Drinking and driving: should it be illegal?

[Elta]

So if you live in Nevada, and have your house keys on the same keyring as your car keys, it's illegal to get drunk?

If you rent the house and you are in possession of the keys, yup.

*What I want from you is a link that validates your claim. Not the silly number to the court house. If you cant produce such a link then all the rest of your comments are simply heresay.

As for my own offer of proof. Here is a list of the laws covering DUI in Nevada. I dont see anything in here that gives them the authority to do what you allege. http://www.duilaws.com/nevada/nevada-dui-laws/

* Call the number and talk to the man, he has a law degree.

Until I see some actual proof of that I dont believe it.


What cop? I saw no cop give any opinion. Did you? And if so, where exactly? I saw Elta saying what he thought he heard the cop say. But thats not the same thing as a copy saying it to us now is it?

It's called precedent, If you in possession of the keys and arrested the judge will charge your ass with DUI.


I was in jail for 7 days at the beginning of this year. Everyday they rounded all of us and walked us into the court room to see if our cases will be heard. I sat through 7 days of it, I even saw people with their lawyers there. And not one lawyer tried to argue the point that these guys who mouthed off to the cops were at home, because they knew they would lose anyway, if you do not own the home it is considered possession of control of the vehicle.


This is an interpretation of the law by precedent. I've given you a phone number of a Lawyer who works for the city of North Las Vegas and is paid to educate people on the DUI laws of Nevada.

There is not much more I can do for you.



You work at a desk all day and I am sure post here often while at it. Just call the number and see for yourself.




Here is another gem for you while I am at it: In Clark County there are only *off sale and on sale sales of liquor. Meaning that an on sale is, you buy the drink there and you drink it there. If it is off sale, you buy the unopened bottle of liquor there and drink it at a private residence. If you are walking down the street in Las Vegas with a bottle of beer you can be arrested for drinking in public.

It is not enforced because it would be bad for business, but that is the law.



*Except on New Years eve, ST. Patrick's day, Chinese New Years, Cinco de Mayo almost every place in town is granted a permit.

 

[Karalysia]

Cell phone usage is banned while driving. Why? Because its distracting to the driver and may result in accidents.

The same principle applies to this. So yes. Open container laws are a good thing. The only people raging against it are frat boys.

 

[Elta]

Cell phone usage is banned while driving. Why? Because its distracting to the driver and may result in accidents.

The same principle applies to this. So yes. Open container laws are a good thing. The only people raging against it are frat boys.

Do you honestly think it should apply to a bottle of spirits or wine in your trunk that is not accessible from the driver and passenger area of the car?

 

[Zelig]

* Call the number and talk to the man, he has a law degree.

MobBoss is making a good point here. As a neutral observer, I'd also like to request an actual link to the law in question.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Why do they call it "open container" laws if it applies to closed containers?

 

[Karalysia]

Do you honestly think it should apply to a bottle of spirits or wine in your trunk that is not accessible from the driver and passenger area of the car?

No it shouldn't. And its a good thing it doesn't.

 

[MobBoss]

* Call the number and talk to the man, he has a law degree.

No, why dont you call the man, and ask him for a web link indicating that so you can prove to your buds here your arguement is right.

It's called precedent, If you in possession of the keys and arrested the judge will charge your ass with DUI.

Try not to speak as if this were fact when all you have to offer as proof is 'call this guy'.

I was in jail for 7 days at the beginning of this year. Everyday they rounded all of us and walked us into the court room to see if our cases will be heard. I sat through 7 days of it, I even saw people with their lawyers there. And not one lawyer tried to argue the point that these guys who mouthed off to the cops were at home, because they knew they would lose anyway, if you do not own the home it is considered possession of control of the vehicle.

Are you really saying your in a position to correctly assume why an attorney may or may not make a point in a case?

Again, if its that easy and so widespread of a fact in Nevada, then by all means produce a link to verify it.

This is an interpretation of the law by precedent. I've given you a phone number of a Lawyer who works for the city of North Las Vegas and is paid to educate people on the DUI laws of Nevada.

There is not much more I can do for you.

Call him. Ask him for a link that proves it. Post link here. Viola, arguement validated.

You work at a desk all day and I am sure post here often while at it. Just call the number and see for yourself.

I looked online and found a link in regards to Nevada DUI law that supports my arguement. Now its your turn to make your point...or not. If you cant, then simply say you cant.

Here is another gem for you while I am at it: In Clark County there are only *off sale and on sale sales of liquor. Meaning that an on sale is, you buy the drink there and you drink it there. If it is off sale, you buy the unopened bottle of liquor there and drink it at a private residence. If you are walking down the street in Las Vegas with a bottle of beer you can be arrested for drinking in public.

