Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 3/23/06 01:03 AM, IllustriousPotentate wrote:

At 3/23/06 12:59 AM, BFG_Nine-Thousand wrote: But it's pretty predictable what happens when a person drinks too much alchohol and gets behind the wheel. Driving under the influence is illegal for a damn good reason.

But still, why not arrest them when they actually start to get behind the wheel of a car? Rather than arresting people that may have had designated drivers, or were planning on taking a cab home?

Depends, you have no idea how it actually works.

They might just arrest people just to stay overnight and boot em out the next day. That actually isn't a bad idea, so it keeps the drunk person from doing something really stupid.

If a grocery store sells me a big bottle of Jack Daniels, and I drink it, and commit some sort of illegal act, why wouldn't they get in trouble under the same standard as bars, then, especially if I'm drunk?

Because it's not hosting a party.

Fuck, don't make up some stupid bullshit to pretend civil rights are being gone here. We have this shit up here in Canada, except for arresting people in bars, and so far no store has been in a lawsuit because someone bought beer from them. Stadiums, Hosts, and Bartenders are the only ones that can get into trouble if they continue getting someone drunk and let em leave without getting a taxi.

At 3/23/06 02:41 AM, LadyGrace wrote: This isn't about "drunk driving" per se. This is about arresting people IN A PLACE IN WHICH THEY'RE ALLOWED TO DRINK and then claiming it's because they MIGHT be getting behind the wheel of a car, which is pure speculation and illegal grounds to arrest someone. I think we should just arrest all arabs in this country because they MIGHT set off bombs.

Beer impairs your judgement and makes you do things you wouldn't normally do.

Being arab doesn't do that.

At 3/23/06 03:00 AM, Gunter45 wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it illegal to serve drunk people alcohol?

Technically the bartenders are supposed to watch out for signs and keep track on how many beers each person has. It's not an easy job, but they have to do it.

At 3/23/06 03:54 AM, Shin-Tenshu wrote: a bar is a place to get drunk.

another example of our rights being taken away.

screw america. can go to hell for all i care. which is exactly where it is heading.

land of the free my ass. more like land of the told your free but each day a right of yours is take away for a stupid cause.

Sorry to burst ya bubble... but it's illegal to "serve ppl who are intoxicated" in our (as far from America as you can get) country.

Welcome to the new Paradigm. *twilight zone music*

At 3/23/06 09:04 AM, MarkyX wrote: Technically the bartenders are supposed to watch out for signs and keep track on how many beers each person has. It's not an easy job, but they have to do it.

;
You are 100% correct.
But they are not breathalizer machines.
Also if you have a good crowd in it also makes it harder to keep track of exactly what someone has had to drink.
Ex: What if they have had a couple befor coming in?
; Someone buys them a drink and takes it over to their table and the Bar staff doesn't see that, or they go outside to smoke...whatever, and happen to have a mickey in their pocket.
My girlfriend is a bartender and what they do is watch for obvious signs of intoxication.
They also know which regulars are problematic, and they get good at picking out the unruly.
In an earlier post someone mentioned about taking cabs and Designated drivers, around here in N.S. the cops will take you in for walking drunk down the street.
Usually you are held until you sober up, then released without charge.
But if you have a D.D. or get into a cab they leave you alone .
By showing that you can still be responsible enough to take a cab etc. they leave you alone so they are free to deal with the real problems.
Which is how it should be.
I mean what's next are they are going to go go to the malls and start checking to see if you have enough money to be there?
Oh,oh this guys only got $3.00 dollars he/she must be going to shoplift they need to be arrested?
Drinking and driving is a serious problem but what is the good from arresting someone who may be to impared to legally drive, but is still capable of taking the bus/cab/friend home?
What exactley is the good of this type of inforcement?
It sure isn't going to help the bar business!
So much for going out to the bar with friends for say the superbowl or other big sporting events!

At 3/23/06 09:42 AM, morefngdbs wrote:

At 3/23/06 09:04 AM, MarkyX wrote: Technically the bartenders are supposed to watch out for signs and keep track on how many beers each person has. It's not an easy job, but they have to do it.

;
You are 100% correct.
But they are not breathalizer machines.
Also if you have a good crowd in it also makes it harder to keep track of exactly what someone has had to drink.

