On Apr 5, 11:27=EF=BF=BDpm, Larry wrote:
> In article <65pnv3F2hem2...@mid.individual.net>,
> =EF=BF=BD"_ Prof. Jonez _" wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Larry wrote:
> > > In article <8i2ev3hpbffme2qa4ic001egjcejpcc...@4ax.com>,
> > > richard wrote:
>
> > >> On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 21:56:54 -0400, Larry wrote:
>
> > >>> In article ,
> > >>> richard wrote:
>
> > >>>> On Fri, 4 Apr 2008 16:25:04 -0700 (PDT), Jethro
> > >>>> wrote:
>
> > >>>>> ISTR that most states have laws prohibiting the drinking of
> > >>>>> alcohol in public, which is why people often drink from bottles
> > >>>>> wrapped in brown paper ... is this on the basis that the police
> > >>>>> would not be allowed to inspect the bottle, due to having no
> > >>>>> probable cause for a search ?
>
> > >>>>> TIA
>
> > >>>> Actually, you can legally drink in public.
>
> > >>> Goodness, Richard, are you ever right?
>
> > >>> In many places you cannot drink in public. =EF=BF=BDNew York City, f=
or
> > >>> example, has a law prohibiting open containers of alcohol.
>
> > >> Hey larry? you ever been outside of NYC?
>
> > > Yes, many times.
>
> > >> You ever been to a real home
> > >> that has that green stuff around it we call grass? Most states,
> > >> probably including new york, allows consumption of alcohol on private=
> > >> property even though that private property is in the public view.
>
> > > That's not "drinking in public" then. =EF=BF=BDIt's drinking on privat=
e
> > > property.
>
> > >> You ever been to one of them outdoor sidewalk cafe things where they
> > >> serve beer? Why aren't they violating the law? Oh maybe it has to do
> > >> with a little piece of paper called a permit.
>
> > > Right. =EF=BF=BDWithout the permit, they would be violating laws about=
serving
> > > alcohol, and the patrons would be violating laws about consuming
> > > alcohol in public.
>
> > > You DO realize you just proved yourself wrong and made my point? =EF=
=BF=BDThe
> > > reason these places get the permits is because without them, it is
> > > against the law!
>
> > >>>> To a certain extent. What
> > >>>> you cannot do is drive while drinking.
>
> > >>> That's an entirely different crime.
>
> > >>>> Ergo the brown paper bag which
> > >>>> makes it impossible for the officer to see what you're drinking.
> > >>>> Contrary to popular belief, if the officer suspsects you are
> > >>>> consuming impairing liquids while driving that is his probable
> > >>>> cause to stop.
>
> > >>> What "popular belief" are you referring to? =EF=BF=BDI imagine the p=
opular
> > >>> belief is that if the officer sees you drinking and driving - in
> > >>> other words, committing a crime - he can stop you.
>
> > >> Ah but only if he can "CLEARLY" see the labeling.
>
> > > Not at all. =EF=BF=BDIn fact, most drunk drivers are not actually drin=
king
> > > while they drive. =EF=BF=BDDrunk drivers are caught most commonly eith=
er at
> > > checkpoints or after being pulled over for some erratic driving or
> > > traffic infraction. =EF=BF=BDThen the officer sees indications they've=
been
> > > drinking - we all know what they are, we've all been around drunk
> > > people - so they're arrested for DWI.
>
> > >> So he passes me, and he sees me holding a brown paper bag up to my
> > >> mouth. Is that alone probable cause? What if the content of the
> > >> bottle I'm drinking from is water?
>
> > > Why does "probable cause" matter? =EF=BF=BDProbable cause is needed to=
arrest
> > > you - not for the police to walk up to you and ask a question or two.
>
> > Does the suspect have a right to remain silent?
>
> It depends.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Do either of you morons realize that you are posting to a UK (as in
UK) legal group?
It must be Spring. The idiots are in bloom! |