Uncle has turned me into a litterbug.
Ive chucked empty beer bottles out the window. I do not like doing this. I feel guilty about doing this. I never used to do this.
So why do I do it now?
Because having an open container or an empty one in ones car invites severe (and for me, a car journalist, life-altering) consequences. If one happens to be pulled over by a cop for any random reason (seatbelt violation, speeding, an out-of-date sticker) and he sees an open or empty in the car, you are in serious trouble.
Better call Saul.
Even if the empty has been empty for weeks.
Even if all youve had is a sip and your BAC level is nowhere near the legal limit defining drunk driving.
It doesnt matter.
You still face the possibility of being charged with drinking while driving or driving under the influence whatever the verbiage and are subject to arrest and prosecution just as you would be if you blew a .08 or more on the Breathalyzer (see here for an interesting legal explanation/analysis) machine.
Except you didnt.
Not being drunk isnt a defense.
All thats required to establish your guilt is the presence in the car of the open/empty container even if its not yours. Even if you didnt have so much as a sip.
You are presumed guilty of drinking while driving by dint of the presence of the container and it being opened or empty.
This is not unlike characterizing an 18-year-old as a sex offender because he had relations with his 17-year-old girlfriend.
Sober drivers are subject to being arrested and convicted and their lives ruined for what amounts to the same offense in terms of what will happen to them as drivers whose BAC levels are at or beyond the legal threshold defining them as drunk.
Even though theirs arent.
Hence the motivation to throw any empties out the window.
Littering is a small bust.
Clovers (see here) will sniff that people simply ought not to drink alcohol while driving, ever, regardless of the amount. But the presence of a bottle in the car does not establish that the driver has been drinking. Only that someone did. At some point. Maybe a long time ago.
But even if the driver was drinking, so what?
Its ok legal for me to drive after having a meal with a beer to wash it down. I could walk up to a cop, tell him I am going over to that restaurant across the street to have a steak and plan to have a beer with that steak. And then drive home. The cop if he is a vengeful dick could perhaps pull me over to check whether Ive had more than one beer, but provided my BAC level is under the limit, provided he cannot fault my driving, he can do nothing to me, legally speaking.
Why should it matter whether I drink the same beer on the way home?
My BAC will be about the same well within the lawful range, either way.
And if that BAC isnt at the drunk driving threshold (.08) whats the problem?
Especially if its well below the threshold.
Open container or not.
Well, heres the problem:
Clovers equate the presence of any alcohol whatever in ones system with drunk driving and are positively itching to imprison people for this offense. But they know its not yet politically palatable to cage people for having even trace amounts of alcohol in their systems, so they dont say this openly.
Instead, they shriek about open containers.
But isnt it the same thing?
These victims and thats the right word arent being caged for drunkenness. They are being caged for drinking.
Open container laws are in force in almost every state egged on by Uncle, who uses the bully stick of withholding federal highway monies to cage people who arent drunk (or even close to it) according to any of the current standards (BAC levels, roadside gymnastic exercises) by which impairment is measured; who have nil or practically nil BAC levels.
Who dont even have to have been drinking to get convicted of drinking.
They merely had an open container in the car.
Doesnt matter whether they had just as sip. Five minutes ago or five weeks ago.
Or not at all.
Just that it is open. Or that it once contained alcohol.
In other words, mere possession of the open alcohol container is the thing. This is what presumes impairment even if the driver isnt and the usual tests reveal him to be well within the law.
The open container thing is simply a tactical tacit step toward outright Prohibition. Thats the end goal. The eventual criminalization of alcohol consumption in any amount within the nimbus of the operation of a motor vehicle.
This objective has been openly stated by the uber Clovers at Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD). And they have succeeded with regard to drivers under the age of 21. It is already zero tolerance for them.
Eventually, for us, too.
Some may see this as a good thing, the usual mantras about safety wafting through the air. But were far from safe when the state can convict you of drinking while driving even when you havent been and can convict you of being a drunk when all youve had is a drink.
Or even just a sip.





