Local on-line rag ran this article today. I can hardly believe Texas would
be the state to enforce this kind of thing.
<http://www.syracuse.com/us-news/index.ssf/2015/06/texas_cops_shut_down_illegal_childrens_lemonade_stand.html#incart_river>
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
It does get slimy with mold. But the issue isn't Lemonade. That is
the micro-issue.
The issue was selling food from an unqualified kitchen and not having
a health certificate, and a sales permit. Seems much, but ever see
fast food sold on streets ? Push carts ? Now and then someone would
be stricken with something and the cart was transporting food poison
or germs.
It is sad, but it has been that way since the 50's and when I was
growing up. Can't sell balloons on the street either. Just a stupid
balloon.
Martin
On 6/17/2015 7:18 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 6/17/2015 2:00 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Saturday, June 13, 2015 at 4:04:58 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>>> Do you have statistics on food poisoning by lemonade stand? I know
>>> enough about food handling and safe practice to know the risk is
>>> incredibly low. Lemonade is acidic and has good tolerance to the
>>> cooties.
>>
>> No doubt. But take off the grandfatherly blinders... Not everyone
>> will be as safe, sanitary or careful as you particular
>> granddaughters. I can tell this must have hit a nerve for you to take
>> this so literally. You must know that not all drink stands will be
>> manned by conscientious young ladies with all care being made towards
>> keeping their stand sanitary. Some stands might serve a carbonated
>> drink; some a flavored drink like Kool Aid. Other possibilities
>> exist. Not all stands will be manned by sweet young ladies serving
>> only lemonade.
>>
> You don't have any facts about people getting sick from a lemonade stand
> though. I could not find any.
>
>
>
>
>> I was pissed off that I saw another soccer Mom that decided that her
>> little angels were above the law, above its enforcement, and she
>> decided what was right and what wasn't. Her kids of course, didn't
>> have to play by the rules because they were obviously special. This
>> of course was decided by yet another self entitle snot that is passing
>> her attitudes clearly onto her kids.
>>
>> REMEMBER... the only thing the little angels had to do was to get
>> their hysterical mother to turn their sign around and write "donations
>> accepted" or "suggested donation" or something like that. This didn't
>> have to be on national news about the oppression of young children,
>> the unfairness of society, more fodder for Fox news to screech about
>> how America has lost it common sense, and then the Mom and her
>> children on the morning shows talking about how everyone should just
>> use common sense (ignoring the fact they were breaking the law) and
>> then finally wind up on Oprah in tear hoping that the children could
>> go on in such an unfair society. All they had to do is scribble 2 or
>> 3 words on their sign and it would have been perfectly legal...
>>
>
> REMEMBER, all the cop had to do was explain that to the kids and mom.
> You get pissed at the mom over reacting but let the cop slide. Could
> have been handled in two minutes and never made the news. It wasn't.
>
>>>> With about almost 2000 folks served over the years, by simply
>>>> playing by the rules we have never had a problem with law enforcement.
>>
>>> But in reality you are circumventing the rules.
>>
>> That is absolutely untrue. "Donations accepted" is perfectly legal.
>> It is a well defined statute that is upheld by the San Antonio Health
>> Department, the Sheriff's Department, and of course the Police. All
>> one has to do is put the tiniest, most miniscule effort into playing
>> by the rules and there isn't a problem.
>>
> So why did the cop not take two minutes to explain it? Done. Easy.
>
>
>> But if you are s wounded soccer Mom looking for your time in the sun,
>> this was a great stunt. I doubt the little girls had much to do with
>> the outrage, and would probably been fine if they were told to just
>> change two or three words on their sign. I think they were out there
>> for their Dad, not for attention.
>>
> It was a great stunt. Made a cop look like the asshole he is. Got what
> he deserved, IMO.
>
>
>> I trust the kids with
>>> lemonade more that your potentially improperly handled and cooked food.
>>
>> Well, we haven't made anyone sick yet. We have two members of our
>> club that have trained all of us that handle the food and we spend a
>> lot of time and money on sanitation. Of the two trainers, one has
>> been in the food industry for about 25 years, owned and run his own
>> restaurant, and currently trains people on proper serving and handling
>> of food. The other works for a food wholesaler that travels doing
>> food shows. He makes sure that temps are maintained, utensils are
>> cleaned and stored properly, that we are all "gloved up", and that any
>> sanitation issues are addressed as needed.
>>
>>> Could be contaminated with cigar ash.
>>
>> That would be my worry. :^)
>>
>> We are all careful in the prep and serving area, but still, those
>> pesky ashes can be hard to control. Think it might add a different
>> dimension of flavor to the beans, but not so good in the potato salad.
>>
>> Robert
>>
>
>
> How do I know that? The risks are far greater from a bunch of guys,
> training unknown, serving cooked food. Accepting donations does not
> make up for poor food handling techniques, it is simply a work around
> for the normal restaurant regulations. You can ask about it, but don't
> ask the police, they'd rather arrest you.
On Saturday, June 13, 2015 at 4:04:58 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> Do you have statistics on food poisoning by lemonade stand? I know=20
> enough about food handling and safe practice to know the risk is=20
> incredibly low. Lemonade is acidic and has good tolernce to the cooties.
No doubt. But take off the grandfatherly blinders... Not everyone will be=
as safe, sanitary or careful as you particular granddaughters. I can tell=
this must have hit a nerve for you to take this so literally. You must kn=
ow that not all drink stands will be manned by conscientious young ladies w=
ith all care being made towards keeping their stand sanitary. Some stands m=
ight serve a carbonated drink; some a flavored drink like Kool Aid. Other =
possibilities exist. Not all stands will be manned by sweet young ladies s=
erving only lemonade.
Maybe if I had grand kids my heart would melt when I saw a couple of them o=
ut selling food and drinks.
> My granddaughters decided to sell lemonade in front of my house. Little=
=20
> traffic on our street, but the first customer was the local policeman on=
=20
> patrol Even tipped them. Once or twice a year I'll see a couple of=20
> kids selling lemonade and I try to stop and get some. They appreciate it=
.
Again, no doubt. And the police around the here don't hassle the kids, eit=
her. Nor do they worry about the kid's groups that have car washes, sell b=
ottles of water for their churches, etc. I personally don't care about the=
kids selling food and drinks at the side of the road, but I am glad when t=
hey cops make the young teenagers around here close their stands as they ar=
e selling drinks, sandwiches, snacks, etc. I don't know that they ever hav=
e, but I don't want them to make any of the really old people sick in my ne=
ighborhood that have "grandma and grandpaitis" that makes them think they s=
hould stop and drink or eat at one of those stands.
Truthfully, I don't care about the kids or whether they make anyone sick or=
not. I don't care about the people that get any kind of food poisoning at=
one of those stands. I have plenty to worry about besides small change li=
ke that.
I was pissed off that I saw another soccer Mom that decided that her little=
angels were above the law, above its enforcement, and she decided what was=
right and what wasn't. Her kids of course, didn't have to play by the rul=
es because they were obviously special. This of course was decided by yet =
another self entitle snot that is passing her attitudes clearly onto her ki=
ds.
REMEMBER... the only thing the little angels had to do was to get their hys=
terical mother to turn their sign around and write "donations accepted" or =
"suggested donation" or something like that. This didn't have to be on nat=
ional news about the oppression of young children, the unfairness of societ=
y, more fodder for Fox news to screech about how America has lost it common=
sense, and then the Mom and her children on the morning shows talking abou=
t how everyone should just use common sense (ignoring the fact they were br=
eaking the law) and then finally wind up on Oprah in tear hoping that the c=
hildren could go on in such an unfair society. All they had to do is scrib=
ble 2 or 3 words on their sign and it would have been perfectly legal... =
=20
> > With about almost 2000 folks served over the years, by simply playing b=
y the rules we have never had a problem with law enforcement.
=20
> But in reality you are circumventing the rules. =20
That is absolutely untrue. "Donations accepted" is perfectly legal. It is=
a well defined statute that is upheld by the San Antonio Health Department=
, the Sheriff's Department, and of course the Police. All one has to do is=
put the tiniest, most miniscule effort into playing by the rules and there=
isn't a problem. =20
But if you are s wounded soccer Mom looking for your time in the sun, this =
was a great stunt. I doubt the little girls had much to do with the outrag=
e, and would probably been fine if they were told to just change two or thr=
ee words on their sign. I think they were out there for their Dad, not for=
attention.
I trust the kids with=20
> lemonade more that your potentially improperly handled and cooked food.
Well, we haven't made anyone sick yet. We have two members of our club tha=
t have trained all of us that handle the food and we spend a lot of time an=
d money on sanitation. Of the two trainers, one has been in the food indus=
try for about 25 years, owned and run his own restaurant, and currently tra=
ins people on proper serving and handling of food. The other works for a f=
ood wholesaler that travels doing food shows. He makes sure that temps are=
maintained, utensils are cleaned and stored properly, that we are all "glo=
ved up", and that any sanitation issues are addressed as needed.
> Could be contaminated with cigar ash.
That would be my worry. :^) =20
We are all careful in the prep and serving area, but still, those pesky ash=
es can be hard to control. Think it might add a different dimension of fla=
vor to the beans, but not so good in the potato salad.
Robert
On 6/18/2015 1:11 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 17, 2015 at 7:18:34 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>> You don't have any facts about people getting sick from a lemonade stand
>> though. I could not find any.
>
> I never said I did. You are only thinking of cute girls selling lemonade, I am thinking of the whole picture of a community of street side food sellers.
>
>> REMEMBER, all the cop had to do was explain that to the kids and mom.
>> You get pissed at the mom over reacting but let the cop slide. Could
>> have been handled in two minutes and never made the news. It wasn't.
>
> Well, while you are concentrating in such a focused manner on facts, how do you know he didn't? Do you know for a fact that he didn't?
>
>
>> So why did the cop not take two minutes to explain it? Done. Easy.
>
> Again, how do you know he didn't do just that? He didn't write the parents a citation or a ticket. How do you know he wasn't just a polite guy that told the kids and their mother that the way they were doing it wasn't allowed?
>
>> It was a great stunt. Made a cop look like the asshole he is. Got what
>> he deserved, IMO.
>
> Bashing of law enforcement is a really popular sport right now and in some cases, no doubt deserved. If you feel that he "got what he deserved" by enforcing the law, I am sure you must have personal knowledge of why that is so. I will defer to your knowledge of the man personally and his professional service record; I don't know him, nor was I there at the time he asked them to fold up their table.
>
>> How do I know that?
>
> I am not sure what it is you know...
>
>
>> The risks are far greater from a bunch of guys,
>> training unknown, serving cooked food.
>
> Reading carefully you can see that we are trained by professionals that train for a living that make their living in the food business doing just that. Sorry if I was unclear in my description of their training and qualifications.
>
>> Accepting donations does not
>> make up for poor food handling techniques, it is simply a work around
>> for the normal restaurant regulations.
>
> Now you are being deliberately obtuse. You are making a classic straw man argument out of two separate issues. To be clear, accepting donations is accepted by the law enforcement community and the city health board. We are skirting NOTHING, and not trying to deceive or conceal anything. Every event we have the police come by to visit (we give men in uniform free plates of food) and this last event we had the city health inspector come by. Regardless of our donation status, they can still stick a thermometer in our food anytime they feel like it if we are serving to the general public. Likewise, they inspect hand washing stations, gloves, food storage, food prep and utensil storage and use. Since we serve the public we have to (and rightfully so in my opinion) agree to those stipulations.
>
> So WTF are we "working around"?
>
OK, lets cut the BS. You are POd because some soccer mom made a big
deal of what the cop did. It has nothing to do with lemonade, it has
everything to do with her getting publicity.
You mention that lemonade not properly prepared can be unhealthy. You
accuse me of bringing in a straw man arguments, but the fact is, you
brought it in. You don't want kids selling potentially contaminated
lemonade, yet you say it is OK to give food away, no matter how poorly
prepared it is just because you are asking for donations, as opposed to
selling.
Perhaps your setup is perfect, but others not so perfect can do the same
thing as long as it is for donations.
Bring the argument to where it belongs. It has nothing to do with food.
