Shaw Plaza, however, has remained pretty much unchanged. I see an DIY-looking crew banging away inside that potentially very cool corner unit every once in a while. I’ve managed to sneak a few glances in there, and recently it looked like they were reframing the interior and redoing the floors. It’s no where near being ready, probably another 4-5 years at the current rate.

Maybe the breathalyzer is just the evidence clincher, the initiator to a bust would just be somebody acting like a drunk jackass. I gotta look up how the rules are written in Europe. Surely the Germans or the Swiss, being as detail oriented as they are, have managed to create something in writing that says when you cross the line that separates wine-sipping-picnicker from pain-in-the-ass. If I know where the line is, surely it can be put in writing.

What it all boils down to is that we need to have an active pro-fun agenda. Perhaps we could start the crusade for public consumption with a big toast at city hall plaza…

OK, loudness at 50 feet. What if a someone sits down 20 feet from me…who protects my “I’ve got dibs” space? I’m picturing OPD in the park with a tape measure. Oops! You’re at 48.3 feet!

Breathalyzer? I’ve met many a person with one drink in their system who acts like a complete asswipe vs. a professional drunk who is entertaining the room. Which one is the public nuisance? The breathalyzer would indict the professional drunk. But to whom would the police administer the breathalyzer and “win”? I suppose we can legislate using the “protecting one against themselves” argument, but that is kind of like strippers.

Fully agreed on enjoying a perfectly legal beverage in a public space. Consumption laws are definitely remnants of prohibition, though there is nothing progressive about those laws (DHL recently pulled out of shipping alcohol to the US because of our patchwork system). As I am in the wine biz, I deal with these archaic laws on a daily basis. Most alcohol laws revolve around the collection of taxes; new laws are promulgated to protect children and family values (distance laws from schools, churches, etc.). So much for the separation of church and state.

About strip clubs: It’s hypocritical to say you support a woman’s right to make decisions about her own body when it comes to abortion, but not stripping. It’s called sex-positive feminism, look it up everybody, it’s a part of third-wave feminism, and most of our electeds are operating in a second-wave mindset. The Lusty Lady, in SF, is unionized. There are models for doing it right. One is to ban stage fees. At the O’Farrell Theater, women pay a lot to dance, and have to make it up in tips. Ban stage fees and the pressure to engage in prostitution goes down. Not that this will ever happen in Oakland…

Loudness can be quantified by how far away an officer can hear the music. Inaudible at 50 feet, perhaps. Drunkenness… ever heard of a breathalyzer? Isn’t there one in every cop car? The point is, if I want to have a picnic in the park with my girlfriend, and I want to bring a bottle of wine, and we walked there… why is that a problem? Throughout Europe and Japan you can do this. I think public consumption laws are a leftover from prohibition era namby-pamby progressivism.

Anyway. A few defenses. The principle is what matters.

I agree with you Max, in principle, regarding the punishment of the many for the sins of the few. I disagree, however, on certain salient points. If a dog poops on the sidewalk, we have something clearly defined: either it’s cleaned up or it isn’t. What is “too drunk” in public? It’s a qualitative decision that forces a police officer to be cop, judge and jury. (I do completely agree that adults should be able to open a bottle of wine in the park, but I’m forced to play devil’s advocate). Our city government has enacted laws against riding a bicycle on the sidewalk. Why? Craft a law that defines safely riding a bike on the sidewalk, add in a 20% margin of error, and I guarantee that law will state: “walk your bike when on a sidewalk”. Again, qualitative from any perspective. What is “too loud”? I hate gangsta rap, so too loud to me is “loud enough to hear”. Is it fair for me to judge loudness based on what I like to listen to? What if I were to approach a police officer, who is humming to a tune, and say “that is too loud”? Who gets to decide? Aren’t all strip clubs exploitive? What is the difference between exploitive and non-exploitive? College-going white girls vs. a recent emigre trying to earn passage back to country X? Who decides that? What is junk food? Apple juice and Hawaiian punch have almost identical sugar and caloric profiles. But apple juice has 4% of the daily requirement of vitamin C, and Hawaiian Punch has 100%. Shall we ban apple juice? I get what you’re saying, but it seems a bit populist.

The cabaret issue is completely different. It is part of our country’s vehement “what about the children” anti-adult sentiment. To suggest that an adult venue (think alcohol-serving, not peep shows) will automatically have negative impacts suggests prescience. Our city government doesn’t really have a grasp of what is going on right now, let alone what *could* happen. THIS is perhaps one of the most irritating of all things to me. In Europe, it seems, kids are groomed to be adults. As well it should be, as we are adults for the majority of our lives. Feel good measures like OO, while our schools are underfunded, are shocking.

As for the tie in between dog laws and bike laws, this goes back to one of my favorite principles: Don’t punish the many for the sins of the few.

Fine for not cleaning up, not for having a dog.
Fine for being drunk in public, not for having a drink in public.
Fine for riding dangerously, whether in the street or on the sidewalk.
Fine for playing your stereo too loud in the park, not for playing your stereo quietly.
Ban exploitive, publicly visible strip clubs, not all strip clubs.
Discourage junk food laden convenience stores, not all convenience stores (we actually already do this to an extent).
Regulate the impact of cabarets, don’t regulate all cabarets to the point where only the very wealthy can afford to start one.

Seriously, this town has a fun problem. The beginning of the way out is to stop punishing the many when the few are to blame.