Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 12/1/2007 8:12:18 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/1/2007 9:17:16 PM EDT
That video is staged/fake.

Ask me how I know!
Link Posted: 12/1/2007 9:30:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By jonathon:
"My wife is gonna kick yer ass"


I posted that one afew months ago You can also get a DUI on a bicycle.
Link Posted: 12/1/2007 9:38:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By C0Y0TE:
You can also get a DUI on a bicycle.

You betcha! If you are intoxicated and operate something that falls under this WA state definition of a motor vehicle:

"Motor vehicle" means every vehicle that is self-propelled and every vehicle that is propelled by electric power obtained from overhead trolley wires, but not operated upon rails. "Motor vehicle" includes a neighborhood electric vehicle as defined in RCW 46.04.357. "Motor vehicle" includes a medium-speed electric vehicle as defined in RCW 46.04.295. An electric personal assistive mobility device is not considered a motor vehicle. A power wheelchair is not considered a motor vehicle.
,
You can get a DUI!
Link Posted: 12/1/2007 9:51:28 PM EDT
So how do you get a DUI on a bicycle?
Link Posted: 12/1/2007 9:55:50 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Ethereal:
So how do you get a DUI on a bicycle?

By drinking too much, and riding a bicycle.

"Motor vehicle" means every vehicle that is self-propelled...


You can lead a horse to water...
Link Posted: 12/1/2007 10:15:45 PM EDT
My grandfather used to fall asleep on the way home from the city to the farm, the horse knew where to go and just stood and waited at the gate.

Some drunks also did this back in the 70's, they climb on the horse lean over the saddle horn in order to stay on and the horse would take them home.

Not any more, they arrest people for riding drunk on a horse.

This is not rural America anymore, it is a crowed world.
Link Posted: 12/1/2007 10:22:51 PM EDT
Sorry, misread the definition...
Link Posted: 12/1/2007 10:38:50 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/1/2007 10:41:15 PM EDT by YOPD]

Originally Posted By STRATIOTES:
Not any more, they arrest people for riding drunk on a horse.

I am calling BS on this statement.

WA legal definition of a "vehicle":

RCW 46.70.011
Definitions.

As used in this chapter:

(1) "Vehicle" means and includes every device capable of being moved upon a public highway and in, upon, or by which any persons or property is or may be transported or drawn upon a public highway, excepting devices moved by human or animal power or used exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks.

WA DUI:

RCW 46.61.502
Driving under the influence.

(1) A person is guilty of driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug if the person drives a vehicle within this state:

(a) And the person has, within two hours after driving, an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or higher as shown by analysis of the person's breath or blood made under RCW 46.61.506; or

(b) While the person is under the influence of or affected by intoxicating liquor or any drug; or

(c) While the person is under the combined influence of or affected by intoxicating liquor and any drug.

(2) The fact that a person charged with a violation of this section is or has been entitled to use a drug under the laws of this state shall not constitute a defense against a charge of violating this section.

(3) It is an affirmative defense to a violation of subsection (1)(a) of this section which the defendant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant consumed a sufficient quantity of alcohol after the time of driving and before the administration of an analysis of the person's breath or blood to cause the defendant's alcohol concentration to be 0.08 or more within two hours after driving. The court shall not admit evidence of this defense unless the defendant notifies the prosecution prior to the omnibus or pretrial hearing in the case of the defendant's intent to assert the affirmative defense.

(4) Analyses of blood or breath samples obtained more than two hours after the alleged driving may be used as evidence that within two hours of the alleged driving, a person had an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more in violation of subsection (1)(a) of this section, and in any case in which the analysis shows an alcohol concentration above 0.00 may be used as evidence that a person was under the influence of or affected by intoxicating liquor or any drug in violation of subsection (1)(b) or (c) of this section.

(5) Except as provided in subsection (6) of this section, a violation of this section is a gross misdemeanor.

(6) It is a class C felony punishable under chapter 9.94A RCW, or chapter 13.40 RCW if the person is a juvenile, if: (a) The person has four or more prior offenses within ten years as defined in RCW 46.61.5055; or (b) the person has ever previously been convicted of vehicular homicide while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug, RCW 46.61.520(1)(a), or vehicular assault while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug, RCW 46.61.522(1)(b).


No mention of being in control of a horse or other animal while intoxicated. So how are people arrested for being in control of a horse while intoxicated in WA? Can anyone enlighten me? Saying "I don't know, they just do it", or something to that effect, won't cut it.

