diverrick:
O.k. here's one. Bicycles are vehicles by California vehicle code definition, so if you come up behind a bicycle, and there is a solid line on your side, can you "legally pass" the bycycle, (He's waving at you to pass) even if you don't cross into the oncoming lane? This recently happened to me, and it got me wondering if that was an illegal move on my part I never crossed the solid line, but I did pass in a no passing area of the road. BTW I could see well out in front of the bike for oncoming traffic.
If there is a solid yellow line on your side of the road, you are not allowed to cross it except to turn into a driveway or intersecting roadway. Two sets of unbroken double yellows are not to be crossed at all.
If the lane is wide enough that you don't have to cross over any lines, and the bicycle is far enough to the right to allow this maneuver to be done in safety, it's not considered passing.
And technically, bicycles are NOT vehicles under the CVC (that's an urban myth). However, many of the CVC's sections do apply to bicycles, including DUI (BUI?) and most rules of the road such as stop signs and red lights.
catherine96821:
Another question, we had a big argument about the term "under the influence"
is that like .08 in most states, or is that "legally drunk"
I can only speak for CA, but cowjazz nailed it, .08 simply is the "presumed" limit. I only have to prove you were operating a motor vehicle with a Blood Alcohol Content of at least that much; I don't have to go as far as proving impairment.
cowjazz also is correct that, at least for CA, you CAN be arrested for lower BAC's. In CA, minors can now be booked for as little as .05, and commercial license holders such as truck drivers are presumed DUI at .04. With all others I can arrest for lower BAC's if I can show that they were impaired through driving observations and/or Field Sobriety Tests.
BTW a common misconception within the medical community in CA is that someone who is .08 is automatically considered "drunk in public." Presumed limit laws such as .08 only apply to operating motor vehicles, bicycles, and aircraft, and not to activities such as walking or sitting in your own house. Yet we get calls from ER's all the time telling us to put someone in the drunk tank simply because their tox came back with .08 alcohol, even though the person is still able to stand up on his/her own.
What is the term for when you are not allowed ANY alcohol for whatever reason...usually a DUI or probation? when you cannot even have .02 legally...what's that in legal speak?
When CA introduced laws that allowed a minor's license to be suspended for a mere .01, it was referred to as "Zero Tolerance."
When imposing probation, many judges stipulate that the person's BAC while driving be at 0.0% at all times.
DivingsInMyBlood:
when i was around 9 years old we went to a county fair in england and one of these kids (about 11 years old) was lipping off a police officer so the officer hand cuffed the kid to a chain link fence for about 40 minutes in the middle of summer and walked away, a wpc came around and had to go find the other pc to uncuff the boy. Is that legal?
I can't speak for policing outside of CA, much less outside the US, but I suspect that if it was considered acceptable back then, it probably isn't acceptable now.
I always tell the rookies that when they handcuff someone, they "own" them, almost literally. That officer is now responsible for ensuring that person's safety, and can be held responsible if they don't take reasonable precautions to ensure that.
For that and other reasons, handcuffing persons to fixed objects is generally considered a no-no, and handcuffing someone and walking away is definitely not something you do.
