Texas arresting people in bars for being drunk

[gmichael]

vindictive lady.

Huh? Don't both of these words have the same meaning?

But, funny story.

 

[brian32672]

Huh? Don't both of these words have the same meaning?

Yeah, LOL , kinda like lawyers and morals should not be used in the same sentence or paragraph.
Or Monster Cable and morals.

(*that is of course unless 'NO' is put directly in front of morals)
(it's an oxymoron, IMO)


EDIT:: Added quote from myself.

Granted the Fort Lauderdale bars here were completely against the stiffer searches for drunks.
As it totally killed revenue. Also who is to say (speaking of Fort Lauderdale) that these people walked to the bar, got drunk - and walked back to the hotel (in Ft. Lauderdale strip, there was basically a bar then a hotel then a bar then a hotel, etc...)

By the way, when this did happen. A few years later almost all (or rather a lot) of the convictions were overturned, due to entrapment. Ended up costing the cops and courts more money than it was worth. (IMO)

 

[annunaki]

Here in Wisconsin, nearly every bar I have visited has a sign which states they have the right to refuse service to anyone. At that point, would it not make the place a private establishment? If not, what is to stop pub owners from issuing a "club membership" at the door ($2.00 cover charge and get a free drink, $10 cover and 5 free drinks for lifetime membership ) thus making it a private club. It would then be exempt from such ridiculous actions. I understand public safety, and I am against drunk driving. However, to me this begins encroaching on what I do with my own time. It feels as though they are overstepping their bounds. Where then will this stop. Will they arrest me for buying a bottle of alcohol for intent to commit a crime?? Just my opinion.

 

[ZoFo]

Until a couple of years ago you could drive & swig from a whisky bottle in Texas

But that has all changed, now in Texas not even the passenger can have an open container.

And Sheep, that comment about "killing retards" was about who WE decide to put to death down here? Yeah I guess just because a guy has an IQ of 70 he should be allowed to rape and kill whomever he wants right? After all it takes a very high IQ before you know that killing and rapeing someone is "wrong"???

We do things in Texas the way WE WANT TO and we don't let left-coast liberals tell us how to run our Justice System and this includes killing dangerous criminals; if you don't like it I suggest you not visit our State.

 

[gmichael]

We do things in Texas the way WE WANT TO this includes killing if you don't like it I suggest you not visit our State.

You've got a deal.

 

[ZoFo]

Thank God!

The last thing we need down here are more "ditch dwellers" spending their summers in a Texas ditch.


Our differences on the Justice System are most likely from the fact that I have known somebody that was murdered because she made the mistake of taking a shortcut home one night and walked up on a gang initiation. These nice fellas decided to include her and her friend in the initiation and gang-rapped & sodomized them both before cutting off their fingers & toes and other mutilations before killing them. That was 10 years ago and all three of the gang members are STIL alive and sitting on death row.

My values are based on my life experiences; not what I see on TV.

 

[gmichael]

South for the summer? Would you go north for the winter? Gotta heavy coat?

Wasn't knocking your values. Just having fun twisting your words around. They all jumped off the page at me and aranged themselves in my head they way I quoted back to you. Felt a cold chill.

My next door nieghbor, friend from childhood was killed. They never found the body. Only enough blood in the back of a car for the doctors to prove that he couldn't still be living. His killer lives. I know why you feel the way you do. Still not sure what I've decided. One day I say kill the bastards and be done with them. No need to feed, shelter & entertain them. But other days, I say, who am I to play G.d and say who lives or dies.

But back to drinking. Should drinking be alowd in bars? Joke? Truth? Are we in a police state? Marshal law? All rights revoked? You thought this was American but it's really the twilight zone?

 

[Johnd]

gmichael: nice reality check

ZoFo: I admire the bravissimo you posted in the other thread...mainly because I hang out with marines. How about slowing down on the java and rush (not the band), and being a little more tolerant? There is almost always a way to say something without being so offensive. Your otherwise valid points will not be drowned inside a hate speech. Just a little food for thought. Thanks.

 

[ZoFo]

No problem, I hear you. I get this a lot when people hear I am from Texas. You would think that we exacute a few dozen prisioners a day. In fact, I think Virginia has now edged out Texas as the leader. I am for the death penality but only in certian cases and I do believe it's used too much in this country.

Back to drinking - yeah this sucks and I don't even drink. Kind of like those road-blocks that the police put up on weekend nights for "license checks" and such; I think this is horriable and feel like I am in Nazi Germany when I hear about incidents like this.

There used to be show on TV with some sherrif from South Carolina I think, had a big spider painted on his squad car and thought he was really something. He used to brag about how he tied up the highway on weekends with these roadblocks, busting people for outstanding tickets and roaches in the ashtrays like he was really fighting crime and keeping people safe. I think that sherrif belongs in his own cell, which he painted pink!

 

[Pyrrho]

I'll save my comments for later.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060322/us_nm/bars_dc

One problem with what they are saying is this: Not everyone who gets drunk in a bar drives afterwards. (Buckle-meister and brian32672 alluded to this point above.) I have a local bar that I like, and I walk there. Arresting me there would not prevent any drunk driving at all, no matter how much I drank. Also, sometimes people travel together, and only one of them drives. The rest can be so drunk that they can't walk and it will not matter, as long as they do not interfere with the driver. So, if what they are after is less drunk driving, they are casting their net far too wide.

Nor does every drunk become an idiot and try to leap off of balconies (sober people often do stupid things, too, so should we arrest all of them before they do anything wrong?). The idea of arresting someone before they do anything wrong in order to prevent it is ridiculous. Hey, all of you reading this should be arrested in order to prevent you from committing a crime! You might decide to commit a terrorist action, and if you get locked up first, society will be protected from you dangerous people! Anybody else have a problem with this way of thinking?

As for what constitutes "public drunkenness", that is something that it would be good for the article to state. We can also wonder why being drunk in public should be illegal, if the person is otherwise not causing any trouble (and if they are causing other trouble, they could be arrested for that other reason, so there is no need for laws against public drunkenness). If this continues, I suspect that some bar owners in Texas will start taking the advice mentioned above and change to a "private club", and thereby evade this foolishness.

Texas, It's like a whole other country.

 

[Johnd]

Pyrrho: that's the crux of it: What constitutes public drunkeness. I have a pretty good image in my mind's eye, but until we can ascertain what the good Rangers of Texas consider, we're just spiffballing. But again, I can't imagine it's anything as mild as a hiccup...don't they have more serious moral terpitude down there than that?