posted 12-30-2002 11:58 PM            

Kook, My band, Noble Gas, had a minor hit in 1991 called "Fragmented", which used NWO quotes, and Nixon, Agnew, Reagen, etc rapping to a trip hop rhythm. It was played on all the Pacifica stations, college, and alternative radio, as well as all over Europe. I'll post the song on my web site and let you know.

As a survivor of the 60's, we all knew that Nixon and Agnew were the beginning phases of NWO. I first heard the term "fascist" in 1968 describing Nixon. He was the blueprint for what we are living through now.

posted 12-31-2002 03:54 AM            

Alex suggests copying the tapes, to get the info out, otherwise I would never take such liberties. Of course, I wouldn't sell them either. We just have to do what we can to wake people up, in spite of being called Kooks! Although my handle acutally comes from my complete inability to surf.

posted 12-31-2002 10:18 AM            

Drugging Our Children To Death

Toogood Reports 12/31/02: Tom DeWeese

Original Link: http://www.toogoodreports.com/column/general/deweese/20021230.htm

The new year calls to us to save the many children in our nation´s schools who will be diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and prescribed mind-altering drugs. This evil grows exponentially and, with it, the tragedies whose stories are rising to the surface of public notice.

This pseudo-psychological racket is big business. Sales of pharmaceuticals to treat ADHD snowballed to $758 million in the year 2000, and show no signs of slowing down. However, more and more parents are growing skeptical of the diagnoses and subsequent coercive drugging of their children. Spurred by tragedy, some are fighting back.

Lawrence Smith of Michigan and Vicky Dunkle of Pennsylvania both tragically lost their children to psychiatric drugs prescribed to treat their ADHD. Mr. Smith´s 14-year-old son, Matthew died of a heart attack he had while skateboarding. The coroner determined his death was caused by the long-term use of a stimulant that had been forcibly prescribed to him through his school. Early last year, Mrs. Dunkle´s daughter, Shaina, died in her mother´s arms after convulsing in her doctor´s office. She was just 10 years old.

Lawrence and Vicky, bonded by common tragedy, are fighting back. They are determined to expose the fraud surrounding ADHD and the forced drugging of normal children. The problems started for both parents when they were approached by school social workers and psychologists. They were told that their children were "too active," "easily distracted," and that they "talked out of turn." Lawrence and Vicky shrugged off these diagnoses as simply normal traits of energetic youngsters.

Then came the iron fist of government.

Smith was told: "…if we didn´t consider drugging our son after the school had diagnosed him with ADHD that we could be charged for neglecting his educational and emotional needs. If we hadn´t been pressured by the school system, Matthew would still be alive today." Mrs. Dunkle agrees. "If I had followed my heart instead of the advice of ‘professionals´ that thought they knew my daughter better than I did, my precious Shaina would be alive now."

What is going on here? Since when did government schools get in the business of forcing mind-altering drugs on children against their parent´s will?

In 1965, the passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), changed education forever as the seeds for today´s massive restructuring—away from academics and toward behavior modification—began. It was psychology´s crowning moment. The ESEA allocated massive federal funds and opened school doors to a flood of psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers and the psychiatric programs and testing needed to validate them. The number of educational psychologists in the U.S. increased from 455 in 1969 to 16,146 by 1992. As of 1994, child psychologists, psychiatrists, counselors and special educators in and around U.S. public schools nearly outnumber teachers.

In 1991, eligibility rules for federal education grants were changed to provide schools with $400 in annual grant money for each child diagnosed with ADHD. That same year the Department of Education formally recognized ADHD as a handicap and directed all state education officers to establish procedures to screen and identify ADHD children and provide them with special education and psychological services. As a result, the number of ADHD cases soared again.

Today more than 7,000,000 children have been labeled and registered as permanent patients of the school system. Ten to twelve percent of all boys between the ages of 6 and 14 in the United States have been diagnosed as having ADHD. One in every 30 Americans between the ages of 5 and 19 years old has a prescription to Ritalin. Psychologists have never had it so good. The federal trough has been very good for their industry.

With more than half of those 7,000,000 children also prescribed Ritalin, the stock-market value of its manufacturer, the Swiss pharmaceutical company Novartis, has also soared. Now that company and others are working to introduce a host of new drugs into the classroom, including Prozac and Luvox, which has just been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for pediatric use.