#1: Gatlin To: Deckard (#0)
A case of being damned if you do something and again being damned if you do something else. You are damned for driving with an open container in your vehicle and you are damned if you litter. A seemingly complex problem where a moronic Paultard tries to avoid the violation of one law by violating another law has a very simple solution do neither!
States with Littering Penalties
How to report littering from vehicle
Gatlin posted on 2016-06-28 07:27:37 Reply Private Reply
#2: Deckard To: Gatlin (#1)
I had no expectation that you would see the absurdity of this law.
Which is why you will always be ridiculed as a *Clover, or in terms even you can understand, *Canary -
The root cause of every affront to liberty. The spoonful of shit that ruins a gallon of ice cream. Canaries do not believe in live and let live. They believe in telling others how to live at gunpoint, if necessary.
Fawning sycophants like you and the other statist filth that infest this site are the enemies of freedom.
Which is why you are deserving of nothing more than scorn and ridicule.
Deckard posted on 2016-06-28 08:10:16 Reply Private Reply
#3: Gatlin To: Deckard (#2)
No one should "drink and drive" ... then throw the container out of the vehicle to liter.
If that makes me "deserving of nothing more that scorn and ridicule," then so be it.
Gatlin posted on 2016-06-28 08:43:12 Reply Private Reply
#4: Gatlin To: Deckard (#2)
Gatlin posted on 2016-06-28 08:54:18 Reply Private Reply
#5: Deckard To: Gatlin (#3)
As usual, in your haste to strut your Nazi credentials, you missed the entire point of the article.
Oh well - I've long ago realized that anything which threatens or challenges your statist world view is something you cower in fear from.
If that makes me "deserving of nothing more that scorn and ridicule," then so be it.
And I will continue to do so at every opportunity.
Deckard posted on 2016-06-28 08:54:24 Reply Private Reply
#6: Gatlin To: Deckard (#5)
I missed nothing.
If the author doesn't like the laws, then work to get those laws changed.
Writing a "stupid parody" did absolutely nothing ... NOTHING!
What constructive gain did the article contribute?
Gatlin posted on 2016-06-28 09:00:25 Reply Private Reply
#7: Deckard To: Gatlin (#4)
With all due respect, anyone who believes that an open bottle, even when empty, possibly for weeks is grounds for a DWI is seriously fucked up in the head.
Which is why I will continue to mock your views and those of the other government-worshiping assclowns who pollute this site with their unbridled statism.
Deckard posted on 2016-06-28 09:03:49 Reply Private Reply
#8: A K A Stone To: Gatlin (#6)
A K A Stone posted on 2016-06-28 09:07:51 Reply Private Reply
#9: Deckard To: Gatlin (#6)
For one thing, it made you crawl out of your hole in order to display your worship of the almighty State.
I post articles like this in order to show the sane people here what you and the other members of the Canary Clan represent.
Your views are contemptible, your very presence on a site devoted to Liberty is abhorhent.
Deckard posted on 2016-06-28 09:11:16 Reply Private Reply
#10: Gatlin To: Deckard (#7)
CORRECTION: With all due respect, anyone who keeps an open or empty vottle for weeks in his vehicle is either a trashy SOB or a Paultard, both of which are seriously fucked up in the head.
Gatlin posted on 2016-06-28 09:12:18 Reply Private Reply
#11: Gatlin To: Deckard (#9)
Gatlin posted on 2016-06-28 09:13:05 Reply Private Reply
#12: Gatlin To: Deckard (#9)
If I am contemptible because I reject your immoral, warped and abhorrent views on what you construe to be liberty then so be it.
Your anarchy is not my liberty ...
Gatlin posted on 2016-06-28 09:25:45 Reply Private Reply
#13: Gatlin To: A K A Stone (#8)
No.
And if you check, you will find in most states that it is not.
Some states still have stupid laws that need to be changed to realistically define "drinking and driving."
I never heard of a REED'S Apple Ale ... I had to go look it up.
Have you ever tried Gertel?
Gatlin posted on 2016-06-28 09:28:40 Reply Private Reply
#14: A K A Stone To: Gatlin (#13)
A K A Stone posted on 2016-06-28 09:35:47 Reply Private Reply
#15: Gatlin To: A K A Stone (#14)
I had to look it up since I never heard of REEDS. I did not see the strawberry.
