Monday, May 2, 2016

Taking Responsibility

Panda East will remain open but cannot serve alcohol 5/4 through 6/27

Panda East restaurant will NOT appeal the decision of the Amherst Select Board who, acting as the town's Liquor Commissioners, voted unanimously to suspend their all alcohol permit from May 4th through June 27 for the second offense this year of serving alcohol to underage patrons.  

According to Panda East's attorney Kristi Bodin, "The decision (not to appeal) is based on consideration of what is best for the business and what is best for the community."


Anonymous said...

WoW-JUST INCREDIBLE-I am Sooo truly moved and astounded as this charity by the violators-these same ilk sit around at once a year long distance holiday family reunions-in the bleeder seats-ordering only alcohol-while loudly professing "Blowhard" about the psychiatric disabilities of handicapped people(I was in a wheelchair-victim of a bar hopping hit & run drunk,etc, driver) I guess for student princes- jazzing Amherst College dates-insulting D.U.I victims is really putting the "Move on"..Hmm..What's wrong with this picture...??Ya Think ???!!(All liquored up chics-too !!! )

Anonymous said...

Where were the adults responsible for making sure these under aged kids don't ask for booze?

Oh wait, we have a convoluted system where someone is an "adult", but they are not responsible or allowed to be one. Cannot win. Certainly can loose.

The lawyer advised them not to piss off their overseers or they could all loose their ability to make a living. Pretty simple, you don't resist the mafia, you kiss their butts.

Perhaps making restaurants and their employees do the jobs that police and parents failed at is not the solution, but what am I saying, we just want someone to blame.

Anonymous said...

Sooo what runs of the mouth even more liberally-bashing wheelchair bound crippled-for-life D.U.I. patron/victims ?/ Eeeew-Gross-WE don't want"THAT" in here-kinda rains on the parade ? Go Figure...!!

Anonymous said...

Get over it!! We love Chinese food and scorpion bowls. Can't wait until June 28:)

WebTechAds said...

From a simple read, it looked like an open and shut case of blatant disregard for underage drinking.

But specifically, it does strike as odd that the only time Panda East had a situation, was when someone was able to receive booze with a fake ID, and the underage girl's situation hasn't coordinated with evidence that a scorpion bowl was even bought during the time she said she drank it at the establishment.

Why aren't businesses receiving these licenses proposing a different legal structure on the liabilities of identifying someone? If you hire someone who frauds their name, and would actually be an illegal alien or immigrant, you wouldn't be charged the same as someone knowingly harboring an illegal citizen.

The liability should end at the point of fraud. Or at the point that employees exhausted their resources to identify it. It creates this base mistrust of customers who are of legal age, and that mistrust can obstruct good customer service, which is a huge asset for the survival of many businesses.

Also, the law assumes that if a fake ID passes through the business, that somehow the establishment is at fault to the point of getting one step to losing their license. Seldom does anyone see this in any other industry. Liability starts with honesty. And if one side is dishonest, then why punish the other side.

If one side is dishonest, why is this up to the business to solve these issues and put their own existence on the line? Why wouldn't the fault lie on the fake ID holder, the company that makes them, or the parents? Or why not blame anyone? Just fine the teenagers $200 and commit them to 10 hours of community service.

I'm certain the teen learned her lesson. It could've ended worse. But does the fact that it could end worse mean that the business has to be punished to this extent? I feel there is a middle ground or some empathy here, and as well a need for businesses to demand leniency in a situation that should be handled by the police.

When businesses take stolen credit cards or take transactions without chips, they lose that money. That is fair. It be very unfair to take their merchant account away for two months. Legislation is too zealous on underage drinking but simultaneously don't mind people wasting their lives away on liquor once they are of legal age. As if they need proof of the morality of a legal drug. I don't care if they sleep soundly at night. They need to wake up and also realize establishments shouldn't also be the gatekeepers of filtering fraud.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

The ARMS 8th Grade