It has everything to do with a poorly handled situation that could
have been handled in minutes with no publicity.
"John McCoy" wrote:
> Florida can top that. A couple of years ago the Legislature got
> their panties in a wad about "adult gaming arcades", which they
> decided were a form of gambling. In attempting to ban them,
> they created such a poorly worded bill that they outlawed all
> computers, cell phones, and anything else which connects to a
> network.
-------------------------------------------
Lead by that turkey gobbler you call governor.
Lew
"Phil Kangas" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Leon" <> wrote in message
>> On 6/12/2015 10:30 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> Local on-line rag ran this article today. I
>>> can hardly believe Texas would
>>> be the state to enforce this kind of thing.
>>>
>>> <http://www.syracuse.com/us-news/index.ssf/2015/06/texas_cops_shut_down_illegal_childrens_lemonade_stand.html#incart_river>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Obviously some twit neighbor complained. I
>> can't tell you how many CoolAid stands I ran.
>
> The kids won. "Free lemonade. Donations accepted"
Yeah I don't think so. They were taught to expect donations/ hand outs
regardless of quality.
I guess Baker, who initially penned the law, wasn't intelligent enough to p=
en some exceptions, based on common sense and circumstances. I would susp=
ect he is an idiot attorney.
As to selling lemonade, now we know to offer Goodies, for free, and ask for=
donations, for a cause.
This Texas event kinna reminds me of a situation that occurred, here, in Lo=
uisiana, regarding written or the writing of laws, and the "fix" (the Louis=
iana case) has had alternate or counter results. Inmates were overloading=
the courts, by filing frivolous (ridiculous) law suits. To stop the "friv=
olous" suits, a law was proposed to limit the kind of cases to allow and to=
limit the State's liability (payments) for the inmates' "frivolous" suits.=
The proposed law (the wording and public discusion) was circulated many =
months prior to the voting. It was written and understood the law would b=
e to disallow certain (many) suits, altogether, and to limit the liability =
for those that were not disallowed. So that's what the people prepared to =
vote on.
Eight days prior to the election, the proposed law went into committee, for=
final drafting, proper wording, etc. No one is privy to that committee's =
actions (closed door, no review) and once the final bill (wording) comes ou=
t of committee, that's how it's presented/printed on the ballot. It came =
out of committee 3 days before the balloting/voting, which was only enough =
time to get the written words in print, on/for the ballot. No one had tim=
e to assess what had taken place, to stop it. The final wording, which no=
one paid attention to, because everyone assumed it had remained the same, =
as they knew it was to be, .... the final wording had been changed, in comm=
itee, to "all law suits against the State", not just the inmate frivolous o=
nes. The liability limit was reduced, also.
That (Texas) Baker's Law seems to (maybe) be a kind of "all encomposing" ty=
pe of worded law.
Sonny
On Friday, June 12, 2015 at 3:15:26 PM UTC-4, John McCoy wrote:
> Sonny <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:=20
>=20
> > This Texas event kinna reminds me of a situation that occurred, here,
> > in Louisiana, regarding written or the writing of laws, and the "fix"
> > (the Louisiana case) has had alternate or counter results.
> <example snipped>
>=20
> Florida can top that. A couple of years ago the Legislature got
> their panties in a wad about "adult gaming arcades", which they
> decided were a form of gambling. In attempting to ban them,
> they created such a poorly worded bill that they outlawed all
> computers, cell phones, and anything else which connects to a
> network.
>=20
> John
Vegas has a rule related to the number of machines in an establishment, whi=
ch determines whether the smaller establishments have to follow all the sam=
e rules as the large casinos. This allows bars and restaurants to have few =
machines without being considered a full fledged casino.
My son worked for a mom-and-pop chain of small "gambling arcades" where he =
served beer, soda, snacks, etc. to the patrons. The drinks were stored in t=
hose large coolers you see in any convenience store. If a patron wanted a d=
rink, my son just took it out of the cooler and brought it to them.The chai=
n was doing so well that some of the bigger casinos complained that since =
they weren't a bar or a restaurant, they should be forced to play by the bi=
g boy rules. They were basically trying to put them out of business.
The owners solved the problem with some minor remodeling. They built a very=
simple bar in front of the coolers. Now when a patron wanted a drink, my s=
on would go "behind the bar", take it out of the cooler and bring it to the=
m. Problem solved.
Doug Miller <[email protected]> writes:
>"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in news:557b3fd7$0$22334$c3e8da3
>[email protected]:
>
>>
>> "John McCoy" wrote:
>>
>>> Florida can top that.[...]
>> -------------------------------------------
>> Lead by that turkey gobbler you call governor.
>
>You could cut the irony here with a knife.
You might actually look to see what Governor Brown
has accomplished over the last eight years, rather
than just assume that some label applied by his
opponents over four decades ago is actually accurate.
One need not agree with all his policies to yet believe that
he has been both a good governor, and better than many of
his predecessors.
"Mike Marlow" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>>
>> It was the right thing to do. Today, lemonade stands, tomorrow, they
>> will be selling unauthorized Bud Light.
>
> Maybe true - but it is afterall, all about the children...
>
>>
>> Lemonade is like a gateway drug, they start small and later become
>> entrepreneurs and self sufficient. Once that happens the need for
>> government control diminishes and our society will be ruined.
>
> Ponderous sort of thought. I might have to give that some real thought.
> Somehow, I got trapped in the innocence of our own childhood experiences and
> had not looked forward to the perils of the future for our children. So
> glad you corrected my thinking on this...
For sure, it has lead to legally selling marijuana in Colorado and
Washington. Ultimately you end up with California 2.0.
On 6/12/2015 10:30 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> Local on-line rag ran this article today. I can hardly believe Texas would
> be the state to enforce this kind of thing.
>
> <http://www.syracuse.com/us-news/index.ssf/2015/06/texas_cops_shut_down_illegal_childrens_lemonade_stand.html#incart_river>
>
>
Obviously some twit neighbor complained. I can't tell you how many
CoolAid stands I ran.
Leon <[email protected]> writes:
>"Mike Marlow" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> It was the right thing to do. Today, lemonade stands, tomorrow, they
>>> will be selling unauthorized Bud Light.
