Topic: Stupid Drunk Driving Law
adj4u's photo
Sun 04/05/09 09:55 AM
Edited by adj4u on Sun 04/05/09 09:55 AM

In practice the presumption of innocence is animated by the requirement that the government prove the charges against the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt. This due process requirement, a fundamental tenet of criminal law, is contained in statutes and judicial opinions. The requirement that a person suspected of a crime be presumed innocent also is mandated in statutes and court opinions. The two principles go together, but they can be separated.



how can they not have a reasonable doubt

the car was on private land

the driver was asleep

how can they prove beyond a reasonable doubt he was going to drive under the influence


http://www.answers.com/topic/presumption-of-innocence

no photo
Sun 04/05/09 09:57 AM

if I am going out and going to drink...i have a ride set up before i leave the house.


That shows good judgment and common sence my friend! I like people that think before they act! :thumbsup:

yellowrose10's photo
Sun 04/05/09 09:59 AM


if I am going out and going to drink...i have a ride set up before i leave the house.


That shows good judgment and common sence my friend! I like people that think before they act! :thumbsup:


there are times i don't drink when i go out....so if i drive and don't have anyone to pick me up...i don't drink. common sense. passing out in a car isn't an option for me either because there is no telling what could happen. plus i could wake up and think "i'm better now" then drive away and risk my life and others

adj4u's photo
Sun 04/05/09 10:00 AM



if I am going out and going to drink...i have a ride set up before i leave the house.


That shows good judgment and common sence my friend! I like people that think before they act! :thumbsup:


there are times i don't drink when i go out....so if i drive and don't have anyone to pick me up...i don't drink. common sense. passing out in a car isn't an option for me either because there is no telling what could happen. plus i could wake up and think "i'm better now" then drive away and risk my life and others


and then and only then would you qualify for a driving infraction

no photo
Sun 04/05/09 10:02 AM




if I am going out and going to drink...i have a ride set up before i leave the house.


That shows good judgment and common sence my friend! I like people that think before they act! :thumbsup:


there are times i don't drink when i go out....so if i drive and don't have anyone to pick me up...i don't drink. common sense. passing out in a car isn't an option for me either because there is no telling what could happen. plus i could wake up and think "i'm better now" then drive away and risk my life and others


and then and only then would you qualify for a driving infraction


Not according to the law my friend! I love this law yay!! :banana:

yellowrose10's photo
Sun 04/05/09 10:02 AM
the law has been the same in texas for a while...if the keys are in the ignition...it shows intent. otherwise keep them in your pocket. but it's for the judge to decide if it's right or wrong. the cop only needs intent (keys in the ignition)

adj4u's photo
Sun 04/05/09 10:03 AM


should the person buying rat poison be charged with attempted murder of the person they have been fighting with

should the person with a fishing pole be charged with fishing without a license



Alverdine's photo
Sun 04/05/09 10:05 AM

the law has been the same in texas for a while...if the keys are in the ignition...it shows intent. otherwise keep them in your pocket. but it's for the judge to decide if it's right or wrong. the cop only needs intent (keys in the ignition)


Right. Keep your keeps in your pocket/purse if you must pass out in the vehicle. You might still be in trouble but the keys in the ignition are all they require to prove intent. Why would you need to start the car anyway if you are drunk? Then you are going to pass out and your car will overheat and your radiator explode. laugh The cop is doing you a favor.

no photo
Sun 04/05/09 10:06 AM



should the person buying rat poison be charged with attempted murder of the person they have been fighting with

should the person with a fishing pole be charged with fishing without a license





Simple answer for those questions.. Use common sence! period.

yellowrose10's photo
Sun 04/05/09 10:08 AM



should the person buying rat poison be charged with attempted murder of the person they have been fighting with

should the person with a fishing pole be charged with fishing without a license





if the fisherman is near a lake etc....intent
if the person with the rat poison has it near someone food....intent

your example would fit if someone just had bottle near them

adj4u's photo
Sun 04/05/09 10:11 AM




should the person buying rat poison be charged with attempted murder of the person they have been fighting with

should the person with a fishing pole be charged with fishing without a license





Simple answer for those questions.. Use common sence! period.


exactly if someone is not driving they should not be charged with driving

common sense

keys in the ignition does no more a driver make than have rat poison make a murderer

yellowrose10's photo
Sun 04/05/09 10:15 AM
intent n. mental desire and will to act in a particular way, including wishing not to participate. Intent is a crucial element in determining if certain acts were criminal. Occasionally a judge or jury may find that "there was no criminal intent." Example: lack of intent may reduce a charge of manslaughter to a finding of reckless homicide or other lesser crime.

therefore...sense a cop can't read minds...they have to go on certain things (keys in the ignition)

it is up to the courts to decide from there

no photo
Sun 04/05/09 10:17 AM
Edited by Purelifeman on Sun 04/05/09 10:22 AM





should the person buying rat poison be charged with attempted murder of the person they have been fighting with

should the person with a fishing pole be charged with fishing without a license





Simple answer for those questions.. Use common sence! period.


exactly if someone is not driving they should not be charged with driving

common sense

keys in the ignition does no more a driver make than have rat poison make a murderer


This thread will not end until someone gets tired of typing so this is my last thread! Great topic tho it had people going. good luck going in circles people! biggrin

Mr_Music's photo
Sun 04/05/09 10:22 AM
if the fisherman is near a lake etc....intent
if the person with the rat poison has it near someone food....intent


WRONG, on both counts!

