RW>This happens weekend in a college town.  They have to
  >look at the drunk and think; "Does he need to be
  >arrested and maybe ruin his life or does he just need
  >to be told to go with his buddies and sleep it off."
CH> If he's operating a motor vehicle, for public safety and HIS
CH> safety, he gets arrested and goes through the program in
CH> hopes of straightening him out and preventing an
CH> unneccessary death(s) or injury(s).  I don't want discretion
CH> in that area.
Very few collage people, at least when I was in, drive
to parties.  Usually what happens is a house has a
block party that results in loads of drunks walking,
staggering, home.  Some times they fall down in yards
of people who don't want them there and call the
police.  Some times they think they are now the
greatest singer in the world and stand on the corner
and try to show the world.  Either of these can get
some arrested.
In most cases the decision to make the arrest is left
to the officer on the location not some pencil pusher
who's only encounter with a drunk was seeing one using
a phone booth for a toilet.
RW>Now there were probably a couple of dozen of public
  >drunk (illegal) people disturbing the peace (illegal)
  >there but no one was arrested, no one was even
  >questioned.  Was this good law enforcement?
CH> I could go along with your theory except where those drunks
CH> were about to operate motor vehicles.
see above
RW>Now if the town had passed a ZT law they would have HAD
  >to arrest them or face disciplinary action.
CH> And if the town had invoked ZT in a particular area it would
CH> probably  be because it was a problem area that needed to be
CH> cleaned up. 
And who decides that?  Maybe the town thinks the entire
place needs cleaned up.  The fact is there is a BIG
difference between passing a law and law enforcement.
Once you make them one and the same then bad things
start to happen.
                      Remember:  Freedom isn't Free!
--- timEd-B11
---------------