"Owning a vehicle being driven by a drunk driver"? WTF?

Factual Questions
21

[QUOTE=TheLoadedDog]
US traffic laws always seem a little vague to me, for some reason. That is to say, not obvious things like speed limits, but all the licensing and “impairment” stuff. In Australia, the fully licensed driver supervising a learner is legally considered to be driving (both people are) as far as alcohol is concerned, and the police can simply stop the car at a random checkpoint and breath test both occupants of the car. If the instructor is over the legal BAC, he or she will be treated as if driving. I’d be interested to know how other countries do this, especially ones that have a US-style “we’re not even sure you need to be conscious, just there” rule.
[/QUOTE]

This was always my understanding of the law in New Zealand also…

22

[QUOTE=helpmewithaquote]
If you didn’t “give permission” wouldn’t that by definition mean the car was stolen. (If so) what a nice position to be put in - charge your drunken idiot son for stealing a car or be held liable for the damage he caused, when there is littel you could have done about it.
[/QUOTE]

In many fact patterns, that would be the case. It’s another question whether the proof would be sufficient to support a conviction (different standards and all).