Drunk driving in the 1950s and 1960s

[md2000]

Canada has always had the "open liquor" law. One debate that came along with hatchbacks was how to transport an open bottle without a trunk to put it in. (The key is "inaaccessible to the driver"). The consensus - never heard it tested - was that it had to be in the corner farthest from the driver. And yes, the passenger was also liable to be charged with an offense if they were the one holding the liquor. This was the law even when the lax attitude to drunk driving in the 60s was still the situation.

(A famous NB court case had the two guys parked in the car with the key in the ignition. The cop saw the driver had a bottle of beer, asked the non-drinking passenger to pass it to him, then charged the passenger too for handling the bottle. That went all the way to the supreme court to be overturned, IIRC. )

When I was growing up, 60s, I recall that people who did say drunk driving was bad would point to Sweden, where you could actually go to jail for 6 months (!! Horrors!) for being found drunk behind the wheel. "Not like North America where we don't seem to care..."

I remember talking to a much older guy from Switzerland who had moved to Canada, and he mentioned the european attitude to drunkedness in general was very different - more like it was pathetic, like someone who pissed their pants in public, rather that WC-Fields-hilarious. As a result, drunk was not some hijinks to be ignored.

[Elendil's Heir]

Originally Posted by grude

If the cop REALLY wants to be a hard ass you can be open container ticketed for having less than a 6 or 12 pack of beers cans or bottles, or even a single unopened beer can or bottle. Turns out the pack counts as a container.

I've been involved in criminal justice in Ohio for 20-some years and have never seen a ticket for this.

[VOW]

I can't speak for the 50s or 60s, but by mid 70s Germany had REALLY cracked down on drunk driving.

When obtaining our licenses to drive (Hubster was US Army stationed in Germany), we were told that if the German police suspected anyone of driving drunk, the individual could be physically restrained and have blood drawn to ascertain BAC.


~VOW

[CookingWithGas]

BTW aside from the driving part, drinking to excess in general in that era was kind of winked at and funny. You know, three-martini lunches, Otis on Andy of Mayberry, comedian Foster Brooks, a hit comedy single called "Ajax Liquor Store". You didn't do interventions for alcoholics, you told them to "sleep it off" or poured them a cup of coffee or even poured them another drink just for the sheer entertainment value. Your party wasn't a success unless you had at least one drunk.

[md2000]

Originally Posted by Elendil's Heir

I've been involved in criminal justice in Ohio for 20-some years and have never seen a ticket for this.

Alcohol opened from the way it is sold is considered "open" under Canada law. I had a cop pull me over and check my passengers twelve pack. He turned it over to see if we were pulling from the bottom, so I told him "good idea, I never thought of that!"

After all, what's the difference between someone chugging a six pack one at a time and throwing the empties out the window, or chugging from the Southern Comfort and then screwing the cap back on. In both cases you may or may not have consumed it in the vehicle, but the indication is you could have.

[pkbites]

Originally Posted by Elendil's Heir

I've been involved in criminal justice in Ohio for 20-some years and have never seen a ticket for this.

That's because it's nonsense and nobody has yet to supply an actual cite to a state law that proves it's true.

Originally Posted by md2000

Alcohol opened from the way it is sold is considered "open" under Canada law.

Can we see a cite to this law? Canada is just strange enough to have one.

[Floater]

Originally Posted by pkbites

One of the DWI arrests I made in, like, circa 1984 or so the guy brought a liter of Southern Comfort to court, slammed it (I'm not kidding: he fuggin' slammed it in like 30 seconds flat) and then insisted we give him a FST (field sobriety test) to prove he could hold his liquor.

I remember a case where a driver, who had somehow ended upside down in a field beside the road, claimed that the alcohol content in his blood was because he had emptied a bottle of punsch (and believe me, Swedish punsch is a very sweet stuff that you just don't gulp down) while hanging upside down in his safety belt, waiting for the rescue team to arrive. He also showed the court that he could do it, but for some reason his story was dismissed.

Originally Posted by md2000

Alcohol opened from the way it is sold is considered "open" under Canada law. I had a cop pull me over and check my passengers twelve pack. He turned it over to see if we were pulling from the bottom, so I told him "good idea, I never thought of that!"

Can anyone explain to me why I, who don't even drive, would not be allowed to drink a beer inside a car driven by someone else.

[CookingWithGas]

Originally Posted by Floater

Can anyone explain to me why I, who don't even drive, would not be allowed to drink a beer inside a car driven by someone else.

