2 Men In Austin, TX Busted For DWI Involving A Horse And Buggy

Just when you think you've heard it all, along comes this item from Austin's KLTV by way of Gather.com and Bing:

Quote :

AUSTIN, TX (CNN) - Two men are arrest in Austin for DWI...but here's the unusual part, they were riding a horse and mule.

Jose Rios and his sidekick Olivio parked their horse trailer near I-35 and 12th street Friday night.

They rode their mule and horse down to 6th Street inviting people to take pictures with them and their 4-legged beasts.

Rios appeared to be so intoxicated that he couldn't even finish his sobriety test.

Authorities say it, "It is legal to ride a horse on a public street ...just not while you're intoxicated."

The horse was unavailable for comment.

From the comments:

Quote :

This arrest is stupid. In order to arrest someone for D.W.I they have to be driving a motor vehicle. A horse is not a motor vehicle, they should have been arrested for Public Intoxication.

I'll admit calling a horse a vehicle is stretching it, but clearly the men were intoxicated. They'll get their legal terms straightened out somehow.

If it was Washington state it'd be involving a Horse and Buggery.

You're sick, man.

Sick, but nothing new; we've had horse-fucking stories before, on the previous boards. This is a new one, though.

This isn't as rare as you think. Come down here on the weekends during the fall and you will see people riding horses in shorts and wife beaters while drinking a beer and singing Johnny Cash.

This exact thing happened in my childhood town when I was a teenager. Some drunk college kid hijacked an Amish family's buggy and began riding it down the street.

Knorg wrote:

If it was Washington state it'd be involving a Horse and Buggery.

Only if Microsoft employees are involved.

It's Sixth Street! Stuff like this shouldn't surprise anyone!

EileenK98 wrote:

From the comments:

Quote :

This arrest is stupid. In order to arrest someone for D.W.I they have to be driving a motor vehicle. A horse is not a motor vehicle, they should have been arrested for Public Intoxication.

I'll admit calling a horse a vehicle is stretching it, but clearly the men were intoxicated. They'll get their legal terms straightened out somehow.

Here in brit-land we've already gone down that route... Hence the term 'Drunk and in charge of..."

You can be arrested for riding a bicycle while pissed, for being drunk and in charge of a mobility scooter... I'm sure there's more...

WD40 wrote:

Here in brit-land we've already gone down that route... Hence the term 'Drunk and in charge of..."

You can be arrested for riding a bicycle while pissed, for being drunk and in charge of a mobility scooter... I'm sure there's more...

I eagerly await the public awareness campaign in which a little girl is horrifically and graphically killed by a drunk cyclist.

UK propaganda: Because shock value stops people from making bad decisions when drunk. Next week. When they can't even remember their own address.

Penguin wrote:

WD40 wrote:

Here in brit-land we've already gone down that route... Hence the term 'Drunk and in charge of..."

You can be arrested for riding a bicycle while pissed, for being drunk and in charge of a mobility scooter... I'm sure there's more...

I eagerly await the public awareness campaign in which a little girl is horrifically and graphically killed by a drunk cyclist.

UK propaganda: Because shock value stops people from making bad decisions when drunk. Next week. When they can't even remember their own address.

in defence of that law: It's more to do with giving the police the ability to remove a drunkard/drunkard's bicycle from a situation where they may injure themselves or others.

You might not mangle another person (although, you can still injure them.) but you might fall over infront of a car, for example, or cause other incidences that may cause problems or injury to yourself or others.

It's not usually the sort of thing you get prosecuted for (unless you've made a habit of it, or are titanically stupid), just arrested for, giving the cops the ability to shove you in a cell so you can sober up, and released later without charge. And even then it's rare that the law is enforced. Cops have better things to do, after all.

In fact, with the exception of violence, pretty much all laws that deal with activities under the influence of booze, and/or most drugs, run like that.

How is a horse not a vehicle?

WD40 wrote:

in defence of that law: It's more to do with giving the police the ability to remove a drunkard/drunkard's bicycle from a situation where they may injure themselves or others.

You might not mangle another person (although, you can still injure them.) but you might fall over infront of a car, for example, or cause other incidences that may cause problems or injury to yourself or others.

It's not usually the sort of thing you get prosecuted for (unless you've made a habit of it, or are titanically stupid), just arrested for, giving the cops the ability to shove you in a cell so you can sober up, and released later without charge. And even then it's rare that the law is enforced. Cops have better things to do, after all.

