Do bicyclists ever get arrested for drunk biking??

I never heard of it, but they ought to be. They're on the road too and
if drunk, pose a menace to others though not as big as if driving an SUV.

On Aug 26, 9:52 pm, Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
wrote:
I never heard of it, but they ought to be. They're on the road too and
if drunk, pose a menace to others though not as big as if driving an SUV.

Yes, they do. http://www.just****inggoogleit.com

"Bo Raxo" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Aug 26, 9:52 pm, Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
wrote:
I never heard of it, but they ought to be. They're on the road too and
if drunk, pose a menace to others though not as big as if driving an SUV.

Yes, they do. http://www.just****inggoogleit.com


Good one

Chocolic

Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS wrote:
I never heard of it,

Because you're an ignoramus.

but they ought to be. They're on the road too
and if drunk, pose a menace to others

Yes, they do.

though not as big as if driving
an SUV.

Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS wrote:
I never heard of it, but they ought to be. They're on the road too and
if drunk, pose a menace to others though not as big as if driving an SUV.

Generally, in the US--a police officer can cite anyone for operating any
type of vehicle unsafely on public roadways, and that can and does
include non-registered, non-motorized vehicles. And that covers riding
bicycles under the influence.

Right off I can recall news stories of a man being cited for driving a
riding lawnmower in the street while drinking, and another news story of
a man who was cited for pushing a motorcycle down the street (he had
come from a bar and admitted he was too drunk to drive).

----

Police can also cite someone for NOT operating a vehicle unsafely as
well--pedestrians impeding traffic.
~

DougC wrote:
Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS wrote:
I never heard of it, but they ought to be. They're on the road too
and if drunk, pose a menace to others though not as big as if driving
an SUV.

Generally, in the US--a police officer can cite anyone for operating any
type of vehicle unsafely on public roadways, and that can and does
include non-registered, non-motorized vehicles. And that covers riding
bicycles under the influence.

Right off I can recall news stories of a man being cited for driving a
riding lawnmower in the street while drinking, and another news story of
a man who was cited for pushing a motorcycle down the street (he had
come from a bar and admitted he was too drunk to drive).

Yeah - i've heard the lawm mower story but that's a motorized vehicle.
You say cops CAN cite cyclists for DUI. But do they? I bet it's
super-rare.

Pneuma Pelosi wrote:

On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 04:54:15 -0000, Bo Raxo wrote:

On Aug 26, 9:52 pm, Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
wrote:
I never heard of it, but they ought to be. They're on the road too and
if drunk, pose a menace to others though not as big as if driving an SUV.

Yes, they do. http://www.just****inggoogleit.com


I had a neighbor get arrested for it years ago in California. He protested
the arrest and charges, but the court would hear none of it.

Why didn't he argue that the statute says "Driving While Intoxicated" or
"Driving Under the Influence" and since you don't "drive" a bike, you
"ride" a bike, he was innocent? They'll point to case law where others
were charged and convicted for this so-called "driving" a bike while
drunk, but he could point out that no one used his novel defence, that
there was a time when blacks in America were legally slaves and that
this is a comparaable miscarrage of justice that warrants a Supreme
Court review. The court would then rightly charge him with its own made
up crime, Driving Judges Nuts in the Courtroom While Drunk. He would get
20 years to life in prison even if he'd only had "a couple of beers"
before breaking the law, which is exactly what all the DUI suspects
claim in "COPS".



--
"Throw me that lipstick, darling, I wanna redo my stigmata."

+-Jennifer Saunders, "Absolutely Fabulous"

Bill Bonde ( 'Hi ho' ) wrote:
Pneuma Pelosi wrote:

On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 04:54:15 -0000, Bo Raxo
wrote:

On Aug 26, 9:52 pm, Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
wrote:
I never heard of it, but they ought to be. They're on the road
too and if drunk, pose a menace to others though not as big as if
driving an SUV.

Yes, they do. http://www.just****inggoogleit.com


I had a neighbor get arrested for it years ago in California. He
protested the arrest and charges, but the court would hear none of
it.

Why didn't he argue that the statute says "Driving While Intoxicated"
or "Driving Under the Influence" and since


Why don't you read the actual statute?


snip


In Colorado, the DUI statute encompasses not only Cars and Trucks, but also
Bicycles, Motor Boats, and Horses ...

