TN Open Container Law

[Fallguy]

I can assure you that no one made any laws based on my experiences. They didn’t check with me or even seek my input.

LOL...not 100% sure I'd want them to on everything anyway...

I’m just basing my opinion on a chit load of traffic stops involving drunks and drunks that didn’t even know they were drunk until I made them aware of that little fact.

As someone said, if your in a state where open container is illegal period I might can see that as they are already breaking the law But reckon in TN how many cars LEOs pass or pass by them that they didn't even notice because the driver was sober and driving properly.

I'm basing this as someone that has both driven someone around that was drinking and I wasn't and as someone that has been drinking in the passenger seat and the driver was not drinking....

I have also observed that if you have a mix of people consuming alcohol in vehicles or if you have a bunch of people drinking and handling firearms; chances are pretty high you will have an incident involving someone getting arrested or going to the hospital. Because you see “law abiding citizens†and other people living at the foot of the cross don’t usually find themselves in these situations.

Perhaps......and maybe I'm just as law abiding as others I guess.....:-\

[Good_Steward]

Make fun of it or dismiss it if you like; but I still have nightmares from it, and it’s been many years ago. You kinda get use to seeing adults killed; I don’t think anyone gets use to seeing the kids die.

And make no mistake about it; we are talking about something as deadly as blindly firing a high powered rifle down the street.

Open liquor has no place in a vehicle period (unless it’s a chauffeured vehicle like a bus or limo). Anymore than someone carrying has any business drinking… even one beer. Maybe I’m jaded by being the guy that got sent to the aftermath of those scenarios.

But hey…. I fully understand that the tin foil hat “government intervention†stand will be more popular here than common sense.

I support the groups like MADD for what they have done. I don’t see how that makes me like the anti-gun lobby; but if that makes you feel better go for it.

Believe it or not, no tin foil hat for me. So, having a drink as a passenger in a limo is different than having a drink as a passenger in a car? I am not defending drinking and driving. I am, however, defending drinking and riding, and our ability to do so without government oversight.

[DaveTN]

This is exactly my point on this. The assumption that it's not possible for a sober driver to haul around a bunch of drunks is no more logical than the opposite. In either case, it's irrelevant because it ultimately comes down to the driver making a decision whether to drink and drive or not. I strongly believe that for a driver to make such an irresponsible decision, the existence of an open-container law is a moot point. Once a driver is willing to do something that stupid and illegal, a silly open container law has zero influence. Also, if an officer must rely on the presence of an open-container to make a legal DUI arrest, then they either need more training on how to detect and investigate a DUI, they have allowed themselves to get lazy, or they don't care whether they need to criminalize a harmless behavior in order to make it easier to make an arrest. One poster doesn't understand where my perspective comes from, but the answer is simple: I don't mindlessly go about my daily life accepting the world as it is without questioning the logic of it all. When I have encountered multiple people doing things that are technically illegal, but see that they are causing no other person any direct harm, I wonder why we are wasting time and resources worrying about it. When I see drug dealers shooting it out in the streets over the illegal drug trade so people can sit in their houses and get stoned out of their mind without harming anyone else, I question the logic of the policies we have. When I can look at US government data that clearly shows the rate of illegal drug use is higher in 2010 than when the "War on Drugs" was started in 1982 and I consider all of the money and lives that have been wasted on it, I question the logic of the policy. When I see alcohol causing more harm than marijuana and cocaine, but we make alcohol legal and outlaw the others, I question the logic of the policy. Finally, I strongly believe that it is morally wrong to use the law as a tool to force people to act in certain ways, not because they are doing harm to me or someone else, but because I simply disagree with the behavior. If someone wants to drink a beer while riding to a concert or party, what harm are they doing to anyone? Why do we care? If the driver does it, then we have a different story, but until someone can show any sort of causal relationship between passengers consuming alcoholic beverages and the increased likelihood a driver will suddenly be enticed to drink and drive, then we need to worry about more important crime problems.

What would be more important? Real criminals? Like Robbers and rapists?

I don’t know where you live or where you worked as a cop, but if the chances are higher that you or your family will be injured or killed by a “real criminal†as opposed to a traffic offender; you should think about moving.

Open container laws are simply part of aggressive DUI enforcement. My confusion comes from you saying you were a Police Officer and then making statements like these laws are silly and those that enforce them are lazy or want easy arrests. DUI enforcement is not a game. The vast majority of states have decided that open container laws are a part of aggressive DUI enforcement. It appears that some county governments in this state also disagree with the legislator’s stamp of approval on drinking in a vehicle.

I’m sorry your service left you so disillusioned; Police work can do that with some people.

[vontar]

OK, my head hurts,

I am totally against any drinking and driving.

I don't really want to be drinking as a passenger either(talking about myself) but I can see why some might. Maybe a long trip or something.

However, I want to point out, I don't think there would be allot of different between me getting drunk at a bar and having my wife drive me home verse her driving and me drinking a beer. I have never done it, but I don't think it would directly cause a problem with her driving.

As it has been said, this is not talking about underage drinking, as there are laws against there.

This is not about a driver drinking and driving as there are laws against that already.

BTW, since I got my HCP, I don't drink out as much because I prefer to Carry instead. My wife has noticed as well. I still go to those places but I plan ahead time if I can going to have a drink or not. If not, she does and I drive.

********

So currently to transport an OC legally is like a hand gun if you don't have a HCP?

OK, I get it, OC in general seem to need to be locked away in another area like the trunk away from the driver. Kinda like a person with no HCP has to separate hand guns and ammo.

Lets me ask this.

If my wife is driving and I get in the TRUNK with the with OC can I drink it since both the OC and myself are both safely locked away from the driver and therefore can not influence the her? /jking

[DaveTN]

However, I want to point out, I don't think there would be allot of different between me getting drunk at a bar and having my wife drive me home verse her driving and me drinking a beer. I have never done it, but I don't think it would directly cause a problem with her driving.

In that case there probably wouldn’t be a problem. That scenario is not why the open container laws were passed.

If my wife is driving and I get in the TRUNK with the with OC can I drink it since both the OC and myself are both safely locked away from the driver and therefore can not influence the her? /jking

Yes. But it might be hard to breathe, especially if three or four of your friends get in there with you.

[Daniel]

What would be more important? Real criminals? Like Robbers and rapists?

I don’t know where you live or where you worked as a cop, but if the chances are higher that you or your family will be injured or killed by a “real criminal” as opposed to a traffic offender; you should think about moving.

Open container laws are simply part of aggressive DUI enforcement. My confusion comes from you saying you were a Police Officer and then making statements like these laws are silly and those that enforce them are lazy or want easy arrests. DUI enforcement is not a game. The vast majority of states have decided that open container laws are a part of aggressive DUI enforcement. It appears that some county governments in this state also disagree with the legislator’s stamp of approval on drinking in a vehicle.

I’m sorry your service left you so disillusioned; Police work can do that with some people.

He doesn't appear to be the disillusioned one to me.

[Punisher84]

He doesn't appear to be the disillusioned one to me.

[Guest Jamie]

Here's a little fuel for the fire:

How about a Limousine? The driver's up front, but the people in the back are drinking. How are they any worse than people in a bar or at a part doing exactly the same thing?

Personally, if I were still a LEO, and I stopped a limo full'a people drinking, I'd pretty much treat 'em as cargo, so long as they weren't hanging out of the windows or something of the like, and were all over 21, and just deal with the driver and whatever issue that caused me to pull him over in the first place. The passengers wouldn't become an issue unless they made themselves an issue with their behavior during the stop.

I would probably apply the same logic to a motor home or R/V as well, without some extenuating circumstance: If the driver's sober and not drinking, and the passengers aren't causing a problem, then I'd treat them the same as I would if I was showing up at someone's house, and simply deal with whatever caused me to be there.

Ah well... probably a good thing I'm not in that line of work anymore.

[TNRobocop]

Well something else to consider that (unless I missed it) driving is a privilege, not a right. Opening a can of worms here but there isn't a right to drive like there is a right to bear arms.

Therefore restrictions on behavior on the roadway can be regulated much more than conduct of an individual not on the roadway.

[Guest Jamie]

There isn't a right to drink, either, but ya saw how prohibition worked out.

[DaveTN]

Here's a little fuel for the fire:

How about a Limousine? The driver's up front, but the people in the back are drinking. How are they any worse than people in a bar or at a part doing exactly the same thing?

Personally, if I were still a LEO, and I stopped a limo full'a people drinking, I'd pretty much treat 'em as cargo, so long as they weren't hanging out of the windows or something of the like, and were all over 21, and just deal with the driver and whatever issue that caused me to pull him over in the first place. The passengers wouldn't become an issue unless they made themselves an issue with their behavior during the stop.

I would probably apply the same logic to a motor home or R/V as well, without some extenuating circumstance: If the driver's sober and not drinking, and the passengers aren't causing a problem, then I'd treat them the same as I would if I was showing up at someone's house, and simply deal with whatever caused me to be there.

Ah well... probably a good thing I'm not in that line of work anymore.

I would guess those counties that have banned it have exclusions for limos and such. (But that’s just a guess since I can’t find the county laws)

Here is how Illinois handles that situation.

© This Section shall not apply to the passengers in a limousine when it is being used for purposes for which a limousine is ordinarily used, the passengers on a chartered bus when it is being used for purposes for which chartered buses are ordinarily used or on a motor home or mini motor home as defined in Section 1‑145.01 of this Code. However, the driver of any such vehicle is prohibited from consuming or having any alcoholic liquor in or about the driver's area. Any evidence of alcoholic consumption by the driver shall be prima facie evidence of such driver's failure to obey this Section. For the purposes of this Section, a limousine is a motor vehicle of the first division with the passenger compartment enclosed by a partition or dividing window used in the for‑hire transportation of passengers and operated by an individual in possession of a valid Illinois driver's license of the appropriate classification pursuant to Section 6‑104 of this Code.

