[Waitone]

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=30288

Cops go to bars to arrest drunks
Gestapo-like tactics prompt outrage, complaints among owners, citizenry

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: January 6, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern



© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com


In the ongoing effort to keep public places clear of intoxicated citizens and drunk drivers, some police agencies are using a controversial tactic – going directly into bars and restaurants in order to make arrests.

Such is the situation in northern Virginia, where Fairfax County Police are targeting patrons suspected of having one too many.

"[Officers] were talking to one of the guests, then physically pulled him off the barstool," Richie Prisco, general manager at Champps bar told the Reston Times. "They were really aggressive and nasty."

According to the report, police are hauling customers outside of establishments to conduct sobriety tests, then arresting them for public drunkenness should they fail.

Tavern owner Jimmy Cirrito says it was intimidating and unnecessary to have some ten officers show up in SWAT-like attire. He notes police seemed to be tagging people at random, despite their telling bar owners they had undercover agents inside, calling in to provide specific descriptions of certain individuals.

"They tapped one lady on the shoulder – who was on her first drink and had just eaten dinner – to take her out on the sidewalk and give her a sobriety test," Cirrito told the paper. "They told her she fit the description of a woman they had complaints about, and that they heard she was dancing topless."

Cirrito said the woman passed the test and was allowed back in, but soon after, police pulled another woman outside who had arrived shortly before officers did.

"They made her count backward, say the alphabet, tell them where she lived, how she got there, how she was getting home," he said. "She had just gotten there five minutes ago in a cab."

Authorities say such methods are not new, despite protests from bar owners that they've never heard of police coming inside their establishments to enforce drinking laws.

"I've been an officer for over 17 years, and we've been doing it on and off over my entire career," police spokeswoman Sophia Grinnan told the Times. "As much as officers hate to spoil a good time, they hate even more to go out at 2 a.m. and work a death of anybody that is alcohol-related."

Virginia statutes say any business with a liquor license is considered a public place; therefore, police are allowed free access. If they find someone over the legal alcohol limit of .08, or suspect a customer of being intoxicated while still being served or present in an establishment, police can issue a ticket for public intoxication.

In response to complaints the raids were overly aggressive, Grinnan said, "I've had bar owners come up to me [and] ask what is going on, but I've also had some approach me aggressively, telling me I couldn't be there and I was violating their constitutional rights. We love to give explanations of what we're doing because it has an impact, but officers don't have to give up their game plan. That is just a courtesy."

In the wake of the published report, citizens appear to be siding with the bar owners and patrons, gauging from posts in an online messageboard.

"The way police are handling the drink situation is the biggest B.S. I have ever heard of," wrote Ray Williams.

"I lost a son (at age 16) a few years ago, and I most certainly support stopping anyone from drinking and driving. However, this police raid that seems to take place at some local bars is just totally crazy. ... Are we now living in a communist environment where we are not allowed to do anything without being harassed by the military/police?"

Russ Heisinger of Northport, N.Y., asked: "What is next, the alcohol police entering your home on Super Bowl Sunday, and inviting you outside to take a breath test? A solution would be for all the bar and restaurant owners to become 'private clubs,' and charge a very nominal fee for membership. However, the true solution is for the 'Barney Fifes' there to uphold the part of the Constitution about unlawful search, and to remember that we are after all, a free society, unless the cops think this is Baghdad!"

Others, like Don Armstrong, urged people to reject field sobriety tests, and request a blood-alcohol test at a local hospital.

"I have a form of arthritis that often affects my speech patterns and walking abilities," he wrote. "Under their standards of an acceptable set of motor functions, I would fail even if I never had an alcoholic drink."

[Beren]

Um. Pardon me a moment, but if you're sitting on a stool and not in a car, isn't it a violation of your 5th Amendment rights to /force/ you outside to undergo intoxication tests, not to mention a violation of your 4th Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure? You don't have to give the cops your name, much less anything else.

I hope someone files suit to help "encourage" the police to stop this invasive behavior.

What would I find acceptable? Glad you asked.

1. Undercover personnel in bar keep tabs on the heavy drinkers. Marked units are nearby, but out of sight.

2. Heavy drinker gets into car. UC alerts marked units, who, if the engine is started, move to block the suspect's car. UC has reasonable cause to believe that the person is both intoxicated and demonstrating clear intent to drive. (Even then, he might be able to claim he was just going to get the car warmed up for his buddy to drive.)

3. Suspect is tested.

Yes, this presents a greater risk of danger to the public and the police, since the potentially drunk person is now in a vehicle.

What's that quote about sacrificing liberty for security?

[mjustice]

If this was just one bar or two, I would tell folks to vote with their feet and drink elsewhere. But in a situation like this, the residents and business owners in Fairfax need to make it clear that this is not acceptable at all. Where are the lawsuits? Where's the public outcry? Where's the ACLU when you need them? ;)

MJ

[TheeBadOne]

I suspect they are in a state that has a public drunkeness law. My state does not so you'd never see something like this.

[Preacherman]

Sounds like they're going to have to employ the Australian solution... I received this story a couple of months back from a friend down under (Queensland, Australia).

