DriveSmartBC - Open Liquor in a Vehicle
 

On a sunny afternoon patrol one weekend I stopped a vehicle that had been exceeding the speed limit. As I approached, I could see two gray haired women in the front and two men of the same vintage in the rear of the car. I could also see a partially consumed cold beer in the hand of each of the men, who made no attempt to hide them from me.

I explained that the liquor was being possessed and consumed illegally and that I would be searching the car under the provisions of the Liquor Control and Licensing Act. I had to convince the two to hand over the two open bottles of beer and searched for and seized the balance under very strong verbal protest.

The registered owner of the vehicle, a local resident, was one of the males and he exclaimed that he could see nothing wrong with enjoying a drink with his visiting guest as his wife drove the car. She had not been drinking, but she received the ticket for illegal transport of the liquor.

Perhaps I have seen too many collisions caused by impaired drivers, but I do believe that there are more appropriate places to enjoy an alcoholic drink than doing so in the passenger compartment of your vehicle while it is being driven on the highway. In my view it is a very short step between passengers drinking and the driver joining in too.

Reference Links

rrrriight.. flex 'em muss-kels!:rolleyes:

It may be a "short step" between the driver drinking or not, but it is a "step" after all. I think this law is a bit too severe.

That said, it is the law, and I'm glad you're helping raise awareness of it.

Is it a short step between owning a gun and killing someone with it?

The additional problem is that this often ends up with a sober driver and intoxicated passengers. The intoxicated passengers become uncontrollable and influence the driver. My first ever fatal was from exactly that situation where the drunk passenger grabbed the wheel and caused a craash that killed one and injured 2 others. Allowing the passengers to get drunker as you drive is not a good idea at all.

So what about kids? They can be "out of control" too.. They should be banned!

Fatal accidents happen for all sorts of reasons, from drunk drivers, to drunk passengers, to crazy kids, to changing radio stations...

not sure drunker is a word, more drunk sounds better. but anyway, so if your the designated driver, how is it any different? you still have a car full of drunk people, chances of them grabbing the wheel are the exact same as someone sitting there having a beer on a sunny day... i guess.
if you are responsible enough to stay sober all night in order to drive your friends home after the bar, chances are you aren't going to get in your car and down a mickey of smirnoff. the reasoning behind this law makes no sense

Ready the last line of my post.

read the first line in mine. i clearly read yours... most people do not get more drunk after they leave the bar. the liquior stores are closed by that time, so you can't buy any more liquor. skidmark's example is more likely to happen, and in that situation, the law is unreasonable.

Hmmmmmm....a legitimate thread that pertains to the MVA?!

OK, here's the thing. I've been pulled over before, as driver and passenger, when the passenger had a beer in hand. Did not get tickets, but beer was poured out in ONE instance. I disagree with this law, but it makes sense. So you CANNOT have open liquor in the car, even if it isn't in the driver's possession. Good to know.

How about empties in the car? If the driver was not intoxicated, is that fair game? IE, you get pulled over, passenger chugs the beer.

Also, what constitutes as open liquor? I've been pulled over in vernon before, I had 5 out of 6 beers in a six pack, in the back seat. One beer fell when I was putting it in the car, so I shotgunned it. I was under the legal limit. The officer stated that having 5/6 beers was open liquor, and I had to get picked up.

I also heard that open liquor is only valid if it is within reach of the driver. So if I had half a bottle of scotch in the TRUNK, would that still be an offense?

What is the forum coming to??

Makes total sense: the driver could just as easily have been drinking it and handed it off to the passenger. The cop has no way of knowing the difference.

Same with skidmark's original story: how does he know that the guys in the back aren't passing the beers up to the driver for the occasional swig? The only DEFINITE way to prevent this happening is to pour out the open beers and confiscate the rest.

Nope. That's the secret when transporting any alcohol, open or not: put it in the trunk, and avoid any problems.

Be happy that you did not get caught in Nova Scotia...the fine is $ 500 for open liquor in a vehicle. Based on past experience, drunk people who drink more booze, tend to get drunker and less controlable....unless they completely pass out . Anyone else here ever have the opposite experience where people consuming more booze get sober and easier to handle?

so you're saying a trained police officer would not be able to tell that the driver had been just drinking and handed off the beer to the passenger? you're kidding right? i've been breathalised because the people in my car were drunk and the cop could smell the liquior on them, and assumed i was drunk too... if you're drinking a beer while driving, get pulled over, and give it to the passenger, the cop would be able to tell that you were just drinking. so that's not an excuse for this law. oh and i want to know if a beer missing out of a case is considered open alchohol too. we were walking downtown with an 18 case of beer, with one missing, got questioned by the cops, and when they saw that the case was open, gave us drinking in public tickets and made us poor out 17 beer. seems a bit harsh to me, since we werent drinking in public...

