Re: Michael Ray’s columns Musings on the Coast and “The New Prohibitionists”. It is sad but so very true… The scenario he described is going to happen if the SHO ordinance is passed. What a tragedy it will be.
I am a parent of three sons all under the drinking age. I do not advocate in any way underage drinking. I would never knowingly facilitate underage drinking. You would think therefore that I would be in favor of the SHO ordinance and yet it is the opposite. I am 100 percent against it.
I don’t need the city of Laguna Beach to help me parent my children. It is my job as a parent to be aware of what my kids are doing; who they are hanging out with. If they are at a friend’s house it is my job to know that kid and his family well. My kid isn’t allowed at a home where the family is unknown to me. My kid isn’t allowed to socialize with a kid that I feel could be an “at risk kid,” unless it is with my supervision nearby. As a parent this is my job.
Why is it that the Laguna Beach City Council has once again decided to thwart state law by enacting their own set of ordinances and rules? There are laws in the state of California that protect and govern against an individual who knowingly provides alcohol to a minor. It is a chargeable and punishable offense. The state law is written in a very clear way; (unlike the SHO ordinance) state law ensures that innocent people are unlikely to be caught up in its legal net. The same cannot be said for the SHO ordinance and its language.
Protecting our youth is good as a community. The city of Laguna Beach, however, acting in the capacity of a parent is not! My hope is that the new council members that have been added to our council recently will help to sway the vote away from this ordinance becoming law. The teenager Jason, whom Michael Ray wrote about, will become a sad fact. How then will the advocates of the SHO ordinance feel? Pretty crummy I bet.
Kimberly O’Brien-Young, Laguna Beach