Replies

I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing, but how is it different from prostitution and drug stings when the police use an undercover officer?

It is my understanding that, with regards to the prositution, the undercover cops are not allowed to proposition the "john". They can hint at it, but the john must be the one to offer money for sex. If the cop were to say something like "For $50 I'll have sex with you" that would be considered entrapment. However, if the cop said "Hey sugar, what can I do for you tonight?" and the john answered "How about $50 for sex?" then they've got him.

Likewise with the undercover drug stings, although given the leeway that law enforcement gets when going after anything drug-related, any concern about entrapment probably gets thrown out the window these days. On the other hand, it's hard to argue entrapment when they bust you with 10 kilos of cocaine, 4 AK-47s and $250,000 in cash.

The worst thing about these tobacco and alcohol stings using minors is that they usually target the lowest-paid employees, i.e. some college kid working at 7-11. The idea that minimum-wage employees now have to be agents of law enforcement seems ludicrous. By that I mean that the legislature passes a law saying kids under 18 can't have cigarettes, and then declare that it is up to the sellers to determine who is violating that law, and if they fail to enforce it, they are the ones who get busted.