Yeah, it's not a crime to be drunk. It's a crime if they do something completely stupid and break the law, but being drunk is not a crime as far as I know.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Texas halts arrests of drunks in bars
- Thread starter vniow
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Abstract said:
Actually in Virginia, public intoxication, is a crime. The issue here is whether being drunk in a bar meets that legal definition.
In the states that I know of, it is illegal to serve alcohol to those that are "impaired". What is missing in the OP, is penalties for the bars that "public drunkenness" arrests are made in.
In most states IIRC, are required to not serve drinks to those that "appear to impaired". But this would not serve the interest of the state, since it would lower the taxes collected.
I am considering a beach weekend at a B&B next to a popular bar. As long as I do not cause a disturbance in the bar or in the street; and that I can cross the street safely to my room - why does it matter?
Chip NoVaMac said:
Then who do you arrest? Do you arrest the drunk, or do you fine or even arrest the bartender responsible for serving him alcohol until he got this way?
Abstract said:
IMO you fine the drunk, and arrest the bartender, and close the bar down for 6 months.
I did some time as a bartender. We were given strict instructions as to what the laws are. At least here in the East, bartenders are legally liable for serving alcohol to those that are are already "under the influence".
It is a fine line as the way the law describes it. In this Texas example, it seems that they are looking for a new revenue stream. It MAY limit drunk driving. But in my experience those that get "trashed" in bars already know that they will not be driving home under their own control.
Maybe I am not part of the "norm". I am considering a Memorial Day weekend to "let my hair down". One situation is for a beach weekend at a B&B that is across the street from "the" bar to go to.
The other option is for a "fraternal" gathering with private bars and private buses to keep the streets safe from those that may have had too much.
In the end we need to decide who should be responsible for "over indulgence" - those that serve the drinks (my preferred method) ; or those that are served drinks when they should not be.
That's really the only time they prosecute for public drunkenness. That's why it's usually drunk and disorderly. If you're drunk in a bar AFAIK it's not illegal because it's private property, unless you leave and start causing trouble, in which case the disorderly part comes in and they take you to jail to sober you up and hit you with a fine. This seems to be arresting people because they think they might commit a crime. I'm glad this bothered people enough to say something because it should.Chip NoVaMac said:
MacNut said:You arrest the car dealership for selling him the deadly weapon that he might use to go drunk driving in.
Just an observation from my trip to Reykjavik this year. They live to party. They drink at home first (from what I was told). But the only cars I saw on the streets late at night were Taxis leaving the city center.
The reason is a zero tolerance to drunk driving. The impression I was left with was one that as long as one that drank did not cause a problem in the bar, then there were no issues.
a quick Googling reveals a maximum $500 fine for public intoxication in Texas. Follow the money.
MacNut said:You arrest the car dealership for selling him the deadly weapon that he might use to go drunk driving in.
Especially if they didn't come with breathalyser tests built-in into them. Clearly the auto maker's fault.
Why arrest them in the bar - not the car?
Q.Why arrest them in the bar - not the car?
A. The standards are different. To arrest a motorist in Texas for drunk driving the driver has to have a blood alcohol level of XXX ( I don't recall ) - but to arrest someone in a bar or on the street, the standard is that they appear to be intoxicated and the arresting officer believes they could cause harm to themselves or someone else.
The standards of public intoxication leave a tremendous amount of discretion in the officers hands. I think too much in many cases.
Q.Why arrest them in the bar - not the car?
A. The standards are different. To arrest a motorist in Texas for drunk driving the driver has to have a blood alcohol level of XXX ( I don't recall ) - but to arrest someone in a bar or on the street, the standard is that they appear to be intoxicated and the arresting officer believes they could cause harm to themselves or someone else.
The standards of public intoxication leave a tremendous amount of discretion in the officers hands. I think too much in many cases.
yeah I remember reading that story when it came out and thanked god yet again that I'm in Canada.
Although the recent actions of the Calgary Police Force has me wondering...
They claim this is to stop drunk driving...yet I wonder how many of the arrested even had cars at the bar? I don't even own a car right now, and when I did I left it at home when I was out drinking.
Although the recent actions of the Calgary Police Force has me wondering...
They claim this is to stop drunk driving...yet I wonder how many of the arrested even had cars at the bar? I don't even own a car right now, and when I did I left it at home when I was out drinking.
In my youth, this would bbe called 'entrapment'. Even to the extent that the police couldn't be waiting around outside the bar for people to get into their cars.....entrapment again.
But going into the bar to find drunks, what an amazing concept. Glad the uproar caused it to stop.
But going into the bar to find drunks, what an amazing concept. Glad the uproar caused it to stop.