1,900 fined in blitz on bingeing

Alan Travis, Friday August 6, 2004, The Guardian

Nearly 1,900 drunken troublemakers have been handed on-the-spot
fines as a result of the first half of the government's
two-month summer crackdown on binge drinking, the Home Office
said yesterday.

Police have also carried out "sting" operations against 646 off
licences, bars and clubs for selling alcohol to underage
teenagers, and have confiscated alcohol from more than 4,000
adults and juveniles in "designated areas".

The home secretary, David Blunkett, said the figures showed that
the coordinated police blitz was delivering results in tackling
underage and binge drinking.

Home Office figures show police visited 14,150 licensed premises
during the first four weeks of the campaign and 5% of them were
found to have committed an offence, including selling alcohol to
under-18s. The "sting" operations, which used teenagers of 13
and 14 to attempt to buy alcoholic drinks, found 51% of the pubs
that were targeted and 29% of the off licenses were prepared to
sell drink to children.

The 1,869 fixed penalty notices issued by police during the
blitz included 794 for harassment, 786 for being drunk and
disorderly, and 289 for other offences.

The British Beer and Pub Association's spokesman, Mark Hastings,
said: "We fully support the Home Office enforcement campaign.
However, the overwhelming evidence is that the vast majority of
the 60,000 pubs in the UK are law-abiding businesses."

1,900 fined in blitz on bingeing

Alan Travis, Friday August 6, 2004, The Guardian

<http://society.guardian.co.uk/drugsandalcohol/story/0,8150,1277261,00.html>

1,900 fined in blitz on bingeing

Alan Travis, Friday August 6, 2004, The Guardian

<http://society.guardian.co.uk/drugsandalcohol/story/0,8150,1277261,00.html>

Zenobia wrote:

> The "sting" operations, which used teenagers of 13
> and 14 to attempt to buy alcoholic drinks,

I thought entrapment was illegal in the UK? Or do they simply use it as
a warning?

Cheers
Ric

Zenobia wrote:

> The "sting" operations, which used teenagers of 13
> and 14 to attempt to buy alcoholic drinks,

I thought entrapment was illegal in the UK? Or do they simply use it as
a warning?

Cheers
Ric

On Fri, 06 Aug 2004 15:13:48 GMT, Ric >
wrote:

>Zenobia wrote:
>
>> The "sting" operations, which used teenagers of 13
>> and 14 to attempt to buy alcoholic drinks,
>
>I thought entrapment was illegal in the UK? Or do they simply use it as
>a warning?
>
>Cheers
>Ric

I think talking someone into committing a crime by offering
inducements or by engaging them in a conspiracy is what is
illegal. This is often called entrapment. Walking into a shop
and buying booze is not entrapment, as such.

On Fri, 06 Aug 2004 15:13:48 GMT, Ric >
wrote:

>Zenobia wrote:
>
>> The "sting" operations, which used teenagers of 13
>> and 14 to attempt to buy alcoholic drinks,
>
>I thought entrapment was illegal in the UK? Or do they simply use it as
>a warning?
>
>Cheers
>Ric

I think talking someone into committing a crime by offering
inducements or by engaging them in a conspiracy is what is
illegal. This is often called entrapment. Walking into a shop
and buying booze is not entrapment, as such.

Zenobia > wrote in message >. ..
> On Fri, 06 Aug 2004 15:13:48 GMT, Ric >
> wrote:
>
> >Zenobia wrote:
> >
> >> The "sting" operations, which used teenagers of 13
> >> and 14 to attempt to buy alcoholic drinks,
> >
> >I thought entrapment was illegal in the UK? Or do they simply use it as
> >a warning?
> >
> >Cheers
> >Ric
>
> I think talking someone into committing a crime by offering
> inducements or by engaging them in a conspiracy is what is
> illegal. This is often called entrapment. Walking into a shop
> and buying booze is not entrapment, as such.

Yes, it's not intrapment because the onus on determining age rests
with the vendor in cases of products where legality is dependent upon
age.

the 'decoys' are instructed to give their correct age if challenged.