I don't know, there is something about this story that just irks me.

I quote, "Schwartz told the paper teens as young as 17 who throw a party could be tried as adults under the new law." Now, I don't want to come across as supporting underage drinking by any means. But there is something very incongruent here. A guy has a few friends over, he is underage but somehow gets a few beers, he is in trouble for drinking as a minor. If he happens to have four friends with him, he will be busted under this new law, that "makes it a misdemeanor for the owner or occupant at any given address to host a gathering of five or more minors who are consuming alcohol or drugs."

The kicker is, under this law, he may be tried as an adult. At 17 years of age, he can serve in the Armed Forces, but he can't drink a beer, but if he does drink a beer when there are any friends present, he can be tried as an adult for drinking as a minor.

It just caught me as odd. Underage drinker tried as an adult.