Recently a routine police patrol parked outside a neighborhood tavern. Late in the evening the officer noticed a man leaving the bar, so intoxicated that he could barely walk. The man stumbled around the car park for a few minutes, with the officer quietly observing. After what seemed an eternity, and trying his keys on five vehicles, the man managed to find his car, which he fell into. He was there for a few minutes as a number of other patrons left the bar and drove off. Finally he started the car, switched the wipers on and off (it was a fine dry night), flicked the indicators on and off, tooted the horn and then switched on the lights. He moved the vehicle forward a few inches, reversed a little and then remained stationary for a few more minutes as more patrons left in their vehicles. At last he pulled out of the car park and started to drive slowly down the road.

The police officer, having patiently waited all this time, now started up the patrol car, put on the flashing lights, promptly pulled the man over and carried out a Breathalyzer test. To his amazement the breathalyzer indicated no evidence of the man having consumed any alcohol at all!

Dumbfounded, the officer said "I'll have to ask you to accompany me to the Police station - this Breathalyzer equipment must be broken."

"I doubt it, "said the man. "Tonight, I'm the designated decoy."

[hammer4nc]

Tavern owner Jimmy Cirrito says it was intimidating and unnecessary to have some ten officers show up in SWAT-like attire.

I'm not a drinker, don't go to bars, think dui is criminal...however, going into bars with swat teams, seems to be the archtypical "solution in search of a problem". We used to hear "designated driver" as the solution responsible partiers used.

This approach smacks of police state, dept. of precrime. Its so far-fetched, I expected the authorities to bring up some "other" reason for the tactics (i.e., crack dealing, illegal liquor sales, organized crime).

I hope that the responsible leo's realize how much this jbt activity drags down the integrity of all law enforcement!

[Baba Louie]

We're at the point where any and everyone who isn't a lawyer, politician or LE is guilty of something. Potential drunk drivers/public drunkeness, smoking in public, going into an adult bookstore, owns a firearm or ammunition, hate crimes and thought crimes (used the word "spic, chink or wop, etc" in public), pro-life or pro-choice, is a christian or a muslim or an aetheist, drug abuser/user...

Maybe we should lock up everyone who isn't a lawyer, politician or LEO and throw away the key for good.

If it saves just one child's life. (providing he/she grows up to be a lawyer, a politician or a police officer)

Yeah, that's the ticket.

What was it Ayn Rand wrote about enough laws being passed till everyone is a criminal of one type or another? Then you've got em where you want em.

Just shut up, pay your taxes and do what you're told, prole.

Adios

[Gordon]

Why does a crack dealer or anything short of a heavily armed gang need a swarm of armored officers. I remember nasty felons being arrested by a couple burly detectives or patrolmen back when we didnt have a police state. Now an inner city gang thats another story, but I only see patrolmen in small groups there. Is this "sensitive " community policing?Sounds like prelude to Gulag stuff.:fire:

[JohnBT]

While I think Fairfax stinks (did I say that?), here's what a quick search using the engine on the state web site turned up.

www.courts.state.va.us/opinion/2276003.doc

Bottom line is that the drunk in public law does not define the word public. According to this decision, public as used in the law means in public places or in public view.

I won't post the entire decision because it's too long. To make a long story short - the VA Court of Appeals said it was okay under state law to arrest this guy for being fall-down drunk on his front porch. The porch was 60 feet from the road; the police had been called, but they at first allowed the guy to sleep it off. He didn't and came outside on his porch. Also involved a little resisting arrest and such.

John

[andy28277]

Mr. Jones,

I'd be curious to know why you would publish the names and addresses of all of these concealed weapon permit holders?

It would seem to me that you are telling criminals who definitely has firearms in the home and who may not. The criminal mind can then say, after reading your paper, "hey, I can case this house, make sure nobody is home, and have a chance at stealing a firearm", or "hey, I now know which houses to avoid. The chances are the other homes don't have firearms and it will make it easier to rape the wife". You are setting people up for violent crime or helping criminals arm themselves based on this list.

I think that you have done an enormous diservice and have given criminals an edge. The great thing about concealed weapon permits is that criminals don't know, until now, who may have a gun on him and it protects all citizens.

I think you have helped out criminals a great deal - and opened your paper up to a tremendous amount of litigation from victims.

Please explain to me why you would do this?

***** You can email the Managing Editor, Ed Jones, at edjones@freelancestar.com

[Master Blaster]

Tavern owner Jimmy Cirrito says it was intimidating and unnecessary to have some ten officers show up in SWAT-like attire. He notes police seemed to be tagging people at random, despite their telling bar owners they had undercover agents inside, calling in to provide specific descriptions of certain individuals.

I have a strange urge to throw up my right hand and yell sig Heil.

:," Cirrito told the paper. "They told her she fit the description of a woman they had complaints about, and that they heard she was dancing topless."

Translation you have a nice rack and we wanted to give it a squeeze, any objection, good cause we dont want to throw you in jail for not submitting.

These police are Trained by the TSA no Doubt.

Delaware just passed a no smoking ban in bars and restaurants as well as any public place.

How long will it be before smoking in your own home near your own children will be considered child abuse????

My guess is not long.

I am opposed to this and I dont smoke.
:cuss:

No remember huddle in your house do what the nice men with machine guns say and dont question or talk back or mention the CONSTITUTION or well declare you a terrorist and throw you in jail forever.

Too late the time to dig up your guns has passed.

Nothing to see here Papers please, eyes front move along.

:fire:

[gun-fucious]

are the patons of a bar not in a private establishment?

they are not in "Public" untill the police take them outside

[2nd Amendment]

At one time here in Indiana you could beat a DUI by proving the officer had waitied near a bar parking lot and tagged you as you left. I forget exactly what they called it but it worked. Seems we've come from one extreme to the other, but that pretty much sums up the whole country these days.

[El Tejon]

gun-fu, depends on how the Old Virginny Public Intox statute is written. Could be public if you invite people onto your property. That's how it is here, could be there.

This reeks of federally funded program.

[OF]

"As much as officers hate to spoil a good time, they hate even more to go out at 2 a.m. and work a death of anybody that is alcohol-related." What!? Justifying police actions because A is easier than B doesn't make it right, just or lawful.

Who was it that said: "A policeman's job is only easy in a police state."

- Gabe

[pax]

GRD, it was Orson Welles.

I think the owners of the bars and restaurants should put up big signs reading, "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason."

When the police show up, kick 'em out -- or make them show their warrants.

Individual patrons could simply refuse to show ID, refuse to go outside quietly, etc.

The local media could help by filming the activities.

pax

One way or another, any government which remains in power is a representative government. If your city government is a crooked machine, then it is because you and your neighbors prefer it that way -- prefer it to the effort of running your own affairs. – Robert Heinlein

[Airwolf]

We're at the point where any and everyone who isn't a lawyer, politician or LE is guilty of something.

I totally believe that we are very, very near that being a literal truth. The Police State has had most of its foundations laid by the War On (some) Drugs and now the War On Terrorism has added the last brick in the wall that separates "us" (subjects) from "them" (political/social elites).

[Bottom Gun]

What would happen if someone refused to submit to these sobriety tests?
Arrest? Fines?
Perhaps a simple "No thank you, Officer, I don't care to play your silly a** game" is the way to handle this.

[hops]

What's the $ fine for a public intoxication ticket in Fairfax county Va.?

Sounds like LEO's are being pressed in to 'revenue' collection duty. All the state, county and city budgets are little short this year.

[Mike Irwin]

Now THIS pisses me off.

This is WAY beyond what the police should be doing.

I'll be having a chat with my district supervisor about this. Yes, I'm in Fairfax County.

[PATH]

GO GET 'EM MIKE!:fire:

[Gmac]

Right on BABALOUIE!!!!!! Next they'll be arresting all females over 10 years old because they might be prostitutes!!!!!

[Mal H]

All I ask is that you don't link Fairfax County/Arlington with the rest of Virginia. That would be like judging New York state by the actions in NYC.

[Ledbetter]

Pax is right, if I owned a bar, a sign would go up

Private Property--
Entry prohibited to on-duty
Peace Officers Without a Warrant

[Mike Irwin]

This story hit the local news today. The "man on the street" interviews indicated people were NOT happy about it.

I talked with the legislative aide for my district representative to county council (she lives in my community, and is a friend).

Apparently this tactic has been going on only out of the Reston-Herndon station for the Fairfax County Police, the county council has been getting some heat over this, and there's apparently a meeting scheduled to discuss this with police.

Virginia's ACLU unit isn't happy about it, either.

More as I find out about it.

[Smurfslayer]

I caught Fox ( the blonde guy on at the 5 o'clock hour ) New channel EXCORIATING Unfairtax county for this, and he's supposed to follow up on the 1-8-03 episode. I've seen it in all the local papers, all local broadcasts, internet venues, radio shows... As Bugs would say, "What a Maroon"...

Unfairtax County is known for displaying that they have more budget money than sense, but this little fiasco has been a P.R. catastrophe. Good. There certainly are much more important things for a County to undertake - particularly one that is financially in the red - than this.

[Mr. James]

hops,

The media here report the fine can go as high as $250, but is typically around $40 for a first offense.

The funny papers suggest the interpretation is that a pub is just that - public. But note, they take the "suspects" outside before starting any testing - they're sure in public then. No way do I cooperate with this nonsense.



:fire:

[nualle]

Preacherman: That's a hilarious "desgnated decoy" story. That kind of creative civil disobedience is a clear sign of a people at odds with its government.

[JohnBT]

washingtonpost.com

Bar Raids Irritate Owners, Drinkers
Fairfax Police Defend Sobriety Testing

By Carol Morello
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 8, 2003; Page B01


As the designated driver in her dinner party, Pat Habib was careful to consume no more than one alcoholic drink and follow it up with two sodas.

So she was shocked when a police officer singled her out of the crowd at Jimmy's Old Town Tavern in Herndon and asked her to step outside to prove her sobriety. After she ran through the alphabet without pause, the Fairfax County police officer let her go and explained police had received a complaint about an unruly blond woman matching her description. Then she watched as police tested other women looking nothing like her.

"I could see it if they wanted to prevent you from getting into a car, but they didn't even ask me if I was driving," Habib said.

Habib was among restaurant and bar patrons swept up last month in a joint operation of the Fairfax County police and the Virginia Department of Alcohol Beverage Control. During the holiday period, undercover agents went to 20 bars in Reston and Herndon looking for examples of bartenders "overserving" customers. Police ultimately raided three bars and arrested nine patrons who failed sobriety tests. They were charged with public drunkenness and spent the night in jail.

Police consider the operation a success and said they would consider doing it again. Lt. Tor Bennett, assistant commander of the Reston District station, described it as a "low-key" operation designed to stop drunks before they got behind the wheel.

"We're not talking about someone who was enjoying a cocktail or two and enjoying a nice evening out," Bennett said, noting that the nine men arrested had blood-alcohol levels ranging from 0.14 to 0.22. "They drew attention to themselves by their actions."

But civil libertarians, restaurateurs and many of their customers who were either questioned or arrested have decried the police tactic. They said many people who were drinking responsibly and causing no commotion now have the Class 4 misdemeanor of public intoxication on their record, and many more potential customers were scared away for good out of fear that a drink or two could get them arrested.

"It does smack of a pending police state if law enforcement is going into establishments to monitor behavior," said Lynne Breaux, executive director of the Metropolitan Washington Restaurant Association. "At the same time, we strongly oppose any combination of drinking and driving."

Under Virginia law, a restaurant or bar is a public place, and public intoxication is a low-level misdemeanor punishable by a night in jail and up to a $250 fine.

Kent Willis of the Virginia branch of the American Civil Liberties Union said the law does not specify what level of blood alcohol constitutes public drunkenness. The level for drunken driving is 0.08.

Police said the holiday raids, first reported in the Reston Times, were born of a community policing goal of discouraging crime before it occurs. Bennett said police had been called repeatedly to the three bars in response to fights and disorderly conduct. Undercover agents found no problems in 17 other bars they visited before Christmas, he said. And four of the men arrested were on their way to their cars when police stopped them, he said.

"We're not talking about overzealousness here," Bennett said, adding that uniformed police officers who made the arrests were accompanied by members of the police bicycle patrol clad in nylon pants and polo shirts.

But bartenders and patrons saw it differently.

At Ned DeVine's restaurant in Reston, owner Graham Davies said seven or eight police officers "came bursting into the place."

"If they decided you had too much to drink, you were targeted," Davies said, acknowledging that he believed the three customers who were arrested at his tavern probably had too much to drink.

"The police are within their rights. I can't disagree with what they want to do, which is save lives. But I disagree with the way they did it."

At Champps in Reston, general manager Kevin O'Hare described police as "antagonistic." He said they "pulled" people from their chairs who were making no commotion. "They're always welcome to come in anytime," he said of police. "It's not an issue when they talk to our guests. But when they actually pull people out of their seats, it is an issue. When it's borderline harassment, it's an issue."

One man who was arrested during one of the police raids acknowledged having several drinks during the course of the afternoon, but said he was not driving or acting unruly as he sat at a table with several work colleagues. He had just finished singing "Jingle Bell Rock" on the karaoke machine when an officer asked him to step outside. He failed a breath test and was taken in a van to jail.

"I've lived my life with tremendous respect for the rule of law," said the man, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he is contesting the charges.

Now his respect is tarnished.

"You could be anybody, anywhere, and they can take you out and throw you in jail," he said. ". . .I didn't do anything other than to be in the wrong place at the wrong time."

Katherine K. Hanley (D), chairman of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, said the operation was a tool to reduce drunken driving and would be evaluated before it is repeated.



© 2003 The Washington Post Company

[Mike Irwin]

Preacherman,

BTW, the "designated decoy" is an urban legend, apparently.

Unless it's happened to police in New York City, Harrisburg, York, and State College, PA, Washington, DC, Richmond, Fairfax, and Virginia Beach, Virgina, among others where it's supposed to have occurred on a friend's uncle's wife's brother's sister's minister's boss' son's authority...

[Mal H]

Police said the holiday raids ... were born of a community policing goal of discouraging crime before it occurs.

I just saw a movie based on that concept, "Minority Report"; a concept gone very bad.

[dev_null]

Couldn't have been him, Mike, he was in the tub full of ice, looking for his kidneys and reading the "Welcome to the world of AIDS" written on the mirror in lipstick... :cool:

I am glad to see that this is being played as a special holiday event rather than an ongoing policy. Hopefully that's a spin meant to mask some closed-door @$$-chewing that will put a stop to this JBT nonsense.

-0-

[hops]

Thanks for the info, Mr. James. Even at 40 dollars a pop, that can run up to real money if at the time of test you are .08 blood alcohol level, yet not a danger to anyone.

Gives probable cause and interesting twist. You're in a pub so you may/must be drunk. Please follow us outside so that we figure out the may or must.

Scary.........

[gun-fucious]

a general manager from a Fairfax restaurant called into the "Ron & Fez Show" tonight.

He said the police had undercover informants with cell phones calling in reports of drunken behaviour before the police came in dressed in black "SWAT" outfits.

[JohnBT]

"...put a stop to this JBT nonsense."

CUT THAT OUT!

I didn't do it!!!!!!!!!!

JBT

[matis]

And since I'm here, I remembered another example of the incipient police state, although this one is from England, the land of Magna Carta and all that.

Plain clothes police now eat in minority-owned restaurants, listening for racist or other anti-minority remarks by patrons and arrest!! those who make them and haul them in for charges!!!

Saw this in Reason Magazine some time back

Where does it end?

Matis

[Mike Irwin]

OK, folks! Hot from the Fairfax County Police!

Their "official" response to this!

