Ok, you can get arrested while driving a car, but were there laws against riding a horse or wagon while intoxicated? You were controlling a horse that could go wild. A RUI (Riding Under the Influence), so to speak.
In the UK the roadside breath test is only an indicator and a further breath test for use in court is required to be taken at the Police station. If you suspect you maybe slightly over the legal limit for drink driving pretending to take a drink as soon as you are stopped or claiming to have done so would mean the Police would have to wait 15-20 minutes before giving you a roadside test. This may give you enough time to sobber up enough to pass the breath test used for evidence.
Dunno, but here you can get a DUI for biking or skateboarding on the street when under the influence. If you’re in the road and on wheels, it’s considered to fall under rules of the road even if your “vehicle” isn’t motorized.
I know several people who have been seriously injured in drunken biking accidents.
At least with a horse you’d think the horse could take enough care of itself to avoid the trees and ditches.
Here’s a story about a guy who was charged with reckless driving (of a horse and carriage) and intoxication in 1899. http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1&res=9402E0D8173DE433A25752C3A9649D94689ED7CF
If you search on Google news, you’ll see listings for some pay-to-view articles describing arrests for driving a horse while intoxicated from 1929 on.
Unverified anecdote time! :eek:
My dad has told me that when he was younger and worked on a ranch, he would take a horse the few miles into town to the bar where he would drink. When the time came to head back home, he’d get up on the horse and hold on tight, guiding the horse in the general direction of home. The horse would make its way back to the ranch safely and my dad wouldn’t have to worry about a DUI. This all allegedly happened in rural South Dakota about 35-45yrs ago.
I’m not really sure if the old man is BS-ing me about this, I don’t find it too unlikely that, once put the rough direction home, the horse could make it home. But it would seem mounting/dismounting and putting a horse away while drunk would be a major hassle. So I see it as a tossup, but I’d lean towards him just enjoying pulling my ‘city-boy’ leg.
While researching what constituted a ‘vehicle’ under Ohio’s OVI law two summers ago, I found a case holding that a horse was not a vehicle. I suspect the defendant passed out on his steed, who then walked home on his own–I seem to recall that the reasoning was that the horse had some independent sense and volition, and could handle himself just fine, never mind the drunken sot slumped over his back.
Just about everything else I found was a vehicle, though, including riding mowers and snowmobiles.
I guess it’s one of those jurisdiction dependant things. In my (non-US) jurisdiction (which has large rural areas), riding a horse or other animal while under the influence is defined to be an offence.
This thread seems only tangentially related to Cecil’s recent column on the “glove box defense” so I’ll move this thread to General Questions, our forum for factual queries.
bibliophage
moderator CCC
I knew someone who got his licensed pulled for 2 DUI’s. He decided that he could still ride his small lawn tractor into town while trashed. Didn’t work.
I think this is one of those issues (DUI Laws) that should be enacted at the federal level, simply becuase of the many variations among state and local jurisdictions. States rights are one thing, but people move and most don’t go looking up what the DUI laws are in their new state other than when they read the driver manual prior to getting a new driver license. In Oregon, the defense of intervening consumption is allowable. I sat on a jury that didn’t buy the defendant’s claim - in large part because his own witnesses difffered in their testimony on the facts. I chalk that one up to an attorney who did a shoddy job of witness prep. He also asked questions under cross examination of witnesses that hurt his case, proving the saying - if you don’t know the answer to the question you’re going to ask - don’t ask the question.
Of course if you have the money, the best tool I’ve found for research is Lexis-Nexis. Sure, one could cite the infinate knowledge of Cecil in Court, but I doubt many Judges would allow it into evidence.
What happens of you are sober but the horse is drunk?
I am pretty sure in NC you can get ticketed for driving a boat while drunk.
On a related note, a while back I read that 50% of all people who drown are drunk.
Feel free to use this tactic. It won’t work. Alcohol is processed by the body at an average of .015% BAC per hour. I don’t know what the limit is in the UK but in the states it is .08% BAC (from reading articles linked in FARK I think it is the same). Waiting 20 minutes means that the BAC will drop around .005%. Waiting 20 minutes is not going to significantly sober anyone up . Maybe a very small percentage of people are right on the edge but there is no way to know it. If you had just taken a drink prior to driving your body may not have absorbed the alcohol yet and your level may actually be going up.
It is different from state to state but where I work roadside breath tests are not required and can be used as only one part of probable cause for an arrest. All that needs to be shown is impairment. The observation of the officer (which is now usually caught on tape) is enough. After the arrest when the suspect is brought in it is required to wait 20 minutes before the test. The suspect is under constant observation during that time. This is to ensure that no other substances were in the mouth for that long. It has been proven by smarter people than me that 20 minutes is enough time to ensure a clean test. Our machines require that the time of arrest be entered and they won’t even allow a sample to be taken until the 20 minutes is up.
Wouldn’t that fall under some sort of illegal modifications to a vehicule header, like fitting your car with nitro boosters ? 
Or check your university library’s (or large city public library’s) online offerings; chances are you have, or can get, free access to historical news articles from important papers of your area, and probably the New York Times as well. CSU Fullerton’s library gives us access to the NYT back to 1850 or so, and the L.A. Times back to its inception in 1881. Oh yeah, they have that important Orange County news organ too, but I forget what it’s called. Hah! a little joke.
Japan law is the same on this point.
In Pennsylvania, apparently, a horse is not considered a motor vehicle. The following is a dissent written by Judge Eakin, disagreeing with his colleagues that said horses don’t count as motor vehicles: (sung to the tune of Mr. Ed)
A horse is a horse, of course, of course,
but the Vehicle Code does not divorce
its application from, perforce,
a steed, as my colleagues said.
“It’s not vague” I’ll say until I’m hoarse,
and whether a car, a truck or horse
this law applies with equal force,
and I’d reverse instead.