Posted on 02/16/2011 8:22:34 AM PST by big black dog
Under this idiotic theory, you could be inside your HOUSE asleep and be convicted of drunk driving.
After all, you have access to the keys and the vehicle, and you could go out, insert the keys and start it up.
I have no sympathy for someone who’s actually driving drunk. But this case is a travesty.
This guy was busted in the PARKING LOT of HIS APARTMENT BUILDING.
What if he had a few and went out to the car to listen to some tunes ? That’s something I do occasionally in my driveway. I’m not intending to drive, I’m intending to listen to music.
Absolutely statist, total BS decision.
I’ve spoken with several people today regarding this (one who happens to have a brother who’s a LEO.)
Apparently this is the norm, and has been for quite awhile.
From the article: “Laws covering driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) have evolved over the years to cover the situations where police find a parked, but recently driven, vehicle with a drunk behind the wheel.”
According to him, the vehicle does not even need to have been “recently driven”. In the vehicle with the keys is enough to convict (and has been).
I’m surprised this hasn’t ended up in front of the State Supreme Court sooner.
I think it’s time to rewrite the law. Or at least rename it.
“Driving” under the influence hardly seems appropriate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.