Warning, there's a LOAD of BULL :cuss: masquerading as community policing here.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Subject: Col. Manger's response to bar arrests
Importance: High

The following was sent out to citizens who sent e-mails to the Chief concerning the bar arrests in
Reston:

Dear Sir/Mam:

I have received your correspondence depicting your concerns about recent alcohol ordinance
enforcement by my agency in the Herndon/Reston area. The main purpose for enforcing alcohol-
related laws in our community is to save lives. Unfortunately, during the last twenty years 8,346
Virginians lost their lives because of drinking and driving. During 2002, 62 people were killed in
traffic crashes in Fairfax County and it is disturbing to note that 25% of these crashes were
related to alcohol use. The cost in human lives, pain, suffering, medical and property damage is
staggering.

As a matter of legal obligation, law enforcement agencies are required to enforce laws related to
alcohol use. The Fairfax County Police Department does not wish to stand by and treat the
symptoms of alcohol use through enforcement after an alcohol-related crash or death has
occurred. Rather, we have proactively partnered with the Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control
and other regional law enforcement agencies to target the root causes of alcohol related deaths.
This is accomplished by enforcing the laws related to intoxication in public places, illegal
purchasing of alcohol by underage persons, failure of merchants to adhere to legal requirements
of the service of alcoholic beverages, and other crimes associated with alcohol consumption in
public places.

The Fairfax County Police Department did not arbitrarily select alcohol establishments in the
Herndon and Reston areas. The sites were selected based upon statistical data, calls for service
related to alcohol violations, arrest data related to alcohol incidents (i.e., Driving While
Intoxicated, Drunk in Public, assaults, etc.), crash data, and other reliable information regarding
alcohol violations in and around the establishments targeted. The enforcement of such laws is to
clearly send a message to the community that we will not tolerate illegal use of alcohol, which is
a major factor in creating deaths on our roadways and decreasing the quality of life in our
neighborhoods.

During the 3 1/2 week period from December 8, 2002 through January 3, 2003 a total of 19
establishments were observed by police officers, 16 of those establishments were found to be in
compliance with no violations observed and no police action taken. There were three locations
where violations were observed which resulted in a total of 12 arrests. Nine of those arrests were
for persons who were drunk in public. Almost half of those arrested for drunk in public were
arrested in their vehicles or as they approached their vehicles. The lowest Blood Alcohol level
detected was .14, which is almost twice that of the legal limit. The remaining three arrests were
for drug related charges and Obstruction of Justice.

Lastly, our enforcement efforts have an educational component. The police department will be
meeting with the managers and owners of all of the establishments where enforcement efforts
took place. These meetings will be utilized to educate owners and managers about alcohol-
related laws to prevent future violations of those laws.

During the 2002-2003 Holiday season, 5 people were killed on the roadways of Fairfax County.
Of those crashes, 60% were alcohol related. During this same period in the Reston and Herndon
areas, I am happy to report that no citizen was killed
because of an alcohol related crash. I cannot statistically prove that no persons were harmed in
the Reston and Herndon areas as a direct result of our efforts. However, I can say that the men
and women of the Fairfax County Police Department aggressively worked to ensure the safety of
all our citizens by conducting alcohol enforcement in all our communities to include the Reston
and Herndon areas.

I am sorry you feel that an
"
invasion
"
of privately owned local establishments that serve alcohol has taken place in your community.
By no means did the Fairfax County Police Department
"
invade
"
such establishments. As outlined above, as obligated by law, and based upon prior statistical
history, we conducted enforcement of alcohol laws at specific locations that served alcohol.
Undercover Officers observed violations of alcohol laws and then advised uniformed personnel
of the violations. Once a violation was established, uniformed personnel would confront the
person(s) who committed the infraction. It is also well documented that many officers are
seriously injured and killed in establishments that serve alcohol. Therefore, only the appropriate
amount of personnel was assigned to assist in such operations to ensure the safety of the officers
and the citizens frequenting the establishments.

The recent media article explaining police activity at alcohol serving establishments in the
Reston and Herndon communities is not an accurate description of our actions. Each enforcement
campaign was conducted in an organized fashion in accordance with the law, and carried out
with respect for the owners and patrons of the establishments. I invite you to take advantage of
our ride a long program and see first hand your police officers carry out their duties in the Reston
and Herndon areas. I can assure you that spending several hours riding with a Fairfax County
Officer will be a positive experience that will demonstrate to you that your community is
provided essential law enforcement services by oneof the finest police agencies in the United
States.

If you would like additional information and arrange for a ride a long, please do not hesitate to
contact the Commander of the Reston District Station, Captain Michael Vencak. Captain Vencak
can be reached at 703-478-0904. Additionally, more specific information about alcohol law
enforcement is available at the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control's website

http://www.abc.state.va.us

Sincerely,
J. Thomas Manger, Colonel
Chief of Police

Erin F. Schaible, Lieutenant
Fairfax County Police Department
Community Policing Division
Work- (703) 246-4764
FAX- (703) 385-3464

Erin.Schaible@fairfaxcounty.gov

[WilderBill]

Am I missing something here?
It would seem that a bar patron would normally be expected to be drinking. If he isn't getting rowdy, then he is only a danger to his own liver.
If he is intending to drive, that's another matter, but shouldn't be a crime unless he DOES drive.
I have seen folks dumb enough to get totally smashed, yet wise enogh to call someone else to drive them home.

[pax]

*pax tiptoes quietly into the room, considers for a moment, and then tosses some juicy flame bait into the room to see what will happen*


The police weren't doing anything wrong. They were enforcing the law as it is written, and should not at all be blamed for it.