>>
>> Maybe true - but it is afterall, all about the children...
>>
>>>
>>> Lemonade is like a gateway drug, they start small and later become
>>> entrepreneurs and self sufficient. Once that happens the need for
>>> government control diminishes and our society will be ruined.
>>
>> Ponderous sort of thought. I might have to give that some real thought.
>> Somehow, I got trapped in the innocence of our own childhood experiences and
>> had not looked forward to the perils of the future for our children. So
>> glad you corrected my thinking on this...
>
>
>For sure, it has lead to legally selling marijuana in Colorado and
>Washington. Ultimately you end up with California 2.0.
And the world would be a better place, to boot.
On 6/14/2015 8:30 AM, Dr. Deb wrote:
> On Friday, June 12, 2015 at 10:32:19 AM UTC-5, Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Local on-line rag ran this article today. I can hardly believe Texas would
>> be the state to enforce this kind of thing.
>>
>> <http://www.syracuse.com/us-news/index.ssf/2015/06/texas_cops_shut_down_illegal_childrens_lemonade_stand.html#incart_river>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> -Mike-
>> [email protected]
>
> The America we like to remember is just that, a memory. Today we are fat, self-indulgent, lazy, PC obsessed, litigation insane and indoctrinated instead of educated.
>
Yea, that pretty well sums it up.
Not a good sign.
Reminds me of a show that scared the crap out of me, Max Headroom.. I
believed we would come to that. And guess what... we are becoming that.
--
Jeff
In news:[email protected],
Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> belched:
> On 6/14/2015 7:30 AM, Dr. Deb wrote:
>> On Friday, June 12, 2015 at 10:32:19 AM UTC-5, Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> Local on-line rag ran this article today. I can hardly believe
>>> Texas would be the state to enforce this kind of thing.
>>>
>>> <http://www.syracuse.com/us-news/index.ssf/2015/06/texas_cops_shut_down_illegal_childrens_lemonade_stand.html#incart_river>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> -Mike-
>>> [email protected]
>>
>> The America we like to remember is just that, a memory. Today we
>> are fat, self-indulgent, lazy, PC obsessed, litigation insane and
>> indoctrinated instead of educated.
> Yes! I'll add, entitled and every one gets a trophy.
Don't forget the gold star, too : )
On 6/14/2015 7:30 AM, Dr. Deb wrote:
> On Friday, June 12, 2015 at 10:32:19 AM UTC-5, Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Local on-line rag ran this article today. I can hardly believe Texas would
>> be the state to enforce this kind of thing.
>>
>> <http://www.syracuse.com/us-news/index.ssf/2015/06/texas_cops_shut_down_illegal_childrens_lemonade_stand.html#incart_river>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> -Mike-
>> [email protected]
>
> The America we like to remember is just that, a memory. Today we are fat, self-indulgent, lazy, PC obsessed, litigation insane and indoctrinated instead of educated.
>
Yes! I'll add, entitled and every one gets a trophy.
On 6/17/2015 2:00 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Saturday, June 13, 2015 at 4:04:58 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>> Do you have statistics on food poisoning by lemonade stand? I know
>> enough about food handling and safe practice to know the risk is
>> incredibly low. Lemonade is acidic and has good tolerance to the cooties.
>
> No doubt. But take off the grandfatherly blinders... Not everyone will be as safe, sanitary or careful as you particular granddaughters. I can tell this must have hit a nerve for you to take this so literally. You must know that not all drink stands will be manned by conscientious young ladies with all care being made towards keeping their stand sanitary. Some stands might serve a carbonated drink; some a flavored drink like Kool Aid. Other possibilities exist. Not all stands will be manned by sweet young ladies serving only lemonade.
>
You don't have any facts about people getting sick from a lemonade stand
though. I could not find any.
> I was pissed off that I saw another soccer Mom that decided that her little angels were above the law, above its enforcement, and she decided what was right and what wasn't. Her kids of course, didn't have to play by the rules because they were obviously special. This of course was decided by yet another self entitle snot that is passing her attitudes clearly onto her kids.
>
> REMEMBER... the only thing the little angels had to do was to get their hysterical mother to turn their sign around and write "donations accepted" or "suggested donation" or something like that. This didn't have to be on national news about the oppression of young children, the unfairness of society, more fodder for Fox news to screech about how America has lost it common sense, and then the Mom and her children on the morning shows talking about how everyone should just use common sense (ignoring the fact they were breaking the law) and then finally wind up on Oprah in tear hoping that the children could go on in such an unfair society. All they had to do is scribble 2 or 3 words on their sign and it would have been perfectly legal...
>
REMEMBER, all the cop had to do was explain that to the kids and mom.
You get pissed at the mom over reacting but let the cop slide. Could
have been handled in two minutes and never made the news. It wasn't.
>>> With about almost 2000 folks served over the years, by simply playing by the rules we have never had a problem with law enforcement.
>
>> But in reality you are circumventing the rules.
>
> That is absolutely untrue. "Donations accepted" is perfectly legal. It is a well defined statute that is upheld by the San Antonio Health Department, the Sheriff's Department, and of course the Police. All one has to do is put the tiniest, most miniscule effort into playing by the rules and there isn't a problem.
>
So why did the cop not take two minutes to explain it? Done. Easy.
> But if you are s wounded soccer Mom looking for your time in the sun, this was a great stunt. I doubt the little girls had much to do with the outrage, and would probably been fine if they were told to just change two or three words on their sign. I think they were out there for their Dad, not for attention.
>
It was a great stunt. Made a cop look like the asshole he is. Got what
he deserved, IMO.
> I trust the kids with
>> lemonade more that your potentially improperly handled and cooked food.
>
> Well, we haven't made anyone sick yet. We have two members of our club that have trained all of us that handle the food and we spend a lot of time and money on sanitation. Of the two trainers, one has been in the food industry for about 25 years, owned and run his own restaurant, and currently trains people on proper serving and handling of food. The other works for a food wholesaler that travels doing food shows. He makes sure that temps are maintained, utensils are cleaned and stored properly, that we are all "gloved up", and that any sanitation issues are addressed as needed.
