British man banned for drunk-driving in toy Barbie car

[Praxius]

British man banned for drunk-driving in toy Barbie car | News.com.au

A BRITISH man was banned from driving for three years after getting behind the wheel of a pink toy Barbie car when drunk.

Paul Hutton, 40, leaped into the seat of the tiny electric car, which has a top speed of just over 6km/h, when he was over the UK legal limit, The Sun reports.

But a police patrol car spotted Hutton crammed behind the steering wheel crawling along the road near his home in Essex, southeastern England, and pulled him over.

Hutton admitted being a "complete twit" after he ended up in front of Colchester Magistrates' Court, in Essex, charged with drunk-driving.

Speaking after the hearing, he said: "You have to be a contortionist to get in, and then you can't get out.

"I was very surprised to get done for drink-driving but I was a twit to say the least.

"I'm not unhappy with my punishment, just a little bit surprised."

Hutton, a former Royal Air Force aeronautical engineer, modified the tiny car with his son for a college project, after finding it dumped near his home.

On the day of his arrest, he said he jumped into the 0.6m-high vehicle to drive it to a friend's house to show him the results of the project.

The white mini jeep, which he could only drive with his knees tucked up under his chin, runs on batteries and goes slower than a mobility scooter.

:roll: I'm all for people not drinking and driving, but he couldn't friggin damage a mail box with one of those things at full speed and could probably run faster then this toy car could move at full speed... would they charge him with drinking and running if that were the case? :-?

Must have been a slow week for the police, cripes.... I don't know how the laws against drinking and driving apply to this since it's not technically a Motor Vehicle, let alone above 50cc.

 

[AnnaG]

Nah, Brit authorities just take themselves too seriously.

 

[Ron in Regina]

I don't know about Britain, but in Canada a vehicle doesn't have to have a
engine to be classed as a vehicle. Bicycles are vehicles in Canada and
fall under the same traffic laws as any other vehicle. The 50cc thing has
to do with licensing in certain jurisdictions, and nothing to do with the
definition of a "vehicle." Even 5th wheel campers (RV's = Recreational
Vehicles) are considered vehicles, though they do not move under their
own power...but that of the tow vehicle.

That little electric car, though tiny & slow....moves (is propelled), has wheels
or ski's, & carries a person (or goods). It's a vehicle. I'm not justifying the DUI
charge one way or another, but just offering perspective. I've heard of DUI's
issued in Canada for drunks on Garden Tractors, Bicycles, and those Rascal
things that the infirm use.

I'm sure an argument could be made (due to having wheels, and being
propelled by muscular power) that things like baby-strollers or wheel-chairs
might fit the legal description of vehicles even though they're not traditionally
pictured as such.

 

[AnnaG]

In Canuckville, he'd likely have been charged with being drunk in public and embarassed in the newspapers. It's a misdemeanor.

 

[Praxius]

I don't know about Britain, but in Canada a vehicle doesn't have to have a
engine to be classed as a vehicle. Bicycles are vehicles in Canada and
fall under the same traffic laws as any other vehicle. The 50cc thing has
to do with licensing in certain jurisdictions, and nothing to do with the
definition of a "vehicle." Even 5th wheel campers (RV's = Recreational
Vehicles) are considered vehicles, though they do not move under their
own power...but that of the tow vehicle.

That little electric car, though tiny & slow....moves (is propelled), has wheels
or ski's, & carries a person (or goods). It's a vehicle. I'm not justifying the DUI
charge one way or another, but just offering perspective. I've heard of DUI's
issued in Canada for drunks on Garden Tractors, Bicycles, and those Rascal
things that the infirm use.

I'm sure an argument could be made (due to having wheels, and being
propelled by muscular power) that things like baby-strollers or wheel-chairs
might fit the legal description of vehicles even though they're not traditionally
pictured as such.

Well I understand that bikes could be classified the same... they can pick up some good speed and do some serious damage to something or someone.

