Technically, you are not supposed to get so drunk in public that you're clearly intoxicated, even in a bar. It's also not legal to serve to someone who is clearly intoxicated.

That doesn't justify cops going into a bar and looking for drunk people to arrest, and they clearly weren't doing that...they were just going in to cause trouble and start some shit.

However, I very, very, very highly doubt the veracity of this story. I don't think it's an outright fabrication, but it is definitely highly biased. I think there are some very large details being left out.

Syd Lexia wrote:

A bar is a private establishment. It is not public.

It is a location open to the public (minus age restriction). Therefore, if you're intoxicated there, you're intoxicated in public.

Public property can, and often is, privately owned.

username wrote:

that can be considered entrapment in some states.

Not in any of the United States. Entrapment is when a police officer essentially forces you to do something illegal. Not just when they offer you a chance to do something illegal, and certainly not when they park themselves outside a place that's likely to have illegal activity.

It might be a stop without probable cause, but if the officer saw you stumble as you walked out of the door, that's cause there.

Believe me, there's very little police officers do that's "entrapment".

username wrote:

well, in cali, if a cop car is sitting on a dark street waiting for speeders to pass by, thats considered entrapment.

No, it's considered "law enforcement", and if you don't believe that, try bringing that up in court. You can't seriously think that "I wouldn't have broken the law if I knew the cop was there" is a legitimate defense to a ticket. Police are absolutely allowed to lie in wait, and they do it for a lot more than just speeders (cops had their favorite red light and stop sign stakeout spots I remember from my California days).

It's possible for entrapment to come up in speeding cases, though. If the speed limit isn't clearly posted, or obscured, or if the speed limit changes frequently within an unreasonable period of time, or if a police officer tailgates you to try and pressure you into going faster, it can be considered entrapment in those cases. And there may be other laws that prohibit officers from doing certain things. But a hidden cop waiting for speeders to pass by is in no way inducing them to break the law, so there is no entrapment defense.

Syd Lexia wrote:

In my town, the cops usually park in the used car lot on Main Street at night and wait for speeders there. It would be a really clever idea, except that EVERYONE FUCKING KNOWS THEY'RE THERE.

Most of the cops I've spoken with really don't like writing tickets, unless there's a "revenue enhancement drive" going on. So they don't mind if they're parked right out in the open where everyone can see them...it still has the net effect of slowing people the fuck down, which is what they want anyways. Besides, not everybody knows...they nail out-of-towners that way, and they're far more likely to not fight the ticket.

I've seen cops get pretty devious, though. I've seen a highly visible officer park along a stretch of road, then right around the corner is another one. The first one is just to slow people down, but the second one bags people after they pass the first one and think it's safe to gun it.

Quote:

your points do make sense, so i wouldnt be surprised if i was misinformed.

There are a lot of misconceptions about what police are and are not allowed to do during the course of their duties. Truth is, they get a lot more leeway than you think, they're allowed to lie and be devious little bastards to catch people, and police don't really dispel a lot of those misconceptions because it helps them do their job when the public thinks the police are restricted in some way (the widespread belief that police can't lie catches a LOT of prostitutes, for example).

90% of police work is finding loopholes in the fourth amendment.