Don't Ride Drunk

The Oregon Court of Appeals just issued this decision upholding the
permanent revocation of driving privileges based on drunk bicycling.
http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A141099.htm

Hey, that guy is now a dedicated, lifetime bicyclist!

On Dec 8, 8:57 am, Jay Beattie wrote:
The Oregon Court of Appeals just issued this decision upholding the
permanent revocation of driving privileges based on drunk bicycling.http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A141099.htm

Hey, that guy is now a dedicated, lifetime bicyclist!

I might say something like "uh-oh", but have no strikes :-)

"Jay Beattie" wrote in message
...
The Oregon Court of Appeals just issued this decision upholding the
permanent revocation of driving privileges based on drunk bicycling.
http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A141099.htm

Hey, that guy is now a dedicated, lifetime bicyclist!

Very cute. I think his attorney should be disbarred. What is the definition
of "driving" in that state?

On Dec 8, 4:57*pm, Jay Beattie wrote:
The Oregon Court of Appeals just issued this decision upholding the
permanent revocation of driving privileges based on drunk bicycling.http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A141099.htm

Hey, that guy is now a dedicated, lifetime bicyclist!

I worked with a fellow whose claim to fame was that at Cambridge he
was arrested for being drunk in charge of a bicycle. He rose to become
chairman of one of the iconic British companies. -- AJ

"Jay Beattie" wrote in message
...
The Oregon Court of Appeals just issued this decision upholding the
permanent revocation of driving privileges based on drunk bicycling.
http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A141099.htm

Hey, that guy is now a dedicated, lifetime bicyclist!

Well we wouldn't want him to wind up killing anyone ;D


Cheers

On Dec 8, 12:07*pm, "MikeWhy" wrote:
"Jay Beattie" wrote in message

...

The Oregon Court of Appeals just issued this decision upholding the
permanent revocation of driving privileges based on drunk bicycling.
http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A141099.htm

Hey, that guy is now a dedicated, lifetime bicyclist!

Very cute. I think his attorney should be disbarred. What is the definition
of "driving" in that state?

"(1) Every person riding a bicycle upon a public way is subject to the
provisions applicable to and has the same rights and duties as the
driver of any other vehicle concerning operating on highways * * *

Your argument is a good one, but bicyclists are considered to be
"drivers" -- at least for most purposes. The odd part of this is that
it punishes people who may be trying to be responsible, viz., they
ride a bike instead of driving a car, albeit drunk. I do think the
two should be treated differently since a drunk bicyclist typically
injures only himself or herself -- and usually not that bad. Not true
with cars.-- Jay Beattie.

On Wed, 8 Dec 2010 20:05:53 -0800 (PST), Jay Beattie
wrote:

On Dec 8, 12:07Â*pm, "MikeWhy" wrote:
"Jay Beattie" wrote in message

...

The Oregon Court of Appeals just issued this decision upholding the
permanent revocation of driving privileges based on drunk bicycling.
http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A141099.htm

Hey, that guy is now a dedicated, lifetime bicyclist!

Very cute. I think his attorney should be disbarred. What is the definition
of "driving" in that state?

"(1) Every person riding a bicycle upon a public way is subject to the
provisions applicable to and has the same rights and duties as the
driver of any other vehicle concerning operating on highways * * *

Your argument is a good one, but bicyclists are considered to be
"drivers" -- at least for most purposes. The odd part of this is that
it punishes people who may be trying to be responsible, viz., they
ride a bike instead of driving a car, albeit drunk. I do think the
two should be treated differently since a drunk bicyclist typically
injures only himself or herself -- and usually not that bad. Not true
with cars.-- Jay Beattie.


Depends where you are. Drunk on a bike in California or Oregon is an
offence. I believe in Utah as well - likely quite a few more states.
In Canada it is not,as under the Criminal Code of Canada it is section
253:

Every one commits an offence who operates a motor vehicle or vessel or
operates or assists in the operation of an aircraft or of railway
equipment or has the care or control of a motor vehicle, vessel,
aircraft or railway equipment, whether it is in motion or not,

And a bicycle is not a motor vehicle.

The main offenses are laid down under section 253 (a) and (b) of the
Canadian Criminal Code and include:

1. operating a motor vehicle while the ability to do so is impaired
by alcohol or a drug, and

2. operating a motor vehicle while having a blood alcohol
concentration of greater than 80 milligrams of alcohol in 100
milliliters of blood.




(If yoiu are going to "sleep it off" in your car, make sure the keys
are well out of reach, preferably locked in the trunk)



but you can be charged for careless driving under the provincia
lHighwayTraffic Acts.

On Dec 9, 5:01*am, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Dec 2010 20:05:53 -0800 (PST), Jay Beattie





wrote:
On Dec 8, 12:07*pm, "MikeWhy" wrote:
"Jay Beattie" wrote in message

....

The Oregon Court of Appeals just issued this decision upholding the
permanent revocation of driving privileges based on drunk bicycling.
http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A141099.htm

Hey, that guy is now a dedicated, lifetime bicyclist!

Very cute. I think his attorney should be disbarred. What is the definition
of "driving" in that state?

