When I was 18, the allowable BAC was 0.15. Skill was a much bigger factor back then.

This is a similar ( albeit more complex) question to my contention regarding speed limits on major thoroughfare infrastructure.

I sometimes daydream about The following interchange between myself and a police officer that has pulled me over for speeding on BW8 or 99.
Officer: "Going a little fast aren't we?"
Me: "We'll officer, I suppose relative to the arbitrary posted speed limit, yes. But if the true concern is for the safety of myself and other motorists, I would argue that I am a much safer driver traveling at 80 mph fully engaged in the situational traffic awareness compared to driving at 60 to 65 miles an hour distracted by boredom."
Officer: "Touch. I'll be right back with your warning."

Ok enough of my whimsy. Gotta jet to my defensive driving class!

olib said:

---

When I was 18, the allowable BAC was 0.15. Skill was a much bigger factor back then.

---

Dang, you're old.

Martin Cash said:

---

olib said:

---

When I was 18, the allowable BAC was 0.15. Skill was a much bigger factor back then.

---

Dang, you're old.

---

It was lowered nationally to 0.1 about 1980.

I also don't understand how one can be charged with a DUI if they are drunk and sleeping in the backseat with the keys in their pocket. The logic is apparently "you have control of the vehicle", but you could make that case while a person is still in a bar.

Sims said:

---

Assuming you're being pulled over with probable cause, your skill level has already been tested and failed.

---

Not necessarily. They could've been watching you walk out of a bar and just assumed you had a few drinks.

Seven Costanza said:

---

I also don't understand how one can be charged with a DUI if they are drunk and sleeping in the backseat with the keys in their pocket. The logic is apparently "you have control of the vehicle", but you could make that case while a person is still in a bar.

---

Do you know someone who was arrested for DWI on those facts?

I agree. That is what the the Trooper instructor told them when he retested me after blowing .08 into the intoxilyzer. I had 6 outta 6 on HGN.

But I looked good on everything else and they were inexperienced.

At .06 I'm still golden. My reaction time might be diminished but I'm not driving like a maniac like when I haven't been drinking.

Martin Cash said:

---

Seven Costanza said:

---

I also don't understand how one can be charged with a DUI if they are drunk and sleeping in the backseat with the keys in their pocket. The logic is apparently "you have control of the vehicle", but you could make that case while a person is still in a bar.

---

Do you know someone who was arrested for DWI on those facts?

---

This is going to sound like complete BS, but we had a family friend ~58 year old female arrested and taken to jail on a Friday evening while approaching her car with her keys in hand. It happened in Plano, at The Shops Cops at Legacy. Now, she has money and a good lawyer that made that **** disappear, but it happened and cost her $$$ and time to fight it. Along with spending time in holding while they processed her.

Definitely Not A Cop said:

---

If Dale Earnhardt is a better driver after 6 beers than I am after 1, why does he have to go to jail and I'm good to keep on driving?

---

Because "beer goggles" do not allow you to see reality.

Martin Cash said:

---

Bubblez said:

---

Sims said:

---

Assuming you're being pulled over with probable cause, your skill level has already been tested and failed.

---

Burned out tail light at 3pm, no problem. Burned out tail light at 3am, you are being pulled over. "Probable cause" is very much abused.

---

That's probable cause for a traffic stop. It's not probable cause for DWI. He would have to develop probable cause for arrest on something he found after the stop, i.e. alcohol on the breath, open container etc.

And the term is DWI in Texas. DUI is someone under 21 with ANY detectable amount of alcohol in his system.

---

"I smell alcohol on your breath" is very much an open ended excuse whether it really does does or not. They say it does therefore it is. It's certainly not a barrier for a cop to trample over the constitution

What was she arrested for? Even a bad lawyer could have gotten a DWI charge dropped

Definitely Not A Cop said:

---

Sims said:

---

Assuming you're being pulled over with probable cause, your skill level has already been tested and failed.

---

Assuming the cop isn't camping out by a bar and pulling people over for specious things, of course. If a cop wants to pull you over, they can pretty much always find a reason.

---

Specious. You helped me learn a new word today. Good stuff, thanks.

BMX Bandit said:

---

What was she arrested for? Even a bad lawyer could have gotten a DWI charge dropped

---

I am not a lawyer, nor did I dig too much into the details, but she mentioned something to the effect that Texas has something called "actual physical control" that was used. I would defer to an actual attorney, but she said basically they told her since she had everything she needed to operate the vehicle, was approaching the vehicle, and was intoxicated...it was cause.

We fixed the keg said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

BAC is an objective measurement.

---

Which is why you never, ever, ever want to blow into a breathalyzer. You'll have to deal with the license suspension, but if you blow over the legal limit, you're hosed.

---

This.