In fact, with the exception of violence, pretty much all laws that deal with activities under the influence of booze, and/or most drugs, run like that.

As long as it basically boils down to "public intoxication" and the penalty is set accordingly, I don't have an issue with it. Still, I'm a bit disappointed that there won't be any over-the-top commercials about the terrible, bloody, permantly life-damaging consequences of drunk bicycle riding for me to roll my eyes at. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Penguin wrote:

WD40 wrote:

in defence of that law: It's more to do with giving the police the ability to remove a drunkard/drunkard's bicycle from a situation where they may injure themselves or others.

You might not mangle another person (although, you can still injure them.) but you might fall over infront of a car, for example, or cause other incidences that may cause problems or injury to yourself or others.

It's not usually the sort of thing you get prosecuted for (unless you've made a habit of it, or are titanically stupid), just arrested for, giving the cops the ability to shove you in a cell so you can sober up, and released later without charge. And even then it's rare that the law is enforced. Cops have better things to do, after all.

In fact, with the exception of violence, pretty much all laws that deal with activities under the influence of booze, and/or most drugs, run like that.

As long as it basically boils down to "public intoxication" and the penalty is set accordingly, I don't have an issue with it. Still, I'm a bit disappointed that there won't be any over-the-top commercials about the terrible, bloody, permantly life-damaging consequences of drunk bicycle riding for me to roll my eyes at. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

A friend of mine's mother was hit by a cyclist, her brain swelled up and the doctors thought she was going to die.

I know that sort of thing's not common, probably not enough to justify a law or anything, and a PSA about it would be pretty dumb, but it IS possible to seriously injure someone with a bicycle, yes.

Mr.Doobie wrote:

This exact thing happened in my childhood town when I was a teenager. Some drunk college kid hijacked an Amish family's buggy and began riding it down the street.

Must've made for some interesting moments when the guy was booked after his arrest.

Chris91 wrote:

Mr.Doobie wrote:

This exact thing happened in my childhood town when I was a teenager. Some drunk college kid hijacked an Amish family's buggy and began riding it down the street.

Must've made for some interesting moments when the guy was booked after his arrest. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I suppose that it is within the realm of possibility for there to have been humorous observations about the situation.

Chris91 wrote:

Mr.Doobie wrote:

This exact thing happened in my childhood town when I was a teenager. Some drunk college kid hijacked an Amish family's buggy and began riding it down the street.

Must've made for some interesting moments when the guy was booked after his arrest.

There were probably no charges filed, though. The Amish don't hold with 'English' law, and they also tend to take the whole 'forgive and forget' thing very seriously. Unless the local cops could come up with some other reason to charge him, the kid probably walked free.

Yes, we've got a fair number of Amish around here, and this happens once every couple of years. I have no idea why the kids who do it think it's so hilarious, so I'm going to assume it's the amount of alcohol they've consumed that causes it. That and there's not a lot to do in most of the small towns the Amish live near.

Penguin, we've got a local law that prohibits operating a riding mower or handicapped cart while drunk. You can, however, operate a handicapped cart on the streets provided you have an orange flag attached to it and you don't do so after dark. I've seen people doing this. In the winter. Though thankfully not after dark.

Rabid Badger wrote:

Yes, we've got a fair number of Amish around here

Really? Do you hail from Lancaster, Pennsylvania? Blue Ball? Intercourse (hurrrrrr)? I've heard Florida and Oregon have big Amish populations too.

Seule wrote:

How is a horse not a vehicle?

It is not a motor vehical. I am pretty sure DUIs require the motor to be on in whatever you are operating under the influance. Or not, I dunno.

And, the charges have been reduced to public intoxication.

Guess they finally realized DWI doesn't work when the "vehicle" has four legs and a stomach instead of wheels and an engine.

Mr.Doobie wrote:

Rabid Badger wrote:

Yes, we've got a fair number of Amish around here

Really? Do you hail from Lancaster, Pennsylvania? Blue Ball? Intercourse (hurrrrrr)? I've heard Florida and Oregon have big Amish populations too.

Actually, I live in Iowa, which has sizable populations of both Amish and Mennonites. We live within half-an-hour of a small town called Bloomfield that has a large enough Amish population they actually outnumber the 'English' as far as numbers of people in the county goes.

Unfortunately, we don't have any towns with silly names. Or at least none that are related to the Amish/Mennonite communities. Probably because neither live in towns; they prefer to live out in the country.