Exactly. Sure, bartenders should cut people off if they think they've had enough. But to hold servers accountable for someone else's actions is absurd, because of the factors you mention. It's one's job to take responsibility for actions they do while drunk, not the bar's or stadium's or whatever. If you can't do it yourself, then you need to have a sober buddy there to keep you safe.

At 3/23/06 02:36 AM, IllustriousPotentate wrote: Being able to do basic math isn't a valid indicator of reaction time, the main problem with drunken driving.

It was just an example, the test would try and see if they can still do basic things like reason and think ahead.
The point was if someone can hold their alcohol really well, they might be able to drive normally.

If private establishments are considered public nowadays, what is considered "private"? Is it the things you "own"?

Is the occasional stroll through the bar a half hour before closing not doing the trick?

At 3/23/06 11:06 AM, -LazyDrunk- wrote: Is the occasional stroll through the bar a half hour before closing not doing the trick?

Meaning non-undercover cop in full uniform, complete with big, hearty smile.

At 3/23/06 10:23 AM, fahrenheit- wrote:

At 3/23/06 02:36 AM, IllustriousPotentate wrote: Being able to do basic math isn't a valid indicator of reaction time, the main problem with drunken driving.

It was just an example, the test would try and see if they can still do basic things like reason and think ahead.
The point was if someone can hold their alcohol really well, they might be able to drive normally.

No, being able "to hold" alcohol doesn't make the person any less dangerous behind the wheel of a car. In fact, being under the legal limit still has an adverse affect. Just because someone isn't puking and going around with a lampshade on their head doesn't mean they're competent enough to drive an automobile at that time.

At 3/23/06 09:02 AM, MarkyX wrote: Beer impairs your judgement and makes you do things you wouldn't normally do.

So? That's exactly what it's used for, it doesn't mean every person who has a beer ever will be getting behind the wheel of a car.

Being arab doesn't do that.

No, but due to overgeneralizations which people in this thread seem so prone to do about drunk people, Arabs have a pension for blowing shit up in the name of God.

At 3/23/06 09:04 AM, MarkyX wrote:

At 3/23/06 03:00 AM, Gunter45 wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it illegal to serve drunk people alcohol?

Technically the bartenders are supposed to watch out for signs and keep track on how many beers each person has. It's not an easy job, but they have to do it.

Generally, bartenders only cut off alcohol when someone's really fucking wasted, or starting to get violent. When they feel they are endangering the lives of themselves or others, that's when the bartender has to step in. Generally, in a croud of people who are just rowdy and having a good time, they don't care.

They aren't arresting the bartenders....

They are arresting the people who are drinking. (on the charge of PUBLIC intoxication)

So why is the main discussion on why or how people shouldn't give/allow/sell people alcohol...

At 3/23/06 01:54 PM, RedScorpion wrote: They aren't arresting the bartenders....

They are arresting the people who are drinking. (on the charge of PUBLIC intoxication)

So why is the main discussion on why or how people shouldn't give/allow/sell people alcohol...

Speaking of public drunkenness, why is that a crime anyways? Don't nuisance laws cover any sort of public ruckus without having to involve a legal substance?

(sorry for double post)

Yes, I had figured LadyGrace's first example would have caught people's eye about unascertained premises...

Here's the specific guidelines for this law...

Public Intoxication Statute of Texas

49.02 Public Intoxication

"Public Intoxication" means:

A person commits an offense if the person appears in a public place while intoxicated to the degree that the person may endanger the person or another.

"Intoxicated" is defined as:

not having the normal use of mental or physical faculties by reason of the introduction of alcohol, controlled substance, a drug, a dangerous drug, a combination of two or more of those substances, or any other substance into the body; or

having an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more.

An offence under this section is a Class C Misdemeanor. An individual adjudged guilty of a Class C misdemeanor shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $500.00. However, for a minor, the punishment terms are in the same manner as if he committed the offense of Possession of Alcohol by a Minor.

They are arresting under technicalities... I'm wondering how many of them actually own a car, or planned on driving.

If the cops want to assure the public of no intoxicated drivers on the road, they should park their ass outside the bar, and breathalyze anyone coming out and heading for a vehicle.

That's my $0.02.

Public intoxication law