TexasCHLforum.com

Walking to the elevators to go to their rooms?? WOW!

This hapend to a buddy of mine several years back in Longview. He was sitting at the bar talking to this guy sitting next to him and when they walked out he was arrested for PI by that same guy. There has got to be something unconstitutional about that.

I guess this means that i will no longer talk to random people at a bar. Guess that also means i have to talk to women somewhere else.

Do a search for" TABC SIP program" and you'll be ASTOUNDED! Seriously. That's about all I can type without it turning into TABC-bashing. It's a sad day when a state agency has to "save us from ourselves."

cubbyjg wrote:Nope he was not being rowdy or anything. They took him and a couple of other individuals, including the actual bartender. The bartender had to go to court with a lawyer. He only had two beers and was actually talking to the UC in the bar. This was a first for the bar from what i have been told. I spoke with the owner and he thinks someone probably complained about noise in the area which i find odd because that area is a shopping area with multiple bars. I truly feel that they were out to meet some quota or waste taxpayers dollars. This bar is a place where people bring their pets, play board games, etc and there never has been any kind of trouble from what i have seen all these years. The only reason i said maybe him working for a law firm might have played in his favor was because within a few hours, the owner of the law firm called him to see what was going on since he received notification that an employee of his was arrested. His boss is representing him and will probably have a field day with this incident.

Normally i would ask, "who are you and please identify yourself" or "unless you are a LEO, i do not have to show you my ID" and walk away. However, i feel they would automatically think im being smart and give me even more problems since i already had a beer. Its like they set him up to be in a position where asking questions will only dig a deeper hole or something. I have no problem showing my ID to someone if they identify themselves as a LEO whether i am drinking or not because they are the only ones in my book who have a right to ask.

Sounds the monthly "envelope" didn't get passed along and the TABC was sending a message to the bar, not your friend.

Its just sad that now everytime i go for a drink i will be worried about being "harrased" (my opinion) for engaging in an act that i am legally allowed to enjoy. Im all for LEO/TABC actually arresting the drunk, aggressive people who cause problems but majority of people are jsut out to have a good clean fun and enjoy a beverage.

Weren't they in trouble in the past for using actual under age kids to purchase alcohol in liquor stores? I seem to recall seeing them defending puposefully violating the law to "catch" violators. I don't know the outcome.
Edited for spelling and content

A buddy of mine is a partial owner of a bar in Austin. He refused entry to a girl whose ID looked valid because he just couldn't believe she was 18, let alone 21. She then showed up later with an armband on (like the ones they give to legally aged people in the bar) and would have been granted access by the door guy if my buddy hadn't spotted her. Turns out later she was 17 and working for TABC.

Not clear on if she was employed by them officially or unofficially, but they got her the ID/armband and sent her to his door.

On a possibly related note, my friend's LEO relative told him that he was instructed to no longer give out warnings. The reason being that the great state of Texas needs more money to pay for the costs of Obamacare.

Not sure if TABC might have gotten the same notice or if it's just a local thing.

puma guy wrote:Weren't they in trouble in the past for using actual under age kids to purchase alcohol in liquor stores? I seem to recall seeing them defending puposefully violating the law to "catch" violators. I don't know the outcome.
Edited for spelling and content

It's not a violation of the law. There is a written in exception exactly for this activity.

cubbyjg wrote:They didnt ask him to blow, ask him questions, or anything. They just said you are intoxicated and under arrest.

Nor would they need to - you just have to articulate that the person was intoxicated in public, AND a danger to themselves or others.

cubbyjg wrote:So my question is, if someone asks you for your ID and if they are in fact a LEO but fail to state that prior to asking for your ID, are you required to show them your id? What should you do in these kinds of situations?

No, as long as they are not in uniform. It would be reasonable (IMO) to ask to see their credentials first...however I'm not a Jury/Judge. Until I'm officially detained I would keep on trucking.

cubbyjg wrote:They let him go probably because he works for a law firm and it popped up in the system when they were taking him in.

Doubtful. Which system is this exactly?

cubbyjg wrote:i feel they were totally violating his rights.

How so...better yet...which rights specifically?



For my own curiosity I'd be interested to know what "a few beers" means. People get arrested everyday for drinking "just two beers." (It's obviously not really JUST 2 beers...but that's the standard drunk answer during a traffic stop) - Not saying your friend was intoxicated or not...however....drunks that I pull over have told me they "only had 2", and then their blood comes back with like a 2.58 BAC. That's the reason why I ask...trying to get a good idea as to what his BAC might have actually been. How many beers over what time period? How is he built? What did have to eat?

He only had two beers over a two hour time frame and probably weighs 185. Like i said, he wasnt doing anything to show that he was intoxicated besides conversing with the undercover. He wasnt threatening anyone or doing anything that would provoke anyone. The person who arrested him was in plain clothes and never identified himself prior to asking for his ID. Im not sure what the system is but his boss got a notice on his phone about his employee's information being processed. His law firm does a lot of work with the sherriff's department as well. Like i said before, his boss is a lawyer and is already handling the situation. It just surprises that this can somehow be legal. I myself have cut back vastly on my consumption of alcohol in general since getting my CHL.

If you just have to articulate that someone is intoxicated, then why isnt ever single person on sixth street in the ATX given a PI for example? That is the extreme end but based on what you have stated, LEOs can be stopping everyone left and right. In my experience when i went to college there, they gave you a PI when you did something dumb like peeing in an alley way, etc. I would completely understand him being arrested if he was doing something stupid and making a scene but he was on his way out to grab a bite to eat.