"(1) Every person riding a bicycle upon a public way is subject to the
provisions applicable to and has the same rights and duties as the
driver of any other vehicle concerning operating on highways * * *

Your argument is a good one, but bicyclists are considered to be
"drivers" -- at least for most purposes. The odd part of this is that
it punishes people who may be trying to be responsible, viz., they
ride a bike instead of driving a car, albeit drunk. *I do think the
two should be treated differently since a drunk bicyclist typically
injures only himself or herself -- and usually not that bad. Not true
with cars.-- Jay Beattie.

Depends where you are. Drunk on a bike in California or Oregon is an
offence. I believe in Utah as well - likely quite a few more states.
In Canada it is not,as under the Criminal Code of Canada it is section
253:

Every one commits an offence who operates a motor vehicle or vessel or
operates or assists in the operation of an aircraft or of railway
equipment or has the care or control of a motor vehicle, vessel,
aircraft or railway equipment, whether it is in motion or not,

And a bicycle is not a motor vehicle.

The main offenses are laid down under section 253 (a) and (b) of the
Canadian Criminal Code and include:

1. operating a motor vehicle while the ability to do so is impaired
* * by alcohol or a drug, and

2. operating a motor vehicle while having a blood alcohol
* * concentration of greater than 80 milligrams of alcohol in 100
* * milliliters of blood.

(If yoiu are going to "sleep it off" in your car, make sure the keys
are well out of reach, preferably locked in the trunk)

but you can be charged for careless driving under the provincia
lHighwayTraffic Acts.

I don't know about Canada specifically but in most of the ex-Colonies,
beyond the enactments, there is the common law. And that has whole
bunch of offenses relating to being 'in charge of a moving vehicle'. A
bicycle is definitely a moving vehicle. -- Andre Jute.

fiultra5 wrote:
On Dec 9, 5:01 am, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Dec 2010 20:05:53 -0800 (PST), Jay Beattie





wrote:
On Dec 8, 12:07 pm, "MikeWhy" wrote:
"Jay Beattie" wrote in message

...

The Oregon Court of Appeals just issued this decision upholding
the permanent revocation of driving privileges based on drunk
bicycling. http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A141099.htm

Hey, that guy is now a dedicated, lifetime bicyclist!

Very cute. I think his attorney should be disbarred. What is the
definition of "driving" in that state?

"(1) Every person riding a bicycle upon a public way is subject to
the provisions applicable to and has the same rights and duties as
the driver of any other vehicle concerning operating on highways *
* *

Your argument is a good one, but bicyclists are considered to be
"drivers" -- at least for most purposes. The odd part of this is
that it punishes people who may be trying to be responsible, viz.,
they ride a bike instead of driving a car, albeit drunk. I do think
the two should be treated differently since a drunk bicyclist
typically injures only himself or herself -- and usually not that
bad. Not true with cars.-- Jay Beattie.

Depends where you are. Drunk on a bike in California or Oregon is an
offence. I believe in Utah as well - likely quite a few more states.
In Canada it is not,as under the Criminal Code of Canada it is
section 253:

Every one commits an offence who operates a motor vehicle or vessel
or operates or assists in the operation of an aircraft or of railway
equipment or has the care or control of a motor vehicle, vessel,
aircraft or railway equipment, whether it is in motion or not,

And a bicycle is not a motor vehicle.

The main offenses are laid down under section 253 (a) and (b) of the
Canadian Criminal Code and include:

1. operating a motor vehicle while the ability to do so is impaired
by alcohol or a drug, and

2. operating a motor vehicle while having a blood alcohol
concentration of greater than 80 milligrams of alcohol in 100
milliliters of blood.

(If yoiu are going to "sleep it off" in your car, make sure the keys
are well out of reach, preferably locked in the trunk)

but you can be charged for careless driving under the provincia
lHighwayTraffic Acts.

I don't know about Canada specifically but in most of the ex-Colonies,
beyond the enactments, there is the common law. And that has whole
bunch of offenses relating to being 'in charge of a moving vehicle'. A
bicycle is definitely a moving vehicle. -- Andre Jute.

I'm curious how common law classifies rollerblades.

Jay Beattie wrote:
On Dec 8, 12:07 pm, "MikeWhy" wrote:
"Jay Beattie" wrote in message

...

The Oregon Court of Appeals just issued this decision upholding the
permanent revocation of driving privileges based on drunk bicycling.
http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A141099.htm

Hey, that guy is now a dedicated, lifetime bicyclist!

Very cute. I think his attorney should be disbarred. What is the
definition of "driving" in that state?

"(1) Every person riding a bicycle upon a public way is subject to the
provisions applicable to and has the same rights and duties as the
driver of any other vehicle concerning operating on highways * * *

Your argument is a good one, but bicyclists are considered to be
"drivers" -- at least for most purposes. The odd part of this is that
it punishes people who may be trying to be responsible, viz., they
ride a bike instead of driving a car, albeit drunk. I do think the
two should be treated differently since a drunk bicyclist typically
injures only himself or herself -- and usually not that bad. Not true
with cars.-- Jay Beattie.

I hear what you're saying. But it doesn't diminish the urge to gouge my eyes
out for having read such offensive tripe. Which was worse? The miscarriage
of justice, or riding home from the tavern after doing what people do in
taverns? Maybe I can petition Allah to fasttrack me someplace sane if I give
him just a bit help on this planet.