Weak laws show lack of concern for underage drinking

WE’VE CONCENTRATED so much in recent years on the problems with South Carolina’s loophole-ridden DUI laws that we’ve lost sight of our other alcohol problem — underage drinking.

But we got a wake-up call this summer, when three Lexington County youths were killed in separate alcohol-caused wrecks on the same day. As tragic as those deaths were, they’re made worse by the role our state’s lackadaisical attitude toward underage drinking played.

As The State’s “Under the influence” report on Sunday pointed out, the laws our state has put in place to combat underage drinking are every bit as lacking as our laws against driving under the influence.

Oh, we have laws against underage drinking — or, rather, against underage possession of alcohol. But the punishment is lacking, and we make it too hard for prosecutors to convict the kids who are drinking or the adults who look the other way or even actively assist them. It’s as though we consider underage drinking a rite of passage rather than the danger that it is.

This needs to change:

• We need tougher penalties for kids who drink.

It’s illegal for minors to drive with alcohol in their blood system, but the punishment is only a three-month license suspension. Fifth Circuit Solicitor Barney Giese argues that the suspension should be “years, not months,” and we tend to agree.

Possession of alcohol and other alcohol crimes carry penalties of up to six months in prison, and the loss of a driver’s license or college scholarship. But those tough penalties are rarely imposed. Instead, kids get $50 fines, or they enroll in pretrial intervention programs that clear their records if they go through counseling.

It doesn’t make sense to lock kids up for drinking, and it might be counter-productive to take away their chance to go to college. But there are other penalties that could make kids think twice about drinking — automatic revocation of their prized driver’s licenses, for instance, or a serious dose of community service. And even kids who go through pretrial intervention should lose their license for a significant period of time.

In one of the more bizarre twists, S.C. law makes it a crime for kids to buy alcohol, but not to try to buy it; to possess alcohol but not to drink it. Both exclusions make it tougher to enforce the law and should be lifted.

• We need to get tough on the adults who help kids drink.

It’s practically impossible to hold parents responsible when kids drink at their homes, unless they supply the alcohol themselves. Other states have “social host” laws that allow adults to be arrested if they permit underage drinking on their property; it’s a smart approach that forces adults to take more responsibility for what happens under their roof.

Lawmakers also should add South Carolina to the 31 states with keg registration laws, which help police determine who supplied beer for underage parties.

Of course, weak laws aren’t our only problem. Police and prosecutors can still make a dent in the problem when they have the resources to do their jobs. But underage alcohol enforcement is yet another of the public safety efforts that got short shrift when the Legislature refused to set priorities during the recession that dried up tax revenue in the early part of this decade.

Lawmakers are slowly restoring funding to our police agencies, and that needs to continue. Meanwhile, they need to pass laws that make it clear to minors and their adult suppliers that our state is serious about protecting kids from alcohol.