Drunk Driving?

[Tiresman]

I know laws vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but this just doesn't seem right.

Here's the set-up, 18 year old kid goes out drinking with his buddies, realizes that he is too drunk to drive home,(good for him) so he puts down the rear seats in his SUV to sleep it off before going home. Cop comes by several hours later and arrests him for drunk driving, he's in the back sleeping, how can they do this? Because he is in the car and he is in possession of the keys.
Sometimes I wonder WTF.

[Galapogos]

That's how it is everywhere, in North America at least, as far as I am aware.

[euphoricism]

They can arrest you for almost anything. Its convictions you need to worry about.

Lawyer up, and this one is cake.

[I Like Pie]

That's a pretty easy charge to beat. He wasn't driving.
Drunk sleeping is not against the law anywhere I know of.

I don't know about dem Florida laws but it Canada he wouldn't be charged if that story is true.

[Fnord]

Jury Trial FTW

[euphoricism]

That's a pretty easy charge to beat. He wasn't driving.
Drunk sleeping is not against the law anywhere I know of.

I don't know about dem Florida laws but it Canada he wouldn't be charged if that story is true.

All he has to do is *think* you *might* have driven to the location where you're sleeping, and he can arrest you. Being underage is a good part of it. The drinking and driving laws for minors are INCREDIBLY strict (.02 blow here... which you can get off some nyquil for christs sake)

Inconvenient, stupid, yes. But basically impossible to convict.

Thing is, most police departments have a list of things they *have* to arrest you for.. and two of the biggies are A) Domestic abuse B) suspicion of driving while under the influence. This falls under B, so you get to go for a ride. Its crap. The police know its crap. Every officer would rather be doing something else. But they don't have much of a choice, it comes from the boss who around here is an elected official -- not a law enforcement person. He's a politician. All he knows is to repeat "tough on crime!" at every opportunity.

[Reidak]

Eupho said it best

[Pelion]

That's a pretty easy charge to beat. He wasn't driving.
Drunk sleeping is not against the law anywhere I know of.

I don't know about dem Florida laws but it Canada he wouldn't be charged if that story is true.

the charge isnt drink driving its drunk "in charge" of a vehicle and its one of the most retarded laws ever. It bascially means you get punished for *not* getting home as fast as possible (i.e. driving) and avoiding the police.

[andy-akb]

[quote="Pelion"]

That's a pretty easy charge to beat. He wasn't driving.
Drunk sleeping is not against the law anywhere I know of.

I don't know about dem Florida laws but it Canada he wouldn't be charged if that story is true.

Ive spoken with my father several times about cases he has had that are nearly identical to this and it is a pretty easy charge to beat. What usually happens around here is that some kid will get too drunk and decide to just sleep in their car in the bar parking lot. Most of the time this is fine, maybe they will get a ticket for parking overnight; however, in Maine the winters get pretty cold, so often times they leave their car running. Some cops [the police in my town, a college town, are absolute dicks] consider this "operating" under the influence and arrest people for it. Maybe it technically is a violation of the statute, but that obviously wasnt the intent of the law and the kids who are smart enough to get a lawyer will get it thrown out.

If the kid was just sleeping in the car, I dont think they really can get him for an oui. I read eupho's post and Im not positive if it is accurate that they simply need to believe you may have gotten to where you are by driving drunk. I could easily be wrong, but from what I know, they need more than that. Ive heard of a few cases locally where people have been arrested after the fact based on suspicion of previously driving drunk, and with a competent lawyer, they are typically thrown out [unless it is really clear cut].

Regardless though, I cant imagine the charge will stick with this one, just make sure he gets a lawyer.

[Pelion]

im pretty sure you dont actually have to drive to get in trouble for drink driving. Being drunk with the keys on you will usually do it.

[Lukie]

im pretty sure you dont actually have to drive to get in trouble for drink driving. Being drunk with the keys on you will usually do it.

in ohio, this is correct (if you're in the car, regardless of whether or not you've driven anywhere).

it's pretty bogus if you ask me. it's just the way it is though, and I've always been in the impression it's like that in most states.

[Pelion]

its like that in the UK. Its one of the stupidest laws ever since it encourages people to drive home drunk rather than sleep overnight in their cards :/

[Galapogos]

its like that in the UK. Its one of the stupidest laws ever since it encourages people to drive home drunk rather than sleep overnight in their cards :/

Umm no. It encourages people not to go near their car with the keys when they're drunk. The reasoning being, once you sit in your car you will so often conclude in drunken fashion, "Hey, now that I think about it, I could probably make it home."

And really, where are you drinking that the only place to sleep is your car? The only time I see this being the case is where you're in a situation like that of the guy in OP where you've driven then decide to pull over and pass out. In which case, he was guilty of drinking and driving anyway.

[euphoricism]

^ win.

We dont know if OP started to driving, decided he was too drunk to drive, then decided to pull over, but if he did, it will weight heavily against him.

