Busted for being drunk...in a bar...

[DaveC]

Is this even legal...?

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/US/03/23/texas.bars.reut/index.html

SAN ANTONIO, Texas (Reuters) -- Texas has begun sending undercover agents into bars to arrest drinkers for being drunk, a spokeswoman for the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission said Wednesday.

The first sting operation was conducted recently in a Dallas suburb where agents infiltrated 36 bars and arrested 30 people for public intoxication, said the commission's Carolyn Beck.

Being in a bar does not exempt one from the state laws against public drunkenness, Beck said.

The goal, she said, was to detain drunks before they leave a bar and go do something dangerous like drive a car.

"We feel that the only way we're going to get at the drunk driving problem and the problem of people hurting each other while drunk is by crackdowns like this," she said.

"There are a lot of dangerous and stupid things people do when they're intoxicated, other than get behind the wheel of a car," Beck said. "People walk out into traffic and get run over, people jump off of balconies trying to reach a swimming pool and miss."

She said the sting operations would continue throughout the state.

 

[nbcrusader]

I guess it technically is still public intoxication - bars being public accommodations. This will put a huge burden on the bar owners.

 

[BrownEyedBoy]

This doesn't make sense.

 

[BVS]

The pre-emptive strike has become very popular in all facets of life. The beauty is they don't have to make sense.

 

[Irvine511]

wow.

well, time to buy a bottle of vodka and sit in the house and do shots all night.

 

[Justin24]

I also heard now they are going to hotels with bars also.

 

[Irvine511]

aren't there real crimes to worry about? drinking and driving is one thing, drinking in a bar is something altogether different.

 

[DaveC]

I want to know how it's legal to arrest someone for being drunk on the assumption that they may drive drunk later that night??

Sounds very Minority Report-like to me.

 

[AliEnvy]

I guess it technically is still public intoxication - bars being public accommodations. This will put a huge burden on the bar owners.

Not to worry, I'm sure the drinks companies will pay off the right people to stay out of their business.

 

[snowbunny00774]

I want to know how it's legal to arrest someone for being drunk on the assumption that they may drive drunk later that night??

Sounds very Minority Report-like to me.

They are arresting them for breaking the public intoxication law.


*striking Texas off my "to visit" list*

 

[DaveC]

Yes, I know that. But the official says explicitly: "The goal, she said, was to detain drunks before they leave a bar and go do something dangerous like drive a car."

That's arresting someone for pre-crime, basically. Like arresting a sober 20 year old walking down the street on a Saturday night on the presumption that they might have a drink later that night and commit the crime of underage drinking.

It's excessive and unbelievably dumb.

 

[nbcrusader]

I want to know how it's legal to arrest someone for being drunk on the assumption that they may drive drunk later that night??

No, they are being targeted for violating a separate law - public intoxication.

Edited to say:

Sorry, it was mentioned above.

 

[snowbunny00774]

Yes, I know that. But the official says explicitly: "The goal, she said, was to detain drunks before they leave a bar and go do something dangerous like drive a car."

That's arresting someone for pre-crime, basically. Like arresting a sober 20 year old walking down the street on a Saturday night on the presumption that they might have a drink later that night and commit the crime of underage drinking.

It's excessive and unbelievably dumb.

There is a law against public intoxication. These people broke that law. That law would have been based on the intention to prevent people doing harm to themselves or others. By enforcing the public intoxication law, then yes the official is correct. But precrime prevention is not the charge they are getting booked under.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Well I'm sure someone will challenge this in court very soon

 

[DaveC]

That's completely ridiculous though. One should use common sense and assume that there will be public intoxication in places that serve alcohol. I could understand if they were busting people for being drunk at hockey games or something, but in a bar...? That's just stupid. What a waste of police resources.

 

[nbcrusader]

It strikes me as more of an allocation of resources question instead of a legality question.

 

[snowbunny00774]

exactly, the law is the law until they change it. I think it is ridiculous myself, but that's not going to be worth a whole in an arguement with a cop!!

