I’m sure everyone has heard of the PB riot on Monday, Labor day. Well I wasn’t there, but I was on the water on the other side in the Crowne Point bay wakeboarding, and we could see the police helicopter circling. This was fine, since they didn’t bother us. But after boarding we anchored over by the condos right on the beach that were going off, and proceeded to drink a few (read: More than a few) beers and blast some music. This was great until around 9:30 when the police helicopter turned on our party, and shined a spotlight at the crowd spread out on the beach. Immediately cops started running in from the street up above, and people started running. Things got bad for us when the helicopter turned its spotlight to our boat, the only one left out on the water at that time. We immediately packed up and left, and only later that night I found out the details of the PB riot. Check out this clip for a good overview of the events that took place:
After doing a quick search on PB Riot on google, I found a few shots on Flickr. Although I can hardly imagine that this guy is any good for our argument against an alcohol ban. I understand people getting painted up for sporting events and stuff, but this guy was so drunk he got painted up TO CELEBRATE LABOR DAY! What the fuck do we even celebrate labor day for, I mean I appreciate the day off, but…?
Anyway, today I received an email from Brianna at The Stolen Three with a petition about the impending Alcohol Ban in PB. It makes a few good points, but at the same time kind of pisses me off because no matter what happens, the police will always have their “use of force” questioned. I have a good friend that is a cop, and I fully trust him to make snap decisions on when force is necessary, and I can’t believe that any of these cops are any different. These guys always get the short end of the stick, and I’m positive that a bunch of drunk assholes in PB were doing their best to provoke them. I really have no doubt that their use of force was justified. That being said, banning alcohol on PB beaches will be not only impossible, but impossible to enforce. Why can’t we just mark it up as a holiday incident, and move on? Regardless, here is the petition, sign it and forward it on if you believe in it. I’m still on the fence…
From: Ryan Faith < email@example.com>
Date: Sep 6, 2007 12:30 AM
Subject: Petition in Opposition to Alcohol Ban
Friends and colleagues, please sign your name below in opposition to the proposed alcohol ban. After each signature, please forward to fellow San Dieagans and copy each forward to:
Dear Councilman Faulconer:
The following remark is attributed to you in today’s press: “For those who believe an all-out ban is too extreme, I invite you to convince me otherwise.” We, the constituents of District 2, wish to accept this invitation and offer the following petition:
As you are aware, there was a confrontation between several sunbathers and the San Diego police this past weekend. While the bulk of the facts are still coming to light, it is clear that many of the sunbathers were also legally drinking alcohol. It further appears that, within this group, some sunbathers had set up a water slide on the beach. Commonly know as a “Slip ‘n Slide,” this product is a yellow tarp that is satiated with liquid to create lubrication. Users propel themselves towards the tarp via pedal locomotion then slide over the tarp. Using this device is both legal and widespread throughout the United States during warmer months. Specific to San Diego and Pacific Beach , similar devices, such as small inflatable pools or inflatable rafts, are ubiquitous and can be found in the yards of local residents and on the beaches.
The incident on the beach came to a head when officers attempted to confiscate the slide. It is unclear whether the confiscation was justified. Tensions were escalated by the introduction by the police of pepper spray to the confrontation. This force may or may not have been reasonable. Only a court can properly advise on this point. However, before you rush to judge the individuals confronted by the police, please remember that our history books and court dockets are filled with precedent, whereby a defendant can claim self-defense against an agent of the government if that act is deemed a defense of liberty. If the sunbathers were legally using the device, and legally consuming alcohol, then what right did the police have to interfere? The simple answer is that had not justifiable right. Thus, your constituents respectfully urge you to fully consider each of the following:
1) The economic impact of a total alcohol ban;
2) Whether an alcohol ban would even accomplish the goal of reducing alcohol related incidents;
3) Whether the police force justifiably used force to confront the sunbathers;
4) Whether any criminal act occurred prior to the use of force; and
5) Whether creation of small alcohol-free “family zones” could accomplish the goal of reducing unwanted behavior, without significant economic impact.
It is our hope that you will create a commission to study and report on each of these concerns because we, the voters, believe responsible legislation is impossible without considering such information.
We, the people, support the right to consume alcohol on the beaches and pledge to vote accordingly to protect this right.
We, the people, believe that a total alcohol ban would have a devastating impact on an already limping local economy.
We, the people, believe that property values could be further eroded by such a ban.
We, the people, petition you to refrain from precipitously legislating in response to poor publicity and offer our signatures below.
Friends and colleagues, please sign your name below in opposition to the proposed alcohol ban. After each signature please forward to fellow San Dieagans and copy each forward to:
1) John C. Tolla 900 block Felspar 92109
2) Kenny M Jack, Noyes Street, 92109
History is rife with examples of politicians legislating without full consideration of the consequences. We ask that you accept our invitation to refrain from such a mistake.
“They that can give up an essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”