Posted on 03/17/2006 10:33:37 AM PST by billorites
IRVING, Texas -- The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission has taken its fight against drunken driving to a new level. TABC agents, along with Irving police, targeted 36 bars and clubs Friday, arresting some allegedly intoxicated patrons before they departed the businesses.
The officers and agents also kept watch on bartenders who might have over-served patrons.
Agents arrested 30 people Friday night. Most of the suspects now face charges of public intoxication.
The agents and Irving police officers traveled from bar to bar and worked undercover, according to an NBC 5 report.
The report also said that some agents shared tables with suspected drunken patrons. Some patrons were subjected to field sobriety tests inside bars.
Agents and officers said the operation represented an effort to reduce drunken driving.
Sgt. Chris Hamilton, of the TABC, said some inebriated bar patrons "end up killing themselves or someone else" after departing the businesses.
Next they'll be going into whore houses and arresting people for screwing.
Sorry, but as a smoker I get a big chuckle out of this.
Wow, this is really turning out to be a good year for nanny-staters.
No problems, thats Texas. They wont show up again for 6 months. They like to do a big show and then disappear for a long stretch.
You make a good point about keys in ignition. In many states, you can be prosecuted for DUI if you are drunk and asleep in your car with your keys in your pocket.
Now, faced with a closed bar and a 10-mile drive, I'd rather see the person sleep it off, free from fear of arrest.
Otherwise, you've got a drunk trying to make a calculated decision: I might get arrested here and I might get arrested driving. At least I sleep in my own bed if I make it home.
A couple of years ago in S.C. my brother drove to a local bar, about a half a mile away and proceeded to get very drunk. When he left the bar he gave his keys to the bartender and walked home. About halfway home the police stopped him and charged him with public intoxication, even though he was just quietly and carefully walking, staying well away from traffic, which even the police officers admitted.
Seems you can't win either way.
don't these people have the freedom to take a cab home?
Next up, arrests at topless bars for public lewdity.
"Not sure I go along with this, but it would have been a huge favor to some people I know to have been busted in a bar before they ever got behind the wheel."
Why should our freedoms be taken away because you have stupid and irresponsible friends? Catch them drunk driving (not merely some subjective under the influence) but drunk driving and send them away a long long long time the very first time...because the first time in many cases is merely the first time caught.
You can't impute imagined prior transgression. Most criminals would fit your profile.
"Your honor, technically this is a first offense since this is the first time we caught him but this burglar probably burgled before though we have no proof."
I believe that you've summed this up very well.
"They threw me into Publik!"
"A woman, seeking solitude, peace, and quiet, while her husband was busy and noisily working around the house, sought that escape by taking her husbands boat, docked on the shore, to the middle of the lake, anchored and proceeded to read her book.
An officer soon pulled up next to her and asked for her fishing license. To which she replied, "I am not fishing, as you can see, I am simply reading. So I don't need to have a fishing license"
The officer countered her reply by saying "well I can see that. But I can also see that you have all the equipment to fish in your boat"
The woman replied "yes, it belongs to my husband, who does fish, and does have a license. But again, as you can see, I am reading, not fishing"
The officer proceeded to tell the woman he would have to arrest her, since she was in a fishing area, with all the right equipment, which she could use at any time"
The woman was a quick thinker. She replied "I will have to charge you would sexual assault"
The officer: "I never touched you!"
The woman: "I know, but you have all the right equipment, and you could use it at anytime."
They used to arrest people in private houses for screwing in Texas. The Supreme Court overturned it. Lawrence v. Texas.
OOPS I guess I wasn't very clear. I am protesting the police state tactics in texas and am scoffing at those who would regurgitate that "if you don't go to a bar and drink you have nothing to fear."
I wonder if the law relating to public intoxication actually has a blood alcohol level mentioned in it? The blood alcohol level related to DUIs (usually .08) is there as an assumption of impairment to operate a motor vehicle. I think you'd have a pretty strong argument in court that 'public drunkeness' relates to behavior (being unruly or, the opposite, being passed out on the sidewalk). I'd want to see where in statutes it specifically says that having a blood alcohol level of .08 outside of a private residence is a violation of the law.
A field sobriety test, and a blood alcohol level, might suggest an impairment to operate machinery, but what relevance does a .08 blood alcohol level have if you're simply sitting on a barstool watching a ball game?
Of course sheeple will then be skull cracked for disorderly conduct and arrested immediately, but turnabout is required here.
The advent of the Self-Hate Crime.
I think the Ron "tater salad" White routine goes something like this:
"I didn't want to be drunk in public. I was drunk in a bar. They threw me out in public."
If you're not doing anything wrong, you don't have anything to worry about. </sarcasm>
Until they declare whatever you're doing is now wrong.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.