They absolutely should be allocating those resources elsewhere, and who knows - that might be the point in enforcing this law, they are trying to draw attention to the fact they could be doing something better with their time. Kind of a work to rule standpoint, but maybe thats just wishful thinking on my part that they are that clever!!

 

[AliEnvy]

The pre-emptive strike has become very popular in all facets of life. The beauty is they don't have to make sense.

No kidding. When you think about it, what's to stop these sting ops from cherry picking anyone to arrest on suspicion of being drunk by virtue of being in a bar?

Guess it seems more legit than people just being whisked from street corners or their homes as in some of the more uncivilized police states of this world.

At least we can feel safe that there aren't drunks on the road.

 

[Irvine511]

how is a bar being "in public" -- i thought such distinctions were made for places deemed public property, like parks, streets, sidewalks, beaches, etc. a bar is a private business, how is it any different from, say, getting drunk at the employee Christmas party or even at my house?

 

[nbcrusader]

how is a bar being "in public" -- i thought such distinctions were made for places deemed public property, like parks, streets, sidewalks, beaches, etc. a bar is a private business, how is it any different from, say, getting drunk at the employee Christmas party or even at my house?

As a public accommodation.

If we treat a bar (or any similar business) the same as a house, you shut out all forms of government regulation.

 

[a-mole]

seriously... then they should close / forbid bars alltogether

once again, I am amazed

 

[indra]

Oooh! So the loud, obnoxious, slobbering, puking drunk behind me at damn near every gig I've ever been to can be arrested? Cool!

Other than those instances it seems pretty silly though.

 

[WildHoneyAlways]

Ah yes, this story reminds me of bar laws in college.

In Champaign, one must be 19 years old to enter a bar. (drinking age still 21) The police would raid bars and give tickets to anyone under 21 who was within an arm's length of a drink. Doesn't matter if you are drinking it or not. The arm's length was enough to get you a $275 dollar ticket. Really, a college bar? In Champaign? Everyone is within an arm's length of a drink. What a scam.

I never got caught but my sister racked up 2 tickets before turning 21.

 

[melon]

I would imagine people would be used to Texas being one of the most backward states in the union.

Melon

 

[LJT]

getting arrested for being drunk at a bar? What do they quantify as being sufficiently intoxicated?

 

[yolland]

I would imagine people would be used to Texas being one of the most backward states in the union.

And ironically, that backwardsness is just as strongly associated with a tendency to overindulge in drinking as to primly oppose it as some kind of blight on society. I certainly saw a lot of both in the "backwards" place I grew up...

 

[Angela Harlem]

i think it's perfectly logical, really.

 

[BluRmGrl]

If we treat a bar (or any similar business) the same as a house, you shut out all forms of government regulation.

(Prefaced to say that the following statement is in no way directed to nbcrusader... it's only a reaction to his comment in general. )

Egads - shut out MORE government regulation of our personal lives?!?!? Perish the thought.


I understand the public intoxication angle, but it's really not that far a leap to imagine that the next step for Texas (or any other state) is to arrest you if you get drunk in your home or the home of anyone else - because you could just as easily get in your car and drive drunk from there as you can a bar. A few more years & no one will be in danger any longer... Big Brother will have taken care of everything for us.

 

[trevster2k]

Send em to Padre Island !!

Hopefully, the judge will throw these charges out of court since this is definitely not the intent of the law. Oh wait, this is Texas, they're gonna burn.

Totally ridiculous! I would have an arrest record as thick as a phonebook if I was arrested for every time I was drunk in a bar.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

As someone explained it on the news last night, it is illegal to serve more in a bar to a person who is already intoxicated. So it is also for the protection of the bar and the server. With the drunk driving laws the way they are, that's probably the way things are headed in more places other than Texas. And I am all for preventing drunk driving, unfortunately there are far too many people who still refuse to be responsible. It's another situation of trying to balance rights and responsibilities.

There are also plenty of people who can and do drink in a bar without getting intoxicated.