Live in Texas? Don't get drunk in the bars!

But see, along with that example. You completely missed what I was getting at. I was not likening the drunken person to the baby at all. I don't see how you figured that. The drunken person is to the parent as the baby is to the people that the drunken person is having an effect on after he leaves the bar. The logic is not that hard to follow and it works fine.

And also, that was not my only example. Please read through the thread before commenting.

Originally Posted by CloudNine

Ok, I have a question for you guys.

Say a guy is drinking and gets really smashed at a bar and decides he wants to leave. He walks out and decides he is way too drunk to drive home, so he decides to lie down in his car wait to sober up. He gets cold while being in the car and decides to turn the car on to warm up, all the while with no intention of actually moving the car anywhere. While waiting, he falls asleep with the car still running. A little while later, a police officer knocks on his door, tests him and books him with a DUI.

Do you think that this is fair? The guy was not actually driving the car and says he had no plans to.

Originally Posted by CloudNine

Ok, what if he was sleeping in the back seat?

What if that car was a van where the shift knob is unreachable from the back seat?

What if the car is off, the man is in the back seat drunk and the keys are in the glove box?

All of these are arrestable offenses punished by a DUI. I have heard no one complaining about these. This is just the next step. Stopping the massive amounts of drinking in situations where people can possibly make unrational decisions seems like a good idea to me.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

See, I read those--because I did go through the thread--but those aren't so much examples of this law in action as much as you clarifying what can, and does, already happen. Why? Because the answers seem so ridiculously obvious. Do you think a cop would bother a man asleep in the back of a car? If it looked like he had broken into it, maybe. Other than that I doubt he'd even notice. The only mildly likely one is where he's sitting there with his car running, and there's nothing wrong with that because at that point it would seem, extremely so, that the man was going to drive while intoxicated.

"Arrestable offences" and "Being arrested" are two entirely different things. As it is it's illegal to step outside of the bar while drunk, but I've never seen it happen. Have you? Maybe if you live in Texas. This law is making it laughably easy for police to trod on citizens rights, and what's worse is they are.

Double Post:
But please, since I'm a young idealist who let's little things like the Constitution dictate my stances on rights, explain to me what you're getting at. The point is obviously lost on me.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by Fresh Frank

See, I read those--because I did go through the thread--but those aren't so much examples of this law in action as much as you clarifying what can, and does, already happen. Why? Because the answers seem so ridiculously obvious. Do you think a cop would bother a man asleep in the back of a car? If it looked like he had broken into it, maybe. Other than that I doubt he'd even notice. The only mildly likely one is where he's sitting there with his car running, and there's nothing wrong with that because at that point it would seem, extremely so, that the man was going to drive while intoxicated.

My neighbor was arrested and charged with a DUI while sleeping in the passenger seat of his car while drunk. The car was not started and he was not planning on driving anywhere.

Quote:

"Arrestable offences" and "Being arrested" are two entirely different things. As it is it's illegal to step outside of the bar while drunk, but I've never seen it happen. Have you? Maybe if you live in Texas. This law is making it laughably easy for police to trod on citizens rights, and what's worse is they are.

Like I said before, just because it doesn't happen, doesn't mean that it can't happen and because of the laws surrounding it, (you yourself just said it was illegal to leave the bar intoxicated) they are justified in arresting people who do such things.

Quote:

But please, since I'm a young idealist who let's little things like the Constitution dictate my stances on rights, explain to me what you're getting at. The point is obviously lost on me.

My point is that things like this has already been happening in this country for years and have been approved in many cases. I will once again go back to my case, which I still believe is completely valid. Just like the mother who leaves her child in the car seat is negligent of the possible dangers that may face her child, the drunk person who leaves the bar is being negligent of his resposibilities to not harm innocnet people. Why is the mother charged with a crime of endangering her child when nothing has happened, but the man who leaves the bar is not? I would venture to say that more people are killed by drunk drivers every year then parents leaving there children in the cars. Why is there nothing to prevent this type of negligence?

Why do you think we have drunk driving and public intoxication laws in the first place? Because people intoxicated are generally unable to control themselves and will act in irrational and negligent ways.

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by CloudNine

My neighbor was arrested and charged with a DUI while sleeping in the passenger seat of his car while drunk. The car was not started and he was not planning on driving anywhere.

Alright, name five more cases that you know of off-hand. One doesn't cut it when you're using such a shakey point, sorry.

Quote:

Like I said before, just because it doesn't happen, doesn't mean that it can't happen and because of the laws surrounding it, (you yourself just said it was illegal to leave the bar intoxicated) they are justified in arresting people who do such things.

If it can happen but it doens't there's a reason, in this case the reason is drunks walking home or getting into a car (to be driven by someone sober) pose no threat. The laws you allude to are in place for the instances where a drunk does do something stupid after walking out, last I checked we didn't run a zero-tolerance country.

