Not so fast... I was in that camp too until I started reading things like this:
Digital Killed My Tripod - Ken Rockwell
I still have my tripod for things like really long exposures and HDR work, but it's not used as much as, say, my Dad used his when he was shooting.
yeah, that article was all fine and dandy.
but, it doesnt fit with most digital cameras.
if you cant afford a lens with a stabilization feature, then you will get blur.
even with the IS of my favorite walkaround lens (canon 17-85mm IS) i still need a tripod for longer exposures at night because my camera.
the xti, gives a hell of a lot of noise at higher ISO's, and unless you have a nice budget to afford that F1.8 zoom or prime lens (not just the nifty 50 bc its not always a practical choice) then you will be in the neighborhood of F3.5-4. max.
with my camera, to get the nice night shots that i want, i usually set it at about F8 to 10, and the ISO at about 400. i still need a pretty long exposure to get all the light and details that i want.
handheld would give me a lot of shake and blur.
i can give higher ISO's and a smaller aperture and probably avoid using the tri-pod, but then i'll have a soft, blurry, extremely noisy picture that does me no good.
now, if i had the budget for a professional camera (say the 5d mark 3) that has a higher quality sensor and much more in means of ISO speeds, then that may be possible.
but at the low end of the budget, a tripod (or solid, stable surface) will be what is needed to get clear crisp night shots.