>
>> Could be contaminated with cigar ash.
>
> That would be my worry. :^)
>
> We are all careful in the prep and serving area, but still, those pesky ashes can be hard to control. Think it might add a different dimension of flavor to the beans, but not so good in the potato salad.
>
> Robert
>
How do I know that? The risks are far greater from a bunch of guys,
training unknown, serving cooked food. Accepting donations does not
make up for poor food handling techniques, it is simply a work around
for the normal restaurant regulations. You can ask about it, but don't
ask the police, they'd rather arrest you.
On 6/12/2015 1:09 PM, Sonny wrote:
> I guess Baker, who initially penned the law, wasn't intelligent enough to pen some exceptions, based on common sense and circumstances. I would suspect he is an idiot attorney.
>
> As to selling lemonade, now we know to offer Goodies, for free, and ask for donations, for a cause.
>
> This Texas event kinna reminds me of a situation that occurred, here, in Louisiana, regarding written or the writing of laws, and the "fix" (the Louisiana case) has had alternate or counter results. Inmates were overloading the courts, by filing frivolous (ridiculous) law suits. To stop the "frivolous" suits, a law was proposed to limit the kind of cases to allow and to limit the State's liability (payments) for the inmates' "frivolous" suits. The proposed law (the wording and public discusion) was circulated many months prior to the voting. It was written and understood the law would be to disallow certain (many) suits, altogether, and to limit the liability for those that were not disallowed. So that's what the people prepared to vote on.
>
> Eight days prior to the election, the proposed law went into committee, for final drafting, proper wording, etc. No one is privy to that committee's actions (closed door, no review) and once the final bill (wording) comes out of committee, that's how it's presented/printed on the ballot. It came out of committee 3 days before the balloting/voting, which was only enough time to get the written words in print, on/for the ballot. No one had time to assess what had taken place, to stop it. The final wording, which no one paid attention to, because everyone assumed it had remained the same, as they knew it was to be, .... the final wording had been changed, in commitee, to "all law suits against the State", not just the inmate frivolous ones. The liability limit was reduced, also.
>
> That (Texas) Baker's Law seems to (maybe) be a kind of "all encomposing" type of worded law.
>
> Sonny
>
That sounds like they pulled a fast one. Great legislators... can
someone please put them in a cage where they can't do any harm.
--
Jeff
Sonny <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> This Texas event kinna reminds me of a situation that occurred, here,
> in Louisiana, regarding written or the writing of laws, and the "fix"
> (the Louisiana case) has had alternate or counter results.
<example snipped>
Florida can top that. A couple of years ago the Legislature got
their panties in a wad about "adult gaming arcades", which they
decided were a form of gambling. In attempting to ban them,
they created such a poorly worded bill that they outlawed all
computers, cell phones, and anything else which connects to a
network.
John
"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in news:557b3fd7$0$22334$c3e8da3
[email protected]:
>
> "John McCoy" wrote:
>
>> Florida can top that.[...]
> -------------------------------------------
> Lead by that turkey gobbler you call governor.
You could cut the irony here with a knife.
On Friday, June 12, 2015 at 10:32:19 AM UTC-5, Mike Marlow wrote:
> Local on-line rag ran this article today. I can hardly believe Texas would
> be the state to enforce this kind of thing.
>
> <http://www.syracuse.com/us-news/index.ssf/2015/06/texas_cops_shut_down_illegal_childrens_lemonade_stand.html#incart_river>
>
>
> --
>
> -Mike-
> [email protected]
The America we like to remember is just that, a memory. Today we are fat, self-indulgent, lazy, PC obsessed, litigation insane and indoctrinated instead of educated.
On 6/12/2015 11:36 PM, Gray_Wolf wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Jun 2015 13:01:00 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Leon wrote:
>>> On 6/12/2015 10:30 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>>>> Local on-line rag ran this article today. I can hardly believe
>>>> Texas would be the state to enforce this kind of thing.
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.syracuse.com/us-news/index.ssf/2015/06/texas_cops_shut_down_illegal_childrens_lemonade_stand.html#incart_river>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Obviously some twit neighbor complained. I can't tell you how many
>>> CoolAid stands I ran.
>>
>> Don't be admitting this in public Leon - you're leaving yourself open to
>> future prosecution. I'm not sure there is a statute of limitations on
>> lemonaid stands in Texas...
>
> I don't think it matters much anymore. They can charge you with
> anything they want. No mtter if you did it or not.
> How about an IRS audit to start off with.
>
OTOH, this all happened so long ago, what difference does it make now?
;)
Sadly, we have a great deal of roaming attorneys scouring the streets for b=
usiness just like anywhere else these days.
The ordinances to prevent anyone from setting up a food vending without per=
mits by folks that don't follow the local health codes and are not properly=
trained in food handling issues such as temperature control, actual handli=
ng of food, storage, personal cleanliness, etc. have been on the books in S=
tate and its cities for decades. While these two small 8 year old children =
are no doubt absolutely darling and remind one of their own days of growing=
up in a Norman Rockwell America, things have changed.
The cop probably did the parents of these children a favor. The parents ca=
n be held responsible for any food poisoning or sickness resultant of the l=
ittle darlings efforts, no matter how cute or well intentioned. And the la=
w wasn't meant to drive small children into a police state terror, it was m=
eant to keep the multitudes of impromptu vendors away that started showing =
up at State festivals, county events, and city celebrations. They were sel=
ling food from unknown sources, prepared in many cases off site and unsuper=
vised. When food poisoning broke out it was impossible to find out the cul=
prit's identity since there were so many of these little trailers and stand=
s set up at events. Since a law has to be written broadly enough to cover =
most instances of concern, it often encompasses everyone. =20
So the two little wide eyed waifs that simply wanted to do something nice f=
or their father (saw it with me.... awwwww.... how cute) fall under the sa=
me ordinance as he guy that sets up a card table outside a local car show a=
nd sells tacos (made at home, unsupervised, from who knows what)out of a ol=
d beat up cooler. To not stop these two children is <selective> enforcemen=
t of the law, and I know how that grinds the gears of this group. Uneducate=
d about the world and having that sense of entitlement that their parents s=
eem to have about their actions (MY children should be able to do what they=
want)they may not realize that they can be liable for any food poisoning, =
damage or injury suffered on their property from their commercial enterpris=
e. To me, the cop did them a favor. =20
Not nearly as much fun as yelling about the loss common sense and lamenting=
the loss of the "good old days", though. This had to a a good thing, righ=
t? After all it was just two cute little girls doing something to show the=
ir Daddy how much they love him. =20
I shudder to think about my nephew touching his own food at 8 years old. A=
n industrial strength kid, you had to hose him down to make sure it was act=
ually him on occasion. Like a lot of kids, he didn't really connect the do=
ts on hygiene, and was unworried about it consequences. Same age as the tw=
o darlings...
