IBJNews

Inspections find fewer Indiana underage alcohol sales

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

State inspections have found fewer of Indiana's bars, restaurants and liquor stores selling alcohol to underage Hoosiers.

That improvement followed adoption of a much-ridiculed law requiring all carry-out alcohol customers — regardless of age — to show identification that has since been loosened up by state legislators.

State Excise Police reported that officers conducted more than 5,000 inspections from Jan. 1 through June 30 during which people ages 18 to 20 accompany officers and try to buy alcohol. The agency found violations by 8.8 percent of bars and restaurants and 4.3 percent of liquor stores — down from more than 40 percent in 2009.

Excise Police Officer Travis Thickstun said that the tougher ID requirements and a law mandating certified serving training helped improve compliance.

"I think we've got a couple things going on here at the same time," Thickstun told The Journal Gazette.

The inspection program began in 2007 and in the second half of 2009, and establishments that served to the minors with the officers began receiving fines and citations.

Thickstun said business owners are getting the message about not serving to minors after being hit with citations and fines. He also credited a 2010 law requiring the server classes, which last about two hours and cover not giving more drinks to someone who is intoxicated, how to spot fake IDs and the basic alcohol laws in the state.

Thickstun said the law requiring IDs from all carry-out customers probably also helped with the decline in citations.

Legislators this spring overwhelmingly approved revising the law to no longer require store clerks to card customers who reasonably appear older than 40. That law took effect July 1.

The previous law came into effect in July 2010 and drew complaints from senior citizens and others who said it made no sense.

Liquor store owners supported the stricter ID law, saying it wasn't that inconvenient and that it had led to a drastic drop in attempts by minors to buy alcohol because they knew clerks had to card all customers.

This year's state inspections have found violations at 2 percent of grocery stores, down from 22.6 percent in 2009. Violations this year have been 2.6 percent of private clubs, down from 11.5 percent.

The only category of establishment to see an increase was hotels: 27 percent failed inspections in 2011, compared with 26 percent two years ago.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • UNDERAGE DRINKING
    Just because they are buying it doesn't mean parent's aren't providing it to them. This is a HUGE problem! Who's going to crack down on thisi problem?

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT