patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Police Bust 13 Businesses for Selling Alcohol to Minors

Stores in Odenton, Severn and Gambrills were among those that could face fines following a two-month investigation.

 

Stores in Odenton, Severn and Gambrills have been identified as having sold alcohol to minors, following a crackdown by Anne Arundel County police. 

Police say they have identified a total of 13 businesses following a two-month operation intended to reduce the number of businesses that are non-compliant with alcohol sales laws.

Police used minors to attempt to purchase alcohol at 47 businesses in the county, 34 of which properly asked to see identification and refused to make the sales.

Included on the list are the Hops and Vines store in Piney Orchard, the Wine Box on Annapolis Road, both the store and bar known as The Place, on Telegraph Road. 

Ye Old Farm Spirits in Severn and Village Wine and Spirits in Gambrills also made the list. 

According to police, the following businesses allegedly did sell alcohol to minors:

  • The Place Liquor Store, Odenton
  • The Place, Odenton
  • Hops and Vines, Odenton
  • The Wine Box, Odenton
  • Ye Olde Farm Spirits, Severn
  • Village Wine and Spirits, Gambrills
  • Arundel Mills Wine and Spirits, Hanover
  • Turner Liquors, Pasadena
  • Frank's Den, Glen Burnie
  • John's General Store, Pasadena
  • Northway Liquors, Millersville
  • Staples Corner Liquors, Crofton
  • Jackie's Liquors, Maryland City

Police are following up on alleged violators, and the 13 businesses could face fines or even closure.

In addition to the business sales, officers increased surveillance in the parking lots of the businesses, resulting in several arrests for alcohol possession offenses, drug offenses and warrants.

Operation Selective Alcohol Violation Enforcement (SAVE) was funded by a grant from the Anne Arundel County Health Department.

Related Topics: Alcohol Violations, Anne Arundel County Police, and Operation SAVE

Mary Dent

7:18 am on Sunday, January 6, 2013

This is so disappointing! Hops & Vines is my favorite. I am always asked for ID every time I purchase from them!! It is very hard to believe one of their employees fell through on asking for ID. They are all very professional and kind! Please don't close down!!!

Reply

McGibblets

8:23 am on Sunday, January 6, 2013

No kudos to the stores that carded?

Reply
Comment_arrow

MyOpinion

9:35 am on Sunday, January 6, 2013

Why should Kudos be given to stores that do what they are supposed to do, especially by law? Kind of like saying "Good Job coming to work today....."

Comment_arrow

McGibblets

10:48 am on Sunday, January 6, 2013

My point Matt is that by giving out the names and info of the law abiding ones, people who give a damn about this will patronize their stores rather than the ones listed.

So no, its not like saying "blah blah....."

Kat

9:35 am on Sunday, January 6, 2013

I wish people would be a little more relaxed about this - it's ok to get married, drive a car, go to war etc. at age 18 but it's not ok to buy a beer??? You can probably even buy a gun, too, before you can buy a drink - ludicrous!!

Reply
Comment_arrow

Carol B

11:03 am on Sunday, January 6, 2013

Who said these MINORS were 18? The report says only that they were under-age: would you be as sanguine if it came out that the purchasers were 14 year olds? 12 year olds? No matter how old (or young) they were, this is just one more demonstration of greed triumphing over responsibility--and the businesses involved should not only be ashamed of themselves--they should be boycotted by the community as well. Minors don't have the judgment to "drink responsibly"--take a look at the fatalities among people under 25 in this area (and others) and calculate how many of those events involved drugs and/or alcohol. If the adults in the community don't protect kids from themselves--who's going to do so?

Comment_arrow

McGibblets

11:26 am on Sunday, January 6, 2013

Carol:

"Minors don't have the judgment to "drink responsibly""

Thats a parenting issue, not a taxpayer/legislation issue. The higher you make the 'minor' age the longer you postpone maturation and encourage 'minor' like behavior.

Also:

You can't collectively group all people under whatever age you want and say they all are the same. 'Minors' are made up of individuals, each acting individually.

Comment_arrow

USA

4:18 pm on Sunday, January 6, 2013

I agree with you Kat.. Carol what about our troops under 18?? if they are Minors don't have the judgment to "drink responsibly"" then Why we are sending them WAR..

Jeff I

9:40 am on Sunday, January 6, 2013

I agree with Kat.. 18 to do everything but drink? Lets stop wasting money on a futile effort.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Calique

9:18 am on Monday, January 7, 2013

18-year-old can barely drive as it is... you want MORE of them drinking and driving? I think the DRIVING age should be 18!

Bill C.