I am glad the parents pulled their sanctimonious, self righteous, self dese=
rving heads out of their asses and do what everyone else has done here in T=
exas for the last 25 years, and that is to simply ask for a donation. Ever=
y church fund raiser is done that way. Every boy/girl scout barbecue, car =
wash, snow cone stand, cold water selling, spaghetti dinner, casino night, =
etc., etc., etc., etc., is done that way.
Every year for the last six our cigar club has a Memorial Day barbecue to e=
arn money to pay for a Christmas Eve dinner at the Fisher House. Every yea=
r we serve about 300 plates of brisket, sausage, beans, hot dogs, potato sa=
lad, drinks, chips, etc. Every year, the health department says, "now sir,=
I have a very important question for you. I know you would prefer a donati=
on, but you have someone come up to the food line and simply want a plate, =
will you feed them?" I say, "yes", and they sign my permit for the park ga=
zebo. No donation is necessary, because if they are >>required<< to donate=
to get food that is the same as selling it.
This year they sent a guy by to see if he could get a free plate, and since=
I trained the servers, they told him absolutely. No harm, no foul.
With about almost 2000 folks served over the years, by simply playing by th=
e rules we have never had a problem with law enforcement. In fact, when I =
go to the city hall of the little suburb that has the park I use, I always =
tell the police to make sure they come, as we honor all men in uniform. We=
always give them a free plate, and about half of them donate.
Learning how the world works can be a tricky business for some people. Whe=
n most self centered folks want to do things "their way" and ignore laws an=
d ordinances simply because they feel like their case is special, they may =
never learn on their own that the world isn't actually about them. I saw m=
ore than one interview with the idiot mother, and she was the one that expo=
sed her own selfish stupidity by making a national case of outrage out of t=
his incident. I was happy for the little girls that someone told the parent=
s about the "church dinner" rule so the kids didn't have to suffer more fro=
m the asininity of their parents.
Robert =20
On 6/12/2015 11:30 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> Local on-line rag ran this article today. I can hardly believe Texas would
> be the state to enforce this kind of thing.
>
> <http://www.syracuse.com/us-news/index.ssf/2015/06/texas_cops_shut_down_illegal_childrens_lemonade_stand.html#incart_river>
>
>
It was the right thing to do. Today, lemonade stands, tomorrow, they
will be selling unauthorized Bud Light.
Lemonade is like a gateway drug, they start small and later become
entrepreneurs and self sufficient. Once that happens the need for
government control diminishes and our society will be ruined.
On Wednesday, June 17, 2015 at 7:18:34 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> You don't have any facts about people getting sick from a lemonade stand=
=20
> though. I could not find any.
I never said I did. You are only thinking of cute girls selling lemonade, =
I am thinking of the whole picture of a community of street side food selle=
rs.
> REMEMBER, all the cop had to do was explain that to the kids and mom.=20
> You get pissed at the mom over reacting but let the cop slide. Could=20
> have been handled in two minutes and never made the news. It wasn't.
Well, while you are concentrating in such a focused manner on facts, how do=
you know he didn't? Do you know for a fact that he didn't?
> So why did the cop not take two minutes to explain it? Done. Easy.
Again, how do you know he didn't do just that? He didn't write the parents=
a citation or a ticket. How do you know he wasn't just a polite guy that =
told the kids and their mother that the way they were doing it wasn't allow=
ed?
> It was a great stunt. Made a cop look like the asshole he is. Got what=
=20
> he deserved, IMO.
Bashing of law enforcement is a really popular sport right now and in some =
cases, no doubt deserved. If you feel that he "got what he deserved" by en=
forcing the law, I am sure you must have personal knowledge of why that is =
so. I will defer to your knowledge of the man personally and his professio=
nal service record; I don't know him, nor was I there at the time he asked =
them to fold up their table.
> How do I know that? =20
I am not sure what it is you know...
> The risks are far greater from a bunch of guys,=20
> training unknown, serving cooked food. =20
Reading carefully you can see that we are trained by professionals that tra=
in for a living that make their living in the food business doing just that=
. Sorry if I was unclear in my description of their training and qualifica=
tions.
> Accepting donations does not=20
> make up for poor food handling techniques, it is simply a work around=20
> for the normal restaurant regulations.
Now you are being deliberately obtuse. You are making a classic straw man =
argument out of two separate issues. To be clear, accepting donations is a=
ccepted by the law enforcement community and the city health board. We are=
skirting NOTHING, and not trying to deceive or conceal anything. Every ev=
ent we have the police come by to visit (we give men in uniform free plates=
of food) and this last event we had the city health inspector come by. Re=
gardless of our donation status, they can still stick a thermometer in our =
food anytime they feel like it if we are serving to the general public. Li=
kewise, they inspect hand washing stations, gloves, food storage, food prep=
and utensil storage and use. Since we serve the public we have to (and ri=
ghtfully so in my opinion) agree to those stipulations.
So WTF are we "working around"?
> You can ask about it, but don't=20
> ask the police, they'd rather arrest you.
I'll have to ask the police, or at our next event, the MPs on base those qu=
estions while they are chowing down in their Christmas Eve meal. They may =
not be too worried about what we are serving and how as at San Antonio Mili=
tary Medical Center and the adjoining Fisher House they have their own comp=
liance officers that inspect our food handling, preparation and serving as =
well as all sanitation techniques. They will not take a chance on any hosp=
italized soldiers or their families getting sick, so they do their own comp=
liance inspections and will shut down the whole dinner for any violations.
