Can the police pull you over for sleeping in the car?

[sangha]

It doesn't prove intent to drive. It proves intent to use the car and the car has other operations that require the key to be in the ignition. They have to prove intent to drive, but simply sitting in the car even the driver's seat with the keys in or even the car on doesn't prove that they intended to drive the car. (If the car is on though, not just alternate power, then you have less of a doubt.) The people do have to prove that beyond a reasonable doubt though that there was intent to drive, not simply sit in the car. Or should. Unfortunately thanks to special interest groups many states have simply made it law that you can't do that.

I think reasonable people could come to either conclusion.

And the interest of those "special interest" groups is to stop drunks from killing people with their cars. It's not what I would call a profitable activity.

 

[roguenuke]

I think reasonable people could come to either conclusion.

And the interest of those "special interest" groups is to stop drunks from killing people with their cars. It's not what I would call a profitable activity.

Those groups go too far. Those that kill people driving drunk are generally not the ones who would make a decision to sleep in their car rather than drive home. An interest group doesn't have to be profitable for it to be something that goes too far. It can simply be too emotionally set with their own crusade to end something they deem to be wrong.

 

[sangha]

Those groups go too far. Those that kill people driving drunk are generally not the ones who would make a decision to sleep in their car rather than drive home. An interest group doesn't have to be profitable for it to be something that goes too far. It can simply be too emotionally set with their own crusade to end something they deem to be wrong.

Possibly

Or maybe they're just concerned about those who get caught just before they were going to drive drunk and weasel out of it due to some technicality like they hadn't started the car yet, or they passed out before they were able to risk other people's lives.

I just can't get worked up over some idiot who spends all their money in a bar and then can't afford to take a taxi home. Maybe that's a character flaw of mine.

 

[roguenuke]

Possibly

Or maybe they're just concerned about those who get caught just before they were going to drive drunk and weasel out of it due to some technicality like they hadn't started the car yet, or they passed out before they were able to risk other people's lives.

I just can't get worked up over some idiot who spends all their money in a bar and then can't afford to take a taxi home. Maybe that's a character flaw of mine.

I see the other things that people worry about. I don't have to agree with people's choices to feel that they shouldn't be punished for what they might do or be doing when in reality they aren't putting anyone in danger, no matter how it may look to others.

 

[Brooks]

Many accidents are caused by people having strokes and heart attacks.

Shouldn't anyone with high cholesterol or had a heart attack in the past have their license permanent suspended?

Accidents are caused by people who's ashtray starts smoking. Shouldn't anyone smoking in a car be arrested?

Accidents are also caused by people distracted due to messing with the stereo. Shouldn't it be illegal to have a stereo on in a vehicle while driving?

If any student falls asleep in school or employee falls asleep at work, teachers and employers should be required to report this to the state DOT, which would suspend the person's license pending a hearing to determine if that happened. If it did, the person's license should be permanent suspended since the person clearly is a deadly threat on the road.

Additionally, GPS and cellular should be connected to all vehicles' black boxes and any violate of any traffic law reported automatically and the person then ticketed. Prior to starting the vehicle and randomly while traveling, the driver should be required to blow into a biometric activated breathalizer - and a camera in the car pointed at the driver's seat to insure the person is who took the breathalizer.

If any light on a vehicle or warning light of a vehicle comes on, the vehicle should automatically be capable of being driven only in 2nd gear or reverse and for no more than 30 minutes.

There is no expectation of privacy in a car, driving is a privilege not a right, and violating traffic laws is illegal whether anyone was endangered or not, for which all traffic laws should be enforced strictly and universally. If a person changes lanes without signaling or enters or exits a driveway without first signalling, not coming to a complete stop if exiting any parking lot, that person should be ticketed. The same for wandering out of your lane, not coming to a complete stop when required to, changing lanes in an intersection, speeding, driving under the minimum speed limit, and following closer than 1 car length per 10 miles per hour. No exceptions nor tolerance should be allowed for any motor vehicle being started or operated where it is not demonstrated there is no danger by the driver or the vehicle.

A for effort, but merely exaggerating existing laws does nothing to challenge their credibility.

Each automatic ticket causes a 1 week license suspension. 4 automatic tickets by the black box monitoring system within a year and the vehicle can no longer be operated, the person's license is suspended for 10 years and the car becomes illegal contraband and an instrument of crime thus owned by the state.

Automatic ticket for what offense?
Where is this true?