We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
Posts must be:
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
Shit like this just lowers the seriousness of DUI. DUI is bad because real cars (and lesser extent motorbikes) have enormous potential for carnage and death. A pink toy jeep does not.
Surely a public intoxication or nuisance charge exists that would better suit?
I had a buddy back in the day. Get a DUI on a bicycle.
I feel like that could be a sport on the ocho
Would certainly liven up the tour de france.
Given he was operating it on the road, he would be a hazard to himself and a distraction/hazard to other drivers.
I'd say it doesn't lessen the seriousness of a DUI. They take the DUI so seriously they'll even get you in the pink barbie jeep.
It would be equivalent to him walking, re: speed and general safety. Hell, it's a pink "car", which is great for visibility! It's nonsense to charge him with a DUI. They gonna do the same to someone drunk while in a motorized wheelchair?
Also, this whole situation is just an extension of our stupid car-centric societies: the damned sidewalks stopped existing on his path to the store. He was otherwise just fine using the sidewalk until he couldn't. That's neglect on the city's part.
Edit: downvote all you want, the cars were a danger to him, not the other way round.
If it was just as fast to walk, then he should have walked. But by taking a vehicle into the street while intoxicated he enters DUI territory.
As for your wheelchair comment i think the context matters. I doubt they would charge someone who needs the wheelchair with a DUI in the scenario but someone just taking a motorized wheelchair for a drunken joyride down the road will likely end up with a DUI.
The punishment must fit the crime. Minimum sentence in Canada for a DUI is apparently 1000 rupees and 12 months driving prohibition. That punishment makes sense for the crime of negligently operating heavy machinery that can and does kill thousands every year. Not for operating light low-power electric vehicles where killing a third-party is only a remote (though real) possibility. That minimum sentence being applied equally is not just when the danger posed to society is so unequal. I would also expect a truck driver to have a higher minimum sentence for the same reasons.
On top of the justice concerns, if the punishment is the same for everyone, a drunk college dickhead who would have ridden a bicycle home (still a reprehensible crime mind you) might decide to drive their car instead if they feel like they're less likely to get caught and it would be punished the same anyway. Especially as cases like this get media attention.
That's the pitfall with blind and strict rules, if I know I'll be getting expelled from school for getting punched by a bully, then I'm incentivized to cave their face in before the grown-ups get here.
It lessens it in the sense that he can make jokes about it.
I got a DUI, but its okay, I was in a barbie jeep. Lol.
That its posted here is proving my point, its been treated as a joke. We are both sensible people, we know its serious, but others will just see it as a joke. I'd rather they charged him with something else. He's just as much a hazard if he was sober.
It's no different to riding a horse. Drunk riding is a thang
I know a dude who went riding while drunk and almost died. He was being a dumbass and spooked his own horse and it threw him.
if anything, motorcycles have more potential for carnage
Care to elaborate?
My reasoning was that motorcycles normally can't kill car, and cars can often kill multiple other cars. But in terms of likelihood of crashing, or the likelihood of serious injury/death, sure? I'm not a motorcyclist, and I dont drive drunk, so I dunno...
usually, motorcyclists are more likely to get very injured, while the entitled old man in the SUV blasting through a red gets away scott free with only a dent on his pavement princess.
or in general too, motorcyclists have to be more careful not to turn into carnage themselves. basically safe for others vs safe for yourself.
It's to protect the everyone on the road, including the person in the pink plastic car. Rules on the road are different than the rules on private property.
Just a heads up this story is over two months old. That said, here are some key points:
Give the man a slurpee and a high five, not a DUI. What the fuck
He was driving on the sidewalk until it ended.
You mean in the end he was on the road? Because the picture looks like he's on the road and not the sidewalk.
Suspended license for having a previous dui, is it not?
I thought he'd ran over the actual Prince George for a minute until I read the article and realised it was a place
Thanks! I was somewhat confused before reading the article, too.
I now still have to find out what a "DUI" is...
Driving under influence. Of alcohol usually
So just a drunk doing stupid drunk things in traffic?
Not even half as funny any more...
Well, with a toy Barbie Jeep. The funny part is getting the DUI for driving a toy car, rather than for driving a real car (which is not funny and endangers others). This is akin to getting a ticket for walking drunk, because the toy car in question can't go very fast, nor does it fall over like a bicycle, so it's actually safer than drunk cycling.
I had a friend in college who was ticketed for riding his bike while drunk.
No, it’s Donkey’s Uncle Ian.
I know a guy that got a DUI riding a bicycle. This doesn't surprise me at all.
I know a guy who got a DUI for sleeping in his car.
Happened to a friend if mine.
Once it went to court his lawyer made the cop look like a tool.
Still cost him a bunch, just not an actual DUI.
Also had cops arrest a friend who was a passenger in a car, and tried to give him a DUI, too. The judge blasted that cop pretty bad.
ACAB
Class traitors.
Blast all they want, the cop will repeat his behavior because the judge will issue no fines or punishments to the cop
I'm way oversimplifying here:
Judges can only make decisions within their scope, the extent of the law, and on the evidence before them. They do have some jurisdiction within their court, like holding someone in contempt, but they can't convict when no charges have been laid.
Cops can be sued civilly, but since we're talking criminal law the charges would be determined by a crown. The problem is the whole criminal court process usually starts with cops arresting someone and presenting their reports, so good luck finding cops who will rat on a buddy. Or, a crown who wants to risk losing the cooperation of the police. I know one who moved to practice in another province after they went after an extremely corrupt detachment.
The CCLA has done a bunch of work taking up cases to hold cops accountable, but the whole judicial foundation isn't just cracked, it's crumbling. Ask any half decent crown, judge, or lawyer in private what they think of the police if you want to get stuck down a depressing rabbit hole.
Is the prince ok?
He probably would have gotten away with it but one of the Jeep's taillamps was out.
Pay the fine with Monopoly money.
Come on, Barbie, let's go party.
Why is this worse than driving an ebike? Do ebikes also need insurance to drive legally?
I thought this was (North) America!
Is the Prince okay?
Typical PG...
This sounds like a headline from The Day Today.