My state is FULL of lakes. Unless that line is in the water and I'm holding onto the other end of it, I ain't fishin'.

Just because someone may have been taking care of a rodent problem, and somebody else was stupid enough to put their food next to the poison, does NOT equal "intent".

adj4u's photo
Sun 04/05/09 10:25 AM

intent n. mental desire and will to act in a particular way, including wishing not to participate. Intent is a crucial element in determining if certain acts were criminal. Occasionally a judge or jury may find that "there was no criminal intent." Example: lack of intent may reduce a charge of manslaughter to a finding of reckless homicide or other lesser crime.

therefore...sense a cop can't read minds...they have to go on certain things (keys in the ignition)

it is up to the courts to decide from there


sense the police can not read minds and the guy was asleep

it is obvious he was not driving (cold maybe)

it should be thrown out and the guy should sue for malicious prosecution and false arrest and he should win

how much does that cost the taxpayer

yellowrose10's photo
Sun 04/05/09 10:28 AM
which is up to the courts to decide. there was intent there. and who knows if the guy had just passed out or went to sleep and for how long? for all the cops knew...he could have rested his eyes to clear them to drive. it's not up to the cops...all they need is intent and the keys in the ignition are a good sign of intent. it's up to the courts to decide if it is right or not

adj4u's photo
Sun 04/05/09 10:30 AM
Edited by adj4u on Sun 04/05/09 10:31 AM

which is up to the courts to decide. there was intent there. and who knows if the guy had just passed out or went to sleep and for how long? for all the cops knew...he could have rested his eyes to clear them to drive. it's not up to the cops...all they need is intent and the keys in the ignition are a good sign of intent. it's up to the courts to decide if it is right or not


it does not matter

he was NOT driving and was on private proberty


Mr_Music's photo
Sun 04/05/09 10:40 AM
Something that really chaps my ass is, you could not have a single thing to drink ALL DAY, except for perhaps a glass of water or a soda sometime in the afternoon. That evening, a cop pulls you over for something minor, and one of the first things they'll ask you is if you've been drinking. It doesn't matter if you're a teetotaler and never touch a drop of the stuff, everyone is automatically expected that they do. You tell the cop, "No, I haven't," and he (or she) will ALWAYS respond, "'Cause I can smell alcohol coming from inside your car." No, you can't. It's a trap, just to use as an excuse to get you to do the drunk test, and to give them some excuse (under the guise of "probable cause") to search your vehicle.

Too many people don't know their constitutional amendment rights. Cops know this, and they use it to their advantage.

adj4u's photo
Sun 04/05/09 10:45 AM
Edited by adj4u on Sun 04/05/09 10:45 AM
you are exactly right mr m

i shared this a while back i was in the same city each time you would think they could remember after a couple times

"""and have been harassed for being the designated driver; every weekend for 15 weeks straight(never had a drink and never had breath test during this) (stopped at least 1 time every fri and sat same city dept) till i was almost hit by the last officer in the string of harassmen, cause i stopped as soon as he turned his lights on and threatened a lawsuit and told them i would no longer drive those drinking anywhere. if they do drink and drive i would be a witness that they may have had a ride, had it not been for the cities harassment of those that try to keep them from driving"""

like i said b4 it is all about the money

unsure's photo
Sun 04/05/09 10:50 AM
I was not going to even reply to this BUT here I go..I guess if you have lost a loved one due to someone being drunk and behind the wheel, then you feel totally different then others feel. I lost my cousin to a drunk driver..she left 4 kids behind to face the world on their own. Why? Because a bunch of teens decided to drink and drive...so when you mix alcohol and a vehicle..its not a good combination.
Sure, your friend was not actually driving YET..but you have NO clue what he was going to do!! Your friend probably doesn't even know what he was going to do ONCE he woke up! He actually went out side, got behind the wheel and put the key into the ignition. Did he actually pass out before he started the car or did he really decide to sleep it off?
People keep saying its all money but I say its all about public safety. If we didn't have laws could you imagine how crazy this world would be? I say if you want to drink then drink BUT take in consideration other peoples safety..you are not the only person out there on the road! Life is not just about you and if you think it is, you have a very hard lesson to learn. If you are going to drink then take every single precaution to getting home safely, not just for you but for every single person out there.
Good luck and God Bless flowerforyou