A
anon_0k9zlfz6lz9oy
Guest
anyone who disagrees with the OP is just a ****** person. The cops have been HORRID for yearsssss in the blue lot.
BLUE LOT DRINKING TICKET
- Thread starter SF88
- Start date
The way it was envisioned was like this.
Let the students have their fun at the Alley. About 40 minutes before game time the band would march over there and then march back with them. At the same time the Alley would be closed, no choice of staying, this way there weren't students partying during the game.
It was hoping to solve the issue of getting the students into the stadium on time and shut down some tailgating that went on during the game.
As you stated it all fell apart after the Alley was shut down. Oh well
I had a suggestion as to the why earlier in the thread about that and maybe why we see less Rutgers in the actual Lots too.
This is like we when we vote on our proxy statements for executive compensation in the Spring for our portfolios...just an “advisory” position, doesn’t mean they have to act on no matter how good some of the ideas are.
Not saying you didn't hear it, but it sounds ridiculous. If they needed to write tix, you'd think the other cops standing around would write some on those kids on the way to the scarlet walk.
I was on the FAB #1. It was a focus group for Julie's dumb ideas. The first meeting was to tell us why parking is the best it could be. The second meeting was to get students into the games. Cops were brought up both times. The response I recall is "we have to have a huge police force there". The third was to get more fan support for the Wbb team. I honestly forget what the fourth one was about, maybe marketing to NJ. Nothing of substance implemented. Mostly just "we can't do that because". Simple things like show the coaches press conference on the Jumbotron to delay people all leaving at once were ignored.
The libertarian in me says if people are peacefully congregating and not in distress and not bothering anyone else leave them alone. If RU cares about fans' game day experience they need to address this issue. Most European countries have 18 for a the legal drinking age and they seem fine, Germany is 16 for beer and wine. Maybe they should use NJSP.
I saw the bit about why less RU cops. And maybe that's true. But I missed where anybody suggested why we need quite so many, overall.
Well as @RUJohnny99 was informed at the meetings....”Because we said so.”
Those in charge feel they know better than you and the rest of us....on almost everything.
Doesn't matter if you're in Blue: you never go to the games!
Completely agree. They need to hear about this from multiple sources.
I thought he was stretching to the point that that 19 year old girl would become a concentration camp guard or something like that.
I've heard recently that it's tough sledding to get anything accomplished.
Yep, I've heard the same about a number of venues in the Midwest, Texas and CA.
Count me in too!
I LOVE this idea! But the Alley NEEDS to come back to life. The students LOVED it and it was picking up so much buzz across even non-students.
The student groups need to get together to make an "unoffical" alley happen. A student group organizes it by getting the space and the AD has nothing to do with it. They would be subject to all the policing that all other tailgaters deal with, but they just happen to find an empty lot that RU does not issue parking passes for on Busch
Or the athletic dept hosts one that is only 21+ but makes it such an attraction that it still draws a crowd and students look forward to being 21 to join (like they wait and still go to the bars today). They hire a DJ, they make it festive, they check IDs and wrist band on the way in. But they make it fun, how the students want it. A big DJ booth, pong tables, open space, etc. Maybe even hire some artists for a game or two a year.
I checked the statute. An underage person can consume alcoholic beverages under supervision of a parent on property owned, leased, or managed by the parent. So that applies to homes, but also to hotel rooms (which are leased), or campsites (which are also leased).
I would guess that a good argument can be made that the tailgate site is also leased and managed by the parent. Unlike a public park, where you can sit down on a bench next to me, you can't just walk into my tailgate site and sit down in a chair. My tailgate site is a small piece of property that I lease from Rutgers for my exclusive use for the specific purpose of tailgating.
If the parent in the OP challenged the ticket, I don't know if they'd win, but based on my reading of the statute, they certainly could present a good argument.
Morris, I respectfully disagree with you on the Hobbs being able to provide guidance other than promoting strict enforcement of the laws governing underage drinking. Were Hobbs to issue such instructions I am not even sure they would be binding on the LEO's. Secondly if serious injury or death were to occur after the university requested a relaxation of enforcement, the university's liability in the matter greatly increases. Hobbs' job is to protect the school and he cannot issue any guidelines to the contrary.
That being said, I agree the policing is ridiculous but I do not think Hobbs has the power to relax it.
The problem was that it was too successful. I think they envisioned somewhere in the vicinity of 400-800 students: instead, they got thousands.
So if they card and make it a 21+ only event, that would significantly damper the attendance and it would remove the potential media storm for liability
he could "relax it" by lessening the number of LEO's in attendance, or, as previously stated, just get rid of the one offending MCSD officer.
I expect that in many ways, they do know better than us. But that doesn't mean they should totally ignore situations that run counter to their building a larger fan base. I suspect I'm preaching to the converted and that you already agree with that.
Both seem reasonable, so hopefully we eventually accomplish both.
If I were the school, I'd have additional LEO from the region on call in case of an emergency. But I wouldn't have so many patrolling and disrupting family tailgates.
Letter of the law versus spirit of the law debate. I bet I can find the no fun do as I say parents in this thread easily. Probabaly the big government is ok crowd too.
We should raise money next year and distribute 5,000 red solo cups and just create interference. Let the overzealous cops try and check 5,000 hilarious Empty leads.
We should raise money next year and distribute 5,000 red solo cups and just create interference. Let the overzealous cops try and check 5,000 hilarious Empty leads.
That is on the mother to answer, not me. I don't know what her intent was, but I doubt it was making her daughter drunk.
Just because something is the law does not make it sensible or just or a good use of money.
