Do bicyclists ever get arrested for drunk biking??

I never heard of it, but they ought to be. They're on the road too and
if drunk, pose a menace to others though not as big as if driving an SUV.

On Aug 26, 9:52 pm, Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
> wrote:
> I never heard of it, but they ought to be. They're on the road too and
> if drunk, pose a menace to others though not as big as if driving an SUV.

Yes, they do. http://www.just****inggoogleit.com

"Bo Raxo" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Aug 26, 9:52 pm, Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
> > wrote:
>> I never heard of it, but they ought to be. They're on the road too and
>> if drunk, pose a menace to others though not as big as if driving an SUV.
>
> Yes, they do. http://www.just****inggoogleit.com
>
>
Good one

Chocolic

Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS wrote:
> I never heard of it,

Because you're an ignoramus.

>but they ought to be. They're on the road too
> and if drunk, pose a menace to others

Yes, they do.

>though not as big as if driving
> an SUV.

Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS wrote:
> I never heard of it, but they ought to be. They're on the road too and
> if drunk, pose a menace to others though not as big as if driving an SUV.

Generally, in the US--a police officer can cite anyone for operating any
type of vehicle unsafely on public roadways, and that can and does
include non-registered, non-motorized vehicles. And that covers riding
bicycles under the influence.

Right off I can recall news stories of a man being cited for driving a
riding lawnmower in the street while drinking, and another news story of
a man who was cited for pushing a motorcycle down the street (he had
come from a bar and admitted he was too drunk to drive).

----

Police can also cite someone for NOT operating a vehicle unsafely as
well--pedestrians impeding traffic.
~

DougC wrote:
> Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS wrote:
>> I never heard of it, but they ought to be. They're on the road too
>> and if drunk, pose a menace to others though not as big as if driving
>> an SUV.
>
> Generally, in the US--a police officer can cite anyone for operating any
> type of vehicle unsafely on public roadways, and that can and does
> include non-registered, non-motorized vehicles. And that covers riding
> bicycles under the influence.
>
> Right off I can recall news stories of a man being cited for driving a
> riding lawnmower in the street while drinking, and another news story of
> a man who was cited for pushing a motorcycle down the street (he had
> come from a bar and admitted he was too drunk to drive).

Yeah - i've heard the lawm mower story but that's a motorized vehicle.
You say cops CAN cite cyclists for DUI. But do they? I bet it's
super-rare.

Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS spewed:

<< ECP removed >>

> I never heard of it, but they ought to be. They're on the road too and
> if drunk, pose a menace to others though not as big as if driving an SUV.

Why don't you go take a flying leap? www.jumperpool.com

--
D epartment of
H ysterical
S creaming

Pneuma Pelosi wrote:
>
> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 04:54:15 -0000, Bo Raxo > wrote:
>
> >On Aug 26, 9:52 pm, Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
> > wrote:
> >> I never heard of it, but they ought to be. They're on the road too and
> >> if drunk, pose a menace to others though not as big as if driving an SUV.
> >
> >Yes, they do. http://www.just****inggoogleit.com
> >
>
> I had a neighbor get arrested for it years ago in California. He protested
> the arrest and charges, but the court would hear none of it.
>
Why didn't he argue that the statute says "Driving While Intoxicated" or
"Driving Under the Influence" and since you don't "drive" a bike, you
"ride" a bike, he was innocent? They'll point to case law where others
were charged and convicted for this so-called "driving" a bike while
drunk, but he could point out that no one used his novel defence, that
there was a time when blacks in America were legally slaves and that
this is a comparaable miscarrage of justice that warrants a Supreme
Court review. The court would then rightly charge him with its own made
up crime, Driving Judges Nuts in the Courtroom While Drunk. He would get
20 years to life in prison even if he'd only had "a couple of beers"
before breaking the law, which is exactly what all the DUI suspects
claim in "COPS".



--
"Throw me that lipstick, darling, I wanna redo my stigmata."

+-Jennifer Saunders, "Absolutely Fabulous"

Bill Bonde ( 'Hi ho' ) wrote:
> Pneuma Pelosi wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 04:54:15 -0000, Bo Raxo
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On Aug 26, 9:52 pm, Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
>>> > wrote:
>>>> I never heard of it, but they ought to be. They're on the road
>>>> too and if drunk, pose a menace to others though not as big as if
>>>> driving an SUV.
>>>
>>> Yes, they do. http://www.just****inggoogleit.com
>>>
>>
>> I had a neighbor get arrested for it years ago in California. He
>> protested the arrest and charges, but the court would hear none of
>> it.
>>
> Why didn't he argue that the statute says "Driving While Intoxicated"
> or "Driving Under the Influence" and since


Why don't you read the actual statute?


<snip>


In Colorado, the DUI statute encompasses not only Cars and Trucks, but also
Bicycles, Motor Boats, and Horses ...

"_ Prof. Jonez _" wrote:
>
> Bill Bonde ( 'Hi ho' ) wrote:
> > Pneuma Pelosi wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 04:54:15 -0000, Bo Raxo
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Aug 26, 9:52 pm, Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>> I never heard of it, but they ought to be. They're on the road
> >>>> too and if drunk, pose a menace to others though not as big as if
> >>>> driving an SUV.
> >>>
> >>> Yes, they do. http://www.just****inggoogleit.com
> >>>
> >>
> >> I had a neighbor get arrested for it years ago in California. He
> >> protested the arrest and charges, but the court would hear none of
> >> it.
> >>
> > Why didn't he argue that the statute says "Driving While Intoxicated"
> > or "Driving Under the Influence" and since
>
> Why don't you read the actual statute?
>
Because reading the actual statute wouldn't be half as much fun as
having a little fun with it.



> <snip>
>
> In Colorado, the DUI statute encompasses not only Cars and Trucks, but also
> Bicycles, Motor Boats, and Horses ...
>
Yet it's called "DUI", which means that my argument is still valid. BTW,
you drive a car, a truck and a boat, right? Do you drive a horse? The
Amish should be allowed to get sloshed before going out and slowing
traffic. Wait, you can "drive" horses when you are trying to corral
them. The Amish wouldn't be allowed to do that while drunk under these
rules.

What prevents them from getting you for walking while intoxicated? How
about crawling? What about "being" while intoxicated? If "driving" can
mean what you do on a bike, it could be expanded to what Martin
Heidegger termed "Sein". I think a person charged with DUI should bring
this up in court.


--
"Throw me that lipstick, darling, I wanna redo my stigmata."

+-Jennifer Saunders, "Absolutely Fabulous"