On consideration, all in all probably not too different from the stringent =
observation of compliance issues dealt with by the lemonade girls.
Robert
On 6/13/2015 12:35 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> Sadly, we have a great deal of roaming attorneys scouring the streets for business just like anywhere else these days.
>
> The ordinances to prevent anyone from setting up a food vending without permits by folks that don't follow the local health codes and are not properly trained in food handling issues such as temperature control, actual handling of food, storage, personal cleanliness, etc. have been on the books in State and its cities for decades. While these two small 8 year old children are no doubt absolutely darling and remind one of their own days of growing up in a Norman Rockwell America, things have changed.
>
> The cop probably did the parents of these children a favor. The parents can be held responsible for any food poisoning or sickness resultant of the little darlings efforts, no matter how cute or well intentioned. And the law wasn't meant to drive small children into a police state terror, it was meant to keep the multitudes of impromptu vendors away that started showing up at State festivals, county events, and city celebrations. They were selling food from unknown sources, prepared in many cases off site and unsupervised. When food poisoning broke out it was impossible to find out the culprit's identity since there were so many of these little trailers and stands set up at events. Since a law has to be written broadly enough to cover most instances of concern, it often encompasses everyone.
>
> So the two little wide eyed waifs that simply wanted to do something nice for their father (saw it with me.... awwwww.... how cute) fall under the same ordinance as he guy that sets up a card table outside a local car show and sells tacos (made at home, unsupervised, from who knows what)out of a old beat up cooler. To not stop these two children is <selective> enforcement of the law, and I know how that grinds the gears of this group. Uneducated about the world and having that sense of entitlement that their parents seem to have about their actions (MY children should be able to do what they want)they may not realize that they can be liable for any food poisoning, damage or injury suffered on their property from their commercial enterprise. To me, the cop did them a favor.
>
Do you have statistics on food poisoning by lemonade stand? I know
enough about food handling and safe practice to know the risk is
incredibly low. Lemonade is acidic and has good tolernce to the cooties.
My granddaughters decided to sell lemonade in front of my house. Little
traffic on our street, but the first customer was the local policeman on
patrol Even tipped them. Once or twice a year I'll see a couple of
kids selling lemonade and I try to stop and get some. They appreciate it.
> Every year for the last six our cigar club has a Memorial Day barbecue to earn money to pay for a Christmas Eve dinner at the Fisher House. Every year we serve about 300 plates of brisket, sausage, beans, hot dogs, potato salad, drinks, chips, etc. Every year, the health department says, "now sir, I have a very important question for you. I know you would prefer a donation, but you have someone come up to the food line and simply want a plate, will you feed them?" I say, "yes", and they sign my permit for the park gazebo. No donation is necessary, because if they are >>required<< to donate to get food that is the same as selling it.
>
> This year they sent a guy by to see if he could get a free plate, and since I trained the servers, they told him absolutely. No harm, no foul.
>
> With about almost 2000 folks served over the years, by simply playing by the rules we have never had a problem with law enforcement.
But in reality you are circumventing the rules. I trust the kids with
lemonade more that your potentially improperly handled and cooked food.
Could be contaminated with cigar ash.
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> It was the right thing to do. Today, lemonade stands, tomorrow, they
> will be selling unauthorized Bud Light.
Maybe true - but it is afterall, all about the children...
>
> Lemonade is like a gateway drug, they start small and later become
> entrepreneurs and self sufficient. Once that happens the need for
> government control diminishes and our society will be ruined.
Ponderous sort of thought. I might have to give that some real thought.
Somehow, I got trapped in the innocence of our own childhood experiences and
had not looked forward to the perils of the future for our children. So
glad you corrected my thinking on this...
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Leon wrote:
> On 6/12/2015 10:30 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Local on-line rag ran this article today. I can hardly believe
>> Texas would be the state to enforce this kind of thing.
>>
>> <http://www.syracuse.com/us-news/index.ssf/2015/06/texas_cops_shut_down_illegal_childrens_lemonade_stand.html#incart_river>
>>
>>
>
>
> Obviously some twit neighbor complained. I can't tell you how many
> CoolAid stands I ran.
Don't be admitting this in public Leon - you're leaving yourself open to
future prosecution. I'm not sure there is a statute of limitations on
lemonaid stands in Texas...
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
"Leon" <> wrote in message
> On 6/12/2015 10:30 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Local on-line rag ran this article today. I
>> can hardly believe Texas would
>> be the state to enforce this kind of thing.
>>
>> <http://www.syracuse.com/us-news/index.ssf/2015/06/texas_cops_shut_down_illegal_childrens_lemonade_stand.html#incart_river>
>>
>>
>
>
> Obviously some twit neighbor complained. I
> can't tell you how many CoolAid stands I ran.
The kids won. "Free lemonade. Donations accepted"
[email protected] wrote:
>
> The ordinances to prevent anyone from setting up a food vending
> without permits by folks that don't follow the local health codes and
> are not properly trained in food handling issues such as temperature
> control, actual handling of food, storage, personal cleanliness, etc.
> have been on the books in State and its cities for decades. While
> these two small 8 year old children are no doubt absolutely darling
> and remind one of their own days of growing up in a Norman Rockwell
> America, things have changed.
>
Yes, of course - all states have similar ordinances for the same reasons.
That said - we all survived those risky days of our own childhood with front
lawn lemonaid stands. There's a point where public health concers that are
targeted at one aspect of food service, simply over extend themselvs at
other levels.
> The cop probably did the parents of these children a favor. The
> parents can be held responsible for any food poisoning or sickness
> resultant of the little darlings efforts, no matter how cute or well
> intentioned. And the law wasn't meant to drive small children into a
> police state terror, it was meant to keep the multitudes of impromptu
> vendors away that started showing up at State festivals, county
> events, and city celebrations. They were selling food from unknown
> sources, prepared in many cases off site and unsupervised. When food
> poisoning broke out it was impossible to find out the culprit's
> identity since there were so many of these little trailers and stands
> set up at events. Since a law has to be written broadly enough to
> cover most instances of concern, it often encompasses everyone.
Yup it does, but that does not make it a shame that broad brushes paint such
wide swaths. Reason sometimes does not seem to prevail.