I cannot believe anyone is defending the cop here. How can anyone in 2017 in this country be opposed to a 19 year old have a beer with their parents?!?!
This is why things in NJ are they way they are. We literally have public employees serving no purpose but revenue generation and they generate revenues through harassment.
The MCSD needs to go from game day. Not that it needs to be bedlam but getting rid of them would not seem to make it less safe. Unless there is some law or insurance policy barring it that should be what the admin does.
This is why things in NJ are they way they are. We literally have public employees serving no purpose but revenue generation and they generate revenues through harassment.
The MCSD needs to go from game day. Not that it needs to be bedlam but getting rid of them would not seem to make it less safe. Unless there is some law or insurance policy barring it that should be what the admin does.
There already is a spot, right next to it that could hold those types of crowds.
Some blame has to go to the parents for not planning ahead. Buy a large DD or WAWA coffee on the way to the game. Consume the coffee. Clean out the cup with some water. Pour in beer and replace lid. Unless the child was visibly intoxicated the police would have a difficult time coming up with an articulable suspicion to warrant an examination of the cup.
Exactly. Using discretion when bending the rules or looking the other way only invites the potential for trouble. That's been a main point of my contention. Instead of making everyone follow the law, the police are now supposed to pick and choose their intended targets based on the demeanor of the underage drinkers or who they are with? One, isn't that profiling? And two, allowing some underage drinkers to continue does not guarantee how that underage drinker will react and what they will do at a later point in time. That sounds like a legal nightmare and another black eye for Rutgers. It's simple. Follow the law, and you don't risk getting yourself (or your kid) in trouble.
Following the terrorist attacks of 2001, there was a large increase in the number of LEO's at our games and tailgating areas.
It seems that those high numbers are still in place. There are hundreds of LEO's there from several agencies.
However, whenever one of these issues happen, it always seems to involve the MCSD.
I wonder why that is?
It seems that those high numbers are still in place. There are hundreds of LEO's there from several agencies.
However, whenever one of these issues happen, it always seems to involve the MCSD.
I wonder why that is?
Would you card this man?
Jeez, he looks like Roy Orbison...
Seven pages on allowing or not allowing underage drinking at a tailgate...it must be the off season.
It's a conspiracy, I tell ya!However, whenever one of these issues happen, it always seems to involve the MCSD.
I wonder why that is?
They do that all the time.
Ever drive on the Turnpike?
Ever get stopped and ticketed for going 66 mph?
Why not?
Because everyone is going faster than 65. Everyone is breaking the law. So the state police set an enforcement threshold to pick off those who are most flagrantly - or dangerously - violating the law. On the NJTP you typically won't get stopped for going anything under 80.
Of course,
But you and I and our establishment was serving the booze. The difference is people bring their own booze. When we would go to concerts years ago, the police weren't so crazy trying to write up every under age drinker. If you were tailgating and had your beer in a cup, the cops usually didn't bother you unless you were acting up. Not sure why police need to harass and id all the kids who are behaving.
I, for one, felt infinitely safer knowing that such a vile and despicable criminal was put to justice on Saturday. With that being said, I felt a night in Rahway would have been a better deterrent than a simple ticket & court date for such an injustice. Let's hope the MCSD stops getting soft on these hardened criminals over the coming months.
Following the terrorist attacks of 2001, there was a large increase in the number of LEO's at our games and tailgating areas.
It seems that those high numbers are still in place. There are hundreds of LEO's there from several agencies.
However, whenever one of these issues happen, it always seems to involve the MCSD.
I wonder why that is?
not only are they still in place but we have no les than 3 bomb sniffing dogs at each game.
---
it is easy to defend the policeman because he is enforcing a law.... if we don't like it, change the law......someone posted it was ok to drink with a parent in their home, and certain other places....the law should be amended to include situations such as this.
changing the law removes the responsibility the policeman feels upon viewing a law breaking drinker..... I would bet that the cops would like to see a change.
I can't address the MCSD because I'm neither a big time tailgater nor had any interaction with them over these many years. From what I read here they seem to have cornered the market in overzealous jerks.
You have to look at this in the big picture but lets get this out of the way first. Parental approval means squat. It isn't worth the time it takes to give it. Right or wrong, the law is the law.
I understand RU's point. Just like what happened with the Alley, they can't be seen to condone it by doing nothing. All it takes is one incident to screw it for everyone including those of legal age. By having the police checking ID's they show they are performing their due diligence. They have what I guess would be call plausible deniability.
Would it be great if the cops simply made the young person give the drink up and leave with a warning? Of course it would. Should someone have to pay a ridiculous fine for getting caught? No they shouldn't. The problem is no one is going to chance being called complacent if anything bad happens. It's simply the way of this law suit crazy world we and Rutgers live in.
I'm okay with the bomb sniffing dogs and any FBI or homeland security presence. I suspect we pretty much all are okay with that.not only are they still in place but we have no les than 3 bomb sniffing dogs at each game.
Drug sniffing dogs could be a problem though. LOL
True story - most of those dogs are basic K9 trained. The cops tell people they're bomb dogs or drug dogs or whatever but mostly what they're trained to do is give an "alert response" based on a subtle signal from the handler. That allows them to say "The dog just alerted on your car, here. We're gonna have to look inside."
Of course it's the law and it won't change barring something totally unforeseen- NJ wants that highway money, though I'd be curious to know how the revenue would stack up if we changed to 18.
That said, the cops don't pull over everyone going over the limit, or every tinted window they see, for example. They dedicate resources to the more severe problems. Having these guys here is just a bad use of that discretion.