Why are there open container laws?

[muldoonthief]

A separate question - for the states that have an open container law - is having an open container legally equivalent to DUI/OUI? If you get pulled over for a broken tail light, and the cop sees a back seat passenger has an open beer, but the driver is tested and has a 0.00% BAC, are there states where he would get the full drunk driving treatment?

Looking at Mass law, the answer is no - it’s a $100-$500 fine, while the punishment for blowing a .08 is much worse.

[Musicat]

@Walloon

A similar statute in Michigan was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1948 (Goesaert v. Cleary), but that decision was explicitly disapproved by the Court in 1976 (Craig v. Boren).

IANAL, so perhaps this is nitpicking, but Goesaert was a case about not allowing women to bartend unless related to the owner, and the law was affirmed. But Craig was about a law that allowed women to buy beer that men could not, and it was overturned.

While both look like gender discrimination to me, they aren’t the same question. One was about employment; the other, about purchase of beverages.

I suppose you are saying that the premise of the Craig decision was that it was gender discrimination for no compelling state reason, as the court held. I can see that, but was that the first case that reached that kind of broad (!) conclusion? Or is the association with liquor in this case a factor?

[Walloon]

A footnote to the majority opinion in Craig v. Boren (1976):

Insofar as Goesaert v. Cleary, 335 U.S. 464 (1948), may be inconsistent, that decision is disapproved. Undoubtedly reflecting the view that Goesaert’s equal protection analysis no longer obtains, the District Court made no reference to that decision in upholding Oklahoma’s statute. Similarly, the opinions of the federal and state courts cited earlier in the text invalidating gender lines with respect to alcohol regulation uniformly disparaged the contemporary vitality of Goesaert.

[tonedef]

@Sierra Indigo

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.

Yeah thats what i meant^^^

Sorry I didn’t realize they aren’t called “booze bus” in other places.
What are they called in other parts of the world?

[Hostile_Dialect]

@tonedef

Yeah thats what i meant^^^

Sorry I didn’t realize they aren’t called “booze bus” in other places.
What are they called in other parts of the world?

Checkpoints. There’s another, more casual term for them, but I can’t think of it right now.

[Martini_Enfield]

@fetus

Checkpoints. There’s another, more casual term for them, but I can’t think of it right now.

They’re frequently called “RBTs” (Random Breath Testing) here in Australia and in New Zealand.