If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Simcoe News)   For driving while intoxicated purposes, an e-bike is a bike if you pedal it but a vehicle if you use the battery power as at least three people in one town learn in the last week   (simcoe.com) divider line 57
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

3054 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Aug 2014 at 11:32 AM (7 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



57 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-08-27 08:04:09 AM  
This is stupid.  Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them.  Don't drive them while you're drunk.  These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.
 
2014-08-27 08:19:09 AM  

serial_crusher: This is stupid.  Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them.  Don't drive them while you're drunk.  These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.


The head line is a Train-wreck. it's a Lohan. It's the Hesperus.
 
2014-08-27 09:12:01 AM  

serial_crusher: This is stupid.  Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them.  Don't drive them while you're drunk.  These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.



There are plenty of states where DUI laws don't apply to bicyclists including five that specifically exempt bicycles (and in the case of South Dakota, tricycles and horses too). That's not to say you might not still get charged with something like public intoxication in many of those places, but you won't get a DUI. There are only a handful of states that have specific penalties for BUI,.
 
2014-08-27 10:40:46 AM  
You still have to stop at red lights.
 
2014-08-27 11:36:19 AM  
Wanted for questioning.

www.pakistanlaw.net
 
2014-08-27 11:39:35 AM  

Sybarite: serial_crusher: This is stupid.  Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them.  Don't drive them while you're drunk.  These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.


There are plenty of states where DUI laws don't apply to bicyclists including five that specifically exempt bicycles (and in the case of South Dakota, tricycles and horses too). That's not to say you might not still get charged with something like public intoxication in many of those places, but you won't get a DUI. There are only a handful of states that have specific penalties for BUI,.


I know in Indiana you can still get charged with DUI even if you're riding a bicycle.  I think it's kinda silly to level the same charge and penalties for it, though.  If you're riding a bike drunk you're much more of a danger to yourself than anyone else, whereas if you're driving a car you pose a serious danger to anyone else out on the road.
 
2014-08-27 11:40:48 AM  
Any conveyance they choose is considered a "vehicle" when alcohol ticket profit is involved.
 
2014-08-27 11:40:59 AM  

Neondistraction: Sybarite: serial_crusher: This is stupid.  Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them.  Don't drive them while you're drunk.  These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.


There are plenty of states where DUI laws don't apply to bicyclists including five that specifically exempt bicycles (and in the case of South Dakota, tricycles and horses too). That's not to say you might not still get charged with something like public intoxication in many of those places, but you won't get a DUI. There are only a handful of states that have specific penalties for BUI,.

I know in Indiana you can still get charged with DUI even if you're riding a bicycle.  I think it's kinda silly to level the same charge and penalties for it, though.  If you're riding a bike drunk you're much more of a danger to yourself than anyone else, whereas if you're driving a car you pose a serious danger to anyone else out on the road.


You've never been pedestrian-ing along and been hit by a bike.
 
2014-08-27 11:41:59 AM  
You can get a DUI on a bike, a motorized cooler, am electric golf cart, a horse, and a lawnmower.  And about anything else you can ride.

If this isn't just a bike and is self propelled, you certainly should be able,to get a DUI on it
 
2014-08-27 11:42:40 AM  

Neondistraction: If you're riding a bike drunk you're much more of a danger to yourself than anyone else, whereas if you're driving a car you pose a serious danger to anyone else out on the road.


I think an impaired bicyclist could cause some serious and potentially fatal traffic farkups. Drunk biker swerves, you slam on brakes to not hit him, get rear ended, etc.
 
2014-08-27 11:42:48 AM  
The headline made my head hurt.
 
2014-08-27 11:43:23 AM  
Makes sense, making a distinction between human-powered and motor vehicles, and some e-bike kits can make bikes go to plaid. But smitty's a headline-mangling buffoon.
 