They do, however, come to town to do grocery shopping. Bloomfield actually has a section of their downtown that has rails you can hitch your buggy to. You sometimes see them shopping in Ottumwa (where I live), but in those cases, they generally hitch a ride with a non-Amish neighbor.

Some of the more 'liberal' Amish will allow one man in the community to get a driver's license and own a car. He then becomes responsible for taking people shopping and running any errands that need to be run that can't be done by buggy (such as taking people to the hospital in the event of an accident). While they prefer home medical care and home birth, they will visit a Doctor if they think there's something serious wrong, and women will deliver in a hospital if the midwife discovers there's a problem (such as the baby being breech) or feels that giving birth at home could be harmful to the mother and/or baby.

Miss Prince wrote:

Penguin wrote:

WD40 wrote:

in defence of that law: It's more to do with giving the police the ability to remove a drunkard/drunkard's bicycle from a situation where they may injure themselves or others.

You might not mangle another person (although, you can still injure them.) but you might fall over infront of a car, for example, or cause other incidences that may cause problems or injury to yourself or others.

It's not usually the sort of thing you get prosecuted for (unless you've made a habit of it, or are titanically stupid), just arrested for, giving the cops the ability to shove you in a cell so you can sober up, and released later without charge. And even then it's rare that the law is enforced. Cops have better things to do, after all.

In fact, with the exception of violence, pretty much all laws that deal with activities under the influence of booze, and/or most drugs, run like that.

As long as it basically boils down to "public intoxication" and the penalty is set accordingly, I don't have an issue with it. Still, I'm a bit disappointed that there won't be any over-the-top commercials about the terrible, bloody, permantly life-damaging consequences of drunk bicycle riding for me to roll my eyes at. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

A friend of mine's mother was hit by a cyclist, her brain swelled up and the doctors thought she was going to die.

I know that sort of thing's not common, probably not enough to justify a law or anything, and a PSA about it would be pretty dumb, but it IS possible to seriously injure someone with a bicycle, yes.

What about the cyclist? I imagine if he was going fast enough to cause that, he had to have went to the pavement forcefully himself.

Also, backwards Hill People like the Amish need to be kept the fuck off of public roads unless they're going to drive a vehicle suited for them like the rest of us. Having these fucking idiots oaf along at ten miles per hour on country roads with speed limits of 55 MPH is just a danger to themselves and others.

Rabid Badger wrote:

Mr.Doobie wrote:

Rabid Badger wrote:

Yes, we've got a fair number of Amish around here

Really? Do you hail from Lancaster, Pennsylvania? Blue Ball? Intercourse (hurrrrrr)? I've heard Florida and Oregon have big Amish populations too.

Actually, I live in Iowa, which has sizable populations of both Amish and Mennonites. We live within half-an-hour of a small town called Bloomfield that has a large enough Amish population they actually outnumber the 'English' as far as numbers of people in the county goes.

Unfortunately, we don't have any towns with silly names. Or at least none that are related to the Amish/Mennonite communities. Probably because neither live in towns; they prefer to live out in the country.

They do, however, come to town to do grocery shopping. Bloomfield actually has a section of their downtown that has rails you can hitch your buggy to. You sometimes see them shopping in Ottumwa (where I live), but in those cases, they generally hitch a ride with a non-Amish neighbor.

Some of the more 'liberal' Amish will allow one man in the community to get a driver's license and own a car. He then becomes responsible for taking people shopping and running any errands that need to be run that can't be done by buggy (such as taking people to the hospital in the event of an accident). While they prefer home medical care and home birth, they will visit a Doctor if they think there's something serious wrong, and women will deliver in a hospital if the midwife discovers there's a problem (such as the baby being breech) or feels that giving birth at home could be harmful to the mother and/or baby.

Really. I grew up with the Pennsylvania Amish, and I don't know a single group of Amish that has someone that can drive a car. My home town actually had the railings for parked buggies that you were talking about.

Mr.Doobie wrote:

Really. I grew up with the Pennsylvania Amish, and I don't know a single group of Amish that has someone that can drive a car. My home town actually had the railings for parked buggies that you were talking about.

The Pennsylvania Amish tend to be what's known as "Old Order Amish;" they adhere more strictly to the Amish ideal than their brethren further west (although there are some Old Order communities outside of Pennsylvania, as well - it really depends on the group in question). I used to live just west of a county with a large Amish population, and we would always end up running into large groups of them at the local Save-a-Lot. They drove an old GMC van which, with a spoiler and the right paint job (and less rust) could have been the A-Team van.