Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060322/us_nm/bars_dc" target="_blank">http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/200 60322/us_nm/bars_dc</a> Kinda defeats the entire purpose of going to one, doesn't it?
Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder Snarky remarks aside, on one hand I suppose I can see the rationale, but after literally centuries of people being drunk in saloons or bars NOW they start doing this? What if a group has a designated driver? Or what if people were going to be calling a cab or riding a bus? Bizarre, really....
Originally Posted By imadisneygal Yeah, it seems like it defeats the purpose of being in a bar at all. I'm not a proponent of drunkneness at all, let alone in public where you are more likely to have to find a way home (car, walking, etc.) I wonder if these arrests have anything to do with disorderly conduct as well. My guess is that the patrons were beligerent or otherwise aggravating others or they probably wouldn't have even been noticed. That is unless they fell into or vomited on an undercover officer on their way to the bathroom. I bet it's more about the behavior exhibited than the actual blood alcohol level or drinks consumed. Apparently the solution is to drink in the dark closet while rocking back and forth in the fetal position.
Originally Posted By mele <<Apparently the solution is to drink in the dark closet while rocking back and forth in the fetal position. >> Hello to my average Friday night.
Originally Posted By PlainoLJoe Why am I being arrested? You are drunk in public. I was drunk in a bar, they threw me into public. They call me tater.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Apparently the solution is to drink in the dark closet while rocking back and forth in the fetal position. >> Slap on a set of headphones, play InAGaddaDaVida, and you've got yourself a party!!
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> 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. << Sorta like a "pre-emptive strike", huh - arrest them before they can do whatever it is we think they're going to do. Is it texas itself? Is there something in their weird culture that encourages the idea that you can impose your own unjustified beliefs and morals on others? Next they're going to have temperence rallies castigating the demon rum. I can't shake the feeling that "the church" is somehow at the bottom of all this.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer >>"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."<< So, Mr Beck, is drunk balcony leaping a major problem in Texas?
Originally Posted By imadisneygal See, the problem here is....you can't fix stupid!!! If someone wants to get drunk enough that they think they can fly then I say it's their own fault.
Originally Posted By Mr X Reading this article makes me wonder, what exactly defines "public drunkenness"? I mean, are we talking breathalizer, legal limit stuff here? Is it only legal to consume one or two alcoholic beverages (regardless of whether you are driving, or just standing around) before facing arrest? And, who makes the call? Are these undercover cops actually issuing tests? Or is it just their opinion? Scary stuff (but then again, look at whos home state it is!).
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By cape cod joe Hey I quit drinking 31 years ago TODAY on my mom's birthday, but this is insane> not letting people get drunk in a bar! Let them and let them jump! It's in the Constitution isn't it?
Originally Posted By RoadTrip You get rid of enough Texas drunks and the state might turn Blue! <<But much of the further point you make that you suspect “morals†in the Red states are superior to those in the Blue is in error. The facts may be counterintuitive.....but they are still the facts. For example: There are more unwanted pregnancies annually in the Red States than in the Blue states. There are more “shotgun†marriages annually in the Red States than in the Blue states. The incidence of chronic alcoholism is higher in the Red States than in the Blue states. The incidence of smoking is higher in the Red States than in the Blue states. The suicide rate in Red states is the same as in the Blue states. The rate of child (under 18) suicide is higher in the Red states than in the Blue states. The incidence of incest is higher in the Red states than in the Blue states. The number of bars and brothels---per 1000 population---is higher in the Red states than in the Blue states. Moreover, the divorce rate among people under 35 is exactly the same for people who call themselves “born again Christians†as it is for people who say they “have no organized religious faith." And, finally, the state with the lowest divorce rate in the country is----are you ready for this?----Massachusetts! (All of this data--and more--is available in the Statistical Abstract of the United States. As I said: The facts sometime are counterintuitive....but they are still the facts.) >> Source: <a href="http://www.thomasbrewton.com/index.php/weblog/red_state_vs_blue_state_morality/" target="_blank">http://www.thomasbrewton.com/i ndex.php/weblog/red_state_vs_blue_state_morality/</a> ;-)
Originally Posted By BlueDevilSF ^^^ Facts? No, they're not. They're part of a liberal conspiracy. ;-) (How's the weather? I've been in San Francisco all week.)
Originally Posted By Beaumandy The chicks are hotter in Red States. Except my wife who is hot but in a Blue State.