2014-08-27 11:43:30 AM  
If the locality doesn't have a separate (or inclusive) statute covering intoxicated operation of a bike, then that's a problem.  It should be an offense to operate a bike drunk on public streets (possibly a lower level offense that doesn't put points on a drivers' license and has to occur more than once or involve injury or significant property damage to lead to jail time, but an offense nonetheless).
 
2014-08-27 11:44:07 AM  
something about scooters and fat chicks
 
2014-08-27 11:48:29 AM  
You'd have to be drunk to live in Barrie in the first place, never mind if your only mode of transportation was an e-bike, and you lived in Barrie.
 
2014-08-27 11:51:32 AM  

HailRobonia: Neondistraction: If you're riding a bike drunk you're much more of a danger to yourself than anyone else, whereas if you're driving a car you pose a serious danger to anyone else out on the road.

I think an impaired bicyclist could cause some serious and potentially fatal traffic farkups. Drunk biker swerves, you slam on brakes to not hit him, get rear ended, etc.


I'm aware that's a possibility, which is why I don't have a problem with it being a crime.  But when was the last time you heard about a multi-car accident being caused by a cyclist?  Usually the biker gets hit by the car and that's about it.  I just don't think it should carry the same penalty as driving a car while drunk because you're much more likely to hurt someone else in a car than on a bike.
 
2014-08-27 11:51:51 AM  
img.fark.net

Go home, you're drunk.
 
2014-08-27 11:54:24 AM  
What if the bartender stays sober?

img.fark.net
 
2014-08-27 11:55:02 AM  

cefm: If the locality doesn't have a separate (or inclusive) statute covering intoxicated operation of a bike, then that's a problem.  It should be an offense to operate a bike drunk on public streets (possibly a lower level offense that doesn't put points on a drivers' license and has to occur more than once or involve injury or significant property damage to lead to jail time, but an offense nonetheless).


No. My town already doesn't allow street parking between 2 and 6 am, so further encouraging poor (and college students) to drive instead of safely biking home....is pants on head retarded
 
2014-08-27 11:55:37 AM  
We all remember this story, right?  Pretty sure he was found guilty.

"Ohio man seeks trial over getting DUI on motorized barstool"
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/03/31/barstool.dui/index.html?eref=rss _u s
 
2014-08-27 11:55:52 AM  

Sybarite: serial_crusher: This is stupid.  Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them.  Don't drive them while you're drunk.  These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.

There are plenty of states where DUI laws don't apply to bicyclists including five that specifically exempt bicycles (and in the case of South Dakota, tricycles and horses too). That's not to say you might not still get charged with something like public intoxication in many of those places, but you won't get a DUI. There are only a handful of states that have specific penalties for BUI,.


Yea, DUI laws are designed to keep the public safe from poorly-driven vehicles, so vehuicles that inherently can't cause a serious hazard to others should be exempted -- i.e., vehicles below a certain weight (like bikes) or horses (since they come with their own brain).

It's not impossible to kill someone on a bike, but it's more of a freak-accident that requires the right geography (hills) and a whole lot of bad luck.  Killing someone with a car is trivially-easy in comparison.
 
2014-08-27 11:57:02 AM  

cefm: It should be an offense to operate a bike drunk on public streets (possibly a lower level offense that doesn't put points on a drivers' license and has to occur more than once or involve injury or significant property damage to lead to jail time, but an offense nonetheless).


Given that operating a bicycle doesn't require a drivers' license in the first place, it doesn't make much sense to tie the two together.
 
2014-08-27 12:01:38 PM  

jshine: Sybarite: serial_crusher: This is stupid.  Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them.  Don't drive them while you're drunk.  These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.

There are plenty of states where DUI laws don't apply to bicyclists including five that specifically exempt bicycles (and in the case of South Dakota, tricycles and horses too). That's not to say you might not still get charged with something like public intoxication in many of those places, but you won't get a DUI. There are only a handful of states that have specific penalties for BUI,.