I was only a beer drinker in the military. I gave it up some 15 to 20 years ago and switched to Gerstel. I wasn't drinking beer to get high, I was drinking it because of a taste I cultivated while stationed in Germany and Austria ... having one with a meal.
Most non-alcoholic beers tastes terrible. The only one I found to be excellent is Gerstel, a German non-alcoholic beer. Taking the blindfold taste test, one will find there is no difference in Gerstel and a premium beer.
I now have a Gerstel with the evening meal each day.
Gatlin posted on 2016-06-28 10:36:34 Reply Private Reply
#16: nativist nationalist To: Gatlin (#1)
The Paultard's should just stick to smoking pot, that way they do not have the unsolvable riddle of what to do with the empty beer bottle. I'm surprised they're not touting this is another point in favor of marijuana.
nativist nationalist posted on 2016-06-28 11:32:47 Reply Private Reply
#17: Deckard To: nativist nationalist (#16)
I can't help but laugh at your ignorant comment.
So - I guess you agree with with the other statist twat posting on this thread that an empty bottle constitutes evidence of drunk driving.
And you wonder why you are mocked by those of us who do not worship the police state like you and Gatslime apparently do.
Deckard posted on 2016-06-28 13:07:43 Reply Private Reply
#18: Gatlin To: Deckard, nativist nationalist (#17)
You are still confused about everything in your life.
It is you who fails to see who is mocking whom.
Oh, the irony ...
Gatlin posted on 2016-06-28 13:29:10 Reply Private Reply
#19: TrappedInMd To: Deckard (#0)
Yet if you have no car trunk its illegal to do that, I think,.
New York Open Container laws prohibit open alcohol containers in the passenger area or an unlocked glove box where it can easily be reached by the driver and/or passengers. The law applies to all types of containers (i.e., bottles, cans, cups) and all alcoholic beverages, including wine, beer and liquors that contain at least one-half of one percent of alcohol by volume. All vehicles on a public highway, including the shoulder, are subject to the open container law.
New York Open Container Laws
TrappedInMd posted on 2016-06-28 14:32:00 Reply Private Reply
#20: Hondo68 To: Gatlin (#18)
Yes, there's no doubt that you are.
Carry on, you must be used to it by now.
Hondo68 posted on 2016-06-28 16:22:53 Reply Private Reply
#21: Gatlin To: hondo68 (#20)
Sport, you are more that confused you are an embarrassing demoralization to even consider such a person.
Gatlin posted on 2016-06-28 16:38:54 Reply Private Reply
#22: Hondo68 To: Gatlin, A K A Stone, *The Two Parties ARE the Same* (#21)
Even though GJ is less ghey than your beloved progressive candidates Rainbow Mitt & Donald D. Tranny, I don't support Johnson. Stone knows this too, but he keeps saying that I do, anyway. He too, has trouble facing reality.
I'll most likely vote for Darrell Castle (Constitution Party) for the second time. The first was in 2008 as the VP running mate to Chuck Baldwin.
It's a damn shame that you supported Barack Hussein Obama, by voting for that psycho loser Juan McCain. And then supported Obama again by voting for the even bigger loser, anchor-baby Willie-Mitt Romney. And now you're pushing Hillary...
Hondo68 posted on 2016-06-28 17:47:14 Reply Private Reply
#23: Gatlin To: hondo68 (#22)
Gatlin posted on 2016-06-28 18:01:53 Reply Private Reply
#24: A K A Stone To: hondo68 (#22)
A K A Stone posted on 2016-06-28 20:28:12 Reply Private Reply
#25: GrandIsland To: A K A Stone (#8)
Does a rookie officer, idiot officer (that never should have been hired) or poorly trained officer ever write the ticket of open container for an old dead soldier? Sure. Happens RARELY compared to all the solid deserving tickets for actual open containers. Decktard would like your readers to think issuing false open container tickets is an epidemic... and that's the yella he portrays to cause LE distrust and hate to further his pro drug agenda.
