# Why are there open container laws? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 3, 2007, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080 "2007-11-03T02:19:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![TheLoadedDog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/35a633/32.png) [@TheLoadedDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TheLoadedDog)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2007, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080/21 "2007-11-03T15:50:59Z")
Are there “intent to drive” laws in the States? Here in Sydney, if I drunkenly walk towards the driver’s door of my car, keys in hand, I can be busted for drink driving, potentially even if I tell the officer I was going to get an item from my car. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2007, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080/22 "2007-11-03T16:10:05Z")
[QUOTE=TheLoadedDog] Are there “intent to drive” laws in the States? Here in Sydney, if I drunkenly walk towards the driver’s door of my car, keys in hand, I can be busted for drink driving, potentially even if I tell the officer I was going to get an item from my car. [/QUOTE] Yes, there are. I’m not sure what they are called, but it varies from state to state and the case law is littered with different and contradictory opinions from different jurisdictions as to what would constitute intent. IIRC, if your car was in your driveway and you walked to it drunk to retrieve and item, you would be on better footing that if it was parked in a bar parking lot. YMMV, buy I remember before I left West Virginia, that a guy had just bought a new truck with a custom stereo system. He was sitting in his driveway drinking beer and listening to the stereo system, with nary an intent to drive it anywhere. A neighbor complained about the noise and he was arrested and charged with DUI. I never heard how the case turned out.. ---
**Author:** ![myskepticsight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/cc9497/32.png) [@myskepticsight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/myskepticsight)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2007, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080/23 "2007-11-03T16:14:04Z")
[QUOTE=jtgain] Yes, there are. I’m not sure what they are called, but it varies from state to state and the case law is littered with different and contradictory opinions from different jurisdictions as to what would constitute intent. IIRC, if your car was in your driveway and you walked to it drunk to retrieve and item, you would be on better footing that if it was parked in a bar parking lot. YMMV, buy I remember before I left West Virginia, that a guy had just bought a new truck with a custom stereo system. He was sitting in his driveway drinking beer and listening to the stereo system, with nary an intent to drive it anywhere. A neighbor complained about the noise and he was arrested and charged with DUI. I never heard how the case turned out.. [/QUOTE] I’ve heard stuff like “if the keys are in the ignition, it’s DUI” whether the person is driving or not. No clue as to the truthness, especially because that piece of info given to me was paired with an anecdote about someone’s friend getting busted for DUI while sleeping it off in his car after a party - he wasn’t going anywhere, the car wasn’t on, but he did stick his keys in the ignition, guess to not lose them. ---
**Author:** ![FilmGeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/b19c9b/32.png) [@FilmGeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FilmGeek)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2007, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080/24 "2007-11-03T16:23:54Z")
In Kansas, a 6 pack with only 5 beers in it is considered an open container, even if it’s not accessible, like in the trunk. That’s taking it a bit far, I think. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2007, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080/25 "2007-11-03T18:18:07Z")
[QUOTE=myskepticsight] I’ve heard stuff like “if the keys are in the ignition, it’s DUI” whether the person is driving or not. No clue as to the truthness, especially because that piece of info given to me was paired with an anecdote about someone’s friend getting busted for DUI while sleeping it off in his car after a party - he wasn’t going anywhere, the car wasn’t on, but he did stick his keys in the ignition, guess to not lose them. [/QUOTE] I heard the same thing when I was younger and I was later told that it was an urban legend. I don’t know of any state that has such a bright line rule as that. ---
**Author:** ![Joey\_P](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@Joey\_P](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joey_P)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2007, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080/26 "2007-11-03T18:35:35Z")
Some friends of mine were sitting in their car drinking some beer and were approched my an officer. The driver mentioned that the keys were in his pocket and the cop left them alone. ---