Yea, DUI laws are designed to keep the public safe from poorly-driven vehicles, so vehuicles that inherently can't cause a serious hazard to others should be exempted -- i.e., vehicles below a certain weight (like bikes) or horses (since they come with their own brain).

It's not impossible to kill someone on a bike, but it's more of a freak-accident that requires the right geography (hills) and a whole lot of bad luck.  Killing someone with a car is trivially-easy in comparison.


How about a horse?

http://helenair.com/lifestyles/south-dakota-legalizes-drunken-horse- ri ding/article_1a277334-9efe-55f9-95eb-48414e9d6289.html
 
2014-08-27 12:03:04 PM  

jshine: cefm: It should be an offense to operate a bike drunk on public streets (possibly a lower level offense that doesn't put points on a drivers' license and has to occur more than once or involve injury or significant property damage to lead to jail time, but an offense nonetheless).

Given that operating a bicycle doesn't require a drivers' license in the first place, it doesn't make much sense to tie the two together.


That doesn't mean it won't happen, though.
 
2014-08-27 12:03:08 PM  

jshine: cefm: It should be an offense to operate a bike drunk on public streets (possibly a lower level offense that doesn't put points on a drivers' license and has to occur more than once or involve injury or significant property damage to lead to jail time, but an offense nonetheless).

Given that operating a bicycle doesn't require a drivers' license in the first place, it doesn't make much sense to tie the two together.


I'd be cool with just dropping the bike in a safe place, and give the offender the option to walk twice the distance of his aborted travel plans or wait in the drunk tank to see the judge in the morning.   Just to give them concrete feedback as to weigh their travel options in the future..
 
2014-08-27 12:03:17 PM  

Neondistraction: I know in Indiana you can still get charged with DUI even if you're riding a bicycle. I think it's kinda silly to level the same charge and penalties for it, though. If you're riding a bike drunk you're much more of a danger to yourself than anyone else, whereas if you're driving a car you pose a serious danger to anyone else out on the road.


Yeah, I know someone who got a DUI riding a bike in Indiana. As a cyclist though, I'd say that we advocate for the same rights as drivers: the right to ride in the road, etc. That means that we have the same responsibilities. A bike heading down the street is dangerous and can kill someone or cause a car accident that can kill people. That means you should be sober and concentrating on the road when you operate it.
 
2014-08-27 12:03:27 PM  
if you don't have a license and are given a DUI for being on a bicycle what are the penalties ?

Generally they smack you with points on your license or loss of license. You don't need a license to ride a bike last i checked. So is it just a fine at that point ?
 
2014-08-27 12:05:20 PM  

Neondistraction: If you're riding a bike drunk you're much more of a danger to yourself than anyone else, whereas if you're driving a car you pose a serious danger to anyone else out on the road.


Bicycles are a major hazard for pedestrians.
 
2014-08-27 12:05:30 PM  

serial_crusher: This is stupid.  Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them.  Don't drive them while you're drunk.  These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.


So if you have a DUI and are prohibited from operating a vehicle you're saying they shouldn't be allowed to ride their bike again?
 
2014-08-27 12:06:24 PM  

Earthworm Jim Jones: serial_crusher: This is stupid.  Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them.  Don't drive them while you're drunk.  These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.

So if you have a DUI and are prohibited from operating a vehicle you're saying they shouldn't be allowed to ride their bike again?


If they have a DUI*
 
2014-08-27 12:08:45 PM  
But they have Nationalized Health Care. Therefore, pickles
 
2014-08-27 12:12:06 PM  
I hate e-bikes and e-bike riders. Most of the ones in my town are too lazy to use a real bicycle or can't get a driver's license because of previous impaired convictions.
 We've also has a few of them nailed for taking the pedals off which has gotten the users some pretty hefty fines for no insurance or drivers license.


Saw one idiot try to go off road on his e-bike. Laughed like hell when he hit a ridge in the grass and flipped over.

Wish the province would make licensing them and having insurance mandatory. They ride the same roads as cars make them follow the rules.
 
