# Nonsensical Traffic Laws **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [August 20, 2011, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nonsensical-traffic-laws/593428 "2011-08-20T13:46:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Lukeinva](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lukeinva/32/17872_2.png) [@Lukeinva](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lukeinva)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2011, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nonsensical-traffic-laws/593428/61 "2011-08-22T21:17:01Z")
> [@markm](#): > > This is correct, of course may vary by state. There was a story in the paper not too long ago about a guy who went out to his car after leaving the bar, put his keys in the ignition but did not start the vehicle, then laid down in the seat and went to sleep. Police came about later, tapped on the glass, roused him, then gave him a breathalyzer. He was charged with a DUI, and I believe it was upheld. Ridiculous. The D of DUI stands for _Driving_ which is clearly not so. It is simply impossible for me to comprehend this logic. (Not saying your post is ridiculous, just the law.) ---
**Author:** ![SciFiSam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/47e85d/32.png) [@SciFiSam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SciFiSam)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2011, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nonsensical-traffic-laws/593428/62 "2011-08-22T21:23:48Z")
> [@Muffin](#): > > The trick is to put the keys in the glove compartment and pass out in the back seat, thereby not being in a position to operate the vehicle. Depending on where you live, [this might not exonerate you.](http://www.ukpoliceonline.co.uk/index.php?/topic/22815-drunk-whilst-in-charge-of-a-motor-vehicle/) (Note that even the responses that say sleeping drunk in a car is OK mention putting the keys much farther away than the glovebox). I wouldn’t be surprised if some US states had similar laws. ---
**Author:** ![markm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de053/32.png) [@markm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/markm)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2011, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nonsensical-traffic-laws/593428/63 "2011-08-22T22:05:41Z")
> [@Lukeinva](#): > > Ridiculous. The D of DUI stands for _Driving_ which is clearly not so. It is simply impossible for me to comprehend this logic. > > (Not saying your post is ridiculous, just the law.) Oh, I definitely agree with you. One local bar will make you turn your keys over before they let you go out if they think you’ve had too many. They’ll let you sleep it off in the parking lot, but not with your keys in your possession, just to avoid this sort of thing. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2011, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nonsensical-traffic-laws/593428/64 "2011-08-22T23:34:42Z")
> [@Lukeinva](#): > > Ridiculous. The D of DUI stands for _Driving_ which is clearly not so. It is simply impossible for me to comprehend this logic. > > (Not saying your post is ridiculous, just the law.) In some places the actual statute now reads “_Operating a Vehicle_ While Intoxicated” rather than just _Driving_ While Intoxicated, with “operating” including having what is called “constructive control” of the car - you’re in it, the keys are in it, it’s on a public right-of-way. As mentioned by an earlier poster it’s based on a presumption that if you were drinking you should not even have got close to that vehicle with your keys in your hand. ---
**Author:** ![Balthisar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/balthisar/32/2825_2.png) [@Balthisar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balthisar)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2011, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nonsensical-traffic-laws/593428/65 "2011-08-23T02:40:56Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > In some places the actual statute now reads “_Operating a Vehicle_ While Intoxicated” rather than just _Driving_ While Intoxicated, with “operating” including having what is called “constructive control” of the car - you’re in it, the keys are in it, it’s on a public right-of-way. As mentioned by an earlier poster it’s based on a presumption that if you were drinking you should not even have got close to that vehicle with your keys in your hand. So don’t even think about drinking a beer at a campground in your motor home in such a state. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Robson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gary_robson/32/3448_2.png) [@Gary\_Robson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Robson)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2011, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nonsensical-traffic-laws/593428/66 "2011-08-23T03:00:48Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > In some places the actual statute now reads “_Operating a Vehicle_ While Intoxicated” rather than just _Driving_ While Intoxicated, with “operating” including having what is called “constructive control” of the car - you’re in it, the keys are in it, it’s on a public right-of-way. As mentioned by an earlier poster it’s based on a presumption that if you were drinking you should not even have got close to that vehicle with your keys in your hand. In Montana, I know someone who got a DWI fine for getting something out of her car _in her driveway_ while intoxicated (and carrying her car keys). The excuse: she had the keys and could have started the car and driven it onto the road. There have also been cases in the news (not with people I know personally) of people who got DWI tickets for “sleeping it off” in their car after a night of drinking. Sheesh! Do the right thing by not driving and get penalized for it! ---
**Author:** ![Chopper9760](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/cdc98d/32.png) [@Chopper9760](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chopper9760)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2011, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nonsensical-traffic-laws/593428/67 "2011-08-25T18:07:02Z")
> [@Lukeinva](#): > > (ps- please folks, enough of the handicap parking discussion. It’s been driven into the ground. What the heck is wrong with walking a few more steps from a space further down the lot; exercise is good.) If I leave Handicapped\_Person (HP) in the car to run an errand I cannot guarantee that HP will remain in the car. What if HP changes his mind about waiting, has to pee, or actually has some sort of medical situation crop up? It’s a long shot but it’s better for those folks to be in a handicapped space just in case. You’re right though, this has been ridden into the ground and I’ll shut up about it now. ---