>
> So the two little wide eyed waifs that simply wanted to do something
> nice for their father (saw it with me.... awwwww.... how cute) fall
> under the same ordinance as he guy that sets up a card table outside
> a local car show and sells tacos (made at home, unsupervised, from
> who knows what)out of a old beat up cooler.
Actually - No, in my opinion. I see a lot of difference between the two.
The two little girls posed so little risk for spoilage and like issues, as
to be non-existent. That makes the ordinance unnecessary and even (IMHO)
inappropriate as applied to them.
> To not stop these two
> children is <selective> enforcement of the law, and I know how that
> grinds the gears of this group. Uneducated about the world and having
> that sense of entitlement that their parents seem to have about their
> actions (MY children should be able to do what they want)they may not
> realize that they can be liable for any food poisoning, damage or
> injury suffered on their property from their commercial enterprise.
> To me, the cop did them a favor.
Of course what you say is true in the strictest sense, but again - the
likelihood of this occuring in this case? Laws and fears both need to be
grounded in practical thought.
>
> I shudder to think about my nephew touching his own food at 8 years
> old. An industrial strength kid, you had to hose him down to make
> sure it was actually him on occasion. Like a lot of kids, he didn't
> really connect the dots on hygiene, and was unworried about it
> consequences. Same age as the two darlings...
Well - didn't we all go through that, with little to none of the outcomes
that fear would suggest. Hell Robert - some of us grew up on farms...
>
> I am glad the parents pulled their sanctimonious, self righteous,
> self deserving heads out of their asses and do what everyone else has
> done here in Texas for the last 25 years, and that is to simply ask
> for a donation. Every church fund raiser is done that way. Every
> boy/girl scout barbecue, car wash, snow cone stand, cold water
> selling, spaghetti dinner, casino night, etc., etc., etc., etc., is
> done that way.
>
But that's what makes this whole argument invalid. Nothing else has
changed - the lemonaid is the same product, but now it's ok because it can
be delivered under the banner of a donation. That completely nullifies the
public health concern. It just goes to show how irrelevant the enforcement
of this ordinance really is.
> Every year for the last six our cigar club has a Memorial Day
> barbecue to earn money to pay for a Christmas Eve dinner at the
> Fisher House. Every year we serve about 300 plates of brisket,
> sausage, beans, hot dogs, potato salad, drinks, chips, etc. Every
> year, the health department says, "now sir, I have a very important
> question for you. I know you would prefer a donation, but you have
> someone come up to the food line and simply want a plate, will you
> feed them?" I say, "yes", and they sign my permit for the park
> gazebo. No donation is necessary, because if they are >>required<<
> to donate to get food that is the same as selling it.
>
> This year they sent a guy by to see if he could get a free plate, and
> since I trained the servers, they told him absolutely. No harm, no
> foul.
>
> With about almost 2000 folks served over the years, by simply playing
> by the rules we have never had a problem with law enforcement. In
> fact, when I go to the city hall of the little suburb that has the
> park I use, I always tell the police to make sure they come, as we
> honor all men in uniform. We always give them a free plate, and
> about half of them donate.
That's great - it really is (I'm not being sarcastic). It's a noble
position. But - from a health standpoint, that does no more to ensure
proper health standards than the kid's effort to simply set up a front yard
lemonaid stand. It's just a way around the regulations. Does nothing to
protect against that taco guy you used as an example earlier.
>
> Learning how the world works can be a tricky business for some
> people. When most self centered folks want to do things "their way"
> and ignore laws and ordinances simply because they feel like their
> case is special, they may never learn on their own that the world
> isn't actually about them. I saw more than one interview with the
> idiot mother, and she was the one that exposed her own selfish
> stupidity by making a national case of outrage out of this incident.
> I was happy for the little girls that someone told the parents about
> the "church dinner" rule so the kids didn't have to suffer more from
> the asininity of their parents.
>
I don't suggest ignoring laws and ordinances. I'm talking about the
assinine nature of broad brushes that often accompany poorly thought through
ordinances. When proper concerns such as ensuring proper food handling as
you've mentioned, sweep so low as to regulate something as simple, and as
unlikely to present any form of health hazzard, of a kid's lemonaid stand,
well - that's where the law got really stupid.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On Fri, 12 Jun 2015 13:01:00 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Leon wrote:
>> On 6/12/2015 10:30 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> Local on-line rag ran this article today. I can hardly believe
>>> Texas would be the state to enforce this kind of thing.
>>>
>>> <http://www.syracuse.com/us-news/index.ssf/2015/06/texas_cops_shut_down_illegal_childrens_lemonade_stand.html#incart_river>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Obviously some twit neighbor complained. I can't tell you how many
>> CoolAid stands I ran.
>
>Don't be admitting this in public Leon - you're leaving yourself open to
>future prosecution. I'm not sure there is a statute of limitations on
>lemonaid stands in Texas...
I don't think it matters much anymore. They can charge you with
anything they want. No mtter if you did it or not.
How about an IRS audit to start off with.
"Unquestionably Confused" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 6/12/2015 11:36 PM, Gray_Wolf wrote:
>> On Fri, 12 Jun 2015 13:01:00 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Leon wrote:
>>>> On 6/12/2015 10:30 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>>>>> Local on-line rag ran this article today. I can hardly believe
>>>>> Texas would be the state to enforce this kind of thing.
>>>>>
>>>>> <http://www.syracuse.com/us-news/index.ssf/2015/06/texas_cops_shut_down_illegal_childrens_lemonade_stand.html#incart_river>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Obviously some twit neighbor complained. I can't tell you how many
>>>> CoolAid stands I ran.
>>>
>>> Don't be admitting this in public Leon - you're leaving yourself open to
>>> future prosecution. I'm not sure there is a statute of limitations on
>>> lemonaid stands in Texas...
>>
>> I don't think it matters much anymore. They can charge you with
>> anything they want. No mtter if you did it or not.
>> How about an IRS audit to start off with.
>>
>
>
> OTOH, this all happened so long ago, what difference does it make now?
Statute of limitations must have run out 50 or 60 years ago.
Dave in SoTex