SCC decision on impaired driving

[Rob MacLennan]

Seriously? You mean sleeping in the backseat didn't work? If you fall asleep sitting in the driver seat where you may have had an intention to operate the vehicle, I could see it. But if you're using the vehicle as shelter and you deliberately went into the back seat and went to sleep, you did not have an intention to operate the vehicle. There is no "realistic" chance of injury to anyone if you're sleeping in the back seat. What about people who live in the cars/vans? If they drink too much do they have to go somewhere else?

That's why it's referred to as "care and control of a vehicle", not "occupying a vehicle with intent to drive."

 

[Emefef]

The argument (which I have never agreed with) is that by being drunk and having the ability to operate the vehicle, you are guilty, even if not operating the vehicle. It likely got this way because people may have started driving, then pulled over to sleep it off. If the test was actually driving, it would be much harder to catch people and I think we can all agree, actual drunk driving is unacceptable. Personally I think there should be some reasonable intent applied (ie. in car outside bar ok, in car at side of road not ok as you got there somehow), but that's not the way it is. Alternatively, give people the benefit of the doubt the first time, after a single DUI conviction, you would no longer be allowed to be in/near a car with keys while drunk.

That's a good point about the location. It just seems wrong that you could be convicted of a crime because there's a risk you could commit one. So if you have the ignition interlock device, could you sit in the driver seat with the key in the ignition? It's not realistic or probable that someone could be hurt because the car won't start. You just can't make that decision yourself by climbing into the backseat for a couple of hours.

 

[油井緋色]

.....this law is kinda ****ed up

If my friend is driving, and I'm next to him drunk, shouldn't I be charged too then? There's a potential of me knocking him out and operating the vehicle, just like if I'm in the back sleeping in a parking lot.

-________________-

 

[imnothng]

.....this law is kinda ****ed up

If my friend is driving, and I'm next to him drunk, shouldn't I be charged too then? There's a potential of me knocking him out and operating the vehicle, just like if I'm in the back sleeping in a parking lot.

-________________-

I may be incorrect, but I heard NO ONE in the car can be intoxicated in the state of Oklahoma.

 

[油井緋色]

I may be incorrect, but I heard NO ONE in the car can be intoxicated in the state of Oklahoma.

...Isn't public intoxication illegal?

Are all bars motel/hotels then? WTF!

 

[FiReSTaRT]

That's why it's referred to as "care and control of a vehicle", not "occupying a vehicle with intent to drive."

When I was younger and did a lot of constructive partying in downtown, every time I'd spill out of the cab and stumbled past the car to get into the house, I've always thought how people have been convicted of care and control for being in the vicinity of the motor vehicle with their car keys in the pocket.. Technically I had care and control

 

[imnothng]

...Isn't public intoxication illegal?

Are all bars motel/hotels then? WTF!

I believe "public intoxication" would be in the public where they aren't serving drinks, ie. a park.

 

[Emefef]

I believe "public intoxication" would be in the public where they aren't serving drinks, ie. a park.

...or the middle of the road, trying to jump across the gaps along the dashed yellow line without spilling the beer or dropping the hot dog full of hot peppers because you mistakenly believed that tons of hot peppers would mask the smell of the booze by the time you made it home but now it doesn't matter because the popo aren't taking you home and then....oh. That's a different story.