How about this: Anyone with a car capable of going over the speed limit was subject to being arrested on the spot.
Well, this would be a starting point. PI involves more than just being drunk. You also have be a nuisance or other such things. The exact law is posted in this thread or in the D&D version of it.
I guess you could discuss this hypothetical. It has nothing to do with the issue being discussed, but that seems to be the theme for people trying to argue that it shouldn't be OK to arrest people for committing a crime.
Major, you are WAY too logical for this argument. Personally, I just don't get drinking on the whole. I do it on a rare occassion and I never get drunk. I have been before and it wasn't fun. It was, generally, a pretty miserable experience despite my surroundings, which you'd think would make it a blast. I guess I just wonder why you can't enjoy yourself without it. I'm not moralizing. If you want to drink, that's up to you. I guess I just think, well, if you can't have as much fun without the alcohol involved, doesn't that say something about the mood altering nature of it in the first place? It's like sleeping pills. I mean, if you REALLY can't sleep, you medicate. You do it because you need it. If you fall asleep fine without it, what's the point of taking it? Same with alcohol. Wouldn't it be easier and cheaper to just be happy and have fun without the need for liquid medication? Like I said, no judgement, just wondering out loud. And, of course, Major is right. Just because you think the law is unjust doesn't make it not illegal to break it. If you want the law changed, change the law. But, if you break a known law and the penalty for that law is jail, ultimately, you have no argument. I just paid a ticket for running a red light. When it happened, it was a total accident. There was a big truck in front of me. I went around him, was unable to see the light and, at the last minute, he slammed on his breaks to stop. I wasn't able to stop until I was halfway through the intersection on a light that just changed red. I had to go or restrict the flow of traffic. Cop was there. I got a ticket. Now, I didn't want to shell out the money and it was an honest mistake. But, I broke the law. End of story. So, if you are PI in a bar, you are breaking the law regardless of whether others do it too. If you get busted, you get busted. End of story.
Running a red light and being intoxicated in a bar are completely unrelated.....this story sums up what a majority of the public thinks... http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/03/26kelso.html You've got to hand it to the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission, a state agency that has an amazing grasp of the obvious. Over six months, TABC agents issued 2,281 criminal citations to people in Texas bars, many of them cited because they were drunk. Isn't busting people for being drunk at a bar like shooting a bass in a bathtub? I mean, where else are you going to find drunks? At a University of Texas football game? But hats off to the TABC for being clever enough to realize that if you're looking for drunks, a bar where alcohol is served is a great place to start. I think it's time we rewrote the old Texas tourism motto to say: "Texas: It's Like a Whole 'Nother Country — Saudi Arabia." You're not supposed to drink in Saudi Arabia, and, after hearing what the TABC is doing with its undercover agents in Texas bars, it's become pretty obvious you're not supposed to drink in Texas, either. So if you're a tourist from another state trying to settle on a destination, and you drink, you might want to think about spending your vacation money somewhere else. Try someplace nice where they won't mess with you, like maybe New Mexico. One purpose of the sting is to keep people from presenting a danger to themselves. At least one bar targeted was a hotel bar in Irving. Maybe this was done to cut down on the number of hotel guests falling out of bed. Going to a bar to arrest drunks: That would be like going out to the golf course and busting people for putting. Or, better still, it would be like going to a Girl Scout meeting and busting the girls for making s'mores. 'Course, now we're getting into legitimate arrests. "Maybe they should get somebody to go into the Golden Corral and arrest all the lardasses," said my friend Scott Wilson, who has been known to tip a few on special occasions, like Saturday. I can hear it now from the food cop who has raids the Golden Corral: "Sir, step away from the gravy and put your fork down where I can see it." I never have understood why Texas needs an alcoholic beverage commission in the first place. Just about every town — except for Bartlett — has its own police force, every county has a sheriff's department, and we have a state agency of cops known as the Department of Public Safety. Don't you suppose there are enough officers to enforce booze laws without having a special department? And, if all these TABC people have to do is hang out in bars and go after drunks, I think that proves my point. I think the whole bunch should be given useful jobs mowing the Capitol lawn or something. Certainly we can find some worthwhile work for these folks to do. You know what message this sting sends out to drinkers? The message is this: Instead of drinking with your friends in a bar and listening to country music and carrying on an interesting conversation, you should be drinking at home alone. Isn't that the sort of thing that leads to a SWAT team out front with a bullhorn?
Not in the context I put them. They are both laws being broken. Like I said, if you don't like the law, get it changed. But, as long as it is a law, when it is broken, there are consequences to pay if that person is busted.
I love how non-drinkers keep trying to rationalize this. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to get a drink... -Fatty FatBastard
WRONG. As I stated before, if they started arresting people for speeding, which they can do, I think you would think differently. That is exactly what happened here.
Or if they'd arrested and jailed people five years ago for having oral sex. In that case, finally, the law was changed. And I agree with Jeff that that is what ought to happen ultimately, rather than just ignoring the law. The thing is though, this came out of nowhere. People were doing what millions of people do every single night in America and out of nowhere they were suddenly spending the night in jail and facing criminal prosecution. This law, like the sodomy laws before it, will not survive a challenge brought on by its out of the blue enforcement. I don't believe bars or drinking to the point of drunkenness in bars are in any long term danger, but it sure does suck for those people that got (and are getting?) stung. Jail freaking sucks. Going there for doing something millions of people do and no one is prosecuted for -- behavior that they could not in a million years have predicted would land them in jail -- is horrible and ridiculous. And I don't think one person here who is arguing in favor of the law's enforcement would be singing the same tune about breaking the law and facing the consequences if the cops had been arresting people for all those illegal blowjobs before that law changed. Jeff is ambivalent because he doesn't drink. That's fine but it doesn't make his argument a sensible one.
We could also discuss going to Mars, and that wouldn't be relevant either. Explain how your example is, in any way, relevant, and I'll respond. For starters, what you described is not illegal. People can't be arrested for something not illegal. None of that is true in this case.
Except it didn't come out of nowhere. People are arrested for PI for causing disturbances in bars all the time - 2000+ times in the last six months, according to the article in this thread. The only difference is that the police proactively looked for them instead of just doing it when they happen to be there. It's not the offense that's unique here, it's the fact that there was a sting operation.
In a way TABC may be doing folks a favor if you look at it from that perspective. What is a worse offense to get busted for, PI or DUI? I think I would opt for the PI over getting a DUI.
The flipside is that what if you've planned on a responsible night by a) taking a cab to the bar or b) having a designated driver. Arrested for PI is much worse than having a hangover the next morning after arriving safely home.
Looks like TABC isn't enjoying all the negative publicity... ___________ Crackdown inside bars to get review Public complaints over a statewide crackdown on public intoxication have spurred the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission to open an internal investigation, retrain staff and clarify goals of the program, the agency's administrator wrote in a letter released Wednesday. The agency did not agree to halt the crackdown, as requested by state Rep. Kino Flores, who heads a House oversight committee that's looking into the agency's arrests at Texas bars. But TABC Administrator Alan Steen said the agency continues to "investigate any and all complaints against our officers or against the program as it is currently implemented." The TABC's crackdown, which has led to more than 2,200 arrests in the past seven months, was intended to reduce the number of DWIs by catching intoxicated Texans in bars and other establishments before they got behind the wheel. full article