*pax tiptoes quietly back out the door, wondering if anyone will take the bait*

[matis]

... nibble, nibble, not bad, Pax, but's what's this sharp hook...??

I made this point in two previous posts. Hard to blame the police for enforcing laws that we allow the politicians to make..

On the other hand, enforcing bad laws does taint the police. They've sure taken enthusiastically to civil asset forfeiture laws, haven't they? The do like to confiscate "guilty" cash, cars, real estate, etc., since THEY themselves (their departments) get to keep most of the loot -- they do like to do that, don't they?

Matis

[ravinraven]

Somebody should gather all the information that can be found on the Nazi thugs who are raiding bars and post this info on the web so all can be aware of who they are. Let the world know exactly who is behind this crap and who the people are who participate in the raids. The old Nuremberg Defence of "only doing my job" is not valid here.

If we the people do not band together to end this kind of behavior our kids and grand kids are doomed to one hell of a future watering the tree of liberty.

I would like to see liberty re-established by peaceful means. But I want to see it re-established!

[Mike Irwin]

"The police weren't doing anything wrong. They were enforcing the law as it is written, and should not at all be blamed for it."

Questionable, Pax.

There's apparently no standard in Virginia that defines "public intoxication." The police are apparently using the legal limit for driving under the influence as the arbiter. Under Commonwealth law, that may well be an improper application of the statutes.

Secondly, we then have seriously differing stories about what the police are trying to do. If they're attempting to crack down on rowdiness in the bars, that's one thing, but it would appear to be that the police, judging by the statement that I posted, are saying that this is an issue designed to stop drinking and driving.

If they're leaving a bar full of patrons who continue to drink after they leave, have the police really done anything? Or have they left a bar full of potential DUIs waiting to take to the road?

If you're going to attempt to crack down on DUI, you don't test patrons while they're in the bar. You test them as they leave. Otherwise you've done absolutely nothing to further your stated purpose.

I've got some more information to post on this issue, from police. It's also very interesting.

This also isn't over yet. I'm hearing through the grapevine that attorneys have been retained by at least 2 of the people who were charged, who will contest the application of the statutes that I noted above.

[JohnBT]

Okay. If the Police were just enforcing the Law...How come they never enforced it before? Were they ignoring their responsibilities previously? Why?

Well they should be taken to task for not doing their jobs. Right?

Bad.
Bad.
Bad.
Police.

No milk and cookies before bed tonight.

John

[444]

I wonder if they did a raid like this at the police Christmas party ? Or at the local cop bar ? Oh wait, how silly of me, they our superiors and we, lowly peons.

The amount of the fine is not the point. The fact that you now have a documented case of a substance abuse problem is.

" made this point in two previous posts. Hard to blame the police for enforcing laws that we allow the politicians to make.. "

I keep reading this same thing thing in post after post after post but you know what, this defense failed miserably at the trials in Nuremberg.

[Mike Irwin]

Interesting question, 444...

Some of the most horrific incidents of drinking and driving I've seen have been police officers leaving "police" bars, even FOP bars.

[444]

I have seen them also Mike. In fact I have been with them. Some of the younger guys I work with love to hang out with cops because they know they can't get busted.

[rock jock]

I have no problem with police setting up sting operations to catch drunk drivers after they have actually entered their car and are piloting out of the parking lot. In fact, I encourage it. But arresting patrons who are simply drinking, without becoming a public nuisance, crosses the line BIG TIME. If Va. is like most states, a person can exceed the DUI limit with only two drlinks in a one hour period. How many of the patrons do not exceed that limit? Not many, I would venture, and many of those will not be driving, but will rather be passengers. Should they also be subject to this treatment? Ridiculous.

[Mike Irwin]

Hot off the presses...

Fairfax County Police press release on the subject at hand...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After a series of escalating violent incidents at a few establishments that serve alcohol in the Reston area, officers decided to implement an operation to combat the problem at its source. Police were repeatedly being called to the same few establishments as many as three times each night for alcohol-related problems such as large brawls (one involving over 60 people), assaults, disorderly persons and destruction of property. There was growing concern for the safety of patrons as well as the community as a whole. Prior to implementing any program of enforcement, a survey was conducted of all establishments serving alcohol in the Reston area in conjunction with the Virginia Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control and the Fairfax County Fire Marshals Office to develop a strategy. It was determined that those establishments to which officers were frequently called were the same ones with safety violations cited by those agencies.

A joint operation was conducted on three evenings for six hours between December 8, 2002 and January 3, 2003 and during this time, officers in plain clothes visited as many as six establishments each night. The overwhelming majority of the establishments were in compliance with all laws; however, arrests were made in the same three establishments previously identified as non-compliant. A total of 12 arrests were made in those three establishments. Nine of those arrests were for persons who were drunk in public. The remaining three arrests were for drug-related charges and obstructing justice. The main purpose for enforcing alcohol-related laws in our community is to save lives. Being drunk in public has always been illegal in Virginia and this type of enforcement has been utilized for over 20 years. This is one component of a multi-faceted approach to solving alcohol-related crime which includes DWI checkpoints, roving patrols, underage alcohol sales stings, bar checks, and a large-scale education campaign.