They are not trying to prevent passengers from drinking. They are trying to prevent the driver from drinking then handing to the passenger when they pass a cop.

[Floater]

Originally Posted by CookingWithGas

They are not trying to prevent passengers from drinking. They are trying to prevent the driver from drinking then handing to the passenger when they pass a cop.

Easily solved. Check the driver's breath.

[kayaker]

Originally Posted by Floater

Can anyone explain to me why I, who don't even drive, would not be allowed to drink a beer inside a car driven by someone else.

I've always wondered about this as well. It appears the pendulum has swung too far the other way. The last time I picked up a hitchhiker, I was nervous about the flask he took out of his backpack. I declined his offer of a slug, but still...

[An Gadaí]

Here in Ireland, outside of Dublin and other cities, it just doesn't seem to be considered that big a deal, or at least wasn't until very recently. It's way less common than it used to, but that's because of enforcement. I don't think the act itself is taboo if you don't get caught.

[pkbites]

Originally Posted by Floater

Can anyone explain to me why I, who don't even drive, would not be allowed to drink a beer inside a car driven by someone else.

This brings up this question:

A 200 pound man stops at a bar, drinks 2 regular beers, and drives home.

Same guy doesn't stop for 2 beers but instead drinks 1 light beer while driving home.

Scenario #1 is legal in most places and scenario #2 is illegal in most places. But which is actually more ethical for him to do?

[md2000]

Long whining discussion...
http://forums.blueline.ca/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=13911
http://www.drivesmartbc.ca/impaired-...-motor-vehicle
http://www.justanswer.com/canada-law...le-during.html
(Even an empty plastic cup)

The Manitoba law is more specific: http://www.ebrandon.ca/messagethread...57148&cat_id=3
(a) if the bottle, vessel, or package containing the liquor has not been opened since it was lawfully purchased in Manitoba, or lawfully brought into the province as provided in section 58; or



Of course, in most provinces, even open liquor in public (even the brown paper bag) is illegal, as is consuming it. No surprise that the law is hard on alcohol in cars. Note the passenger could get the ticket if they are the one apparently in possession. Whether "unsealed" means a bottle out of the cardboard container or an open bottle - I guess you can argue that with the judge.

The logic is simple - whether the driver has taken a drink yet or not, if the alcohol is readily available to him, if the passenger could hand it to him, etc. - the law does not want to play games, "ha ha I haven't taken a swig yet!". If there's a possibility the driver can get it readily, then a law has been broken. Remarkably, this was the law even back in the days when drunk driving was considered a minor infraction.

[md2000]

Originally Posted by pkbites

This brings up this question:

A 200 pound man stops at a bar, drinks 2 regular beers, and drives home.

Same guy doesn't stop for 2 beers but instead drinks 1 light beer while driving home.

Scenario #1 is legal in most places and scenario #2 is illegal in most places. But which is actually more ethical for him to do?

Scenario 1, if the guy drinks 6 beers, he can still call a cab and break no laws.

Scenario 2, the guy is driving down the road and has another and another, and it's easy to be breaking the law at some point.


There's always the Gordon Lightfoot defence. Pulled over for failing to turn on his headlights, the famous folksinger in Toronto was taken to the station where he failed the breathalyzer. The judge (musta bin a big fan) bought the lawyer's argument that just because his BAC reached over 0.08 by the time he did the test, did not mean it was over while he was driving. Needless to say, that got tossed out on appeal.

[CookingWithGas]

There are a hundred scenarios where a driver can drink before or even during driving without being impaired. So of course you can attack a "no open container" law on the basis of how this can be done safely by responsible people. If I'm stopped at a red light and don't see anyone coming, I could go through it safely, but that doesn't mean that stopping for red lights is a bad law.

I won't respond to the "safe" scenarios by describing an equal number of hypothetical situations where it could be dangerous, but in general our laws err on the side of saving lives rather than allowing any possible act in the name of personal freedom.

Don't get me wrong, laws can too far. I'm more concerned about laws against Big Gulps than laws that prohibit drinking while driving.

[LouisB]

In Dallas County of Texas, back in the 1950s and 1960s, there were any number of places that offered curb service; people would sit in one place and the carhop would bring all the beer you wanted. There were even a few drive through places that sold hard liquor as well as beer.

I hope those places are out of business by now but I don't know.

[bengangmo]

Anecdote /= data and all that, and also this being outside of the US...