In fact after looking at the definitions, it seems that they shouldn't be arresting/prosecuting for DUI-bicycle, but they do.
Link Posted: 12/1/2007 10:55:51 PM EDT

Originally Posted By YOPD:
In fact after looking at the definitions, it seems that they shouldn't be arresting/prosecuting for DUI-bicycle, but they do.


It is not the same as driving under the influence, it is a endangerment thing, you can't go hoofng it down I-5 through the S curves either and I don't imagine anybody disagreeing that peds or drunks on horses belong on the highway with traffic.

Link Posted: 12/1/2007 11:12:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By STRATIOTES:
It is not the same as driving under the influence, it is a endangerment thing, you can't go hoofng it down I-5 through the S curves either and I don't imagine anybody disagreeing that peds or drunks on horses belong on the highway with traffic.

Do you mean the freeway? Freeways are limited access highways, so of course they won't be there, but since you had mentioned an activity that would likely occur in a rural area, I didn't think you originally meant "freeway".
So it seems you still haven't answered the question. What are they charging people with when someone operates a horse while intoxicated? Who do you know personally that this has happened to, and how were they punished?
Link Posted: 12/1/2007 11:19:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By YOPD:
So it seems you still haven't answered the question. What are they charging people with when someone operates a horse while intoxicated? Who do you know personally that this has happened to, and how were they punished?


If you are familiar with Monroe you know where east main street is and what was the chopping block tavern, he would tie his horse out back in the alley across from S&L, would ride his horse up main street to HW2 and east on HW2 about a mile to his home,

Not just him but a couple gals I know have also been in trouble with po-po for riding drunk, it's ben at least a decade since I have seen any of them but at the time they were arrrested as a endangerment not for drinking and driving.

Link Posted: 12/1/2007 11:32:14 PM EDT
That I don't believe you certainly does not mean it never happened. Unless the officer could prove that the person was enough of a danger to themselves or others, something like this would not mean someone gets thrown in jail. A decade or so ago, misdemeanors got thrown in the pokey. Now, many can be "C&R"'d, cite and release. I just think a horse walking down the road with a "sleeping" rider on a rural road isn't cause for alarm. I guess this makes me "different" than the cops where you are.

I'm just having a very hard time believing you regarding this.
Link Posted: 12/1/2007 11:59:44 PM EDT


In fact after looking at the definitions, it seems that they shouldn't be arresting/prosecuting for DUI-bicycle, but they do.
Years ago that did occur, but the higher court properly called BS on that. LE is busy enough with real drunks drivers.
Link Posted: 12/2/2007 12:35:33 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Eric:


In fact after looking at the definitions, it seems that they shouldn't be arresting/prosecuting for DUI-bicycle, but they do/did.
Years ago that did occur, but the higher court properly called BS on that. LE is busy enough with real drunks drivers.

Covering all the bases.
Link Posted: 12/2/2007 6:10:06 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/2/2007 6:17:27 AM EDT by C0Y0TE]
Charged with DUI's on bicycle is as easy as Google.

link

Link

link

But will it stick is another story. But that does not matter, once you are charged, its up to you to prove yourself not guilty, the lawyers and courts are making money regardless.



Link Posted: 12/2/2007 12:28:04 PM EDT
I got a written warning for speeding on a 12 speed.

37 in a 25
Link Posted: 12/2/2007 12:49:12 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/2/2007 12:57:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By YOPD:
That video is staged/fake.

Ask me how I know!


How do you know?
Link Posted: 12/2/2007 8:33:24 PM EDT

Originally Posted By C0Y0TE:
Charged with DUI's on bicycle is as easy as Google.

link

Link

link

But will it stick is another story. But that does not matter, once you are charged, its up to you to prove yourself not guilty, the lawyers and courts are making money regardless.



Got any recent WA cases?
Link Posted: 12/2/2007 9:15:38 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PCR-00:

Originally Posted By YOPD:
That video is staged/fake.

Ask me how I know!


How do you know?

http://www.marcryan.com/showclips/showclips.htm

He's a comedian, and "Steve" is one of his characters.

Also, drunks do not react that, oh, "violently and overly traumatized" to pepper spray. This, I know from experience.
Link Posted: 12/3/2007 5:09:35 PM EDT
I do know of a case where a indigent man was charged with DUI for pushing his non-functional car while drunk.

He lived in his car and needed to move it every so often to avoid it being impounded.

I'm pretty sure he was suspended at the time, had no insurance, no tags, all that good stuff.

So don't drink and push your car or the Vancouver popo will getcha.

Top Top