# BUI Citation



## Alesis (Feb 29, 2012)

Question- Who has had trouble with BUI citations from a yak or canoe?
 I called the DNR office and was told that technically you can receive a citation for being over the limit even if in a yak or canoe.. Both of these forms of vessel fall under PWC. Kind-of scary if you ask me.. Two tall boys while doing some bass fishing on the river and I can get BUI...


----------



## Randy (Feb 29, 2012)

Given what I see on the river every day, this is not enforced.


----------



## huntfourfun (Feb 29, 2012)

Alesis said:


> Question- Who has had trouble with BUI citations from a yak or canoe?
> I called the DNR office and was told that technically you can receive a citation for being over the limit even if in a yak or canoe.. Both of these forms of vessel fall under PWC. Kind-of scary if you ask me.. Two tall boys while doing some bass fishing on the river and I can get BUI...



I was told you can get a BUI while tubing down the river......warden told us that!


----------



## southernboy2147 (Feb 29, 2012)

i heard that there was a GW that would sit down at a local place where alot of tubers were and ppl would go kayakin and give BUI's and DUA's to the tubers. I never came into contact with him thogh


----------



## Nicodemus (Feb 29, 2012)

What do all these folks do with their cans and bottles?


----------



## GunnSmokeer (Feb 29, 2012)

*future unforeseen consequences*

what effects might a Boating-Under -the -Influence conviction have on your credit score? How about your ability to pass a background check for a new job, or a promotion at work?  No matter what the law says now, I can predict that in the future, employers and insurance companies and even gun-permit-issuing agencies will say that a BUI and a DUI and a HUI (Hunting under the influence) are all the same kind of crime, all with the same consequences.  They could make you unemployable, knock your credit score down a few hundred points, raise your insurance rates through the roof, etc.

I don't like the BUI law applied to unpowered or low-powered vehicles (trolling motor at a few MPH only).  I think anybody who gets a BUI should fight it vigorously.  Because you don't know what the consequences might be years down the road.

(Just ask somebody who pled guilty to misdemeanor "family violence" 50 years ago for yelling at his wife, and now lost his gun rights for life.   All because Ralph said to Alice:  "...one of these days, Alice, it'll be POW, ZOOM, to the MOON!"


----------



## Randy (Feb 29, 2012)

Nicodemus said:


> What do all these folks do with their cans and bottles?



I pick up thousands every year.


----------



## ditchdoc24 (Feb 29, 2012)

Similar concept to the fact that you can get a DUI for driving your car/truck in your own driveway. The law doesn't specify that you have to drive on a highway or road, just that you have to be in control of the vehicle. There's a simple solution......just don't do it.


----------



## Darkhorse15 (Mar 1, 2012)

GunnSmokeer said:


> what effects might a Boating-Under -the -Influence conviction have on your credit score? How about your ability to pass a background check for a new job, or a promotion at work?  No matter what the law says now, I can predict that in the future, employers and insurance companies and even gun-permit-issuing agencies will say that a BUI and a DUI and a HUI (Hunting under the influence) are all the same kind of crime, all with the same consequences.  They could make you unemployable, knock your credit score down a few hundred points, raise your insurance rates through the roof, etc.




I'm not sure where you got your info but a DUI has absolutely nothing to do with your credit score unless you have a fine that you never paid.

I can understand giving someone a BUI while they are drunk driving a motorized boat but paddling under the influence should not be a crime.  Just another example of too much gov't intervention.


----------



## huntfourfun (Mar 1, 2012)

Nicodemus said:


> What do all these folks do with their cans and bottles?



I use a water bottle and keep it.

I've seen more Coke cans than beer cans on the river.


----------



## deerhunter09 (Mar 1, 2012)

Nicodemus said:


> What do all these folks do with their cans and bottles?



  If I were a Game Warden, I would be writing tickets left and right to all of the idiots who litter the rivers with their empty beer cans and bottles. It amazes me how many Beer cans are in the rivers, not to mention along the banks.


----------



## Nugefan (Mar 1, 2012)

Nicodemus said:


> What do all these folks do with their cans and bottles?



throw em in the dang river or on the banks ...



Randy said:


> I pick up thousands every year.



Good for you Dude ...


----------



## 2bbshot (Mar 1, 2012)

I put my empties back in the cooler.


----------



## wgatling (Mar 2, 2012)

The following is an account of a fatality on the class II Tuck gorge. It was written by Sam Fowlkes, a Rescue 3 and ACA swiftwater rescue ITE and fellow ACA Board member who lives beside the Tuck.