2014-08-27 12:13:37 PM  
 
2014-08-27 12:16:15 PM  

jshine: Sybarite: serial_crusher: This is stupid.  Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them.  Don't drive them while you're drunk.  These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.

There are plenty of states where DUI laws don't apply to bicyclists including five that specifically exempt bicycles (and in the case of South Dakota, tricycles and horses too). That's not to say you might not still get charged with something like public intoxication in many of those places, but you won't get a DUI. There are only a handful of states that have specific penalties for BUI,.

Yea, DUI laws are designed to keep the public safe from poorly-driven vehicles, so vehuicles that inherently can't cause a serious hazard to others should be exempted -- i.e., vehicles below a certain weight (like bikes) or horses (since they come with their own brain).

It's not impossible to kill someone on a bike, but it's more of a freak-accident that requires the right geography (hills) and a whole lot of bad luck.  Killing someone with a car is trivially-easy in comparison.


A friend of mine had a kid hit his car on a bike and die, and he's been pretty much messed up ever since then even though it was not his fault. There can be consequences for others.
 
2014-08-27 12:18:47 PM  
Whoops. Make that 46.61.790

And since I had to post that correction -here's the text of the statute:

RCW 46.61.790
Intoxicated bicyclists.

(1) A law enforcement officer may offer to transport a bicycle rider who appears to be under the influence of alcohol or any drug and who is walking or moving along or within the right-of-way of a public roadway, unless the bicycle rider is to be taken into protective custody under RCW 70.96A.120. The law enforcement officer offering to transport an intoxicated bicycle rider under this section shall:

     (a) Transport the intoxicated bicycle rider to a safe place; or

     (b) Release the intoxicated bicycle rider to a competent person.

     (2) The law enforcement officer shall not provide the assistance offered if the bicycle rider refuses to accept it. No suit or action may be commenced or prosecuted against the law enforcement officer, law enforcement agency, the state of Washington, or any political subdivision of the state for any act resulting from the refusal of the bicycle rider to accept this assistance.

     (3) The law enforcement officer may impound the bicycle operated by an intoxicated bicycle rider if the officer determines that impoundment is necessary to reduce a threat to public safety, and there are no reasonable alternatives to impoundment. The bicyclist will be given a written notice of when and where the impounded bicycle may be reclaimed. The bicycle may be reclaimed by the bicycle rider when the bicycle rider no longer appears to be intoxicated, or by an individual who can establish ownership of the bicycle. The bicycle must be returned without payment of a fee. If the bicycle is not reclaimed within thirty days, it will be subject to sale or disposal consistent with agency procedures.
 
2014-08-27 12:29:23 PM  

Cold_Sassy: The headline made my head hurt.


Seriously, that's one heck of a kind of sentence, subby.
 
2014-08-27 12:30:25 PM  

Saborlas: You still have to stop at red lights.


And cars have to drive at or below the speed limit.  What's your point?
 
2014-08-27 12:34:12 PM  

jshine: Sybarite: serial_crusher: This is stupid.  Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them.  Don't drive them while you're drunk.  These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.

There are plenty of states where DUI laws don't apply to bicyclists including five that specifically exempt bicycles (and in the case of South Dakota, tricycles and horses too). That's not to say you might not still get charged with something like public intoxication in many of those places, but you won't get a DUI. There are only a handful of states that have specific penalties for BUI,.

Yea, DUI laws are designed to keep the public safe from poorly-driven vehicles, so vehuicles that inherently can't cause a serious hazard to others should be exempted -- i.e., vehicles below a certain weight (like bikes) or horses (since they come with their own brain).

It's not impossible to kill someone on a bike, but it's more of a freak-accident that requires the right geography (hills) and a whole lot of bad luck.  Killing someone with a car is trivially-easy in comparison.


4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-08-27 12:41:16 PM  

dv-ous: Neondistraction: Sybarite: serial_crusher: This is stupid.  Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them.  Don't drive them while you're drunk.  These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.