**Author:** ![AskNott](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asknott/32/5790_2.png) [@AskNott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AskNott)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2007, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080/27 "2007-11-03T18:41:47Z")
Non-informational anecdote… Once, about 2 dozen of us bought tix to a rock concert in another city, and we chartered a bus to take us all there. Before leaving, we asked the driver if we’d be allowed to drink and 😉 some other stuff. The driver said he didn’t care what happened back there, with one exception. “If we pass another bus, do not moon the other bus.” ---
**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:** [November 3, 2007, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080/28 "2007-11-03T19:08:39Z")
In a nutshell, open container laws are a lazy way to address a symptom rather than a problem. We just got open container laws in Montana last year. So now, for example, we have these silly situations: You come over to my house for dinner and bring a bottle of Scotch. You have one drink from it before dinner. When you leave, I tell you to take the bottle home with you, since I don’t drink Scotch. You’re driving a hatchback, so you have no trunk. Even though you’d probably blow a 0.02 by this time, it’s illegal to take your leftovers home. A friend at work tells me about this wonderful wine that he tried last night. He gives me the bottle, with two glasses’ worth left in it. It is perfectly legal for me to drink the whole bottle and drive home, but illegal to set the bottle on the seat next to me and drive home with a 0.0% BAC. It’s fine for you to drink a couple of beers in a bar and drive home after the alcohol has a chance to percolate into your bloodstream (if you’re my size, that would put you at about 0.06% BAC). It is, however, illegal to drink one beer as you drive home, which would put your BAC at 0.03% max–likely less than that because the full effect wouldn’t have hit your bloodstream until after you got home. Basically, open container laws have nothing whatsoever to do with actual driving impairment. All they do is provide police with reasonable cause to pull you over, and an excuse to arrest someone who is safely driving with a legal amount of alcohol in their blood. NOTE: Lest my comments be misconstrued, I have never had a drink from an alcoholic beverage while driving, although I have transported open containers. I did once get a very expensive ticket because my idiot cousin from another state opened a can of beer while I was driving and took a drink where a cop could see him. Even though I had a 0.0% BAC and a perfectly clean driving record, I got dinged for it. The law really has little effect on my personal behavior (I no longer drive a hatchback, so I have a legal place to stow open containers), but I think it’s a phenomenally stupid law. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2007, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080/29 "2007-11-03T19:23:59Z")
[QUOTE=633squadron] In California, the law allows open containers in an area of the vehicle that is not accessible to the driver. You can carry an open container in the trunk, and I’ve had a CHP officer tell me you can carry one in the back of your SUV if there’s a barrier that prevents the driver from reaching it while he or she is driving. I would guess that this also covers limousines. [/QUOTE] As I suspected, not an accurate statement of California law. Here are the relevant California statutes: > [@Vehicle Code §23223](#): > > (a) No driver shall have in his or her possession, while in a motor vehicle upon a highway or on lands, as described in subdivision (b) of Section 23220, any bottle, can, or other receptacle, containing any alcoholic beverage that has been opened, or a seal broken, or the contents of which have been partially removed. > > (b) No passenger shall have in his or her possession, while in a motor vehicle upon a highway or on lands, as described in subdivision (b) of Section 23220, any bottle, can, or other receptacle containing any alcoholic beverage that has been opened or a seal broken, or the contents of which have been partially removed. > [@Vehicle Code §23225](#): > > (a) (1) It is unlawful for the registered owner of any motor vehicle to keep in a motor vehicle, when the vehicle is upon any highway or on lands, as described in subdivision (b) of Section 23220, any bottle, can, or other receptacle containing any alcoholic beverage that has been opened, or a seal broken, or the contents of which have been partially removed, unless the container is kept in the trunk of the vehicle. > > (2) If the vehicle is not equipped with a trunk and is not an off-highway motor vehicle subject to identification, as defined in Section 38012, the bottle, can, or other receptacle described in paragraph (1) shall be kept in some other area of the vehicle that is **not normally occupied by the driver or passengers**. For the purposes of this paragraph, a utility compartment or glove compartment shall be deemed to be within the area occupied by the driver and passengers. > > (3) If the vehicle is not equipped with a trunk and is an off-highway motor vehicle subject to identification, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 38012, the bottle, can, or other receptacle described in paragraph (1) shall be kept in a locked container. As used in this paragraph, “locked container” means a secure container that is fully enclosed and