**Author:** ![cmosdes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a587f6/32.png) [@cmosdes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmosdes)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2011, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nonsensical-traffic-laws/593428/68 "2011-08-25T20:20:51Z")
[quote=“Gary “Wombat” Robson, post:66, topic:593428”] In Montana, I know someone who got a DWI fine for getting something out of her car _in her driveway_ while intoxicated (and carrying her car keys). The excuse: she had the keys and could have started the car and driven it onto the road. [/QUOTE] How does that work? 1. Police just happen to be at the right spot to notice her walking to her car. 2. Police stick around long enough to determine she looks inebriated. 3. She must have been severely impaired for the police to have such a suspicion based solely on her walking to her car. 4. Police wait around to see if she enters the car. 5. Police don’t wait to see if she starts the car, but instead test her on the spot and give her a DWI. ---
**Author:** ![Yllaria](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yllaria/32/3452_2.png) [@Yllaria](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yllaria)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2011, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nonsensical-traffic-laws/593428/69 "2011-08-25T23:07:05Z")
> [@campp](#): > > I don’t know if this qualifies, but why does the “Cell Phone Parking Lot” have handicapped spaces with signage? Right next to it is “Stay In Your Car”. > > WTH??? My guess would be: A) It used to be a different kind of parking lot and no one wanted to go to the cost of sand-blasting off the handicapped striping. B) It’s a new lot, but no one wanted to go through the process of getting an exception to the standard lot regs (depending on the review process, it might even be cheaper to just put the things in - paint and small signs are pretty cheap). C) It’s a new lot, and it might be changed into another kind of lot in another ten or twenty years, so go ahead and put them in now (guessing where the moving sidewalk, monorail, shuttle pad, or teleport pad might go). > [@hajario](#): > > Obviously there is a law that there has to be a certain number of handicapped parking spaces for every number of regular ones. The law shouldn’t include those types if parking lots but it is written too broadly because it didn’t occur to the people who drafted the law to exclude that type of parking lot. It’s a regulation, not a law. The difference being that regulations come in bunches and get updated all together, while laws stay around until they’re repealed. Also, it’s easier to get a variation/exception for a regulation. In fact, exceptions are a standardized part of the design/plan review/approval process. Not that some reviewers aren’t complete roadblocks for exceptions. That can happen. I think the most likely explanation is A, though. > [@An\_Arky](#): > > . . . Also speed bumps on suburban streets…where does your desire to reduce speed trump one’s desire not to have their shocks worn out? . . . We’re going through a speed bump installation phase. Here, a neighborhood has to band together and request speed bumps and then be put on a list for review. They usually request it when it’s an older neighborhood with straight, through streets where folks who speed have been zipping through to avoid either police cars catching speeders on arterial streets or possible breath stops after they’ve been drinking. I say phase because when you put in bumps (actually, we usually put in humps - they’re wider and not as bad on the shocks) in one neighborhood, the cutters usually move on to the next neighborhood. So then that neighborhood has speeders and incidents and wants bumps like those first guys have. It’s rippling out. We’ll eventually run out of umbumped residential streets. My street won’t get bumps. It’s a much older street, and while it’s straight, it’s also old-time narrow. When cars are parked on the street (and they always are because the driveways are narrow and the garages are too small to hold a modern car) it’s almost impossible for two cars to pass each other. Not something you can zip through. Essentially, my parked car is acting as a psychological speed bump. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2011, 12:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nonsensical-traffic-laws/593428/70 "2011-08-26T12:27:44Z")
> [@ZenBeam](#): > > I don’t agree the law in OP is nonsensical. I can think of cases where it’s legitimate to park there even though the placard holder doesn’t get out. also, I can’t see any good way to enforce it. The officer would have to see the vehicle drive up, watch the entire time until they left again, then pull them over to give them a ticket. I agree, it’s too difficult to enforce. In addition, just because someone doesn’t intend to get out of the car during the stop, does not suggest that they should be trapped in the car during the stop. ---
**Author:** ![Hermitian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hermitian/32/470_2.png) [@Hermitian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hermitian)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2011, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nonsensical-traffic-laws/593428/71 "2011-08-26T14:08:07Z")
“No U turn” signs. In my experience, most of the time these are nonsensical. I, as a person in the left turn lane wanting to take a U turn, can see from all directions. There is no way that I am going to hit anyone. Normally I am very uptight about following rules, but this is one that I break regularly and without remorse or guilt. Never gotten a ticket either. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2011, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nonsensical-traffic-laws/593428/72 "2011-08-26T14:20:49Z")
> [@Hermitian](#): > > “No U turn” signs. There’s a spot here on westbound Manchester where there’s a big sign stating “U-Turn to Manchester Eastbound - Next Signal”. At the signal is a no U turn sign. What you have to do is turn left, and take an immediate left that eventually leads you to eastbound. That’s not a U turn. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Robson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gary_robson/32/3448_2.png) [@Gary\_Robson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Robson)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2011, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nonsensical-traffic-laws/593428/73 "2011-08-26T18:50:26Z")
> [@cmosdes](#): > > How does that work? > > 1. Police just happen to be at the right spot to notice her walking to her car. > 2. Police stick around long enough to determine she looks inebriated. > 3. She must have been severely impaired for the police to have such a suspicion based solely on her walking to her car. > 4. Police wait around to see if she enters the car. > 5. Police don’t wait to see if she starts the car, but instead test her on the spot and give her a DWI. It worked like this: She leaves a bar late at night and walks home (several blocks). The police see her leaving the bar somewhat unsteadily, and follow discretely. When she gets to her house, she pulls out her keys and opens the car to get something. The police step in and give her the test. _She never even entered the car._ She just opened the door, on private property. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nonsensical-traffic-laws/593428.md?page=3)