Cops arrest drunks - in bars for public intox - should they?

from JoeUser Forums
You might have seen the news in the last day or two that officials in Texas, Irving to be exact, caused a fuss by arresting people for public intoxication even though the people they arrested were inside bars at the time.

A small blurb in the Washington, D.C. area free newspaper the Express had this on the issue:



PUBLIC INTOXICATION

Since Bars Prefer Patrons to Stay Sober

Alcoholic Beverage Commission agents swept through Irving, Texas, last week, arresting people for public intoxication -- inside bars, KXAS-TV reported. Dozens were taken in as officials did checks in 36 bars. The action was described as an effort to prevent drunken driving -- even though at least one sweep was done in a hotel bar where guests said they had no intention to drive. "Going to a bar is not an opportunity to go get drunk," Capt. David Alexander said. "It's to have a good time, but not to get drunk." Many residents disagreed. "If a guy's got a designated drive, go ahead and let him get toasted," Steve Harvey said. (EXPRESS)



Now that you've seen the news piece (if you hadn't already), the question is should the officials have been able to do what they did, or is this an overly aggressive application of the law? Do you, or should you, have the right to go to a bar and drink until you are definitely inebriated if you are most definitely not going to be driving or otherwise interacting with others in the true sense of the word "public"?

You tell me, and later I'll give my point of view on the situation.
983 views 7 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
It's to the readers to decide now
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
Aren't bars private businesses? Hence you can't be publicly intoxicated so long as your inside. On the other hand, if the bar owner/staff want someone out they should be able to get rid of them, but I'm sure they can come up with a better reason then this. Sounds rather silly to me.
Start11 - Customize the Start Menu and Taskbar in Windows 10/11.
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top

Aren't bars private businesses?

Yes, they are.  The cops had no right to do that.  They came in to private property and claimed it as "public".  What's next?  Are they going to arrest drunk people in back yard BBQ's?  After all, wouldn't that be as "public" as being inside a hotel bar?

Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
" Aren't bars private businesses? "


Nope. They are regulated public places, they are only privately owned. You have to abide by strict regulation to get a liquor license.

Frankly, I don't like it, but it is the government we've made. The moment they started passing smoking in "public" ordinances, they paved the way for this. If they can tell you that you can't smoke there, they can tell you that you can't be drunk there.

Government has all the power you give it. When people want to lord over each other, they give the government the right to lord over them. People who wanted to tell people they can't smoke in "public" bars, lent their power to the government to decide that being drunk in a bar was being drunk in "public"...
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
IN texas no less!  Where the state drink is Bourbon and Rye!
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
There's limits to how intoxicated a person can be inside a bar. If a bar owner/server has delivered enough alcohol to one person that is obviously and overtly intoxicated, they can lose their license to serve alcohol. I disagree with the style that their duty was performed, but do believe that irresponsible bartenders/servers often overlook signs that a person is headed towards alcohol poisoning (which can be deadly) in favour of the almighty dollar.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
If you take off your pants in a bar, you'll get arrested for public indecency. What's the difference between that and public intoxication as far as the government's right to interfere? Naked people aren't nearly as dangerous as drunk people.