How shocking! We don't need the "police" to tell us the obvious

I disagree, and here's why: "downer drugs" like barbiturates, weed, etc makes most people too "tired and lazy" to accomplish a break-in that requires effort and focus, at least when THAT intoxicated.
"Speedy drugs" like cocaine, meth, etc. certainly would have an intruder pretty wired and focused... not slurring words, stumbling or sounding at ALL like someone who had been drinking.
Alcohol, on the other hand, gives most people just the right combination of "high" and bravado they need to do stupid things like this dipwad. If the homeowner described this thief as "drunk" - I'll bet you that's exactly what he was.
The police?
Police are just looking to protect their funding for the "war on drugs" (as well as their supplemental income from "drug-related confiscations"), when it comes to blaming every-damn-crime on "druggies". The war on drugs needs to be stopped. it's a sham.

You're right Mattie: a good ole "Louisville Slugger" is a great thing to have around the house, and anyone that ever attempts to break into my home will certainly have to deal with my good friend "Louie!"

Well Grand, I admit I have a somewhat "unusual" outlook on the criminalization of drug use and abuse. Not because I believe all drugs are good, because only a fool believes that. I just believe using (illegal) drugs is no worse than using legal drugs like nicotine, alcohol or even prescription drugs.
As long as you keep your use out of the public eye, off the roads, off the job and from endangering anyone else- you can CHOOSE to use alcohol, pills and nicotine with no repercussions. If and when alcohol/pills/nicotine becomes a problem for people, it is up to them to seek help. No one goes around peeking into people's private lives (or homes) to see if they are "abusing" alcohol, and then arresting them for it. Well, I believe the same rules should apply to ALL drugs.
But in our society, cops are allowed to search you, your home, car, boat, your purse, etc. with the intent to find drugs. And the penalty for finding them on you is high; even if you didn't do, haven't done, and don't plan on doing anything "criminal" at all. I have an issue with that.
I also have a problem with the fact that most drug busts are the result of entrapment and or deal-making with other people busted for drugs. (I'll let you off if you rat someone else out). Not ALL people busted for drug possession are "bad people", or have ever done any crime - EXCEPT using a drug. The "war on drugs" doesn't sit well with me; living in a "free" country as we do... It's all about $$$.

"If and when alcohol/pills/nicotine becomes a problem for people, it is up to them to seek help."

OK, is this before of after they:
a.) get behind the wheel of a car
b.) commit crimes to support their habit
or
c.) beat the crap out of the spouse and/or kids.

While I detest illegal search and seizure (the federal government is intruding WAY too much in our lives), proponents of the legalization of drugs have a two fatal flaws in their argument. They are operating under the assumption than 1.) All people possess the ability to judge their own tolerance levels when under the influence, and b.) users know how to avert addiction.

Project Bluebeam, please re-read my post; it specifically states drug use WITHOUT the circumstances of (any) crime being committed, except for the use of the illegal drugs themselves. The laws against drug use CREATE the crime, not prevent it.
As far as driving while under the influence, robbing to pay for the drugs and/or beating your spouse or kids- those are crimes. And they are more often committed under the influence of alcohol than ANY other drug... yet we accept alcohol use as a "choice" for adults. Prescription drug use is the next biggest problem for people, legitimately and illegitimately. But as long as you have a valid prescription from a doctor, no one cares if you take 4 pills a day (instead of 2) or even 10 a day- no cop is busting into your home to see if you are abusing those pills. And no one is testing you for prescriptions if you get stopped for driving like an idiot... as long as you have a prescription, you're cool.
So like the Patch story recently- young guy calls 911 because his house is broken into and he's assaulted with a loaded weapon, and his dad is punched in the face, right?
Cops arrive, and next thing you know, that VICTIM is arrested for marijuana possession and hauled off to jail, bail is set high enough for a felony charge and now he's a "criminal". What did he do wrong? Had some weed in his possession....
The law created the crime. Thousands of examples like that every day.

Bluebeam: you wrote: "They are operating under the assumption than 1.) All people possess the ability to judge their own tolerance levels when under the influence, and b.) users know how to avert addiction."

Well don't we make those same assumptions about LEGAL drugs like alcohol and nicotine and to some extent, prescription and over the counter drugs? Yes, we do.
there are no laws about "abusing" those substances, only their use driving a car or on the job.
Anyone can come home from work - every night of the week - sit in their favorite chair, and down 8 rum & cokes or 10 beers, and no one is going to arrest them for it. They are doing nothing "illegal" because they are in the privacy of their own home- and hurting or endangering no one else. If they should develop an addiction to alcohol, or legal prescription drugs, they are free to seek help by way of detox programs and rehabs, but STILL, they are not arrested as criminals just because they have an addiction. But can the same be said for heroin/coke/meth addicts? No, they get tossed in jail. As if that's going to 'cure' their addiction, when really, it only makes matters worse. I just find the government distinction between "good" drugs and "bad" drugs hypocritical and merely a game of profitable (drug) semantics.