There are plenty of states where DUI laws don't apply to bicyclists including five that specifically exempt bicycles (and in the case of South Dakota, tricycles and horses too). That's not to say you might not still get charged with something like public intoxication in many of those places, but you won't get a DUI. There are only a handful of states that have specific penalties for BUI,.

I know in Indiana you can still get charged with DUI even if you're riding a bicycle.  I think it's kinda silly to level the same charge and penalties for it, though.  If you're riding a bike drunk you're much more of a danger to yourself than anyone else, whereas if you're driving a car you pose a serious danger to anyone else out on the road.

You've never been pedestrian-ing along and been hit by a bike.


But where does it end? Have you ever had someone running smash into you? Clearly running while intoxicated should be illegal. Walking too, while we're at it. Even sitting while intoxicated could be dangerous, by gosh!
 
2014-08-27 12:55:35 PM  
I think you have to distinguish between the kind of electrical bike you can drive without pedalling, and the kind where the electrical motor only gives you a minor boost while you are pedalling.

The one i the articles picture is obviously of the first kind, and it should really be considered a small motor bike instead of a bike bike.
 
2014-08-27 12:56:33 PM  
I was talking to some relative (a cousin, I think) and they commented that a lot of people seem to ride their lawn mowers around town.  "Cheaper than the car, I guess."  I replied, "Or they've got too many DUIs and can't drive."  "Huh.  That would make more sense."

I'm definitely not a fan of drunk drivers but I've seen some cities take it way too far.  Like ticketing someone who's sleeping one off in their vehicle because they had the keys in their pocket and were, therefore, in control of a motor vehicle.  I had a few friends back in the day who would get wasted, unlock their car, stash their keys in a shrubbery, then curl up in the back seat.  Just in case they got hassled by some bored cop making the rounds at 3am.  "I couldn't move this car if I wanted to officer.  I don't know where my keys are.  No, sir, I don't lock my car.  That's how I was able to get in and go to sleep."  Worst they could get was public intoxication.
 
2014-08-27 12:58:09 PM  

HailRobonia: Neondistraction: If you're riding a bike drunk you're much more of a danger to yourself than anyone else, whereas if you're driving a car you pose a serious danger to anyone else out on the road.

I think an impaired bicyclist could cause some serious and potentially fatal traffic farkups. Drunk biker swerves, you slam on brakes to not hit him, get rear ended, etc.


You could say the exact same thing about an impaired pedestrian, or an impaired person on roller skates, or a dog off the leash.  Charging a person on a bike that weighs 20 lbs with the same penalty as if they were driving a 2-ton sedan just because it's a "vehicle" is farking stupid.

dv-ous: You've never been pedestrian-ing along and been hit by a bike.


I have.  The idiot bumped into me when I was crossing the street, and fell over in his clips.  I said, "hey, are you OK?"  and "Alright, be careful."   The end.

This text is now purple: Neondistraction: If you're riding a bike drunk you're much more of a danger to yourself than anyone else, whereas if you're driving a car you pose a serious danger to anyone else out on the road.

Bicycles are a major hazard for pedestrians.


So are cars.  About 200 times more hazardous.  Your chances of dying because you got hit by a cyclist are minuscule compared to you chances of dying by car.  From 2007-2011 in NY state, 766 pedestrians were killed by motor vehicles, and 3 were killed by cyclists (none of whom were drunk, BTW).  That's fewer deaths in five years than the number of people struck by lightning in NY in any one of those years.

A pedestrian getting seriously injured or killed by a bike is pretty much a freak occurrence anywhere but in large metropolitan areas, where it is still rare enough that you're more likely to send yourself to the hospital by tripping on a crack in the sidewalk than by being hit by a cyclist.
 
2014-08-27 01:21:17 PM  

Vlad_the_Inaner: jshine: cefm: It should be an offense to operate a bike drunk on public streets (possibly a lower level offense that doesn't put points on a drivers' license and has to occur more than once or involve injury or significant property damage to lead to jail time, but an offense nonetheless).