Virginia law designates establishments open to the public as public places, therefore law enforcement officers can enter these establishments to ensure public safety. If a person is deemed to be intoxicated, that person can be arrested for appearing drunk in public according to Virginia law. Contrary to some reports, police did not raid establishments dressed in SWAT gear, indiscriminately drag people off their barstools, force them outside and cart them to jail merely for having a cocktail. In fact, the nine persons arrested were identified as being heavily intoxicated. The lowest blood alcohol level detected was .14, which is almost twice that of the legal limit for driving. There is no established blood alcohol level for public intoxication, according to Virginia state law; intoxication is defined as “a condition in which a person has drunk enough alcoholic beverages to affect his manner, disposition, speech, muscular movement, general appearance or behavior.”

As a matter of legal obligation, law enforcement agencies are required to enforce laws related to alcohol use. The Fairfax County Police Department does not wish to stand by and treat the symptoms of alcohol use after an alcohol-related crash or death has occurred. Rather, we have proactively partnered with the Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control and other regional law enforcement agencies to target the root causes of alcohol-related deaths. This is accomplished by enforcing the laws related to intoxication in public places, illegal purchasing of alcohol by underage persons, failure of merchants to adhere to legal requirements of the service of alcoholic beverages, and other crimes associated with alcohol consumption in public places.

Unfortunately, during the last twenty years 8,346 Virginians lost their lives because of drinking and driving. During 2002, 62 people were killed in traffic crashes in Fairfax County and it is disturbing to note that 25% of these crashes were related to alcohol use. The cost in human lives, pain, suffering, medical and property damage is staggering. Four of the nine persons arrested in this operation for appearing drunk in public were arrested in their vehicles or as they approached their vehicles.
The Fairfax County Police Department did not arbitrarily select alcohol establishments in the Herndon and Reston areas. The sites were selected based upon statistical data, calls for service related to alcohol violations, arrest data related to alcohol incidents (i.e., Driving While Intoxicated, Drunk in Public, assaults, etc.), crash data, and other reliable information regarding alcohol violations in and around these establishments. The enforcement of such laws is to clearly send a message to the community that we will not tolerate illegal use of alcohol, which is a major factor in creating deaths on our roadways and decreasing the quality of life in our neighborhoods.

Lastly, our enforcement efforts have an educational component. The police department will be meeting with the managers and owners of all of the establishments where enforcement efforts took place. These meetings will be utilized to educate owners and managers about alcohol-related laws to prevent future violations of those laws

[Tamara]

Ja, zey vere only follovink orders! ;)

[Zundfolge]

Okay, in the spirit of Ayn Rand's quote; "There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. When there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. ... Create a nation of law-breakers, and then you cash in on the guilt"

What happens to you if you get convicted of "public intoxication"?

Are you now labeled by the state as an "abuser of alcohol"?

Aren't "abusers of alcohol" barred from exercising their 2nd amendment rights now days?


just a paranoid little thought :uhoh:

[pax]

Tamara,

I know, I know. That's why I hesitated to post as I did.

However ... I keep thinking about this one. If the law actually forbids public drunkenness, and defines 'public' to include the bars, and defines 'drunken' as .08 -- seems to me that the law is bad and ought to be changed.

Certainly there's enough public outcry now to give some impetus toward changing it. At least, I hope so.

But to say to our police, the same organizations that we expect to obey every last jot and tittle of the law at roadblocks in Arizona, to please completely ignore the law as it is written in Virginia, is perhaps not so good.

I don't want everything illegal unless some bureaucrat (or good ol' boy sheriff) decides to let it slide today ... do you?

Better to trash the law, if it's a bad one, I would think. "A government of laws and not of men" and all that, you know.

Zundfolge, I was also thinking of Ayn Rand's quote. If we make everything illegal, and then enforce it randomly, we'll get there. I think we should repeal the laws which people are going to ignore, rather than letting them clutter up the books so that everyone is a lawbreaker and the bureaucrats can ding you for anything, at any time.

pax

If you have ten thousand regulations, you destroy all respect for the law. – Winston Churchill

[mrat]

Ja, zey vere only follovink orders!

I agree with you there. We do keep electing the same politicians over and over no matter what they do, so in a since they are following orders.

In all seriousness this is a pretty stupid way to enforce the law on whatever problem they are having back there. I mean really, is it that difficult to wait outside the bar for a guy to come and get him after he stumbles into his car?

[DadOfThree]

This seems no different to me than having the ATF dress up in SWAT clothes and patrol firing ranges in order to "enforce the law". Can you imagine having 2 ATF guys question you on what you have with you, how did you transport these weapons, does the address on your CCW match the addres on your license? If one never ever did anything wrong, many would be too intimidated to go back and risk another round of questioning. Most of us would go ballistic at his type of intimidation but some would be willing to overlook it if they were just going after drinkers.
Who could relax with a good meal and a glass of wine with 10 SWAT guys pacing up and down the tables looking for their next "violator"?

[Mike Irwin]

Pax,

Yes, the law prohibits public drunkeness.

However, as I noted, and as is noted in the media spinning from police, the STANDARD for what defines public drunkeness is arbitrary, and is up to the discretion of the officer.

I will give police credit in that they're trying to use the DUI statutes to set the standards for public drunkeness.

However, as I also noted, that MAY, on its face, be illegal.

[444]

The best part of all this is the state has no problem collecting taxes from bars. Liquor taxes, income taxes, sales taxes, business license, property taxes, but this isnt' enough. Let's also fine the customers.