Contrasting this with the guy who walked to his car and immediately rolled down the seats is not an equal comparison.

[swiggidy]

Just drink & bike

[Pelion]

And really, where are you drinking that the only place to sleep is your car? The only time I see this being the case is where you're in a situation like that of the guy in OP where you've driven then decide to pull over and pass out.

Loads of people drive to the pub deciding not to drink and then change their minds later and sleep it off in the pub carpark. Its not hugely sensible but its better than trying to drive home drunk.

[Lukie]

[quote="Galapogos"]

its like that in the UK. Its one of the stupidest laws ever since it encourages people to drive home drunk rather than sleep overnight in their cards :/

Umm no. It encourages people not to go near their car with the keys when they're drunk. The reasoning being, once you sit in your car you will so often conclude in drunken fashion, "Hey, now that I think about it, I could probably make it home."

Going near your car when drunk, or more specifically over the legal limit-- two very different things, probably isn't the best idea, but it isn't and shouldn't be illegal. There's a huge difference between putting yourself in a situation where you have an elevated risk of doing something wrong, and ACTUALLY doing it. If somebody is actually driving drunk or are in a situation where it is clearly provable that they were, bust them then. Not because they put themselves in a bad position but then ultimately made the right, safe choice.

And really, where are you drinking that the only place to sleep is your car? The only time I see this being the case is where you're in a situation like that of the guy in OP where you've driven then decide to pull over and pass out. In which case, he was guilty of drinking and driving anyway.

If the guy is pulled over on the freeway or on the side of the rode, that is one thing. I made mention of that above re: "clearly provable".

[Galapogos]

I can see why people would disagree with that law. I'm just saying I personally see nothing wrong with it. Because seriously, why not try eliminate the possibility of that bad decision happening when someones ability to make decisions is compromised? I really don't see how it's such a bad thing. Something I really disagree with is people saying the law encourages them to drive home drunk. If the drunk person is so stupid they will come to that conclusion, it's them to blame, to say it's the laws fault is ignorant.

Besides, like I said earlier, if someone is in some odd situation where they're drinking alone and have to sleep somehwere, pay a cab to get you home. They're probably shelled out enough for like 8+ drinks already that night, cab fare is affordable.

[Pelion]

If the drunk person is so stupid they will come to that conclusion, it's them to blame, to say it's the laws fault is ignorant.

Who cares whos fault it is? The only relevent point is whether or not this particular law makes people more or less safe. Thats something we obviously disagree on.

A friend of a friend of mine had a fight with his wife and stormed out of the house. He ended up driving around and then sitting in a pub. By the time the pub closed he was obviously too drunk to drive and didnt really want to go home to his wife anyway so he slept on the back seat of his car. He was woken up by police in the pub car park (where he obviously had GOT drunk, not driven there drunk) and he was arrested. I am strongly against drunk driving and just dangerous driving in general (e.g. speeding etc.) but there is no way this guy was going to drive when it was obvious he had already made a concious decision not to. As far as I know nobody is arguing that people who have obviously driven drunk to where they are sleeping should be let off. Its more about people who have already demonstated that they are conciously deciding not to drink and drive, but then get punished for it anyway.
If someone drives to a house party and then decides to get drunk and sleep in the spare room with their keys in their pocket then we dont punish them. Whats the difference?

[Galapogos]

If the drunk person is so stupid they will come to that conclusion, it's them to blame, to say it's the laws fault is ignorant.

Who cares whos fault it is? The only relevent point is whether or not this particular law makes people more or less safe.

Which it does. You might think there's no difference between a guy sleeping on a couch with his car keys vs sleeping in his car with his keys but there is. And while this law won't deter everyone obviously, the few that it works on is worth it vs the way fewer guys that are pissed off at their wives and would rather sleep in the car.

[Tiresman]

Will the kid get off on the drunk driving charge? With a good attorney I'm sure he will. (at considerable cost)

I just think it's wrong to be charged with drunk driving when he has the sense NOT to drive, and is sleeping in the back of his SUV, in the bars parking lot.

If he's got to be charged, then the charge should be underage drinking.

I'm sure we'll never have everyone agreeing on this, but thanks for letting me post.

[Galapogos]

Oh yeah, there was an OP wasn't there? I would think it should be pretty easy for him to get off the criminal charges but I really don't know. Where I live it seems pretty hard to be criminally charged. Cops would way rather hand out 24hr suspensions when they catch someone in the act rather than follow through with proper charges.

I actually have a friend who was serving a 24hr years ago after one of our hockey games. We all got pretty smashed in the dressing room after the game then decided to go to the bar. He gets in his truck, and he's hammered, gets pulled over right at the parking lot exit. The rest of us continue on to the bar expecting him to call at one point needing a ride. Instead, he shows up like 20 minutes later holding another 24hr suspension in his hand. And how did he get there? He drove, the cop left him alone to "wait for his ride" after she gave him the suspension. Basically, to get charged out here, you need to run down a family or something. Cops are so bad with that shit out here.