[SmackinLips]

I thought this was interesting. The same exact laws as driving a car drunk applies to boaters. Well, a neighbor of mine, got hit with a DUI while boating. They randomly chose his boat, they were parked and anchored, but he owned the boat, and everyone was drunk. They wrote him because he had possession of the keys, and access to drive the boat, and they consider that "being in control of the vehicle". So just like a car in Arizona, if you have possession of the keys, you can be written for a DUI. Sounds strange if the motor vehicle is not moving, but it is th law, I checked this morning. I always thought you had to be driving to get a DUI. Just thought I would pass this tid bit along. Seems strange, but it is the law, I called and checked this AM, and they repeated what my friend said, that if you have the keys to a boat or a car, then will give you a DUI, and many get DUIs this way.

28-1381 - Driving or actual physical control while under the influence; trial by jury; presumptions; admissible evidence; sentencing; classification

 

[SmackinLips]

http://www.arizonaduicenter.com/dui-law/dui-categories/#top
Strange, My neighbor got DUI, Maricopa County said they can nail you, but the boating DUI law says something different. I think they should leave people alone who are parked. The law says underway, not parked. Oh well.

Boating DUI (OUI)

This charge is codified in A.R.S. 5-395, which states:
A. It is unlawful for any person to operate or be in actual physical control of a motorized watercraft that is underway within this state under any of the following circumstances:

1. While under the influence of intoxicating liquor, any drug, a vapor-releasing substance containing a toxic substance, or any combination of liquor, drugs or vapor-releasing substances if the person is impaired to the slightest degree.
2. If the person has an alcohol concentration of 0.08 percent or higher within two hours of operating or being in actual physical control of the motorized watercraft and the alcohol concentration results from alcohol consumed before or while operating or being in actual physical control of the motorized watercraft.
3. While there is any drug as defined in section 13-3401 or its metabolite in the person’s body.
4. If the motorized watercraft is a commercial motorized watercraft and the person has an alcohol concentration of 0.04 percent or more.

B. It is not a defense to a charge of a violation of subsection A, paragraph 1 of this section that the person is or has been entitled to use the drug under the laws of this state. A person using a drug prescribed by a medical practitioner licensed pursuant to title 32, chapter 7, 11, 13 or 17 is not guilty of violating subsection A, paragraph 3 of this section.
C. In any trial, action or proceeding for a violation of this section or section 5-396, other than a trial, action or proceeding involving operating or being in actual physical control of a commercial motorized watercraft, the defendant’s alcohol concentration within two hours of the time of operating or being in actual physical control as shown by analysis of the defendant’s blood, breath or other bodily substance gives rise to the following presumptions:

1. If there was, at that time, 0.05 percent or lower alcohol concentration in the defendant’s blood, breath or other bodily substance, it may be presumed that the defendant was not under the influence of intoxicating liquor.
2. If there was, at that time, in excess of 0.05 percent but less than 0.08 alcohol concentration in the defendant’s blood, breath or other bodily substance, such fact shall not give rise to any presumption that the defendant was or was not under the influence of intoxicating liquor, but such fact may be considered with other competent evidence in determining the guilt or innocence of the defendant.
3. If there was, at that time, 0.08 percent or higher alcohol concentration in the defendant’s blood, breath or other bodily substance, it may be presumed that the defendant was under the influence of intoxicating liquor.

 

[BubbaCat]

a breathalizer to start your boat .:cowboy: lol

 

[brianthelion02]

And the LEO's sure get mad when all they find in youre cooler is Dr Pepper's!! LMAO!

 

[SmackinLips]

a breathalizer to start your boat .:cowboy: lol

That would be funny.

 

[SmackinLips]

And the LEO's sure get mad when all they find in youre cooler is Dr Pepper's!! LMAO!

Yep, what they don't know is we hide the flask of Shine.

 

[Guest]

1 thing is for sure they will never find Sailor Jerrys on my Boat...:Nop:

 

[Snagged2]

1 thing is for sure they will never find Sailor Jerrys on my Boat...:Nop:

Well,, If you think you're just going to pour it out,,, I wouldn't,,
,It would set the lake on FIRE!!!:liquor::biggrin:

 

[flathead-40]

QUESTION iN A CAR IF YOU HAVE TO MUCH TO DRINK AND SLEEP IT OFF THEY SAY TO REMOVE KEYS FROM THE SWITCH AND PUT THEM OUT OF DRIVERS REACH-WHERE WOULD YOU PUT THEM IN A BOAT?:dont-know::confused1::confused1:

I thought this was interesting. The same exact laws as driving a car drunk applies to boaters. Well, a neighbor of mine, got hit with a DUI while boating. They randomly chose his boat, they were parked and anchored, but he owned the boat, and everyone was drunk. They wrote him because he had possession of the keys, and access to drive the boat, and they consider that "being in control of the vehicle". So just like a car in Arizona, if you have possession of the keys, you can be written for a DUI. Sounds strange if the motor vehicle is not moving, but it is th law, I checked this morning. I always thought you had to be driving to get a DUI. Just thought I would pass this tid bit along. Seems strange, but it is the law, I called and checked this AM, and they repeated what my friend said, that if you have the keys to a boat or a car, then will give you a DUI, and many get DUIs this way. QUESTION iN A CAR IF YOU HAVE TO MUCH TO DRINK AND SLEEP IT OFF THEY SAY TO REMOVE KEYS FROM THE SWITCH AND PUT THEM OUT OF DRIVERS REACH-WHERE WOULD YOU PUT THEM IN A BOAT?:dont-know::confused1::confused1:

28-1381 - Driving or actual physical control while under the influence; trial by jury; presumptions; admissible evidence; sentencing; classification

 

[BubbaCat]

tie to anchor .:cowboy:

 

[Guest]

well I got nothing to worry about, I drink Bud Lite when on the lake:Happy:I drink real beer at home:Happy:

 

[flathead-40]

I know with a car they say toss the keys under the car but with a boat that would be a big awshi*.

 

[Phillp]

I went through this with the police a while ago. It ruined my life.
I got pulled over because the cop said he thought I was in a suspicious neighborhood and I might be under the influence of drugs. I had been drinking earlier in the day but a lot of time had passed so I thought I was alright so I told the officer I would submit to a blood test as it would exonerate me totally. We get to the station, and he changes his tune, wanting to make me take his field sobriety tests and generally threatening me. I told him I was innocent and would be proved so in a court of law. So I lose my license for a year even though I wasnt charged. I thought they would give it back as innocent until proven guilty, right? Wrong.
Turns out they can charge you if you have ANYTHING in your system in ANY amount. So its in their best interest to have you do the field sobriety test and charge you with DUI to the slightest degree. If you smoke a joint on the weekend and are on your way to work monday, and the officer says you have red eyes, lack of coordination etc. you can be charged. You drink one beer and the officer says you appear to be impaired, even though you blow a .02 you can and will be charged with DUI to the slightest degree which is the same as .08 and costs around 5k in fines and court fees not to mention the loss of rights, insurance costs, intoxylizer bs on your car....
Modern day witchhunt with no end in sight.

 

[rrssmith]

I went through this with the police a while ago. It ruined my life.
I got pulled over because the cop said he thought I was in a suspicious neighborhood and I might be under the influence of drugs. I had been drinking earlier in the day but a lot of time had passed so I thought I was alright so I told the officer I would submit to a blood test as it would exonerate me totally. We get to the station, and he changes his tune, wanting to make me take his field sobriety tests and generally threatening me. I told him I was innocent and would be proved so in a court of law. So I lose my license for a year even though I wasnt charged. I thought they would give it back as innocent until proven guilty, right? Wrong.
Turns out they can charge you if you have ANYTHING in your system in ANY amount. So its in their best interest to have you do the field sobriety test and charge you with DUI to the slightest degree. If you smoke a joint on the weekend and are on your way to work monday, and the officer says you have red eyes, lack of coordination etc. you can be charged. You drink one beer and the officer says you appear to be impaired, even though you blow a .02 you can and will be charged with DUI to the slightest degree which is the same as .08 and costs around 5k in fines and court fees not to mention the loss of rights, insurance costs, intoxylizer bs on your car....
Modern day witchhunt with no end in sight.

Moral of the story.......dont drink and drive....Being hammered drunk is one thing but just blowing a .02 is another that would amount to a sip!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Plus it makes good money for the state

 

[aces70#er]

Moral of the story.......dont drink and drive....Being hammered drunk is one thing but just blowing a .02 is another that would amount to a sip!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Plus it makes good money for the state

god knows they need the money. i dont use it for anything $$.

 

[Phillp]

Moral of the story.......dont drink and drive....Being hammered drunk is one thing but just blowing a .02 is another that would amount to a sip!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Plus it makes good money for the state

Moral of the story is our government is waging a war on our personal freedom.

 

[Iowa_Josh]

Yeah. I don't care for organizations like MADD or the American Lung Association. Having acheived their original goals, they don't disband (they'd lose their jobs) so they lobby for laws that are irritating. Eventually your local congress throws them a yes vote so people know they don't just bicker all the time.

 

[rrssmith]

Moral of the story is our government is waging a war on our personal freedom.

since when has drinking and driving been a personal freedom? Your'e still free to drive just not after you been drinking.

 

[Phillp]

since when has drinking and driving been a personal freedom? Your'e still free to drive just not after you been drinking.

We can extrapolate that logic into many areas. Big brother thinks you may commit a crime with a firearm, no guns. You may use the internet to commit terrorism, so they censor you or eavesdrop. Fact is, drinking and driving shouldnt be a crime. Drinking excessively and smashing your car head on into a family is. Its called personal responsibility and morality, something the government cant legislate. Arresting someone for drinking in an anchored boat is like arresting someone for murder for possessing a switchblade and if you cant see that, well....

 

[Mark J]

Yea, charging and convicting a person on what they might do is BS.
Be like charging me for murder because I own a nice tactical quality rifle and have it on my person.