Given that operating a bicycle doesn't require a drivers' license in the first place, it doesn't make much sense to tie the two together.

I'd be cool with just dropping the bike in a safe place, and give the offender the option to walk twice the distance of his aborted travel plans or wait in the drunk tank to see the judge in the morning.   Just to give them concrete feedback as to weigh their travel options in the future..


Walking drunk is also illegal...
 
2014-08-27 01:29:56 PM  

jimmythefly: RCW 56.61.790 for the win.


http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=46.61.790


Reasonable legislation that instructs police to actually help people?  That's a good one.

api.ning.com
 
2014-08-27 01:39:07 PM  

Z-clipped: Bicycles are a major hazard for pedestrians.

So are cars. About 200 times more hazardous. Your chances of dying because you got hit by a cyclist are minuscule compared to you chances of dying by car. From 2007-2011 in NY state, 766 pedestrians were killed by motor vehicles, and 3 were killed by cyclists (none of whom were drunk, BTW).


I'll take my chances with getting hit by a car on the sidewalk. Or with cars at speed going the wrong way on one-way streets.
 
2014-08-27 01:53:03 PM  

jimmythefly: Whoops. Make that 46.61.790

And since I had to post that correction -here's the text of the statute:

RCW 46.61.790
Intoxicated bicyclists.
(1) A law enforcement officer may offer to transport a bicycle rider who appears to be under the influence of alcohol or any drug and who is walking or moving along or within the right-of-way of a public roadway, unless the bicycle rider is to be taken into protective custody under RCW 70.96A.120. The law enforcement officer offering to transport an intoxicated bicycle rider under this section shall:


Wow.  That's the most reasonable law I have ever seen.  I wouldn't believe it if you hadn't linked it.
 
2014-08-27 01:53:16 PM  
I live in the country.  There's a nice little pub a few miles away, but I never really go because I don't want to drive drunk.

I never considered riding home on a bike, in the dark, drunk.  Sure, it would be safer for the public, but mighty unsafe for me.
 
2014-08-27 01:55:43 PM  
"In a closed society where everybody's guilty, the only crime is getting caught. In a world of thieves, the only final sin is stupidity."

--Hunter S Thompson
 
2014-08-27 02:02:06 PM  

This text is now purple: Z-clipped: Bicycles are a major hazard for pedestrians.

So are cars. About 200 times more hazardous. Your chances of dying because you got hit by a cyclist are minuscule compared to you chances of dying by car. From 2007-2011 in NY state, 766 pedestrians were killed by motor vehicles, and 3 were killed by cyclists (none of whom were drunk, BTW).

I'll take my chances with getting hit by a car on the sidewalk. Or with cars at speed going the wrong way on one-way streets.



I'm not sure what you mean by "take your chances"... you'll never cross the street?

Here's a question for you:

Last year, 30,580 people died in the US because of drunk drivers operating motor vehicles. Over 4,000 of those killed were pedestrians.  If every drunk who drove a motor vehicle last year had ridden a bicycle instead, how many DUI deaths do you think there would have been?  More? Fewer?  How many?
 
2014-08-27 02:03:19 PM  

Neondistraction: jshine: cefm: It should be an offense to operate a bike drunk on public streets (possibly a lower level offense that doesn't put points on a drivers' license and has to occur more than once or involve injury or significant property damage to lead to jail time, but an offense nonetheless).

Given that operating a bicycle doesn't require a drivers' license in the first place, it doesn't make much sense to tie the two together.

That doesn't mean it won't happen, though.


...but hypothetically speaking, if you committed enough bicycle-infractions to accumulate enough "points" on your drivers' license to have it revoked or suspended, you could just keep right on riding your bicycle (and committing infractions), since that license wasn't required for the bike in the first place.

It's just silly.
 
Displayed 50 of 57 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report