locked by a padlock, key lock, combination lock, or similar locking device. > > (b) Subdivision (a) is also applicable to a driver of a motor vehicle if the registered owner is not present in the vehicle. > [@Vehicle Code §23229](#): > > (a) Except as provided in Section 23229.1, Sections 23221 and 23223 do not apply to passengers in any bus, taxicab, or **limousine** for hire licensed to transport passengers pursuant to the Public Utilities Code or proper local authority, or the living quarters of a housecar or camper. > > (b) Except as provided in Section 23229.1, Section 23225 does not apply to the driver or owner of a bus, taxicab, or **limousine** for hire licensed to transport passengers pursuant to the Public Utilities Code or proper local authority. So, the scheme is as follows: You can’t have an open container in your posession as either a driver or passenger. If you have an open container present in a vehicle, it must be in the trunk, unless you don’t HAVE a trunk, in which case it can’t be in any part of the passenger compartment, including things like glove boxes. But none of this applies to taxis and limos. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2007, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080/30 "2007-11-03T19:30:27Z")
[QUOTE=jtgain] I heard the same thing when I was younger and I was later told that it was an urban legend. I don’t know of any state that has such a bright line rule as that. [/QUOTE] Here is the opinion of a criminal defense attorney regarding the law of the state of Florida: > [@](#): > > What does “In Actual Physical Control of a Vehicle” mean? > This term means that the individual has had the capability and power to dominate, direct or regulate the vehicle, regardless of whether or not he or she was exercising that capability or power at the time of the alleged offense. In other words, sitting behind the wheel with the keys in the ignition may qualify as being “in actual physical control” of a vehicle even though the vehicle is not moving. From [Law Office of Nasreen Wilkes, P.L.](http://www.lawinfo.com/expert/criminaldefenseattorneyfortpierce/). She does say “may,” which means it is fact dependent. I do know, however, that I have seen more than one case reported where the issue was litigated and the decision on appeal was against the driver. I’ll see if I can chase one of those down (likely a California case, given that I saw it and I doubt I was paying attention to Rhode Island appellate case reports 😃 ). ---
**Author:** ![Joey\_P](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@Joey\_P](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joey_P)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2007, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080/31 "2007-11-03T19:35:06Z")
[QUOTE=DSYoungEsq] If you have an open container present in a vehicle, it must be in the trunk, unless you don’t HAVE a trunk, in which case it can’t be in any part of the passenger compartment, including things like glove boxes. But none of this applies to taxis and limos. [/QUOTE] If you don’t have a trunk, (hatchback, minivan, SUV) you can still put it in the way back part of the car, out of reach of driver or passengers. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2007, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080/32 "2007-11-03T19:37:53Z")
[QUOTE=InvisibleWombat] In a nutshell, open container laws are a lazy way to address a symptom rather than a problem. We just got open container laws in Montana last year. So now, for example, we have these silly situations: You come over to my house for dinner and bring a bottle of Scotch. You have one drink from it before dinner. When you leave, I tell you to take the bottle home with you, since I don’t drink Scotch. You’re driving a hatchback, so you have no trunk. Even though you’d probably blow a 0.02 by this time, it’s illegal to take your leftovers home. A friend at work tells me about this wonderful wine that he tried last night. He gives me the bottle, with two glasses’ worth left in it. It is perfectly legal for me to drink the whole bottle and drive home, but illegal to set the bottle on the seat next to me and drive home with a 0.0% BAC. It’s fine for you to drink a couple of beers in a bar and drive home after the alcohol has a chance to percolate into your bloodstream (if you’re my size, that would put you at about 0.06% BAC). It is, however, illegal to drink one beer as you drive home, which would put your BAC at 0.03% max–likely less than that because the full effect wouldn’t have hit your bloodstream until after you got home. Basically, open container laws have nothing whatsoever to do with actual driving impairment. All they do is provide police with reasonable cause to pull you over, and an excuse to arrest someone who is safely driving with a legal amount of alcohol in their blood. NOTE: Lest my comments be misconstrued, I have never had a drink from an alcoholic beverage while driving, although I have transported open containers. I did once get a very expensive ticket because my idiot cousin from another state opened a can of beer while I was driving and took a drink where a cop could see him. Even though I had a 0.0% BAC and a perfectly clean driving record, I got dinged for it. The law really has little effect on my personal behavior (I no longer drive a hatchback, so I have a legal place to stow open containers), but I think it’s a phenomenally stupid law. [/QUOTE] Um, avoiding the “debate” about whether such laws have value, here is Montana’s Open Container law. You will note your assertion about your hatchback is not accurate. > [@Montana Code Annotated](#): > > 61-8-460. Unlawful possession of open alcoholic beverage container in motor vehicle on highway. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), a person commits the offense of unlawful possession of an open alcoholic beverage container in a motor vehicle if the person knowingly possesses an open alcoholic beverage container within the passenger area of a motor vehicle on a highway. > (2) This section does not apply to an open alcoholic beverage container: > (a) in a locked glove compartment or storage compartment; > (b) in a motor vehicle trunk or luggage compartment or in a truck bed or cargo compartment; > (c) behind the last upright seat of a motor vehicle that is not equipped with a trunk; > (d) in a closed container in the area of a motor vehicle that is not equipped with a trunk and that is not normally occupied by the driver or a passenger; or > (e) in the immediate possession of a passenger: > (i) of a motor vehicle, including a bus, taxi, or limousine, that is used for the transportation of persons for compensation and that includes the provision of a hired driver; or > (ii) in the living quarters of a camper, travel trailer, or motor home. > (3) (a) A person convicted of the offense of unlawful possession of an open alcoholic beverage container in a motor vehicle shall be fined an amount not to exceed $100. > (b) A violation of this section is not a criminal offense within the meaning of 3-1-317, 3-1-318, 45-2-101, 46-18-236, 61-8-104, and 61-8-711 and may not be recorded or charged against a driver’s record, and an insurance company may not hold a violation of this section against the insured or increase premiums because of the violation. The surcharges provided for in 3-1-317, 3-1-318, and 46-18-236 may not be imposed for a violation of this section. So it merely needs to be behind the last upright seat (subsection 2(c)), or a locked glove compartment (subsection 2(a)). ---
**Author:** ![Hostile\_Dialect](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e495f1/32.png) [@Hostile\_Dialect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hostile_Dialect)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2007, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080/33 "2007-11-03T19:51:14Z")
> [@Rhubarb](#): > > ISTR that the argument is that if open containers are permitted in a vehicle, an officer seeing a passenger with a beer wouldn’t have probable cause to give the driver a sobriety test. Really? I’m sure swerving is probable cause, even though it’s perfectly legal. > [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > So, the scheme is as follows: You can’t have an open container in your posession as either a driver or passenger. If you have an open container present in a vehicle, it must be in the trunk, unless you don’t HAVE a trunk, in which case it can’t be in any part of the passenger compartment, including things like glove boxes. I know it specifically says that cars without trunks are six (not quite seven) kinds of fucked, but where does it say I can actually keep an open container in my trunk? If you _don’t_ have a trunk, but you have a locking glove compartment, can you keep it in there if it’s locked? ---
**Author:** ![Joey\_P](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@Joey\_P](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joey_P)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2007, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080/34 "2007-11-03T19:57:21Z")
[QUOTE=fetus] Really? I’m sure swerving is probable cause, even though it’s perfectly legal. [/quote] Isn’t swerving considered reckless driving. 'Round here, you can get a reckless driving ticket for making you’re wheels spin. > [@](#): > > I know it specifically says that cars without trunks are six (not quite seven) kinds of fucked, but where does it say I can actually keep an open container in my trunk? If you _don’t_ have a trunk, but you have a locking glove compartment, can you keep it in there if it’s locked? > [@](#): > > Originally Posted by Vehicle Code §23225 > (a) (1) It is unlawful for the registered owner of any motor vehicle to keep in a motor vehicle, when the vehicle is upon any highway or on lands, as described in subdivision (b) of Section 23220, any bottle, can, or other receptacle containing any alcoholic beverage that has been opened, or a seal broken, or the contents of which have been partially removed, **unless the container is kept in the trunk of the vehicle.** Bolding mine. ---
**Author:** ![Hostile\_Dialect](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e495f1/32.png) [@Hostile\_Dialect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hostile_Dialect)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2007, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080/35 "2007-11-03T20:02:22Z")
[QUOTE=Joey P] Isn’t swerving considered reckless driving. 'Round here, you can get a reckless driving ticket for making you’re wheels spin. [/quote] I tried to find the relevant law, but I started getting a headache. Hopefully **DSYoungEsq** will be back in to clarify the issue. > [@Joey P](#): > > Bolding mine. :smack: Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Joey\_P](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@Joey\_P](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joey_P)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2007, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080/36 "2007-11-03T20:07:20Z")
