, though, to think of being charged with a crime not committed all stemming from an attempt to blow off some steam.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Of course **MADD<a href="Mothers%20Against%20Drunk%20Driving">/i</a> has an understandable position. The problem is that MADD has evolved into *MAD<a href="Mothers%20Against%20Drinking">/b</a> and has become radicalized to the point that they are despised by a lot of people, myself included.</p>
<p>I just can't believe that the government will trust me with a tank or assault rifle and won't trust me with a beer. Frankly states/counties who strictly enforce their alcohol laws do so not only because they are afraid of MAD but also because it is a whole money-making system for them. Lawyers make money from kids trying to get their UAD's or MIP's dismissed, and when kid's can't afford lawyers the local governments get the money in the form of unreasonable fines.</p>
<p>NO it is not OK. When they charge, that changes it from a party to a "Public Nuisance" (IC7.1-5-10-21b)</p>
<p>You could then be charged with Visiting, even if not drinking. Parties that charge are the ones that get busted first. Don't be there.</p>
<p>Cuse0507: Absolutely. They have evolved into such a neo-prohibitionist organization that the original founder even quit as a result.</p>
<p>I respect all the work they did in making drinking and driving taboo, and I respect it a lot. But they go too far now.</p>
<p>I thought kids who can't afford lawyers have to have one appointed by the court. It's in the miranda rights. "......You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford one, one will be appointed to you by the court."</p>
<p>I will modify my simple "wrong" to say that in almost half of the states, possession of alcoholic beverages by minors is prohibited, even in private, and even if your parents give it to you, except for limited religious exceptions. In other states, there are some exceptions, that vary. In some, parents can consent, or it's permitted in private. In some of those states, it's still unlawful for anyone (including parents) to provide minors with alcohols. Some of those exceptions are further limited (i.e., only 3.2 beer, or only minors over 18, etc.). For more info, see <a href="http://www.alcoholpolicy.niaaa.nih.gov/index.asp?SEC=%7BD65EC56D-D907-4A83-A247-063D27196124%7D&Type=&TAXONOMYid=%7B5156EC1F-D2EF-46D5-9A6B-C590C5F2ED9F%7D&GROUP=INDEPTHSINGLEDATE&action=Clear">http://www.alcoholpolicy.niaaa.nih.gov/index.asp?SEC={D65EC56D-D907-4A83-A247-063D27196124}&Type=&TAXONOMYid={5156EC1F-D2EF-46D5-9A6B-C590C5F2ED9F}&GROUP=INDEPTHSINGLEDATE&action=Clear</a></p>
<p>FutureNYStudent - Miranda only applies (in most states) if you're being charged with a felony/serious jail time. Anything that an underage college student would be charged with in terms of alcohol is going to be a misdemenor, and therefore, you don't have the right to a court appointed lawyer.</p>
<p>NOT in Indiana, and actually EVERY state of the US, Miranda vs. Arizona DOES apply!!!</p>
<p>However, it only applies to "CUSTODIAL INTERIGATION." Identifing questions (name age DOB) ARE allowed. Otherwise, if you are being detained and the COP asks you questions before being Mirandized, those answers can be excluded under the "exclusionary rule."</p>
<p>a dad who know - No, you misunderstood what I was saying! I meant that in some states, you are guaranteed a lawyer if being charged with a misdemonor (which is based on state law)...but Miranda only guarantees you a lawyer if being charged with a FELONY. I realize that the the consititution is applicable in all states. ;-)</p>