Idunno man. I know that when I have "a few beers" sometimes my perspective on how right I was can be skewed. Might be some of that going on, or it might be a bad arrest. I wasn't there. So far doesn't sound like the TABC guys did anything "illegal" much less violated anyones rights (a much more serious issue).

Well all in all, i definitely learned from his experience as well as everyones input on this thread. Pretty much, if they do not identify themselves as an LEO prior to asking for my ID, i will not show my ID.

gigag04 wrote:Idunno man. I know that when I have "a few beers" sometimes my perspective on how right I was can be skewed. Might be some of that going on, or it might be a bad arrest. I wasn't there. So far doesn't sound like the TABC guys did anything "illegal" much less violated anyones rights (a much more serious issue).

Out of curiosity, if the guy really only had 2 beers over 2 hours, and at 185lbs he's not even .08, and let's assume he has a tolerance for alcohol and wasn't showing any signs of being drunk, because he wasn't (unlike my friend who can drink half a beer and puke his guts out for the rest of the night). If everything happened as we're being told (basically saying that if this one side of the story was 100% true), then do you still think the TABC guy didn't do anything wrong?

I know you tend to take the LEO's side in most cases because you see all the stupid stuff they have to put up with and how every day people will flat out lie about what really happened. I don't blame you for that, it makes sense that you would. However, if the guy in question wasn't drunk, wasn't being stupid, and yet took the ride, do you really think the TABC officer was doing his job properly? (Granted, not likely to be "illegal" either way, but still not right IMHO)

If I were the guy who got the ticket, I would have begged for a breath test if I knew I wasn't near the limit.

Fangs wrote:

gigag04 wrote:Idunno man. I know that when I have "a few beers" sometimes my perspective on how right I was can be skewed. Might be some of that going on, or it might be a bad arrest. I wasn't there. So far doesn't sound like the TABC guys did anything "illegal" much less violated anyones rights (a much more serious issue).

Out of curiosity, if the guy really only had 2 beers over 2 hours, and at 185lbs he's not even .08, and let's assume he has a tolerance for alcohol and wasn't showing any signs of being drunk, because he wasn't (unlike my friend who can drink half a beer and puke his guts out for the rest of the night). If everything happened as we're being told (basically saying that if this one side of the story was 100% true), then do you still think the TABC guy didn't do anything wrong?

Nope. It's a big if IMO...but at that point I would question the arrest.

Fangs wrote: I know you tend to take the LEO's side in most cases because you see all the stupid stuff they have to put up with and how every day people will flat out lie about what really happened. I don't blame you for that, it makes sense that you would. However, if the guy in question wasn't drunk, wasn't being stupid, and yet took the ride, do you really think the TABC officer was doing his job properly?

See above same answer for the same question, reworded.

Fangs wrote: If I were the guy who got the ticket, I would have begged for a breath test if I knew I wasn't near the limit.

Yet you would not be entitled to one. The guy who fought us last week on PCP was charged with PI (among numerous felonies and higher misdemeanors) and he would've blown a .00


Again, let's take it back to the Penal Code:

Sec. 49.02. PUBLIC INTOXICATION. (a) A person commits an offense if the person appears in a public place while intoxicated to the degree that the person may endanger the person or another.
(a-1) For the purposes of this section, a premises licensed or permitted under the Alcoholic Beverage Code is a public place.
(b) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that the alcohol or other substance was administered for therapeutic purposes and as a part of the person's professional medical treatment by a licensed physician.
(c) Except as provided by Subsection (e), an offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor.
(d) An offense under this section is not a lesser included offense under Section 49.04.
(e) An offense under this section committed by a person younger than 21 years of age is punishable in the same manner as if the minor committed an offense to which Section 106.071, Alcoholic Beverage Code, applies.

(FYI 49.04 is DWI).

There is no standard of .08 in there, just that the person is an demonstrated danger to themselves or another. This could mean staggering in the streets, it could mean falling over, it could mean being wasted and trying to find their car, it could mean being loud and mouthy - I had a cousin who was drunk...in public...but just chilling until his buddy got arrested - then he started mouthing off to the cop - guess who else got to go jail. Not saying it was a smooth move on the LEOs part, but it was well within the realm of legality.


As far as always siding with LEOs - In this line of work everything you say or do is documented and can be proven or disproven. Any story I share I could back up with audio, video, and reports. People on the internet can post whatever they want without much scrutiny. I've already said I don't know what happened to the OP and told him that his story, as it reads, does not sound like anyone's rights were violated - also - I asked which rights he felt were violated and never got an answer.

I'm not going to fully disect and lay out why I don't totally buy the story as posted - PLUS it may be true and my hunches could be unfounded - so be it. The story starts out with people out to enjoy "a few beers" and then when questioned turned into "two beers, over two hours" a standard answer. I could go on through the DWI questionaire - what size beers, what KIND of beer...etc...

I'm not going to - like I said...maybe it was a bad arrest. I've seen lots of people in the jail at 2:45 am on a friday night that only had two beers and got "arrested for nothing." These are the same bunch talking about how this can't be done and they "know their rights." - Yet no rights have been violated....


BACK TO THIS POST. Generally TABC is not something to worry about unless you actually work for, or own a bar.


If anyone is interested, I can probably set you up with some buddies of mine and you can do a ride along for a neighboring agency and go check out Northgate by Texas A&M on a Thursday night and see why TABC exists


Sorry if you guys always feel like I'm always siding with the man. I'm a CHL'er at heart...promise