Hmm, I hate to say this but most likely other counties will follow. Tarrant, Parker, Hood, Dallas, etc.. Protecting us from ourselves as well as others & banking on county revenuers fees while at it. Texans arent going to like this, but a lot of us need to learn some self control. Anyone still up for Carsons or Hooters in south Arlington?
Who says those people that were harassed by the law in the bars didn't make plans on not driving such as a D/Driver or cab rides? I say that needs to be nipped in the bud before it becomes a standard law enforcement practice.
I've seen way too many bars over-serve patrons & not even bother calling a cab. The issue is there going after public intoxication in a bar. Geez, it just sounds so damn stupid. I can understand a public park or an event like Greenville Ave St. Patricks day parade but it going to escalate to an abuse of power for smaller bars like my favorite neighborhood watering hole.
Page 16 http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa501.pdf. Misplaced Zeal: “You Can’t Be Drunk in a Bar” In December 2002 police in Fairfax County, Virginia, initiated a series of "stings" in bars and taverns in the jurisdictions of Reston and Herndon.169 Eighteen tavern patrons were singled out, while still inside the tavern, and ordered to submit to alcohol breath tests. Half of them were then arrested for "public intoxication." None of the patrons had made an attempt to get behind the wheel of a car. None had been a nuisance for bartenders or caused any type of disturbance. Several of the people arrested were actually accompanied by "designated drivers." Police were also considering fining the bars where the intoxicated patrons were arrested. Police Chief J. Thomas Manger told the Washington Post: "Public intoxication is against the law. You can’t be drunk in a bar." When asked where someone could be drunk, he replied: "At home. Or at someone else’s home, and stay there till you’re not drunk." Despite the public outcry, Chief Manger got a vote of public support from NHTSA. Spokesman Chuck Hurley told the Post: "Nothing in the Constitution says you’re entitled to be intoxicated at these levels. These are somewhat unusual tactics. But given the facts, I support law enforcement." _______ A Former MADD Executive Speaks Out: The Anti-Drunk Driving Campaign: A Covert War Against Drinking--By Charles V. Peña http://www.getmadd.com/PenaArticle.htm
Ok attorneys, Explain how an officer has the right to go into a privately owned business? This is not public intoxication. This is possibly intoxication in a privately owned business.
If there is a law against something, breaking a law in a privately owned business does not make it legal. Just like bars where smoking is illegal...cops can go in there too. It's sill BS though...
This story made it on Good Morning America today. It's pretty sad, they arrested a bunch of people in the bar AND the bartender! The people they arrested were staying in the hotel that the bar was in!
RR and I visited "Milo Butterfingers" on upper Greenville Avenue on Wednesday night around 9pm. Not many people in the bar. We sat down. The 65 year old owner of the bar walks straight over to us. First words out of his mouth: "Are you guys TABC or Dallas cops? If you are, I know you have to identify yourselves."
Thats insane, another reason to believe we really dont live in a free society. If the cops really were smart they would sit in the parking lot. Arresting someone in the hotel bar where they aare staying is pretty sad.... Rob refugee from San Antonio
Wow that is amazing that they could do something like that. Its not like the people were being rowdy or causing a disturbance. Abuse of power.
Here is a quick explanation why the State can continue to check for "public" intoxication. (1) The problem with the previous posts is the incorrect use of the phrase "privately owned business". For example, the State generally has sufficient interest to control certain aspects of a business conduct where the State issues a liquor license. This is true for business entities and individuals (e.g., Doctors, Lawyers, CPAs, Financial Analysis, Restaurants, Shooting Ranges, etc). Generally the word "private" is not applicable where the government has issued a license. (2) Thus, to avoid such control the business can simply choose not to use a license issued by the state. Note this is also true with the federal government with regards to the state and local governments. The perfect example is highway funding and speed limits. Although I do not necessarily agree with the actions of the State agencies, the alternatives are much worse--I have debated this issue many times while in law school. Hope this helps. AnyMeans
Sadly - been there seen that. Several years ago we lived for a while in one of the Rocky Mountain states. The law enforcement folks in the principal town in our very rural county would drive through bar and restaurant parking lots in the evnings writing down license plates and noting the times the cars were seen in the lots. If you stayed in an establishment more than the time it took to wolf down a quick meal you were likely to be stopped as soon as you hit the street. The assumption seemed to be that if you were in a place long enough you must have consumed more than an appropriate quantity of adult beverages and needed to be pulled over. The irony of this is the fact that this town was on a tourist laden highway and the local chamber of commerce was always complaining that no one seemed to be interested in stopping in town for a meal while passing through. It was almost funny. The town fathers never seemed to figure it out. John
Interesting post from a Texas small town cop on another forum. I agree with this from a public safety perspective. I stay in many of these small towns night before duck hunting and will hit the local honky tonk. Parking lot will have 50 cars and there will be 100 drunks inside. When I wake up and leave in the morning 5am, how many cars are left in the lot? Usually 2-3 and I bet more of those were hook-ups than cabs. Conservatively 50% of those cars were driving away intoxicated. Not sure why they don't do more checkpoints. Cop doesn't have to spend 2-3 hours processing a DWI. Just block the road and bus them. What I have a problem with is PI arrests if not legally intoxicated, but from the Irving example with 30 arrested, I agree that most of those were probably way over the limit.