About 2 years ago I bought a breathalyzer on Amazon as I wanted to do some research. I am a regular drinker and have been for over 30 years. I originally wanted to determine BAC for when I felt I was questionable to drive, vs reality. What I stumbled on, was evidence as to why the above poster is 100% spot on. Depending on what you drink, you can blow a MUCH higher BAC than what your BAC actually is. So,if you do a single shot, or straight liquor drink, and test your BAC @ 30 seconds, 1 minute, 2 minutes, and 5 minutes the device registers very high and rapidly drops up until about 10 minutes where it levels off to about what charts show. So, if you get stopped within 10-15 minutes of your last drink and take a breathalyzer, there is a very high chance it will report higher than your actual BAC.

If any of you are a heavier than casual drinker, I would say it is worth the $100 to get one and map yourself out. I was surprised to see how what I drank and at what pace was the difference between a .05 and .08.

---

Greatest "Username checks out" in the history of TexAgs.

Very odd. DWI requires "operating" a vehicle.

Definitely Not A Cop said:

---

If Dale Earnhardt is a better driver after 6 beers than I am after 1, why does he have to go to jail and I'm good to keep on driving?

---

And also, why are the drunk driving tests so hard?

Maybe there needs to be a breathalyzer test to start a new thread?

DWI - APC does not.

DWI requires someone to operate a motor vehicle, however, the Texas Penal Code doesn't define the term "operate".

Falling back to the Texas Administrative Code, s159.3 defines the word operate as:

Quote:

---

(14) Operate--To drive or be in actual physical control of a motor vehicle.

---

TexasRebel said:

---

DWI - APC does not.

---

What penal code section is that?

See the post above yours.

What is "APC"?

That's not the penal code, and the administrative code does not provide the definition for "operating" needed for a conviction that I've ever seen. Is there a case that says that?

Otherwise, you could get a DWI for sitting in your hood while waiting on an Uber. That's not the law

To show "operating" the circumstances must " 'demonstrate that the defendant took action to affect the functioning of his vehicle in a manner that would enable the vehicle's use.'

Simply walking towards the car is not enough. Getting in the driver seat with keys in ignition is.

Earnhardt died driving sober. RIP. So, I'm a better driver after 6 wobble pops…by default.

Pretty sure Dale Earnhardt went right when he should have gone left

Not the beat example

I guess google has you blocked?

https://www.okdui.com/duiactualphysicalcontrolchargeoklahoma.html

TexasRebel said:

---

I guess google has you blocked?

https://www.okdui.com/duiactualphysicalcontrolchargeoklahoma.html

---

Why would I Google Oklahoma when we the discussion i and the other poster having is of Texas law?

What part of this thread specifies Texas?

They also share a squirrelly border. Without a county, the incident in question could have happened to a Texan out of state.

So it's legal for me to shotgun a beer, throw it away, then drive home from work. But it's illegal for me to instead sip a beer as I drive home from work. Is that correct?

I have a buddy that was arrested and charged with a dwi on these facts years ago pre Uber. He went to a bar to watch a game and was over served. Rather than drive home, he cracked the windows, got in the back seat of his truck, and fell asleep. Around 3 am he awoke to the tapping of a maglite on his window. The cop asked him what he was doing sleeping in the backseat. He said he didn't think he should drive home and didn't have anyone who could give him a ride home and back to pick up his car the next day so he decided to sleep in the car. He was arrested for dwi. When he asked why he was being arrested when he had done the opposite of dwi the cop said being in the vehicle with the keys meant he had control of the vehicle in an intoxicated state.

double aught said:

---

So it's legal for me to shotgun a beer, throw it away, then drive home from work. But it's illegal for me to instead sip a beer as I drive home from work. Is that correct?

---

Yes, because MADD wanted to use a 20lb sledgehammer to swat a fly, and the small percentage of alcoholics DD's are asinine egregious repeat offenders that judges always seem to put back on the road too easily.

HTownAg98 said:

---

HollywoodBQ said:

---

A better question is, why .08?
Why not .10 or .05 or .20 or .02?

---

MADD.

---

everytime I see MADD, I think of DAM - Mothers Against Dyslexia

falconace said:

---

I have a buddy that was arrested and charged with a dwi on these facts years ago pre Uber. He went to a bar to watch a game and was over served. Rather than drive home, he cracked the windows, got in the back seat of his truck, and fell asleep. Around 3 am he awoke to the tapping of a maglite on his window. The cop asked him what he was doing sleeping in the backseat. He said he didn't think he should drive home and didn't have anyone who could give him a ride home and back to pick up his car the next day so he decided to sleep in the car. He was arrested for dwi. When he asked why he was being arrested when he had done the opposite of dwi the cop said being in the vehicle with the keys meant he had control of the vehicle in an intoxicated state.

---

I am interested in hearing more about this law.

My wife's cousin was arrested for this, but it was either due to the keys being in the ignition or him being in the driver's seat. According to her cousin, if he was in the backseat and/or no keys in the ignitions, he would have been fine. I don't know if this was in TX or CO, so the laws may differ.

Even this is pretty damn broad.

"demonstrate that the defendant took action to affect the functioning of his vehicle in a manner that would enable the vehicle's use"

walking up to your car and unlocking it with your keyless entry can be argued as an action required to enable the vehicle's use. Unlocking it impacts the functioning of the vehicle, and enables the driver to get in. Absent any other concrete guidance, its whatever the jury interprets.