Skip to comments.
Public intoxication stings catch 2,200 in Texas bars
chron.com ^
| 3/23/06
| Anne Marie Kilday
Posted on 03/23/2006 8:18:08 AM PST by takenoprisoner
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180, 181-200, 201-220 ... 421-436 next last
To: Pessimist
Catching drunks outside a bar in most states is entrapment. It is illegal for cops, in a lot of states, to wait outside and arrest people going to, or getting into, their cars.
I would think the same would hold for arresting people inside a bar and saying that they were going to drive drunk later so we can now arrest them.
This is facist thinking and has no place in America. Many of the people arrested were staying at the hotels that housed the bar they were drinking in.
This is as bad as hate crimes, or maybe worse. Arresting people for what they MIGHT do. Should we arrest people standing outside banks because they might hold it up? How about gun owners? This is one the antis would love. We arrest all gun owners because since they have guns they might commit a crime.
If we allow sh** like this to happen with the bars it won't be long before they are doing it in other areas and maybe in areas you won't be happy about.
181
posted on
03/23/2006 10:17:48 AM PST
by
calex59
(seeing the light shouldn't make you go blind and, BTW, Stå sammen med danskerne !)
To: finallyatexan
I think it is illegal in most states to sell alcohol to someone who is drunk.In Texas, it is against the law to sell the first drink to a stone-cold sober person if that person is known by the server to be a town drunk.
182
posted on
03/23/2006 10:21:06 AM PST
by
houeto
To: Graycliff
Not just me, theres thousands more just like mine.And you're going to start a war. Hope that makes you happy.
To: metesky
Look at all the "conservatives" defending this!The world has gone nuts, metesky. What should be up is down and what should be down is up. What the hell IS this?!
184
posted on
03/23/2006 10:22:17 AM PST
by
SheLion
(Trying to make a life in the BLUE state of Maine!)
To: me-here
Go back??????? ;o)
I don't know about you, but I'd be reeaallyyy pi55ed off for getting arrested when I didn't break any law. PI, my foot!
185
posted on
03/23/2006 10:22:45 AM PST
by
Millee
(Don't make me get out my voodoo doll out!)
To: XR7
But they were drunk in public.Drunk = .08
.08 = 2 beers for a small person/ 3 beers for a 180 lb. man.
186
posted on
03/23/2006 10:22:52 AM PST
by
houeto
To: Graycliff
"You might be right. I sure didn't want that drunk bastard to drive across the median and hit my 17 year old daughter head on. She would have been 27 on the 28th of May. If your idea of freedom is getting drunk and doing anything you want to, then you can keep it."
I'm very sorry to hear about your daughter. I am also in favor of serious penalties for drunk drivers. However, I am opposed to arresting people who have been drinking but are not driving.
How do you feel about the people they arrested who were going to go from the hotel bar up to their rooms? Were those arrests justified because your daughter died in a terrible automobile accident?
If you can explain the connection, I'll be happy to listen.
187
posted on
03/23/2006 10:24:29 AM PST
by
MineralMan
(godless atheist)
To: SheLion
Ok, here's my flaky theory for the day. I wonder if maybe, post-9/11, people are embracing all of this nanny-state crap because it makes them feel like we have control of something even as half the world wants to see us all dead. It just seems to me that the nanny-staters have really picked up a lot of steam lately, and I've been trying to figure out why that is.
To: The Ghost of FReepers Past
First, I don't get stumbling drunk. Second if a free man is of mind to, and he has prepared a way home, I don't care if he gets stumblin drunk in a bar so long as he is not an actual undeniably most overt nuisance and/or threat to himself or other patrons. In that case, call him a cab and send him home immediately.
Why is that too much for you?
To: takenoprisoner
Soon they will come knocking on our doors in order to go through our homes confiscating weapons and looking for contraband from the good citizens who manage to slip these items passed the government camera's install around our homes for our protection.
To: takenoprisoner
I wasn't even aware the cops could arrest you for public intox as long as you were inside the bar and not causing a problem.
191
posted on
03/23/2006 10:26:25 AM PST
by
MEGoody
(Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
To: TheForceOfOne
What pisses me off is that you can now go to just about any other nation in the world and enjoy numerous freedoms that you can't enjoy in America. That's just backwards and wrong.
To: Roccus
According to the article, these stings were staged to prevent DWI. Why didn't they just arrest everyone going into the bar then? YOu have to assume they were ALL going to have a drink. Texas? (spit!)
193
posted on
03/23/2006 10:27:59 AM PST
by
who knows what evil?
(New England...the Sodom and Gomorrah of the 21st Century, and they're proud of it!)
To: Texas Mom
guess after years as a paramedic and working emergency rooms I just have little sympathy for people who let alcohol control them and can't control it.Not everybody out for a Saturday night's yahooing is an out of control drunk, ya know.
Or have you let yourself become like the inner city cop who because he meets 95% scum on his job is convinced that 95% of all "civilians" are scum?
194
posted on
03/23/2006 10:28:39 AM PST
by
metesky
("Brethren, leave us go amongst them." Rev. Capt. Samuel Johnston Clayton - Ward Bond- The Searchers)
To: Junior
Technically, if the cops can arrest them for being drunk in a privately-owned bar, they can arrest them for being drunk in their houses. They'll get around to it.
195
posted on
03/23/2006 10:29:14 AM PST
by
who knows what evil?
(New England...the Sodom and Gomorrah of the 21st Century, and they're proud of it!)
To: takenoprisoner
This is gotta be one of the world's most facist
stings Are spelling rules fascist as well?
196
posted on
03/23/2006 10:29:16 AM PST
by
PAR35
To: Graycliff
.08 is the lawWhat law? The law states you cannot sit in a private business with a blood alcohol level of .08? I don't think so.
Just so you know, I am very anti-alcohol and wouldn't have been upset at all if prohibition had stuck. But to arrest someone 'just in case' they might do something - we don't want to allow our cities/states/nation to go down that road.
197
posted on
03/23/2006 10:32:08 AM PST
by
MEGoody
(Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
To: Junior_G
These are the consequences Osama wished for. The attack on 9/11 was meant to kill Americans, but what he really despised was our freedom.
I am all for monitoring terrorists and their sympathizers but leave Americans alone whenever possible. This article makes me think of the Nazi's.
To: finallyatexan
All this pain because someone walked out of a bar drunk and was too macho to give his keys to someone sober.Not too macho. Probably just too drunk.
To: who knows what evil?
And arrest those who thought about going to the bar to have a drink too. Orwellian...
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180, 181-200, 201-220 ... 421-436 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson