I don't understand your question.

What if you didn't know they were drunk or had a supeneded liscense?

Then don't let any drunks drive your car and you have nothing to worry about.

 

:lol: So black and white, I can't even get you to come into the lightly shaded area...:lol:

What if you didn't know they were drunk or had a suspended license?

 

I answered the drunk part for LRCW but to add to that if someone has been drinking at all you are a fool if you let them borrow your car. I understand you may not know about a suspended license but you have to ask yourself why someone needs to borrow your car and how much do you know about them.

 

In the end if something happens the car owner pays a lot of stupid tax.

:lol: So black and white, I can't even get you to come into the lightly shaded area...:lol:

 

It depends on how much risk you want to take and how much stupid tax you are willing to pay.

I answered the drunk part for LRCW but to add to that if someone has been drinking at all you are a fool if you let them borrow your car. I understand you may not know about a suspended license but you have to ask yourself why someone needs to borrow your car and how much do you know about them.

 

In the end if something happens the car owner pays a lot of stupid tax.

Just curious. NO ONE drives my car but me, I wouldn't even let my GF drive it.

I answered the drunk part for LRCW but to add to that if someone has been drinking at all you are a fool if you let them borrow your car. I understand you may not know about a suspended license but you have to ask yourself why someone needs to borrow your car and how much do you know about them.

 

In the end if something happens the car owner pays a lot of stupid tax.

 

There is a really grey area in all of this.

 

Hypothetical situation...Your friend drops you off at a Christmas party for the company you work for, and says he'll be by to pick you up at whatever time the party ends. Meanwhile, unknown to you, the "buddy" drives straight to Applebee's for a meal and some beer. He eats, has enough beer to be legally drunk, and then gets in your car to come and pick you up.

 

You come out of the party well above the legal limit, and surely unable to tell if anyone else had been sipping on granpdpa's cough syrup.

 

So how could a police officer decide then and there that you did or didn't know the friend was drinking?

 

There is no way to tell if the owner of the vehicle new about the driver's intoxication unless the police offer witnessed the two men drinking together. Therefore the driver of the vehicle should be the only guilty party, regardless of whose name the title of the vehicle is in.

I got hit up for that when I was in the Marines. I let a friend borrow my car and he came back through the gate drunk as a skunk. Let's just say the Sgt. Major wasn't real happy with my poor decision making.

I got hit up for that when I was in the Marines. I let a friend borrow my car and he came back through the gate drunk as a skunk. Let's just say the Sgt. Major wasn't real happy with my poor decision making.

 

 

Yeah, but did you know that he was coming back intoxicated???

 

If you did, I could see him being angry. But if you didn't then just exactly what did you do wrong?

Yeah, but did you know that he was coming back intoxicated???

 

If you did, I could see him being angry. But if you didn't then just exactly what did you do wrong?

Now why would I let a guy drive my car drunk? I was a bit stunned that I could get busted for that. I lost driving privleges for a while.

There is a really grey area in all of this.

 

Hypothetical situation...Your friend drops you off at a Christmas party for the company you work for, and says he'll be by to pick you up at whatever time the party ends. Meanwhile, unknown to you, the "buddy" drives straight to Applebee's for a meal and some beer. He eats, has enough beer to be legally drunk, and then gets in your car to come and pick you up.

 

You come out of the party well above the legal limit, and surely unable to tell if anyone else had been sipping on granpdpa's cough syrup.

 

So how could a police officer decide then and there that you did or didn't know the friend was drinking?

 

There is no way to tell if the owner of the vehicle new about the driver's intoxication unless the police offer witnessed the two men drinking together. Therefore the driver of the vehicle should be the only guilty party, regardless of whose name the title of the vehicle is in.

 

Of course there are a million possibilities but in this example we have to agree to disagree.

 

To my knowledge this is not an often used statute. In your example the owner may get arrested for AI. Otherwise, he would be at his friends trial claiming he was sober and so was the driver.

Now why would I let a guy drive my car drunk? I was a bit stunned that I could get busted for that. I lost driving privleges for a while.

 

It was a rhetorical question.

In KY we have Permitting Illegal Operation and I don't think it is stupid at all.

:thumb: Agreed. If you allow someone to operate your vehicle knowing that they are under the influence, is IMO the same as driving the vehice yourself. The only thing stupid, was allowing the other person to get behind the wheel.