Now, with that said, I've never been a fan of the open container law. Who cares if someone in the vehicle is drinking a beer... even the driver, AS LONG AS THE DRIVER IS SOBER. It is possible to drink one beer and still be sober. For this reason, the only time I issued open container tickets is when they actually did have an open container AND the driver was drunk. Otherwise I made them dump the beer out and continue on their way.
GrandIsland posted on 2016-06-28 21:44:03 Reply Private Reply
#26: buckeroo To: GrandIsland (#25)
buckeroo posted on 2016-06-28 22:02:57 Reply Private Reply
#27: GrandIsland To: hondo68 (#22)
That's some mighty fine deranged logic you got there... How was voting for your unviable Paultard choice in anyway keeping the Chicago urban zoo animal out of the whitehouse?
Go F' yourself. If we never had 8 years of Obunghole, we wouldn't have:
ObungholeCare
Sotomayer the white man hating cunt
Kagan the libtard twat
KILLary the bimbo of Benghazi as SOS
Uncle Joe Biden the gun hater
Riots of black lives matter scum
Riots of illegal aliens
The most active gunman victims of any sitting pres
Faggot bathrooms in schools or no state funding
And all his arrogant fucking bullshit I've gotta hear every time that piece of shit speaks on TV.
I'd rather of had another 4 years of GW... though he waa no Ronald Reagan, he was WAY BETTER than Obunghole, KILLary or Commie Sanders.
I'll take TRUMP all day long... you have fun supporting that no-name candidate.
GrandIsland posted on 2016-06-28 22:18:37 Reply Private Reply
#28: GrandIsland To: buckeroo (#26)
Stone gets my respect. You, Decktard, Hondope, Peter Puff, Fred's Dick Hertz, ConservingPaultard and a host of other drug addict loving shitbirds don't deserve anything other than the way any of you would treat any officer before the officer even opens his mouth.
GrandIsland posted on 2016-06-28 22:32:33 Reply Private Reply
#29: buckeroo To: GrandIsland (#28)
buckeroo posted on 2016-06-28 22:38:11 Reply Private Reply
#30: GrandIsland To: buckeroo (#29)
If I thought you'd use it, I'd toss you a knife. You could either turn it upon yourself (and make me piss my pants happy)... or make me even happier if you turn it upon me and I show you what happens when you bring a knife to a gun fight. lol
GrandIsland posted on 2016-06-28 22:46:53 Reply Private Reply
#31: Hondo68 To: GrandIsland, *Arab Spring Jihad*, Fred Mertz, sneakypete (#28)
Get well soon! You need a dry out in your local rehab, Ahab.
Hondo68 posted on 2016-06-28 22:47:03 Reply Private Reply
#32: buckeroo To: GrandIsland (#30)
When did this maejeckal event occur? Citing Trump does not count.
buckeroo posted on 2016-06-28 23:20:49 Reply Private Reply
#33: nativist nationalist To: Gatlin, Deckard (#18)
LOL. If he just practiced what he constantly preaches he'd be using marijuana in which the container is mostly consumed as the Paultard smoke their joint. Avoiding the dilemma altogether. Paultards should be using this in their paeans to Mary Jane. I's surprised Decktard is overlooking the obvious, but he may have been stoned as he typed his post.
nativist nationalist posted on 2016-06-29 02:06:25 Reply Private Reply
#34: nativist nationalist To: Deckard (#17)
nativist nationalist posted on 2016-06-29 02:31:39 Reply Private Reply
#35: nativist nationalist To: hondo68 (#31)
nativist nationalist posted on 2016-06-29 02:35:30 Reply Private Reply
#36: Deckard To: nativist nationalist (#35)
Thanks in advance.
Deckard posted on 2016-06-29 07:57:06 Reply Private Reply
#37: Deckard To: nativist nationalist (#34)
The only thing you've "triggered" is a fit of laughter which occurs every time I read one of your ludicrous posts.
Deckard posted on 2016-06-29 08:01:16 Reply Private Reply
#38: ConservingFreedom To: GrandIsland (#27)
In my deep-blue state, Chuck Baldwin had no less chance than Juan McLame at getting those electoral votes.
ConservingFreedom posted on 2016-06-30 12:05:15 Reply Private Reply