The Police could smell liquor from inside the vehicle and then start an investigation to see who had consumed it. Unless you have "no alcohol" restrictions on your DL, it is not illegal to have recently consumed "non-impairing" levels of it, and start to drive.

Alcohol must be : "unopened". Look at the liquor act for definitions. It has to be sealed, in an unopened case and NOT in the passenger compartment of the vehicle. You were fortunate that charges were not laid. The person posessing the open liquor can be charged and the driver of the vehicle can also be charged for permitting the alcohol in the vehicle. BTW...your car IS "IN PUBLIC".

"public place" includes

(a) a place, building, passenger conveyance, boat or land to which the public resort or are permitted access, and

(b) a motor vehicle located on land to which the public resort or are permitted access;



44 (1) In this section:

"motor home" has the same meaning as in the Motor Vehicle Act;

"motor vehicle" has the same meaning as in the Motor Vehicle Act, and includes an all terrain vehicle as defined in the Motor Vehicle (All Terrain) Act.

(2) Subject to subsection (3), a person must not drive or otherwise exercise control over the operation of a motor vehicle, whether or not it is in motion, while there is liquor in the person's possession or in the motor vehicle.

(3) Subsection (2) does not apply

(a) if the liquor is in a container that is unopened and has an unbroken seal,

(b) if the liquor is being transported or used in accordance with a licence issued under this Act, or

(c) in any other case, if the motor vehicle

(i) is a motor home and the liquor is kept in a cabinet away from the driver's area,

(ii) is a station wagon or hatchback and the liquor is behind the rear seat, whether or not that seat is in an upright position,

(iii) is a pickup truck and the liquor is in an exterior compartment, a space designed for the carriage of baggage or parcels or any other location that is not readily accessible to any person in the motor vehicle,

(iv) is a motorcycle and the liquor is not readily accessible to the operator, or

(v) is not one referred to in subparagraphs (i) to (iv) and the liquor is in the trunk or space designed for the carriage of baggage or parcels

I've heard girls say I'm more easier to handle after consuming booze...

No, I don't agree with that. Example, ASIANS. They can't drink worth beans. I know guys who can be UNDER the limit, and still drunk as fuck, cause they're weaksauce little guys. hahahaha!!!

Also...officers have a hard time identifying drunk people. This is known fact. They suck at it. I've slipped under their radar, (not admitting to DUI) and I'm sure more can attest to that. It's not hard to "fake" sober when being pulled over, especially when you got a maglite shined in your eyes. Things like chewing gum, spraying cologne, etc, disguise any intoxication signs as well.

Basically we are charging the driver on the basis that he MIGHT commit a crime, and not that he actually HAS committed the crime?

Right, that makes sense...

^Actually, no, we're charging him on the basis that having open alcohol in the vehicle IS a crime.

To respond to the rest of your non-posted comment..about liquor in a mini van..



(ii) is a station wagon or hatchback and the liquor is behind the rear seat, whether or not that seat is in an upright position,

Which is illegal because a driver MIGHT drink it... Or passengers in the back MIGHT get rowdy...

It's like making knives illegal, afterall someone MIGHT get stabbed...

Caught that.

Hence the edited post. :thumbsup:

I saw 3 guys get busted for this a few summers back, 3 guys sitting on the median on the highway, in cuffs, 3 half empty bottles beside them and and half empty case as 2 officers dug through their SUV. On and this was in the middle of the day during traffic. Bright.

ever heard of predrinking? get half drunk at home, DD drives to the bar/club...


Also is there not a law that states you are only legally allowed to transport alcohol from the liquor store DIRECTLY to your home and that it must be completely sealed.

Ok...

what if your car is gutted? lol

You can transport a drunk passenger but you can't transport a drinking one.. hmm.

Is a BC Transit driver at risk of a fine if a passenger sneaks an open beer on board?

We know that the law requires passengers in the back of a limosine to sit around poker-faced and leave the champagne locked in the trunk to prevent the driver from drinking...

The host of a party is not criminally responsible if a drunk guest drives home and causes a collision, why should the driver of a car be held responsible if a passenger is drinking? The driver isn't drinking.

That being said, I hate beer, it smells bad and nobody would ever get an open one into my car :)

More like, making drunk driving illegal because you MIGHT crash and kill someone.

From the driver's perspective, the PASSENGERS are in the trunk, too. It's just a really really big, glitzy, flashy trunk.