The Antelope Valley Times

Your community. Your issues. Your news.

  • Home
  • Latest News
  • Local
    • Palmdale
    • Lancaster
    • Los Angeles County
    • Littlerock
    • Lake Los Angeles
    • Rosamond
    • Edwards AFB
    • Acton
  • Crime
  • Politics
  • Education
  • Health
  • Business
  • Opinion
    • Advertise
    • About
    • Contact Us
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    Show Search

3 local businesses cited for selling alcohol to minors

by The AV Times Staff • December 16, 2017

PALMDALE – Three local businesses were cited Thursday when Palmdale authorities launched an undercover sting operation to stop stores from selling alcohol to underage customers.

The Alcohol Beverage Control minor decoy operation was conducted at about 11 a.m. Thursday, Dec. 14, by Palmdale Sheriff Station’s Partners Against Crime team, according to a news release from the Palmdale Sheriff’s Station.

“Under the direct supervision of deputies, minor decoys entered 14 separate businesses licensed to sell alcohol and attempted to purchase alcohol,” the news releases states.

Three businesses allegedly sold alcohol to a minor decoy and were cited. The alleged offenders included Superior Grocers, located at 38360 20th Street East; CVS, located at 38012 47th Street East; and Liquor King, located at 5564 Fort Tejon Road.

In 1994, the California Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the use of underage decoys is a valid tool of law enforcement to ensure that licensees are complying with the law. These types of operations have shown a decrease in alcohol-related incidents, according to the sheriff’s news release.

–

Filed Under: Crime/ Safety

6 comments for "3 local businesses cited for selling alcohol to minors"

  1. THX1138 says

    December 16, 2017 at 10:18 pm

    Miffed American is absolutely right. Just saw a major car accident tonight where a teen ran a red light and broadsided an SUV with a Family (little kids) inside. Multiple serious injuries… and guess what? The Teenage Driver was DRUNK! He needs to be tried as an Adult! A year in Jail would be a good start… if anyone dies, let him rot in jail for 20+

    • Laughing says

      December 17, 2017 at 10:07 pm

      I believe if licensed they do get tried as an adult.

    • Tim Scott says

      December 17, 2017 at 11:28 pm

      This teen age driver purchased liquor from a retailer that did not check ID? If not, what does your anecdote have to do with this topic?

  2. miffed American says

    December 16, 2017 at 5:46 am

    This is utterly ridiculous and unacceptable for businesses such as CVS and Superior Groceries to not ID. I would expect Liquor Stores to do it, but not the others. I am pretty sure firings are going to happen. I hope the stupidity of not asking for ID was worth it.

    • Tim Scott says

      December 17, 2017 at 11:20 pm

      Firings happen regularly, even without citations. Retailers have policies, usually “everyone buying must show ID.” Employees who do not comply with policy are subject to discipline, which may include firing. Most retailers have requirements that their managers use the in store surveillance on a random basis to monitor the employees for compliance.

      That’s why at the store I shop at even though most of the employees know me by name I still show them ID. If their manager is watching the camera they need to see me flip open my wallet, because that is how they know the employee did their job.

      Now, pretty much every time I’m in that store I hear some customer griping about showing ID while wasting everyone’s time as they root around for it. Frequently they will make some segue into how the line would move faster if the employee wasn’t doing what it turns out they are being paid to do.

      My question, “Miffed,” is…what is your better idea? We have laws, they are enforced. Companies do institute policies in their efforts to comply with the laws, and for the most part they not only work but lead to complaints from law abiding citizens who are either inconvenienced or lose their jobs because they failed to check an ID when it was obviously not legally necessary. So, do you have anything to suggest?

    • Alexis says

      December 18, 2017 at 11:13 am

      completely agree, miffed. they weren’t doing their jobs by asking everyone for I.D. when it comes to liquor purchases.

Recent Comments

  • Tim Scott on Readers Speak Out! (July 2022): “It’s hilarious how the RWNJs see “suppress misleading information” as an attack on them. It’s like they admit that the…” Aug 11, 12:09
  • Tim Scott on Circus Vargas returns to Palmdale Aug. 19 with a new production: “You mean Frank’s? Yeah. I just answered them in kind.” Aug 11, 12:05
  • Tim Scott on Readers Speak Out! (July 2022): “LOL…it was your friend Frank that brought up donkey shows. Meanwhile: “He didn’t send the mob!” -video of him sending…” Aug 11, 12:03
  • Beecee on Circus Vargas returns to Palmdale Aug. 19 with a new production: “Awww what happened? Did Tim’s perverted and disgusting comments get deleted?” Aug 11, 11:52
  • Tim Scott on Op-ed: A message to unincoporated town councils from Supervisor Kathryn Barger: “America’s Most Slow On The Uptake…that’s just the usual move from Frank to try to impress Beecee…gotta throw in a…” Aug 11, 11:26

Copyright © 2022 · The AV Times LLC. All rights reserved. Terms of Use