From: just_jones	Date: 08/09/2007 21:41:44
	Nay

While certain society may cast a disfavorable view upon the imbibing of alcohol, the majority of those who partake in such activity are nonviolent, peaceful sorts. Much of this activity is engaged in the late hours of the evening (or early morning), while out of view of minor children. It can be assumed (and hoped) that adults are able to form their own opinions on public intoxication, and whether or not to participate in such action.

I do agree that anyone, whether intoxicated or not, who appears aggressive, violent, or harmful to themselves or others, should be removed from the streets. But prohibiting those under the influence of alcohol to walk the streets would encourage them to ride a horse, or drive a carriage - neither of which is a preferable option.

Alcohol effects the mind and the senses, and one under the influence of such a powerful substance is oft unable to contain his merriment. He or she may be unaware that their blissful song is distasteful to others. Should we so persecute those who sing in honor of gods we do not worship?

While the sale and distribution of alcoholic beverages remains legal, the consumption of such beverages remains at the discretion of the consumer. To limit it's consumption to within "established businesses" is also to prohibit the consuption of alcohol in the privacy of one's own home. Would such a law oh so subtly permit law enforcement to enter our homes, in the off-chance that we may be engaging in intoxicating behaviors?

I vote Nay to this petition.

	From: notvanilla_chai	Date: 08/09/2007 22:19:47
	Nay

While there is a cause for concern where it comes to safety and drunken behavior, there does not seem to be a need to eradicate public drunkenness. Law enforcement can instead be petitioned to check on publicly drunken citizens and if any prove to be hostile, belligerent or otherwise dangerous, action should be taken.

If they instead are otherwise loud, disturbing the peace or other such behaviors, they should be encouraged, by some force if necessary to return to their homes.

Lastly if they are merely drunk, they may need assistance to their homes, or require some sort of protection from those who would wish to take advantage of their inebriated stated.

Vote: Nay, but with propositions made to increase safety and peace for all.

	From: pretty_peculiar	Date: 08/10/2007 11:27:50
	Nay

No drunks on the street? There's goes the majority of the clientele on Silk Road. It's simply bad for business, not only for Silk Road, but also for various establishments of which their sole purpose is to sell alcohol. Not to mention it will greatly affect people's social interactions. Perfectly innnocent people who simply want to enjoy themselves. Why take that from them?

Also, though drinking is still permitted inside establishments that allow so now, once a drunken individual leaves those doors, he is committing a crime? That's simply unjust.

As far as public safety is concerned, that's what the Law Enforcement Officials are for. Should a drunk individual become disruptive, they can be escorted home. Should they become violent, then Law enforcement can take whatever measures they deem appropriate to difuse the situation.

I heartily vote nay.

	From: hamlin_graves	Date: 08/11/2007 00:27:51
	Nay

While I agree that public safety is of utmost importance I do not believe that we require an outright ban on being drunk in public.

I believe our law enforcement bureau perfectly capable of evaluating and dealing with such behavior on a case by case basis. In which case there is no need for an outright law on the matter.

I vote Nay.