Drunk But Not Driving

outoftheknow

Where it is legal to drive with autopilot, AFAIK the legislation will state the driver is responsible. I know there are high level discussions amongst boffins arguing if a car can be responsible once you reach true autonomous cars, but I haven’t heard of a law anywhere yet that says it isn’t the drivers fault.

I won’t alert GZ but I am fairly sure Tesla would take umbrage in people thinking their (full where legal) autopilot worked “the same as others”. It is designed to work with driver intervention being to tell it where to go and getting out when you get there. Design wise it can then head off and find a park by itself and you call it back on the phone or remote or something like that.

None of this is enabled where illegal and I am not sure where it is is legal - certainly not the UK nor Oz! (Edit - and you have to have pay for it if course )

The Dreamer

AFAIK, you don’t have to be driving to be ‘done’ for being ‘drunk while in charge of a motor vehicle’ - not exactly the same as being ‘driving under the influence’, but close enough - the end result is the same - at least in the U.K. (Don’t know the exact names of the charges, hence the ‘single quotes’)

I had a mate that was going to follow our local hunt to take photographs (for the hunt, not as a saboteur). Anyway, the hunt was due to set off very early in the morning, so he decided to find himself a good spot, and camp overnight in his car.

Having had a few tinnys to aid his sleep, he settled down in the passenger seat, in a sleeping bag, for the night. He was woken by a tap on the window by one of the police officers assigned to oversee the hunt, initially to check he wasn’t a trouble maker.

The officer could smell his breath and saw the empty cans in the footwell. He was asked where the car keys were, and my mate pulled them from his pocket. That was enough to get him a year ban, as he was deemed ‘in charge’ of the motor vehicle while unfit due drink - despite having made no attempt, or having any intention, of driving said vehicle!

I don’t imagine the law has changed in the last 20 years.

Foster

What if they were in the boot?

IronGiant

The reasoning is clear, so long as you possess the keys and you are in the vehicle you are deemed to be in charge of it. And the offence is "drunk in charge" where the onus of proof is on the defendant to demonstrate that they could not possibly drive it while under the influence.

Tomdw82

You’d have to show you had no intention of being in control - such as by handing the keys to someone else (who wasn’t over the limit) who perhaps hid them in the boot.

IronGiant

Or call yourself Katie Price

nvingo

So a vehicle which required a clear breathalyser reading in order to start, would be fine whilst the drunk person in charge was alone; once a Police Officer on duty shows an interest an offence is then being committed:
"Officer, I'll prove it works, look I'll provide a breath sample and demonstrate it won't start, then you provide a breath sample and I'll demonstrate it does start."
...Brrrrmmm.

arenaman

It's not that they "could not possibly drive it" but that there was "no likelihood of them actually driving it" at the time they were alleged to have committed the offence.

IronGiant

Thanks for the clarification