Thats just a simple variation of the open container law.

It is not enforced because it would be bad for business, but that is the law.

Again, a link would be nice.

 

[Elta]

*Why do they call it "open container" laws if it applies to closed containers?

**No it shouldn't. And its a good thing it doesn't.

* Because the bottle has been opened, you are transporting an opened bottle, again off sale and off sale


** Yes it does. 100s of people have gotten DUI over it.

*No, why dont you call the man, and ask him for a web link indicating that so you can prove to your buds here your arguement is right.



**Try not to speak as if this were fact when all you have to offer as proof is 'call this guy'.



***Are you really saying your in a position to correctly assume why an attorney may or may not make a point in a case?

****Again, if its that easy and so widespread of a fact in Nevada, then by all means produce a link to verify it.



*****Call him. Ask him for a link that proves it. Post link here. Viola, arguement validated.



I looked online and found a link in regards to Nevada DUI law that supports my arguement. Now its your turn to make your point...or not. If you cant, then simply say you cant.



Thats just a simple variation of the open container law.



Again, a link would be nice.

* It's called judicial precedent, look it up.

** See above.

*** I talked to the guy in the bunk below me about why his "lawyer sucked so much"
He told me that the lawyers don't even try to argue on that any more.

**** Again, Judicial precedent.

***** Same as above. But you know what, I'll call on Tuesday and ask for a case number so that you can read a case on it.

 

[MobBoss]

* It's called judicial precedent, look it up.

No, YOU look it up and put up a link. I did my own homework and provided a link to support my arguement. You do the same.

Or dont. At this point I think I am going to simply believe you cant support your allegation with a valid link or proof.

*** I talked to the guy in the bunk below me about why his "lawyer sucked so much"
He told me that the lawyers don't even try to argue on that any more.

Yeah. He would know.

***** Same as above. But you know what, I'll call on Tuesday and ask for a case number so that you can read a case on it.

Or you could simply ask him for the Nevada code link that defines 'operation of a vehicle' as having the keys in your rented house. That would work as well.

However, I think I may have this figured out. Part of the Nevada law it seems hinges upon a reasonable belief if you had operated your vehicle while under the influence even though you werent driving it 'just then' or even had a bac in excess of .08. Example: if someone drove home drunk from the pub, and the guy was reported by someone as weaving all over the road recklessly, the cops coming to his house could extrapolate from his current bac level if he operated the vehicle while intoxicated. I saw a reference in there somewhere with a 2 hour timeline in regards to this. So, it *could* be possible for this to happen, just not the way Elta was describing it. The cops would need to have a preponderance of evidence that indicated you were indeed operating your vehicle while intoxicated before arriving home drunk.....not simply sitting in your house intoxicated. I think Elta is just mis-translating/understanding what this guy was trying to tell him.

 

[Elta]

However, I think I may have this figured out. Part of the Nevada law it seems hinges upon a reasonable belief if you had operated your vehicle while under the influence even though you werent driving it 'just then' or even had a bac in excess of .08. Example: if someone drove home drunk from the pub, and the guy was reported by someone as weaving all over the road recklessly, the cops coming to his house could extrapolate from his current bac level if he operated the vehicle while intoxicated. I saw a reference in there somewhere with a 2 hour timeline in regards to this. So, it *could* be possible for this to happen, just not the way Elta was describing it. The cops would need to have a preponderance of evidence that indicated you were indeed operating your vehicle while intoxicated before arriving home drunk.....not simply sitting in your house intoxicated. I think Elta is just mis-translating/understanding what this guy was trying to tell him.

I've heard of people getting arrested on a count of that too.

But I am quite sure of what he told me, If I am wrong I'll come on and say I am.

I'll give the guy a call on Tuesday.

 

[GinandTonic]

Cell phone usage is banned while driving. Why? Because its distracting to the driver and may result in accidents.

The same principle applies to this. So yes. Open container laws are a good thing. The only people raging against it are frat boys.

Well luckily in the land of Orwell's 1984 we dont have the limitations on our freedoms you fellas in the land of the free are constrained by. Open container laws are clearly an excessive restriction on freedom in terms of any benefit they may bring.

Why on earth shouldnt my passenger have a beer if they want?

Given that driving while drunk is an offence and that driving while drinking anything is an offence if it distracts the driver enough to constitute driving without due care and attention (or if the judge decides the circumstances of the road/ driving conditions were hazardous enough that drinking anything constituted driving without due care and attention) what benefits does a law specifically banning drinking while driving bring?