[Guest Jamie]

I would guess those counties that have banned it have exclusions for limos and such. (But that’s just a guess since I can’t find the county laws)

Here is how Illinois handles that situation.

Tn state law doesn't though, so a driver with no passengers, and liquor bottles with broken seals in racks in the passenger area, is pretty much screwed. And technically, probably could be even with passengers, if common sense isn't used in enforcing the law.

[Fallguy]

The limo/RV vs Van and like was something that came up in the debate in Nashville.

When they were looking at passing a bill to completely prevent Open Containers in a vehicle, they were going to make exceptions for limos and RVs and such, but then some argued that it was punishing the less fortunate that maybe couldn't afford a RV/Limo to go watch the game and only had a large van.

However as I said before the reason the law is the way it is now in TN is because of money...... I mean if the state really wanted it 100% legal for passengers to drink they would remove the part that allows cities/counties to make their own ordnances/resolutions...

[Fallguy]

I would guess those counties that have banned it have exclusions for limos and such. (But that’s just a guess since I can’t find the county laws)

If you really want to find out, you may could check with County Technical Assistance Service and MTAS Home#

I was able to get info from CTAS about which counties had a Charter government....

[Guest Jamie]

The limo/RV vs Van and like was something that came up in the debate in Nashville.

When they were looking at passing a bill to completely prevent Open Containers in a vehicle, they were going to make exceptions for limos and RVs and such, but then some argued that it was punishing the less fortunate that maybe couldn't afford a RV/Limo to go watch the game and only had a large van.

However as I said before the reason the law is the way it is now in TN is because of money...... I mean if the state really wanted it 100% legal for passengers to drink they would remove the part that allows cities/counties to make their own ordnances/resolutions...

Kind'a funny, really... because departmental policy, and to a great deal officer's discretion due to/influenced by that policy, will generally follow the "money". Which is, I guess, what the legislature ultimately decided to rely on.

[TNRobocop]

Well I know that if a vehicle is driving down the road with drinking passengers, said vehicle will probably get pulled over.

Additionally someone will be going to jail.

Probably a passenger since he won't keep his drunk mouth shut....

(This was a comment made in jest to lighten the mood, don't take it as totally serious please)

[Fallguy]

Well I know that if a vehicle is driving down the road with drinking passengers, said vehicle will probably get pulled over.

Additionally someone will be going to jail.

Probably a passenger since he won't keep his drunk mouth shut....

(This was a comment made in jest to lighten the mood, don't take it as totally serious please)

Well since it was said in "jest" I'll keep most of my comments to myself....but I will say I don't find it funny.....

[TNRobocop]

Well since it was said in "jest" I'll keep most of my comments to myself....but I will say I don't find it funny.....

Well thankfully keeping you amused is not required.

[Fallguy]

Well thankfully keeping you amused is not required.

Nope....and apparently observing illegal activity is not required to stop a vehicle and go fishing either.....

[TNRobocop]

Nope....and apparently observing illegal activity is not required to stop a vehicle and go fishing either.....

I am assuming you mean "legal" activity?

And yes if I see someone drinking in a vehicle I will stop said vehicle. As long as the driver is not or has not been drinking, nor under the influence to illegally drive, and there are only enough open containers for the passengers only, then they will be sent on there way.

That's just the way it is.

We call that probable cause. Look it up some time.

[Fallguy]

I am assuming you mean "legal" activity?

And yes if I see someone drinking in a vehicle I will stop said vehicle. As long as the driver is not or has not been drinking, nor under the influence to illegally drive, and there are only enough open containers for the passengers only, then they will be sent on there way.

That's just the way it is.

We call that probable cause. Look it up some time.

No, I meant illegal...I thought a LEO needed to see illegal activity to stop a vehicle. But if you can observe a passenger drinking and stop a vehicle, then apparently illegal activity is not required.

If the courts have ruled that seeing an open container in the possession of a passenger is enough PC to stop a vehicle even if one is not observed in the possession of the driver, then shame on the courts.

Just because something is "just the way it is" doesn't make it right or legal.

But hey...why not stop it and see if you can take someone to jail just because you can.....even if they weren't otherwise bothering anyone or had any other reason to interact with the vehicle.

[Guest Jamie]

I am assuming you mean "legal" activity?

No, he got it right. Observe illegal activity - or something that gives you reasonable suspicion of illegal activity - make a stop.

Legal activity? No reasonable suspicion, no probably cause. No grounds for a stop.

[KahrMan]

I am assuming you mean "legal" activity?

And yes if I see someone drinking in a vehicle I will stop said vehicle. As long as the driver is not or has not been drinking, nor under the influence to illegally drive, and there are only enough open containers for the passengers only, then they will be sent on there way.

That's just the way it is.

We call that probable cause. Look it up some time.

Really? Someone not breaking any laws is probable cause to stop them???

[Good_Steward]

Really? Someone not breaking any laws is probable cause to stop them???

Obviously in Nashville.

[TNRobocop]

Probable cause is that there are individuals consuming alcoholic beverages in a motor vehicle. A stop to determine if the driver has been consuming is a legal stop. The officer can very easily articulate that.