10:10 am on Sunday, January 6, 2013

The national drinking age was passed into law by Congress due to medical studies that showed alcohol consumption is particularly harmful to the brain develop of people whose pituitary glands have not developed beyond a certain stage. It had little or nothing to do with the behavior or responsibility of 18-year-olds.

Reply
Comment_arrow

McGibblets

10:51 am on Sunday, January 6, 2013

And we see how well this works, there isnt a 'minor' or even adult 18-21 that can't get alcohol. Its simple and it happens EVERY DAY. Time to rethink the concept of laws apparently, or better yet the role of Congress.

Comment_arrow

Chris W

3:17 pm on Sunday, January 6, 2013

This was another coercive tactic by an out of control federal government. States are free to set the drinking age in their own states. MADD pressured the federal government into passing the National Minimum Drinking Age act of 1984. This law would decrease federal highway dollars for any state with a drinking age under 21.

It's pure coercion. We are a constitutional republic of sovereign states. The founding fathers of this country would not recognize it.

Comment_arrow

Steve

4:17 pm on Sunday, January 6, 2013

Actually the 21 year old Alcohol rule was enacted by the Reagan Government on July 17, 1984 by the United States Congress as a mechanism whereby all states would become thereafter required to legislate the age of 21 years as a minimum age for purchasing and publicly possessing alcoholic beverages. Under the Federal Aid Highway Act, a state with a minimum age below 21 would be subjected to a ten percent decrease in its annual federal highway apportionment.
As the parent of a US soldier who joined when she was 16, this is preposterous. Kids can die for their country but can't buy beer in it? Germany and England have no problem. Their drunk-driving laws are a lot less.The U.S., ranks eighth most dangerous, with 163 deaths per million cars. Though American law enforcement works efficiently compared with a place like Russia, the highest, the high American teen drinking rate makes it tough to bring down drunk driving deaths.

A Concerned Piney Orchard Resident

11:09 am on Sunday, January 6, 2013

It should be noted that, even though the Hops & Vines store has been sold, it still appears that the liquor license is in the name of Councilman Jamie Benoit and his wife, Kari. The license transfer has not been approved by the liquor commission, or at least hasn't been updated in the state licensee database. I find it abhorrent that a sitting Councilman's store was cited for selling to a minor. Perhaps this is exactly the thing that is needed to shut this store, that was never supposed to be in Piney Orchard in the first place absent some shady dealings, down. However, I'm sure the right, honorable Councilman will cut himself a sweetheart deal on this violation, much as he has cut himself sweetheart deals on getting the license in the first place, county health insurance, etc. Thank goodness his term is almost up, and let's hope that he does us all a favor and doesn't run for County Executive!

Reply
Comment_arrow

USA

5:47 pm on Monday, January 7, 2013

I am sure you are running for County Executive this year!!!

Kat

11:26 am on Sunday, January 6, 2013

In Europe, adolescents drink alcohol way before 18 - not sayin' that's necessarily a GREAT thing, but I don't think European's brains are worse off because of it!! By outlawing it, you just make it even more desirable - there have been studies to prove this!! In moderation, there is nothing wrong with a bit of alcohol - it's certainly no worse than all the deep-fried fast food and sugar-laden drinks that people consume in this country!!

Reply

charisse

11:53 am on Sunday, January 6, 2013

Wow.......nobody believe me whem I spoke about some business practices I know are illegal....County needs to check their permits and licenses also....no food handlers or business beauty license are common in Odenton. Next will be a sting on the ones selling drugs.....I guess alchol violation generates more money::::Fines::::for the state.. Sorry tohear about Hops....they just caught in wrong place at wrong time......

Reply
Comment_arrow

McGibblets

12:03 pm on Sunday, January 6, 2013

Victimless crimes where people would rather have the police and local govt decide whats best for their children and police the area accordingly. It starts at home, raise your kids right and you dont need the police making sure there are no opportunities for them to make 'bad' (subjective) decisions.

Ron

2:28 pm on Sunday, January 6, 2013

If they cannot vote, they should not be legally able to. buy alcohol, which is a mind altering stimulant. Being an individual is not a valid excuse. Studies have shown that the teenage brain is quite different from the adult brain. This means that, just like most adult decisions, they are not ready for it. Let them be children and experience adult things when they are adults.

Reply
Comment_arrow

McGibblets

2:57 pm on Sunday, January 6, 2013

By 'adult' do you mean 18 years old? By law that makes them an adult yet they still cannot buy alcohol? How many soldiers die before they can even legally buy alcohol?

All brains are different, from one person to the next, so that point is invalid.

Again, it goes back to child rearing and what you teach your children. Parents are responsible for educating and preparing their children for adulthood.... independent of liquor store busts. Shutting down all the liquor stores wont do a thing to curb bad parenting or a lack of parenting.

