Um... Oooooookay...

[TrixieB]

Texas arresting people in bars for being drunk


Kinda defeats the whole point of going to a bar, doesn't it? :dunno:

[DaForce]

"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.
"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."

I thought that was just the way Texans did things...dangerous and stupid...and mainly drunk.







*Ducks*

[Space Tycoon]

Sometimes, the only thing more harmful than a drunk Texan is a sober one.




.

[sickness]

So what they're looking to do is force people to throw parties and have a bunch of people drive to someone's house (only half or less of whom know the person well) and drink their asses off inevitably followed by some drunk idiot thinking he's sober enough to drive home because he got into a fight with his girlfriend blah blah blah. They're just going to put more drunks on the road.

[Bill_the_Pony]

Originally Posted by Space Tycoon

Sometimes, the only thing more harmful than a drunk Texan is a sober one.




.

In AA, Dubya is pegged as a "dry drunk": exaggerated self-importance and pomposity, grandiose behavior, a rigid, judgmental outlook, impatience, childish behavior, irresponsible behavior, irrational rationalization, projection and overreaction.

[tstone]

This is the state that recently produced Tom Delay and W. Surely, you realize TX politics have been losing IQ points for quite awhile now? We are now closing in on retard status.

[Meathead]

Hate to say it, but I kinda agree with this stance...yes, me, the Canuck who loves his alkiehaul.

There are public ordinances against drunkenness and licentious behaviour that are rarely enforced, but if I'm more likely to die in a drunk-driving incident than I am to get shot in Texas, then that indicates that there may be a problem.

I don't mind the occasional drink, but if your blood alcohol is over 0.05, then you should definitely NOT be driving and I think that Texas is actually making a responsible move in an effort to get the drunks off the streets.

[omicron]

Sorry, but this is WRONG WRONG WRONG. Why not just arrest people who are in line at the market buying beer? Chances are they are going to drink it and drive later? Some of the people arrested in Irving were at a hotel bar, and were guests there! How is this making the roads ANY safer??

This is stupid, over-reaching, and blantant authority interference with simple everyday acts.

Omicron

[kah]

This is about Dramshop laws, which, thankfully, were repealed in WI several years ago. However, if the cops were to walk into my bar and see a man passed out next to a drink, I would get a ticket. It is illegal to "serve an intoxicated customer." Weird, huh? Since once you have 2 drinks, you are legally intoxicated. This law is mainly overlooked in WI, since nobody only drinks 2 drinks and goes home, but if the cops chose to, they could write tickets for it. Kind of like the Ridiculous US laws that are rarely if ever prosecuted.

In the face of rising concerns about liquor consumption and personal injury, many states chose to regulate alcohol through dramshop laws. A dramshop is any type of drinking establishment where liquor is sold for consumption on the premises. Dramshop statutes impose liability on sellers of alcoholic beverages for injuries caused by an intoxicated patron. Under such statutes, a person injured by a drunk patron sues the establishment where the patron was served. The purpose of dramshop laws is to hold responsible those who enjoy economic benefit from the sale of liquor, thereby ensuring that a loss is not borne solely by an innocent victim (as when the intoxicated person who caused the injuries has no assets and no insurance).

The first dramshop law, enacted in Wisconsin in 1849, required saloons or taverns to post a bond for expenses that might result from civil lawsuits against their patrons. Many states followed Wisconsin's lead, and dramshop laws were prominent until the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s, when most were repealed. However, the 1980s brought renewed concern over the consequences of overindulgence in alcohol, and public pressure led to the passage of new dramshop statutes. By 1993, thirty-six states had imposed some form of liability on purveyors of alcoholic beverages for injuries caused by their customers.

[American]

That's cute. Arrest people for being drunk at a bar when you could be spending time doing something more constructive