At any one time on this board or TFL there are at least 3-4 stories like this going on at a time. In every one there are those that defend the honor of the police. After reading several hundred similar incidents I have a hard time buying the excuses. And the same excuses are used every time.
Oh they are just doing their job, if the law is bad let's change it.......................... (insert puke symbol). As I said above; when the nazis used those excuses, no body bought them. However that was a different time and people appearently had more sense. Today, it would work like a charm; why did you march those 10,000 people into a shower and then drop the Zyclon-B ? Oh I was just doing my job, I don't make the rules, if you didn't like me doing that you should have gotten it changed. Oh, you were just doing your job, why didn't you say so ? Please excuse me for questioning anything.

[Tamara]

Isn't this where someone's supposed to say "You weren't there at Dachau and neither was I, so let's hold off on judging, okay?"... ;)

[444]

The people who were there, wern't there long. At least in their normal state of matter.

[Sean Smith]

This is one of the few scenarios I can think of where I really would be as incredibly rude and obstructive as possible to the police in question.

[Ledbetter]

In most states, a "DUI" is what they call the crime of "Driving while impaired due to the use of alcohol."

a Blood Alcohol Content of 0.08% has been set as the standard for a "presumption" of impairment at that level.

Drunk in public statutes, on the other hand, are generally based on a completely different standard: Too drunk to care for self or so drunk as to constitute a danger to others.

It is incorrect to say that a BAC of 0.08% is proof of "drunkeness."

[pax]

444,

Would you suggest, then, leaving the crappy law in place? To what end?

(Yes, that was a fallacy-of-exclusion, for those who care about such things ... but bear with me a moment.)

Mike Irwin,
However, as I noted, and as is noted in the media spinning from police, the STANDARD for what defines public drunkeness is arbitrary, and is up to the discretion of the officer.
Thanks, got it.

So what you're saying is that we already have a situation where the law is arbitrary, and arbitrarily enforced.

All,

I'm NOT saying that the cops on the scene shouldn't be held accountable for their mess ups. I'm saying that it's NOT enough for them to stop doing it...

Does anyone here think that if the cops simply stop enforcing this horribly stupid law, that the law will simply go away rather than going dormant, to be resurrected another time?

It's more of a tactics question than an attempt to excuse the officers from enforcing a stupid law. I'm trying to say that there really should be a public outcry against this sort of thing. And the public outcry should be aimed against the entire situation, not just against the cops on the scene.

How is there going to be any public outcry to get rid of the stupidity, without letting people experience the full force of the stupid law they passed?

pax

[DeltaElite]

We need prohibition back, oh wait, nevermind that didn't work. hmmmmmmmm

I guess all crime in Farifax has been halted, since they have time to waste on liquor enforcement. If liqour enforcement is such an issue, then let their version of the Liquor Control Board do it.
It just serves to give cops another black eye and accomplished nothing.

Now we have in the past used liqour law violations to shut down problem bars where there are numerous fights, shootings, narcotics dealing, etc.
This may or may not be the case in the bars they visited, but harrassing the patrons inside is ridicilous. The bars themselves always have more than enough violations to get them suspended, without harrassing the patrons.

I bet they didn't target any gay bars, for fear of a bias lawsuit, so they went after heterosexual drunks, sounds like bias in and of itself. :neener:

[hammer4nc]

Pax asked:
Does anyone here think that if the cops simply stop enforcing this horribly stupid law, that the law will simply go away rather than going dormant, to be resurrected another time?

As a matter of fact, yes. Discretion, judgement and common sense, should and must be applied...not just in law enforcement, but in all areas of public administration. I would much prefer reasoned discussion, with the beat cop, police supervisor, and elected reps, to a situation where the accepted proessional standard is "I have no choice, just doing my job"...all up and down the line. For example, strict enforcement of speeding 1mph over the limit, on a clear, dry day (w/no traffic) would be viewed as assinine, in light of the overriding safety mission, yet the letter of the law makes no such distinction. Same situation here.

The concept that we must first perfect all laws on the books, before holding the enforcers accountable for being UNreasonable, is one worth revisiting, for a number of reasons.

I saw an interview with the police supervisor responsible for this crackdown on the news today. Sadly, I thought he was your typical power-tripper. Revelling just a little too much with all the attention, grinning while explaining how he was just following the law... He did make some obscure reference to previous "riots" connected with the bars in question. Reading between the lines, one gets the impression that the crackdown was retaliation for perceived lack of respect? "You WILL RESPECT my authoritii"...in the words of Eric Cartman!

One of the big reasons for eschewing the "anal retentive" approach to law enforcement, as opposed to expecting common sense, it that it tends to attract the wrong type of personality to enforcement jobs. Hence the frequent stories about absurd applications of force (and ACCEPTED lack of common sense), that become the fodder for for so many THR threads like this one.

[DeltaElite]

If a law is not enforced long enough, sometimes even the legislature takes notice and purges them from the books.
We recently had laws against adultery, pre-marital sex, oral sex and a few others eliminated, since most citizens, including Le and court officials were currently or had violated the laws previously.
So as societal views change, indeed laws can be changed, but it takes time and patience.

[Mike Irwin]

"You weren't there at Dachau and neither was I, so let's hold off on judging, okay..."

I have been to Dachau. A little after the fact, but I think I'd be safe in passing judgment...