"_ Prof. Jonez _" wrote:

Bill Bonde ( 'Hi ho' ) wrote:
Pneuma Pelosi wrote:

On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 04:54:15 -0000, Bo Raxo
wrote:

On Aug 26, 9:52 pm, Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
wrote:
I never heard of it, but they ought to be. They're on the road
too and if drunk, pose a menace to others though not as big as if
driving an SUV.

Yes, they do. http://www.just****inggoogleit.com


I had a neighbor get arrested for it years ago in California. He
protested the arrest and charges, but the court would hear none of
it.

Why didn't he argue that the statute says "Driving While Intoxicated"
or "Driving Under the Influence" and since

Why don't you read the actual statute?

Because reading the actual statute wouldn't be half as much fun as
having a little fun with it.



snip

In Colorado, the DUI statute encompasses not only Cars and Trucks, but also
Bicycles, Motor Boats, and Horses ...

Yet it's called "DUI", which means that my argument is still valid. BTW,
you drive a car, a truck and a boat, right? Do you drive a horse? The
Amish should be allowed to get sloshed before going out and slowing
traffic. Wait, you can "drive" horses when you are trying to corral
them. The Amish wouldn't be allowed to do that while drunk under these
rules.

What prevents them from getting you for walking while intoxicated? How
about crawling? What about "being" while intoxicated? If "driving" can
mean what you do on a bike, it could be expanded to what Martin
Heidegger termed "Sein". I think a person charged with DUI should bring
this up in court.


--
"Throw me that lipstick, darling, I wanna redo my stigmata."

+-Jennifer Saunders, "Absolutely Fabulous"

On Aug 27, 10:45 am, "Bill Bonde ( 'Hi ho' )"
wrote:
"_ Prof. Jonez _" wrote:





Bill Bonde ( 'Hi ho' ) wrote:
Pneuma Pelosi wrote:

On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 04:54:15 -0000, Bo Raxo
wrote:

On Aug 26, 9:52 pm, Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
wrote:
I never heard of it, but they ought to be. They're on the road
too and if drunk, pose a menace to others though not as big as if
driving an SUV.

Yes, they do. http://www.just****inggoogleit.com

I had a neighbor get arrested for it years ago in California. He
protested the arrest and charges, but the court would hear none of
it.

Why didn't he argue that the statute says "Driving While Intoxicated"
or "Driving Under the Influence" and since

Why don't you read the actual statute?

Because reading the actual statute wouldn't be half as much fun as
having a little fun with it.

snip

In Colorado, the DUI statute encompasses not only Cars and Trucks, but also
Bicycles, Motor Boats, and Horses ...

Yet it's called "DUI", which means that my argument is still valid. BTW,
you drive a car, a truck and a boat, right? Do you drive a horse? The
Amish should be allowed to get sloshed before going out and slowing
traffic. Wait, you can "drive" horses when you are trying to corral
them. The Amish wouldn't be allowed to do that while drunk under these
rules.


Yeah, and you ride a motorcycle instead of driving it. Try that
semantic bull**** and you'll get laughed out of court. Ever wonder
why the legal system has it's own dictionary, Black's Law - because
words in a legal context have specific meanings different from their
everyday use. You're operating a vehicle, and the vehicle can be
defined as a boat or a horse or a bicycle. You don't like it, write
your legislators.

What prevents them from getting you for walking while intoxicated?

Nothing, it's called "public intoxication".

How
about crawling?

Makes it easier to spot that you're drunk.

What about "being" while intoxicated?

You can be arrested for being intoxicated in a bar. Wrap your tiny
head around that concept.

If "driving" can
mean what you do on a bike, it could be expanded to what Martin
Heidegger termed "Sein". I think a person charged with DUI should bring
this up in court.


The law can be written to encompass whatever is constitutional. You
don't have a constitutional right to be intoxicated in public. Hence
there are laws against being drunk in public.

As for Heidegger, I'm old enough to have been forced to read "The
Question Concerning Technology" in college and young enough to
remember I couldn't stand that stupid facist. Funny guy to quote when
you're making what is essentially a libertarian argument.


Bo Raxo