I think that anyone who visits a bar should be responsible enough to curb their consumption to insure they don't drive drunk.
Once the person hits the street while driving the car...it's too late!
To say this effort would be entrapment is incorrect and one individual needs to learn the definition of it!
Entrapment would be where the government attempts to lure someone into performing a previously or otherwise uncontemplated illegal act.
For instance, if the government took the patron into the bar...insured the patron had plenty to drink by purchasing enough beverage to get them drunk...then gave them the keys to drive their car and then arrested them for drunk driving....that's entrapment!
Driving under the influence of alcohol or intoxicants is a serious matter and yet people still recklessly take other drivers lives into their own hands when operating a vehicle while drunk!
It's a sad way of dealing with the issue by avoiding a responsible way of insuring the safety of all motorists.
2007-09-05 07:03:42
·
answer #1
·
answered by KC V ™ 7
·
5⤊
0⤋
Technically, NO. At the point in time you're speaking of, there exists NO probable cause to arrest the subject. If a police officer makes any independant observations of the subject's behavior that makes him believe that the person is intox, then once the individual starts his car, the officer may make an arrest or require an intoxilizer be given. The police have what's called an Alcosensor or SD2, which is a portable intoxilizer to see if someone is intox while in the field.
But your questions are split, you're asking about criminal liability (driving while intox) and then you mention civil liability for the bar. They are completely independant of one another. Also keep in mind that a bar cannot detain someone who's intox, unless they've already broken the law.
2007-09-05 13:55:57
·
answer #2
·
answered by LawGunGuy 3
·
5⤊
0⤋
I think they should have them at the exits of all bars for people to use.. free of charge!!! Imagine how many dui's, accidents, and deaths could be prevented if they did that!! What a great idea..... How can we get something like that going??
I think it's important because noone realizes the amount of alcohol it takes before you can get a dui. People think you have to be falling over, sloppy drunk to get a dui. You can be buzzed and get one after just a couple drinks. It happened to ME... I only had two drinks and thought I was fine to drive and I got pulled over and blew a .1. over the limit... I never thought I would the way I was feeling. I pretty much felt normal and got one. THey really need to put those breathalyzers in bars!!! I hope they do....... I just learned a big lesson from my arrest... I don't plan on even having one drink and driving ever again.
2007-09-05 13:57:41
·
answer #3
·
answered by linz 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Great idea. Unfortunately the ACLU would have a hissy fit over that. It would be considered an invasion of privacy.
I have been chewed out before for parking in lot next to a bar's parking lot and waiting for the drunks to stumble out to their cars. My excuse was that I was just waiting in a target rich environment, the drunks and the brass said I was harrassing them through intimidation and scaring away customers.
2007-09-05 16:06:22
·
answer #4
·
answered by Charlie Fingers 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
Like a Fed Ex guy delivering a carton of napkins? Everybody that comes out of bar isn't necessarily impaired.
2007-09-05 13:55:15
·
answer #5
·
answered by nileslad 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
yes, lets take away all personal responsibilities....before you have sex someone should check to make sure you are wearing a condom, before you go swimming someone should check to make sure that you haven't eaten in the last 30 miutes, etc., etc., etc..............
2007-09-05 13:56:10
·
answer #6
·
answered by bubba 4
·
3⤊
2⤋
No, that is what i consider entrapment. Which is illegal
2007-09-05 13:55:27
·
answer #7
·
answered by kelly 2
·
0⤊
4⤋
Yes, yes, and yes!
2007-09-05 13:54:44
·
answer #8
·
answered by bonstermonster20 6
·
2⤊
3⤋