Comment_arrow

USA

5:51 pm on Monday, January 7, 2013

But they are ready for War..so Let them be children and experience adult things when they are adults while they are in WAR..:-)

Calique

9:21 am on Monday, January 7, 2013

Regardless of what you think the drinking age should or should not be, the law states that those under 21 may not purchase, possess, or consume it.
Regardless of what YOU think about this law, merchants must take proper steps or risk stuff like this happening. One would think they would not be so complacent when it comes to their livelihood.

Reply

Kat

9:43 am on Monday, January 7, 2013

And what about cigarettes?? Surely they hurt an adolescent's body (and those of grown-ups, too!). How come they can buy those at 18?? So many double-standards!!

Reply
Comment_arrow

Calique

9:45 am on Monday, January 7, 2013

Smoking and driving is not a problem. The drinking age has to do with an effort to reduce drunk driving.

Comment_arrow

McGibblets

11:05 am on Monday, January 7, 2013

Do you have a source for that Calique because we now have conflicting 'facts' on here about why the drinking age is 21.

One says it has to do with neurological development and one says its to curb drunk driving.

Understandably the less people drinking should lead to less drunk drivers but picking a random arbitrary age like 21 is foolish. As you later state "And 21-year-old drunk is not necessarily less of a danger than a 20-year-old one, but neither is a 45-year-old drunk driver! " whats the point of 21 then? why not 22 or 20 or 45 for that matter.

It still comes down to decision making, either on the end of the solicitor of alcohol or the consumer.... but when you make everyone abide by laws due to isolated incidences of irresponsible people you take away everyone's freedom due to the stupidity of only some. Collectivism at its finest!

Kat

9:57 am on Monday, January 7, 2013

First of all, I beg to differ! Have you seen how many people smoke while driving? Do you seriously think that doesn't impact on their driving, if one of their hands is taken up by holding a cigarette (and then, of course, there are the phones and iPads etc., but that's a different story :-).
Also, that's not a reason to prohibit non-driving people from having alcohol - it's illegal to drink and drive and that is as should be, just like it's illegal to take drugs and drive. That has nothing to do with what you consume in your own home or when you're not driving. Plus, why would a 21-yr-old drunk driver be less of a danger than a 20-yr-old one??? Don't follow your logic.

Reply

Calique

10:02 am on Monday, January 7, 2013

Smoking does not impair one's brain!! DUH!!
And 21-year-old drunk is not necessarily less of a danger than a 20-year-old one, but neither is a 45-year-old drunk driver!
There needs to be a cut-off though.
Your logic dictates that there should no no drinking age since drinking and driving is already illegal.

Reply
Comment_arrow

McGibblets

11:07 am on Monday, January 7, 2013

This logic dictates that the drinking age is pointless... drunk drivers are drunk drivers, responsible drinkers are responsible drinkers. Picking random ages to allow people to drink at doesnt change their mentality or level of responsibility.

You say there 'needs to be a cut-off though' yet dont justify it whatsoever.

Kat

11:10 am on Monday, January 7, 2013

Agreed. That's the point I was trying to make, too! And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying alcohol isn't dangerous, but I just fail to see why in a country where people want as little government and regulations as possible, this particular "substance" is made out to be the devil and at the root of all evil, so to speak, when there are MUCH worse things freely accesible!!! Running the risk of repeating myself, it's lunacy to let people buy guns but not beers. Rant over :-)

Reply

joan

12:07 pm on Monday, January 7, 2013

I hope Hops and Vines does not close down! I love the service there and I can safely walk there from home without driving.

I have been carded at Hops and Vines and Village Wine and Spirits several times and I'm 27.

Reply

radarradar

12:59 pm on Monday, January 7, 2013

Word has it that MANY of the stores busted DID ask for ID, and were provided with VERY good fake IDs. The buzz is that this is part of a plan by either state and/or local government to strong arm store owners into purchasing electronic scanners to check IDs. The cost to the businesses to lease/purchase and network these machines is supposedly upwards of $350 a MONTH. Our government doing what they do best, sucking taxpaying buisinesses dry.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Calique

3:27 pm on Monday, January 7, 2013

"word" has it?? The "buzz"?
Care to cite sources? These tests are nothing new---they are a routine procedure to make sure that liquor stores are doing what they are supposed to.

The Noochie-Coochie Man

1:07 pm on Thursday, January 10, 2013

I don't know how small business owners survive,
Everyone's trying to eat them alive:
The government always wants more revenue,
Employees stand around like there's nothing to do,
Customers complain at the slightest provocation---
Small business owners: unsung heroes of the nation!

Reply

Leave a comment