Family friends went to a golf tournament. Wives picked up the hubbies and were driving them home.

two hubbies in the back seat sharing a 12-pack, wives in the front.

Car gets stopped at a random breath check point.

Wife (naturally, as not drinking) passes the test.

Copper sees the chaps in the back drinking, just tells them to buckle up and the trip continues.

Everything is as it should be.

Open container laws are crap.

[pkbites]

Originally Posted by md2000

)The Manitoba law is more specific: http://www.ebrandon.ca/messagethread...57148&cat_id=3
(a) if the bottle, vessel, or package containing the liquor has not been opened since it was lawfully purchased in Manitoba, or lawfully brought into the province as provided in section 58; or

Does the statute have a definitions part because I think you may be misinterpreting the word "package".

Originally Posted by md2000

Scenario 1, if the guy drinks 6 beers, he can still call a cab and break no laws.

Scenario 2, the guy is driving down the road and has another and another, and it's easy to be breaking the law at some point.

My question on the ethics of drinking 1 beer while driving vs drinking 2 beers before driving was what it was. Period. Adding what the guy could do is not part of my original dilemma and was uninvited.

[Alley Dweller]

If we read a little further into the law, it says:

Beer in motor vehicles

117(2) Beer shall not be carried in that part of the interior, tonneau, or cab, of a motor vehicle intended for the accommodation of the driver and other persons being carried thereon, unless the bottles or other receptacles in which it is contained are enclosed in a carton or container

(a) that is closed, fastened, or sealed, in the manner prescribed in the regulations; and

(b) that has not been opened since it was purchased from the commission, or from the holder of a beer vendor's licence or a brewer's retail licence, or was lawfully brought into the province as provided in section 58.

[Alley Dweller]

Originally Posted by pkbites

Does the statute have a definitions part because I think you may be misinterpreting the word "package".

Manitoba Liquor Control Act.

"package" means

(a) a bottle, vessel or receptacle containing liquor; or

(b) a container wholly or partly enclosing a bottle, vessel or receptacle used for holding liquor; (« emballage »)

[pkbites]

Odd.

But like I said, Canada is strange enough to have this.

[control-z]

Back in 2000 or so, my girlfriend's parents would go out for a drive most every evening with a cocktail in their hand. I don't know if they were just lucky or what but I never heard of them getting stopped or having an accident.

[md2000]

Like I said, I was puilled over in 1978 on a motorcycle, and the cop looked at the cardboard 12-pack of beer my passenger was carrying -even checked to underside to see if it was opened. I assume that was because he could give one of us a ticket for open liquor if the case was ripped open. Really, two guys with helmets on, in the open air, it would have been pretty obvious if we were actually drinking (we were not). He had no other reason to stop us.

[ThisSpaceForRent]

This is a current story from Wentzville MO. Seems some of the lawmakers really are on the ball...Not wanting to ticket those who travel from St Louis to the ZOU.

MIZ.....ZOU!

[md2000]

Originally Posted by ThisSpaceForRent

This is a current story from Wentzville MO. Seems some of the lawmakers really are on the ball...Not wanting to ticket those who travel from St Louis to the ZOU.

MIZ.....ZOU!

No, the logic is more... logical. Stuff like open liquor laws hould be state-wide; having laws that vary in detail from between counties and minor municipalities is a recipie for chaos.

Say one city allows open cardboard six-packs, the other does not. Yet another considers a case of empties "open liquor", while a fourth will allow limo passengers to drink and a fifth has their own 0.04BAC limit because the mayor owns the towing company...

You think it's complicated when one of these threads is answered with "there are 50 different answers to your question..."; wait until you have to say "ther are 10,000 different answers to the question, depending on which freeway exit you are near, and the only easy way to find out is to get caught."

[jtgain]

Originally Posted by md2000

Scenario 1, if the guy drinks 6 beers, he can still call a cab and break no laws.

Scenario 2, the guy is driving down the road and has another and another, and it's easy to be breaking the law at some point.

That really didn't answer the hypothetical that was posited. In Scenario 2, the driver is taking a chance of becoming DUI at some point, but if he is enjoying his 1 light beer as in the scenario, he is harming nobody. Why should it be a police matter?

It's even more absurd to prohibit a passenger from drinking. He can get blind drunk and not affect the driving abilities of the driver. (Unless you want to argue that his drunken horseplay would affect the driver's abilities as the wife argued. That would presumably outlaw all designated driver programs, taxis, and limos.)