Quote:

My point is that things like this has already been happening in this country for years and have been approved in many cases. I will once again go back to my case, which I still believe is completely valid. Just like the mother who leaves her child in the car seat is negligent of the possible dangers that may face her child, the drunk person who leaves the bar is being negligent of his resposibilities to not harm innocnet people. Why is the mother charged with a crime of endangering her child when nothing has happened, but the man who leaves the bar is not? I would venture to say that more people are killed by drunk drivers every year then parents leaving there children in the cars. Why is there nothing to prevent this type of negligence?

You're wrong. Things like that haven't been happening, not on this scale anyway, they've only had the ability to happen. I can go buy some advil if I get a headache, but instead I'll most likely leave it alone. Why? Because in itself it won't do anything more than annoy me. Just like the majority of drunks. For the minority that do lose all common sense we have the laws that have been in place for years, and if they are not being enforced properly the solution is not to arrest people for the ability to break the law, but to better enforce the laws. As for you comparison, again, it sucks. Get a new one.

If what you want are more solutions to this DD problem, which is what it appears you are asking for, fine. This isn't one of them. Mentioned earlier were people who's states make bartenders keep tabs on people who have had too much, and act accordingly to prevent them from doing anything stupid. Add to this the fact that a chuck, I don't have statistics, of drunk drivers come not from bars, but parties held other places that this bill does not address and you'll see this isn't doing all that much but stepping on the toes of your rights.

Quote:

Why do you think we have drunk driving and public intoxication laws in the first place? Because people intoxicated are generally unable to control themselves and will act in irrational and negligent ways.

Drunk driving and public intoxication laws are in place so that in the event a problem does arise or a problem appears to be inevitable action can be taken. They are not there so that every idiot who's had one too many can pay the state an exorbiant amount of money because he was trying to walk home.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Fresh Frank

They're arresting people before a crime has been committed, and there is no conspiracy in crimes like these. None that could be taken seriously, anyway.

I guess the difference is if you consider a bar a public or private place.

Do you think it's fair for people to be arrested for public drunkenness in large sporting arenas?

FELIPE NO

Well that depends on what they've done. If they've acted out, then sure. However, the same goes for the current laws concerning public intoxication. As has been stated before, a man who's intoxicated should not be bothered while walking home peacefully. Not unless he does something to merit such action, like throwing a baby.

It really doesn't matter to me whether or not the bar is a public or private place, it only matters to the letter of the law. It breaks the letter, but it's the idea behind it that's worse, and that stays regardless of private/public status.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Do we even know what the letter of the law is? I might have missed the post, but did anyone link to the text of the actual law people are being arrested under?

Personally, I don't mind people that get way too drunk in bars being arrested. When I was at a bar with a few friends the other day there were a few guys that had to prop themselves up against walls and stuff so they wouldn't fall down. The three of them were louder than anyone else in the place and I certainly wouldn't have minded if they weren't there.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Quote:

Ok, I have a question for you guys.

Say a guy is drinking and gets really smashed at a bar and decides he wants to leave. He walks out and decides he is way too drunk to drive home, so he decides to lie down in his car wait to sober up. He gets cold while being in the car and decides to turn the car on to warm up, all the while with no intention of actually moving the car anywhere. While waiting, he falls asleep with the car still running. A little while later, a police officer knocks on his door, tests him and books him with a DUI.

Do you think that this is fair? The guy was not actually driving the car and says he had no plans to.

Absolutely fair. If you're drunk - you should be nowhere near a vehicle, unless there is somone sober in the operators seat. As for what happened to your neighbour - good on the cop for arresting his drunk ass. Do you expect a cop to BELIEVE a drunk when he says that he's not planning on driving anywere? I sure as hell wouldn't - what would happen if your neighbour, after the cop left, decided to go get some munchies from the corner store, and ran over some child?

How do you not get this through your head?

Quote:

Ok, what if he was sleeping in the back seat?

Fine, why was he in the car in the first place? What happens if for some reason your drunk friend decides to drive somewhere because he thinks that he's sobered up enough?

Quote:

What if that car was a van where the shift knob is unreachable from the back seat?

It doesn't matter - he should'nt be in the vehicle alone PERIOD.

Quote:

What if the car is off, the man is in the back seat drunk and the keys are in the glove box?

He's still in the car, and intoxicated. Thus DUI is deserved.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Damn Locke for someone with the custom titled "sotned" you sure are a nazi about this.

I don't think people whould be nailed for public intoxication in general unless they're making a huisance of themselves as someone who's just walking home quietly even with a drunken stagger is still not hurting anything. As DUI unless the cars engine is on they should be left alone doubly so if they're jsut sleeping it off inside.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Locke

How do you not get this through your head?

How do you not get it through your head to read the entire thread before responding point by point to a post that you are taking completely out of context?

Because I don't believe that anywhere in this thread did I say alude to anything different than what you said. I'm not even going to bother responding to everything you've said.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?