The industry is looking to even greater growth as the pill brigade is targeting pre-school toddlers. The use of psychotropic drugs, like anti-depressants and stimulants, in two to four year olds more than doubled between 1991 and 1995. The federal trough has been very good to the pharmaceutical industry as well.

As this sickening practice goes unchecked and unquestioned more children are being drugged into a mind-numbing stupor, deteriorating under the long-term effects of their prescriptions. In the worst cases, children are dying.

posted 12-31-2002 10:23 AM            

Wired News 12/31/02: Lauren Weinstein

Original Link: http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,56954,00.html

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Ben Franklin wrote those words over 200 years ago, and, as we reach the end of 2002, the state of important liberties around the world appears to be degenerating rapidly, particularly in the area of privacy concerns.

If one of Osama bin Laden's goals, as has been reported, was to trigger crackdowns against freedoms by Western governments, he got the ball rolling quite effectively on Sept. 11, 2001.

The United States now imprisons its own citizens incommunicado, indefinitely and without lawyers or trials, for the duration of what we're told is an essentially permanent state of war.

In the good old days of the iron curtain, we condemned other countries for such actions, calling them human rights violations. Now some of those same nations are our partners of convenience in the war on terror, and our own government has enthusiastically embraced our former adversaries' old tactics.

Both the USA Patriot and Homeland Security Acts include some elements that are arguably appropriate for national security in today's world. But they also include measures that have nothing to do with the fight against terrorism, and that are likely to have wide-ranging and chilling effects on privacy and liberty.

In the business community, where rampant disregard for privacy concerns has increasingly become the norm, it's financial gain, not national security, that's the driving force.

Consumers' personal information is viewed as a commodity to be bought, sold and traded like vegetables, with consumer privacy rights often treated as a quaint idea of historical interest.

Mere lip service is paid to most privacy policies, usually written in legalese sufficient to cause even Perry Mason's eyes to glaze over, and subject to change without warning at any time.

Telephone companies treat attempts to control their exploitation of subscribers' calling data as practically treasonous, and make customers jump through hoops for even minimally effective opt-outs. Recent decisions by courts and the Federal Communications Commission have worsened this situation.

Internet users' Web movements are increasingly tracked for commercial purposes, above and beyond the expanded tracking government agencies are allowed to perform (often without any court orders required) under the recent anti-terror legislation.

Massive commercial data-mining and profiling operations slice, dice and combine all aspects of consumers' purchases, debts and other facets of their private lives into a flood of data. Few legal constraints are placed on its use for marketing or its release for government surveillance and other investigative purposes.

The rapid expansion of these commercially operated database systems, combined with the lack of meaningful controls on how they're used, suggest that they may be of even greater concern than DARPA's Total Information Awareness project that has received so much attention lately.

Whether we look at the governmental or commercial side of privacy issues, similar key points emerge. In both cases, we've seen an accelerating disruption of the delicate balance needed to protect our rights.

We're told that personal privacy is obsolete in the brave new world of fighting terrorists. Meanwhile, the behavior of many businesses demonstrates a belief that genuine consumer privacy is utterly incompatible with the goals of stockholder profits and economic growth.

Neither of these attitudes are correct nor acceptable. Whether dealing with security matters or business practices, the massive skewing away from an evenhanded approach to privacy issues is fundamentally incompatible with the basic principles that most of us hold dear.

We've been doing a poor job of shepherding our liberties as we come to the end of 2002. It's up to us, as citizens and consumers, to demand an appropriate balance from government and business, both for privacy issues and for our other precious freedoms, which once lost, we may never see the likes of again.

posted 12-31-2002 10:37 AM            

The drugging of America by Linear drugs is something right out of Aldous Huxley's, Brave New World. Soma was it's name. I have even heard that they are going to be giving 5 year old children Prozac, not to mention putting these same drugs right into the genetic structure of food plants.

posted 12-31-2002 10:56 AM            

I won't take it again though. Too risky. I think LSD has a great psychotherapy potential for lets say...hardcore, terminally addicted alcoholics, severely depressed people, people who eye witnessed a disaster like 9/11 or war and are suffering. I see the potential there.

But drugging KIDS? Come on...that is disgraceful an downright satanic...I've been hearing things going on today like child services taking away your child unless you give him/her ritalin or some other zombie drug.

posted 12-31-2002 12:02 PM            

http://www.rense.com/general25/USarmyresearching.htm

posted 12-31-2002 03:08 PM            

Just like...

Home-lund

Father-lund

Riech-lund

posted 12-31-2002 06:24 PM            

PRINT OUT AND DISTRIBUTE WIDELY....

posted 01-01-2003 12:41 AM            

"The 1st Amendment site"

http://w3.trib.com/FACT/

posted 01-03-2003 11:10 AM            

Wired Magazine 01/03/03: Noah Shachtman

Original Link: http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,57005,00.html

It may seem unreasonable, unfair and downright mean-spirited to compare the Bush administration to the minions of Sauron, the granddaddy of evil in The Lord of the Rings trilogy.

But here goes.

The executive branch's attempts in 2002 to peer into the lives of Americans were more than a little similar to the exploits of Middle Earth's would-be rulers.

Take, for example, the Bush team's most notorious proposal of the year: the Total Information Awareness system. TIA is an "ultra-large, all-source information repository" (PDF) meant to track citizens' every move, from Web surfing to doctor visits, travel plans to university grades, passport applications to ATM withdrawals.

For J.R.R. Tolkien fans, the scheme sounds eerily familiar.

"Concealed in his fortress (Sauron) sees all. His gaze pierces cloud, shadow, earth and flesh," says Saruman, the evil wizard allied with Sauron, in The Fellowship of the Ring.

Privacy advocates howled when details of TIA began to emerge.

"It's like Sauron in Lord of the Rings," said Lee Tien, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "He may not be all-powerful yet. But his tentacles reach everywhere. And his (wraiths) are saying, 'Give us that ring or else you are in serious trouble.'"

Particularly galling was the fact that the man in charge of the project was former Adm. John Poindexter, convicted for lying to Congress about his role in the Iran-Contra affair.

As criticism mounted -- especially after New York Times columnist William Safire attacked the plan -- the program's website was revised. Gone were the biographies of the program's participants. Down came TIA's original logo: a glowing, all-seeing eye.

But the system itself remains intact. And it's not the only Sauronesque Bush program.

As Gandalf the good wizard says: "The enemy has many spies in his service."

In January, it seemed that John Ashcroft's Justice Department wanted to amass a similar throng. It proposed Operation TIPS (Terrorism Information and Prevention System): an army of 1 million American citizens recruited to spy on fellow citizens and report unusual behavior.

Like TIA, Operation TIPS met with waves of criticism.

"TIPS fundamentally creates an atmosphere of community distrust and suspicion that's inimical to a free society," Tien said. "It's reminiscent of the tactics that the Stasi (the East German secret police) and the Gestapo used."

Ultimately, the Homeland Security Act, signed by President Bush in November, squashed the program. It also shelved the idea of a national ID card -- a project Tien and others feared would become an "internal passport."

But the act permitted some new privacy infringements, said Chris Hoofnagle, legislative counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center. ISPs are encouraged to hand over a customers' private e-mails to "any federal, state or local governmental entity" if the ISP believes in "good faith" that it's an emergency. The customer has no say in these transfers.

New guidelines from Ashcroft, issued in May and upheld by a federal review court in November, allow law enforcers to comb through commercial databases "even when there is no suspicion of criminal activity," Hoofnagle said.

"It stands the constitutional approach to law enforcement on its head," Tien added. "Even if you want to frisk somebody on the street, you have to show reasonable suspicion. That's not the case here. This is 'We'll gather information on everyone -- just in case we need it later.'"

The review court's decision also made it easier for criminal cases to be shepherded through clandestine federal tribunals -- courts once solely devoted to trying spies and terrorists. According to Cato Institute senior fellow Robert Levy, these "foreign intelligence" courts, which meet in secret, are traditionally more lenient in giving permission to search and wiretap suspects.

The ruling is one of several reasons Steven Aftergood, who heads the Federation of American Scientists' Project on Government Secrecy, feels 2002 "has been a year of 'disillusionment,' literally."

posted 01-03-2003 02:50 PM               

<<>>
[URL=http://www.fair.org/ai/abuse_industry.htm]

posted 01-03-2003 06:59 PM            

This will come as no suprise seeing we have a corrupt government body who are MAJOR stockholders in mental health medication corporations........

Ritalin --- Pharmaceutical Blackmail

Vin Suprynowicz

About that "zero drug tolerance" policy in our schools: Does it really mean what it says? Or would it come closer to the truth for school administrators to admit what they really oppose are pushers offering competing consciousness-altering substances?

Do our public schools today constitute a kind of official, tax-supported dope monopoly which will even threaten to take children away from parents should they refuse to go along with the mind-numbing nostrums which our schoolmasters themselves now press on nearly a quarter of our young boys, the better to keep those valuable butts planted in their seats?

The Albany Times Union, in a May 7, 2000 copyrighted story, tells what happened to parents Michael and Jill Carroll of Albany, New York, when they tried to take their son, 7-year-old Kyle, off the Ritalin.

Kyle Carroll was first prescribed Ritalin last year, after he fell behind at school. Teachers drew up an Individualized Education Plan, a standard course of action for children with "special needs." But last fall, when Kyle started second grade, the Ritalin didn't seem to be doing much good. Furthermore, the Carrolls grew concerned that Kyle was only sleeping about five hours a night and eating just one meal a day --- lunch. So they told school officials they wanted to take Kyle off the Ritalin for two weeks to see if that helped. That's when they got a call, and then a visit, from a Child Protective Services worker, based on a complaint from Kyle's school guidance counselor. The charge? "Child abuse," in the form of "medical neglect." In plain English? Expressing doubts about keeping their child on dope.

As a result, the Times Union reports the Carrolls are now on a statewide list of alleged child abusers, and find themselves "thrust into an Orwellian family court battle to clear their name and ensure their child isn't removed from their home."

The child remains on the medication, "in part because they fear child welfare workers will take him away if they don't," the Albany daily reports.

Furthermore, the Albany paper found the Carrolls' case is far from unique, reporting: "Public schools are increasingly accusing parents of child abuse and neglect if they balk at giving their children medication such as Ritalin, a stimulant being prescribed to more and more students."

The American Academy of Pediatrics reports as many as 3.8 million schoolchildren, mostly boys, have now been diagnosed with the newly-coined "ADHD" --- attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder --- a psychiatric "disease" with symptoms to which most of our grandparents would have responded by simply smiling: "Boys will be boys." Or perhaps by asking, "Could it be that he finds your school boring? Does it really make sense to spend three or four years teaching reading, a skill easily mastered in six weeks if you'd just use phonics?"

At least a million children now take Ritalin for this "disorder." In two school districts near Virginia Beach, Virginia, for instance, a 1999 study by psychologist Gretchen LeFever found fully 20 percent of white boys in the fifth grade in the 1995-1996 school year were receiving prescription drugs for ADHD. And even the AAP acknowledged in a recent study that many cases are misdiagnosed.

"This thing is so scary," says Patricia Weathers, of Millbrook, a suburb of Poughkeepsie, New York. Officials at the Millbrook school district called police and child protective services when she took her 9-year-old son, Michael Mozer, off medications earlier last year.

Weathers reported her child's prescribed drug cocktail --- including Ritalin, the anti-depressant Paxil, and Dexedrine (another stimulant, like Ritalin) caused her boy --- now attending a private school --- to hallucinate.

"Absent evidence that the lives of children are at stake when they're not on Ritalin," USA Today editorialized, "no arm of the state should be ramming the drug treatment down parents' --- and children's --- throats."

Amen to that. The underlying problem here is the notion that children belong first to the state --- that they're best "socialized" in state-run institutions, and that biological parents are allowed to retain custody only at the discretion of school and "child welfare" officials, who after all have "professional diplomas," and thus "know best."

No free country can long operate under such a presumption, with its inevitable corrosive effect on the family. And this --- at least as much as the corresponding academic failures of the public schools --- is what drives the large and growing movement for separation of school and state. (See: www.sepschool.org)

Mr. Suprynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. His e-mail is vin@lvrj.com.

This article was published in the Medical Sentinel 2001;6(1):31. Copyright©2001, Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS).

----------------------------------------------

posted 01-04-2003 12:12 PM            

Privacy by Brenda Pitts Bennett
January 02, 2003

Every month Nevada pharmacists transmit to the state the names of people who have purchased painkillers and other potentially addictive drugs prescribed by doctors -- and that information is available to law enforcement officials...

Every month Nevada pharmacists transmit to the state the names of people who have purchased painkillers and other potentially addictive drugs prescribed by doctors -- and that information is available to law enforcement officials.

Nevada is one of 17 states in which police are able to collect the information under the auspices of a federal program that has pharmacists file regular reports that include patients' names, the names of their prescriptions, the amount of the medication they receive and the names of their doctors. The states' programs fall under the national umbrella of the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program.

Nevada authorities say their system is different from those of other states where the information is routinely funneled to police agencies.

"This is not used as a law enforcement tool," said Louis Ling, attorney for Nevada's Prescription Controlled Substance Abuse Prevention Task Force.

That 15-member task force tracks everything from hard-core narcotics to prescribed painkillers and anti-anxiety medication like the frequently prescribed Xanax and Valium pills. It is composed of representatives from boards that license doctors, veterinarians, dentists and pharmacists as well as physicians who specialize in the treatment of addiction. One member is from the Nevada Division of Investigations.

"Nevada is unique," Ling said. "These people (who are suspected of abusing prescription drugs) don't need to be arrested. They need to be treated."

In Nevada, use by law enforcement of the prescription drug information is limited, he said. The task force turns over the data to police only after it is verified that they have an open investigation of the individual. That must be verified, Ling said.

"That doesn't take very much, does it?" said Alan Lichtenstein, general counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada.

Civil libertarians around the nation have said they are troubled by what they see as the "Big Brother" aspect of the reporting system and the way it breaches doctor-patient confidentiality.

"We're talking about medical information that is supposed to be private and giving law enforcement open access to that," Lichtenstein said.

Ling said the Nevada task force is sensitive to those types of concerns.

"We are not snooping around in somebody's medicine chest," he said.

There are fewer than 100 cases of police access a year, Ling said. And the federal Drug Enforcement Administration cannot get Nevada's information about prescription drug users unless the DEA is working with a Nevada law enforcement agency, Ling said.

Susan Griffin of Reno didn't realize her children's Ritalin prescription records are reviewed by state authorities and could be turned over to law enforcement, but she said she's OK with it.

"It's a controlled drug, it should be monitored," said Griffin, a volunteer with Children and Adults with Attention Deficit Disorder.

"I'm not shocked that it happens. If the drugs are being abused it should be monitored."

People who are going to one or two doctors for prescriptions are not singled out by the task force, no matter how many drugs they take, Ling said.

The computer that holds this confidential information for the task force is not hooked up to any outside line, so there cannot be any unauthorized access, he said.

The task force meets once or twice a year to decide how to use the data that the state receives from about 2 million prescriptions a year. Ling said the primary mission is to identify those who might be abusing controlled substances. A doctor who is treating a patient can request from the task force all of the prescriptions filled for that individual over the past six months or past year. The task force gets about 10,000 of those requests a year.

Ling said this helps physicians determine the amounts and varieties of drugs the individual is using and whether he or she is "doctor shopping" -- going to various doctors to get prescriptions and filling them at numerous pharmacies.

"The doctors love this," he said.

Lichtenstein said not all doctors love it, however. He said the system keeps some doctors from providing enough pain relief to their patients.

"A lot of people with terminal cancer or patients that are dying in agony are not getting the proper pain medication because doctors are frightened about being investigated for being a drug pusher," Lichtenstein said.

Lichtenstein cited a national study that last month gave hospitals in Nevada the lowest possible grade because they offered few pain management services.

And in May 2000, the Nevada Board of Medical Examiners said a regulation was needed to ensure that patients receive adequate drugs to ease persistent and extreme pain and at the same time protect doctors from sanctions.

Ling, however, said the task force does not investigate doctors or druggists who appear to be over-prescribing. But it does provide information to the appropriate licensing board if such a board has started an investigation of a doctor or pharmacist.

Dr. Warren Evins, president of the Clark County Medical Society, said many physicians are supportive of the program.

"I think it's a good program and I use it frequently," he said. "I think most patients know that certain drugs are controlled substances and that the DEA regulates it. All physicians are aware of it. I would think patients are aware too but I'm not positive about that."

Tricia Leland, a program director with the American Cancer Society of Southern Nevada, said she believes the records that are under scrutiny are not those of terminally ill patients.

"They are actually targeting people who are not ill and don't need the medications; that's what they are trying to control," Leland said. "I don't think it pertains to cancer patients."

The task force does look for profiles of people who are going to numerous doctors for prescriptions and having their prescriptions filled at numerous pharmacies to avoid detection. The records of such patients are sent to the doctors and drugstores that are providing the drugs, Ling said. The task force finds fewer than 1,000 of those cases a year, he said.

The goal in those cases is to get doctors or pharmacists to encourage those patients to seek treatment for drug abuse. Ling said there have been many success stories in which individuals reduced the amount of drugs they were taking or kicked the habit altogether.

Typically, those drug abusers are not recreational users but people who have suffered from intense pain, Ling said. Among the most commonly abused prescription drugs are OxyContin, Vicodin, Lontab and Narco, which are classified as Schedule III painkillers.

Federal law breaks lists a number of controlled drugs on five "schedules." The schedules set control guidelines and regulations as to how each of the listed drugs can be prescribed, as well as other control measures.

According to the U.S. Department of Justice, more than 1.7 million controlled substance prescriptions were filled in 1997, the first year of Nevada's prescription tracking program. Of those, 761,043 were Schedule IV drugs such as Xanax and Valium.

In 1997, 4,680 patients exceeded what experts considered to be normal amounts of the prescriptions but only 38 cases were referred to the Nevada Department of Investigations. In 1998, 5,412 patients exceeded the drug threshold, but only 28 were referred to the Nevada Department of Investigations.

posted 01-04-2003 12:24 PM            

THE ATTACK ON THE 1ST AMENDMENT CONTINUES....
http://www.rense.com/general33/master.htm

Bush's Master Plan For The Internet
By Kurt Nimmo
1-3-3

posted 01-04-2003 12:59 PM            

ONE MORE EXAMPLE......

enforcing 0.08 inside bars
Posted by: Admin on Tuesday, December 31, 2002 - 01:08 PM GMT

Liberty According to a Dec. 31, 2002 Springfield Times article:
Fairfax County Police are targeting Reston and Herndon area bar-restaurant patrons suspected of having one too many drinks.

Police have been taking them outside for sobriety tests and, if they fail, arresting them for public drunkenness.

The owners of local bar-restaurants are complaining that these tactics are too aggressive. But a county police spokesman says the practice is nothing new and, besides, helps prevent worse abuse that can lead to alcohol-related driving accidents.
Read more...

Emphasis added:
According to Virginia statutes and the Virginia Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC), any place with a liquor license is considered a "public place." Accordingly, police are allowed free access to such places, and, should they find any customer over the legal alcohol limit of .08 or suspect a customer of being intoxicated while still being served or present in an establishment, police can write that person a ticket for public intoxication.

[...] Richie Prisco was the general manager on duty at Champps in Reston's Plaza America on Sunset Hills Road on Thursday, Dec. 19, when he said police came into the bar and started taking patrons outside.

"They were talking to one of the guests, then physically pulled him off the barstool," Prisco said. "They were really aggressive and nasty."

Champps General Manager Randy Gross compared the police tactics to those of Hitler's Gestapo, and said he feels he is owed an explanation.

[...]

"They made her count backward, say the alphabet, tell them where she lived, how she got there, how she was getting home," Cirrito said. "She had just gotten there five minutes ago in a cab."
And finally, the quote from the police spokeswoman is precious:
"I've had bar owners come up to me [and] ask what is going on," [police public information officer Sophia Grinnan] said. "But I've also had some approach me aggressively, telling me I couldn't be there and I was violating their constitutional rights. We love to give explanations of what we're doing because it has an impact, but officers don't have to give up their game plan. That is just a courtesy."So thanks to DWIs, even those who walk or arrive by transit or cab (see above for example) are prohibited from having three or four drinks. See for example the drinks/weight chart from the Washington State Brewers Guild.

Most important of all, why is a skill level for operating a motor vehicle the same standard used for being in public?

"Your papers please" is not just for Nevada anymore (see the Dec. 27, 2002 UnderReported.com story of the same title) -- it may be at a bar/restaurant near you.