Fairfax county police had a holiday surprise for restaurant and bar patrons the last couple of weeks. Officers went into these hot spots and starting pulling customers outside for sobriety tests and arresting them for public drunkenness if they flunked.-Even if they caused no disturbance and had no intension of driving. They are not distinguishing between those who intend on taking a taxi or those who do have cars in the parking lot.

My questions are how do you all feel about this and will it effect your lifestyle at all? Isn't this a violation of rights? (When will they start knocking on your door at night and give you a breathalizer before you go to bed!)

Yikes! It's things like this that make me glad I live here. ;)

What an awful country, we should invade and liberate the locals. That really pissed me off. :D

Whoah that does sound like a violation of rights, but then again I do think that public drunkeness is a crime and though the individual may not do harm the police can't differinciate one type of drunk from the other and therefore they punish everyone and get paid for it [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Erm...dude... they were INSIDE establishments where alcohol is being served, how can that be a crime ?

So police went into bars and arrested anyone who was drunk? Truth is indeed stranger than fiction.

That is unbelievable, in a country where you are allowed to buy machine guns you aren't allowed a quiet drink.
What next?, confiscating radios to eliminate noise pollution?, Taliban like indeed!.

<font color="#ffccff">It should be noted that the penalty for public drunkeness is a fine...and it should also be noted that Fairfax County is in a budget crisis...this is nothing more than traffic cameras taking pictures and billing the drivers. Drunks do make easy targets since they all congregate at bars. One more way for the state to generate revenue and one more reason why people should get rid of the current local officials....in my opinion. </font>

[ 01-10-2003, 09:36 AM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

Well if they have to persecute people to balance the books perhaps they should just raise taxes!

Like magik said it's all about raising money, (I know back home anyway) to raise local taxes in the county for anything they have to hold a general vote, city/county planners can't do it on their own, and people will rarely vote in favor raising taxes, as a result the police are extremely anal (alot of them are also rejects from other counties) and will take the slightest excuse to not only pull you over and search you, but will also fine you for things that would normally get a warning. I also know alot of people, not troublemakers, who have had policemen lie in wait for them, off of main roads where violations are likely to be committed, or be dangerous to anyone if they are committed (who really cares if you speed on an abandoned country road)/ to the point where they had to change their driving routes just to avoid being pulled over every time they go by, because the cops recognise their vehicle.

[ 01-10-2003, 10:16 AM: Message edited by: Morgeruat ]

Well it deters drunks from the society [img]tongue.gif[/img] :D [img]smile.gif[/img]

Well it deters drunks from the society [img]tongue.gif[/img] :D [img]smile.gif[/img]
But seriously, this is a violation of rights!!!

I saw that on "Good Morning America" today. How utterly stupid.

The law in question is actually about it being illegal to be drunk in a bar. In a freakin' bar? Again, these folks weren't rowdies causing trouble, the police just showed up and started ushering people outside.

They actually took people outside and administered sobriety tests. Those who weren't deemed "drunk" were allowed to return to the bar. Maybe so they could catch up with those who were?

One guy was dressed as Santa and was pulled from the Karaoke stage. Somebody I know is getting lumps of coal in their stockings next year. [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img]

A smiling, giggly officer from the local police was on the show this morning to defend his departments actions, and he said as long as the law is on the books, they'll enforce it. Weird that a law that's been on the books for years and years suddenly becomes necessary to enforce....

thats out of order, merely being drunk should NOT be an offense, its being drunk and then doing stupid things, ie drunk & disorderly (as its known in the UK) that means if your drunk you will be fine, if your drunk and causing trouble in any manner then you can be pulled. But if your in a public place ffs thats just stupid to arrest them, taking things way too far, if they tried that here people would riot and beat the police up i think, its bad enough when the police try and remove just 1 drunk person cos hes stayed after closing (they sent 7 police for 1 guy who was being slow finishing his drink and swore at the barstaff who panicked and called the police)

i got no problem with drunk people, or drunk people in public, just dont get in other peoples faces or be "disorderly" whilst doing so, frankly all antisocial behaviour should be banned, drunk or not, dont know why a distinction is made just for alcohol. Get plenty of people who get very very drunk and just get very tired and want to sleep, how is it right that the police could arrest them just for drinking when they havent impinged on anyone elses rights in anyway, bahhhhhhh cant believe the world today [img]tongue.gif[/img]

the other point is, who is to say if your drunk or not, i know people who can sink 20 pints and still be fully coherent, know where they are and have no ill effects at the same time i know some lightweights who are pissed after a single pint and they get loud, slurred and lose lots of control of functions, yet would pass a breathlyser test, so the police would happily arrest the guy who was sitting quietly minding his business with 20 pints inside him but ignore the guy causing trouble with 1 pint inside him below the limit, bah i say! police/local authorities never seem to get it right from what i seen :( regardless of country.

Eees notta fine by me. [img]smile.gif[/img] . I think 40% of BriTons would need another job to pay the fines.

Well every silver lining has a cloud - at least the bears toting the machine guns have more of a chance of being sober and in touch with their mental faculties now.

Well every silver lining has a cloud - at least the bears toting the machine guns have more of a chance of being sober and in touch with their mental faculties now.</font>[/QUOTE]Naaah! Our bears are all red necks too! They all live in the back woods! Execpt the ones from Jeresy, they are urbanized punks pushing the Dragon!

<font color="#ffccff">
Why raise taxes? Why not just live within your means? Quit trying to do a whole bunch of shit that the government was never really ment to be doing in the first place? When I run out of money i can't raise my own taxes..I have to live within my means..and so should state, local and federal government.</font>

[ 01-10-2003, 01:22 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

<font color="#ffccff">
Why raise taxes? Why not just live within your means? Quit trying to do a whole bunch of shit that the government was never really ment to be doing in the first place? When I run out of money i can't raise my own taxes..I have to live within my means..and so should state, local and federal government.</font></font>[/QUOTE]They don't seem to grasp this concept .....

Come now MagiK. You don´t really expect governments to be adept in logical thinking. ;)

Areesting people for drinking in a bar huh? Do they arrest every driver cause they might be speeding in the future? Hmm maybe I´m giving them ideas. ;)

They could arrest people whose cars were capable of breaking the speed limit, and fine them for harboring an attractive nuisance. Just a thought.

Has anyone noticed tha MADD wants to lower the acceptable blood alcohol level for DUI from 0.08% to 0.03%? This is the level that you get from having one drink, and has no effect on driving performance.

Scared yet Johnny? :D

Don't they have anti-sodomy laws in Virginia as well? Maybe they should start doing random spot checks of peoples bedrooms. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Well, I'd like to see the statute. Normally these statutes must be triggered by or are defined by a behavior aspect (lewdness, loudness, etc). Just setting them at a BAC # is rare - but possible, I guess. This is another reason why I often really dislike police.

Privacy Issue + Bad Politics Issue = only GA and AL have been stupid enough to enforce these in recent years - and each of them only tried once. FYI, masturbation is still illegal in about 11 states.

LOL, you have got to be kidding me. [img]graemlins/laugh2.gif[/img]

It's a <font color=blue>blue</font> law. If I remember correctly, it's illegal in NC for a husband and wife to engage in oral intercourse in the privacy of their own homes. There's another state where any position other than the one preferred by missionaries is illegal. There's a site with hundreds of these out-dated laws a friend showed me once; I'll try to find it, so you folks don't go out breaking the law. ;)

This isn't the site I remember, but it has some good ones. ;)

My favorite NC law? Elephants may not be used to plow cotton fields. :D

Nah, i live in a REAL free country. :D