Even a ride-on lawnmower could fall under that since although they're slow, they're very heavy and have spinning blades......

Personally for me, something has to have some factor of danger to others or surrounding property to be covered by drinking and driving laws.

As I see it, there was no foreseeable danger or risk to others around him by "operating" this "vehicle" to warrant arresting him and charging him for drinking and driving.

Added:

I mean, when you think about it, those barbie electric cars are designed to be safely operated by kids usually well under the age of 10 years.... and he gets his license suspended for 3 years. I could see a warning.... maybe even have it taken away at the worst.... but I think the legal system went a little overboard over this.

 

[Ron in Regina]

Well I understand that bikes could be classified the same... they can pick up some good speed and do some serious damage to something or someone.

Even a ride-on lawnmower could fall under that since although they're slow, they're very heavy and have spinning blades......

Personally for me, something has to have some factor of danger to others or surrounding property to be covered by drinking and driving laws.

As I see it, there was no foreseeable danger or risk to others around him by "operating" this "vehicle" to warrant arresting him and charging him for drinking and driving.

Added:

I mean, when you think about it, those barbie electric cars are designed to be safely operated by kids usually well under the age of 10 years.... and he gets his license suspended for 3 years. I could see a warning.... maybe even have it taken away at the worst.... but I think the legal system went a little overboard over this.

The speed that a vehicle moves has no bearing on its classification as such.

I'm not justifying the charge by any means, but most traffic laws are in place
to try and have traffic flow in a "predictable" & safe manner, therefore avoiding
accidents, deaths, injuries, insurance claims, etc...

A drunk in an electric car moving less than a mans walking speed, low to the
ground, and out on a roadway, might have been seen as an unpredictable
situation with the only real danger being to himself (ending up under another
vehicle or something). Oh well, life lesson & spilled milk for the guy. Nobody
died, and it raises debates on the issue globally (we're talk'n about it) it seems.

The touchy one would be someone who physically can't walk (mobility issues),
leaving a bar, and getting stopped on their power-chair (Rascal, whatever...).
What's the right call there? They might have left their Car/Truck/Van/Whatever
at the bar....and physically couldn't walk home even if they where sober.

Added:

You know, if you get an impaired charge on a power-chair or a bicycle, they
will still suspend your drivers license (so you can't operate a Car/Truck/Van),
yet you can still operate your power-chair or a bicycle which do not require a
drivers license. How ironic is that? 8O

 

[CDNBear]

I believe federal statute dictates anything with a mode of power other then human. To be a motor vehicle, vessel, aircraft or railway. In some cases, you don't even have to be operating it. Merely assist in its operation is an offense.

There is case law, where a person pushing a car stuck in a snow bank, who was found to be over the limit, was successfully charged and convicted under our laws.

These laws are in place to protect the general public, period.

I can't see Britain being to far off our same legislation.

 

[theconqueror]

I'm so sick of British Humour allready. It get's old England, and it's not even cute anymore. Just because England doesn't have a tough justice system doesn't mean you can get away with just blatentley getting in the Barbie Mobile and start parading around town. However, if that is what it takes to keep true crime down, by all means grab me a barbie ride too, i'm down with it. :-?

 

[AnnaG]

I believe federal statute dictates anything with a mode of power other then human. To be a motor vehicle, vessel, aircraft or railway. In some cases, you don't even have to be operating it. Merely assist in its operation is an offense.

There is case law, where a person pushing a car stuck in a snow bank, who was found to be over the limit, was successfully charged and convicted under our laws.

These laws are in place to protect the general public, period.

I can't see Britain being to far off our same legislation.

I don't think the Brits' laws are particularly stupid, but I do think the application of their law was ludicrous in its application in this instance. Idiots can make rational things seem inane.

 

[CDNBear]

I don't think the Brits' laws are particularly stupid, but I do think the application of their law was ludicrous in its application in this instance.

I don't.

 

[AnnaG]

You'd probably fine someone for not being fast enough at picking up a dropped bit of litter, though.