Why shouldnt I have an open container in the car? If I were to go and have a barbie on the beach and have a very small and legal glass of wine why should I not be able to transport that bottle of wine home if I cannot get the cork back in? Or rather, since I can, why shouldnt Americans be able to?

 

[Onionsoilder]

In my opinion, when somebody is driving they should be driving. Not doing something else... if they're doing something else, that increases the risk of an accident. That means no makeup, no cellphones, no eating... and no drinking, even if it isn't alcoholic. Does that mean I want police to pull somebody over if they see them with a large soda? No, but if they get pulled over for a traffic violation, the penalty should be increased, because it means they obviously can't pay attention when doing whatever activity.

 

[GinandTonic]

In my opinion, when somebody is driving they should be driving. Not doing something else... if they're doing something else, that increases the risk of an accident. That means no makeup, no cellphones, no eating... and no drinking, even if it isn't alcoholic. Does that mean I want police to pull somebody over if they see them with a large soda? No, but if they get pulled over for a traffic violation, the penalty should be increased, because it means they obviously can't pay attention when doing whatever activity.

But what relivance does that have to their having a passenger in the car having a beer?

 

[Formaldehyde]

Well luckily in the land of Orwell's 1984 we dont have the limitations on our freedoms you fellas in the land of the free are constrained by. Open container laws are clearly an excessive restriction on freedom in terms of any benefit they may bring.

Why on earth shouldnt my passenger have a beer if they want?

Given that driving while drunk is an offence and that driving while drinking anything is an offence if it distracts the driver enough to constitute driving without due care and attention (or if the judge decides the circumstances of the road/ driving conditions were hazardous enough that drinking anything constituted driving without due care and attention) what benefits does a law specifically banning drinking while driving bring?

Why shouldnt I have an open container in the car? If I were to go and have a barbie on the beach and have a very small and legal glass of wine why should I not be able to transport that bottle of wine home if I cannot get the cork back in? Or rather, since I can, why shouldnt Americans be able to?

You got me. It makes no sense whatsoever unless you try to ban drinking any liquid while driving under the pretext that all of it is far too distracting for the average person to be able to handle.

Basically, we bent over and let a bunch of "law and order" hypocrites change the laws to make it far too easy for police to rid the highways of the DUI menace. We tend to overreact a lot in this country. Many of the laws are nothing but ill-conceived knee-jerk reactions whiich would have been considered to be preposterous a few decades before. This is another excellent example.

What is really ironic is that basically any service station these days contains a "Quickee Mart" where you can purchase all the beer you want. But they typically won't provide a bottle opener as they stick your beer into a brown paper bag to better disguise it. That would be contributing to a violation of the law.

 

[MobBoss]

What is really ironic is that basically any service station these days contains a "Quickee Mart" where you can purchase all the beer you want. But they typically won't provide a bottle opener as they stick your beer into a brown paper bag to better disguise it. That would be contributing to a violation of the law.

Uhm. Most beers sold in the 'quickee mart' have twist tops or are sold in cans. No can opener needed.

 

[Luckymoose]

Depends. Last night I was driving around passing a bottle of gin between myself and the five other people in the car, none of them 21 and two of them 14.

 

[Dachs]

Ain't you just the most badass ITG ever!

 

[Elta]

Ain't you just the most badass ITG ever!

 

[Dragonlord]

Cell phone usage is banned while driving. Why? Because its distracting to the driver and may result in accidents.

The same principle applies to this. So yes. Open container laws are a good thing. The only people raging against it are frat boys.

If distraction were the issue, the law would apply equally to soft drinks. As I understand it, though, the laws we are talking about apply only to alcoholic drinks.

As such, people should only be DUI'd for their actual consumption of alcohol, not their potential consumption. The premise that you will inevitably consume too much alcohol if you have an open container in your car is an insult, IMO.

The same goes for the other examples cited here: having your keys on you, sleeping it off in the car with the keys in the ignition etc. ... all total bull pucky! Driving means 'moving the car', not 'having the opportunity to move it'. You aren't endangering anyone while sitting still, only when moving.

 

[Dragonlord]

Basically, we bent over and let a bunch of "law and order" hypocrites change the laws to make it far too easy for police to rid the highways of the DUI menace. We tend to overreact a lot in this country. Many of the laws are nothing but ill-conceived knee-jerk reactions whiich would have been considered to be preposterous a few decades before. This is another excellent example.

This. QFT.
Overreaction really does seem to be an American trend. We slap foreheads and in Europe every time we read a story about a 6 year old arrested for touching a teachers breast, or a 10 yr old banned from school for showing off his camping utensils etc. etc. Seems the Law and Order fanatics have an aversion to common sense and always insist on the letter of the law in all cases .. or maybe they just get off on high arrest statistics and well-filled jails... ?