AT CRUISE ON BOARD B727-200 INTOXICATED PAX REFUSED TO COMPLY WITH FAR CONCERNING INTERFERING WITH THE DUTIES OF A FLC MEMBER. AUTHS MET ACFT AT DEST.

Narrative

WHEN DOING OUR BEVERAGE SVC; I CAME UPON SEAT XXD AND NOTICED HE WAS DRINKING HIS OWN BEER. I INFORMED HIM NOT TO DRINK ANY MORE OF IT BECAUSE OF HIS BEHAVIOR AND ATTITUDE. AS THE CART MOVED ON; HE OPENED ANOTHER; GOT UP AND STARTED TOWARD FIRST CLASS. MY FLT PARTNER TRIED TO ASSIST HIM AND THE FO CAME OUT TO TALK TO HIM. AFTER A WHILE HE WAS BACK AND PROCEEDED TO FINISH THE LAST OF HIS STASH. WE REQUESTED POLICE MEET THE FLT. WE WAITED ON TARMAC FOR THEM TO ARRIVE AT LEAST 10 MINS; BUT WHEN I DEPLANED FROM THE AFT; ONLY COMPANY AGENTS WERE THERE. THE POLICE ARRIVED 5 MINS LATER. THEY ASKED IF I WANTED HIM ARRESTED. I SAID YES; THE FO SAID TO JUST 'SCARE HIM.' THE POLICE SAID THERE WAS NO CHICAGO LAW TO ARREST HIM! THEY HAD NO HOLDING TANK OR PUBLIC INTOXICATION LAW. SO HE WAS ESCORTED OUT OF ARPT APPARENTLY FREE TO ESCORT HIMSELF BACK IN SINCE I WAS INFORMED THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH POLICE TO ANSWER ALL SIMILAR CHARGES. WHAT I FIND IRONIC ABOUT THIS SIT IS WHY IS THERE A 91:11 FAA REG WHEN THERE IS NO ONE TO ENFORCE IT! WHY DOES A COCKPIT CREW MEMBER HAVE THE AUTH TO HAVE THE SAY ON ARRESTING AND NOT A CABIN MEMBER? THE POLICE ALSO INFORMED US ONLY AN FBI AGENT HAS THE AUTH TO ACT ON A PAX MISCONDUCT RPT. IF THAT IS TRUE; WHERE ARE THEY? THESE SITS ARE BECOMING ALMOST A DAILY OCCURRENCE -- IT'S BECOMING AN APPARENT PROB -- ALCOHOL; AND EVEN MORE APPARENT; NO ONE IS CONSIDERING HARSHER PENALTIES FOR THESE OFFENSES. IT MIGHT MAKE PEOPLE REALIZE THEIR ACTIONS ARE TAKEN SERIOUSLY.