[QUOTE=fetus] I tried to find the relevant law, but I started getting a headache. Hopefully **DSYoungEsq** will be back in to clarify the issue. [/QUOTE] If it’s not, surely crossing the center line is (especially if it’s a solid yellow), not using blinkers to change lanes, driving in the curb lane etc… ---
**Author:** ![Tony\_Montana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/278dde/32.png) [@Tony\_Montana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tony_Montana)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2007, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080/37 "2007-11-03T20:41:36Z")
[QUOTE=Joey P] **Isn’t swerving considered reckless driving**. 'Round here, you can get a reckless driving ticket for making you’re wheels spin. [/QUOTE] From:[From](http://http://www.legis.state.ak.us/cgi-bin/folioisa.dll/stattx05/query=*/doc/%7Bt12445%7D/pageitems=%7Bbody%7D?) In Alaska: \*Article 03. RECKLESS AND NEGLIGENT DRIVING Sec. 28.35.040. Reckless driving. (a) A person who drives a motor vehicle in the state in a manner that creates a substantial and unjustifiable risk of harm to a person or to property is guilty of reckless driving. A substantial and unjustifiable risk is a risk of such a nature and degree that the conscious disregard of it or a failure to perceive it constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the situation.\* I recall from reading the Trooper reports from our local website [Sitnews](http://www.sitnews.us/) that _swerving_ never gets the person a _reckless_ as well as a DUI. I clearly remember this although Im not sifting through these reports. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2007, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080/38 "2007-11-03T21:24:58Z")
[QUOTE=DSYoungEsq] Here is the opinion of a criminal defense attorney regarding the law of the state of Florida: From [Law Office of Nasreen Wilkes, P.L.](http://www.lawinfo.com/expert/criminaldefenseattorneyfortpierce/). She does say “may,” which means it is fact dependent. I do know, however, that I have seen more than one case reported where the issue was litigated and the decision on appeal was against the driver. I’ll see if I can chase one of those down (likely a California case, given that I saw it and I doubt I was paying attention to Rhode Island appellate case reports 😃 ). [/QUOTE] Right, but as her use of the word “may” implies, there is no hard and fast rule. In fact, if I am lying on my bed in my house, with the car keys on the dresser, with me about ready to pass out because of a .24 BAC, I can still jump up, grab the keys and hop in the driver’s seat of the car. Do I then have constructive control of the vehicle, meaning that the police could, if tipped, arrest me in my bed for DUI? ---
**Author:** ![Sierra\_Indigo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f0a364/32.png) [@Sierra\_Indigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sierra_Indigo)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2007, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080/39 "2007-11-03T21:37:10Z")
Tonedef was not talking about a party bus. Tonedef was talking about a “booze bus” which is a colloquialism for a random breath testing stop. Essentially the cops set up an area where they slow traffic and randomly stop drivers. They then submit to a breath test through the driver’s window with the hand-held testing unit. If the driver passes, on their way and they’re free to go. If they fail, then they’re taken to the booze bus for booking. It’s essentially a mobile police station. I believe they may even have one of the blood testing kits inside, so if you blow a positive but have an excuse (mouthwash, or whatever) then they can do the re-test without having to ship you off to a hospital. Essentially Tonedef is saying they’ve been through an RBT check with everyone in the car (presumably except the driver) rollocking drunk, and as long as the driver has passed the blow test, the cops didn’t give a toss about the booze-artists in the passenger and back seats. ---
**Author:** ![Rhubarb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/59ef9b/32.png) [@Rhubarb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhubarb)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2007, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080/40 "2007-11-03T21:48:43Z")
[QUOTE=fetus] Really? I’m sure swerving is probable cause, even though it’s perfectly legal. [/QUOTE] Any exhibition of driving that may indicate impairment, such as swerving, following too close, failure to stay in your own lane, etc. is reason enough for an officer to pull a driver over and investigate further. However, absent an open container law, possession of an open container alone is not. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-there-open-container-laws/425080.md?page=3)