"On June 3, Thursday around 5:00 PM I heard a frantic knock at my front door. A panicked young man recounted how his friend had gone underwater in Double Drop Rapid and had failed to reappear. He related that 911 had been called. I grabbed my rescue gear, pfd and helmet. We got in my truck and raced down to the rapid. I smelled alcohol on his person and commented, he said his friend had "really been drinking" and was not wearing a pfd. I asked him how much time had transpired since his friend went under; he answered "about 15 minutes." After getting a point last seen (PLS) from the eyewitness I did a quick visual inspection. Upon no sign of the victim (Allen Brisson) I put my canoe in the water and began to search the rapid from different perspectives.

A couple of kayakers came on scene (one of them a friend and colleague - WCU Park + Recreation professor Maurice Phipps) and I directed them to search downstream of the PLS. The search continued and Charlie Walbridge (who was in the area on a NRS sales trip) came on scene. About an hour later the Jackson County Rescue Squad (JCRS) came on scene after searching upstream with a female eyewitness.   -more-


----------



## savage (Mar 3, 2012)

*tube/kayak*

Does anyone actually know someone who got a BUI while on a tube or kayak/canoe within the last 5 years?  I don't mean"a friend of mine knows someone who got a BUI while on one".   I doubt this is going on very often.  Just my thoughts.


----------



## Hntr130 (Mar 6, 2012)

I heard from a deputy of a guy that got arrested for BUI on a tube last summer on the Coosawattee River.  I also heard he ran up the bank and tried to hide from the GW.


----------



## slabhunter (Mar 6, 2012)

As for the idiot drunk in a whitewater river, el tougho.

The Darwin Effect cannot be legislated. And fwiw, if you agree to something, sux to be YOU. 

Probable cause and your 4th Amendment rights only serve you when YOU INVOKE THEM! Remember that and save yourself immense and unnecessary expense.

Oh, the ambulance chasing clowns who practice for-profit law, find a new line of work as you will soon be emptying trashcans when we RESTORE the Law.


----------



## simpleman30 (Mar 6, 2012)

2bbshot said:


> I put my empties back in the cooler.



this.


----------



## Tvveedie (Mar 6, 2012)

the BUI limit is .10 however DUI is .08.  In Georgia, you can operate any water vessel up to the .10 limit.  You may also have an open container while operating it.  

Although safer, I cannot pop my beer when I turn into my neighborhood on the way home from work.  Conversely, I can drink almost a sixer and take the boat out for a spin and be within my legal rights.  

Let's straighten out this discrepancy before debating whether tubing the hooch after a few 40's is criminal or not.


----------



## Randy (Mar 6, 2012)

Tvveedie said:


> the BUI limit is .10 however DUI is .08.  In Georgia, you can operate any water vessel up to the .10 limit.  You may also have an open container while operating it.
> 
> Although safer, I cannot pop my beer when I turn into my neighborhood on the way home from work.  Conversely, I can drink almost a sixer and take the boat out for a spin and be within my legal rights.
> 
> Let's straighten out this discrepancy before debating whether tubing the hooch after a few 40's is criminal or not.




I am with you.  Let's work to get DUI moved up to .10!


----------



## seminoleslayer (Mar 6, 2012)

can get you for being drunk in public if they want to.


----------



## Tvveedie (Mar 6, 2012)

Randy said:


> I am with you.  Let's work to get DUI moved up to .10!



I'm probably gonna have better success at working to get my Blood Alcohol level up to .10


----------



## bucktail (Mar 6, 2012)

Do you even have to show a drivers license if caught under the influence on a boat? Your not driving a car and there's no boat license.


----------



## jcinpc (Mar 6, 2012)

glad someone littered back in the 1870`a or I wouldnt have found this English Ale bottle


----------



## Bhrama (Mar 6, 2012)

I do not think you should be charged with BUI in a non powered vessel. What is the point of a BUI for a guy in a tube?


----------



## Lawnmowerman (Mar 7, 2012)

Bhrama said:


> I do not think you should be charged with BUI in a non powered vessel. What is the point of a BUI for a guy in a tube?



The guy, last year at Pope's Ferry, drowned trying to swim about 20 feet to the bank, from his TUBE. 
IMO, had he NOT been drinking, this young man would still be with us today.

I can't believe yall have any question about this whatsoever!!

Alcohol & water do NOT mix!
Love your Family and go home to them sober, or at least get back home.

Yall are asking,, "why this, or why that"?? 
I'll tell you why,, People DIE,,,


----------



## Randy (Mar 7, 2012)

Lawnmowerman said:


> The guy, last year at Pope's Ferry, drowned trying to swim about 20 feet to the bank, from his TUBE.
> IMO, had he NOT been drinking, this young man would still be with us today.
> 
> I can't believe yall have any question about this whatsoever!!
> ...


Probably should be required to have a PFD on also.


----------



## savage (Mar 7, 2012)

*license?*

picture id is required for power boats if the operator is 16 years or older.  not tubes/kayaks.  no boating license here .......yet.


----------



## Fletch_W (Mar 7, 2012)

southernboy2147 said:


> i heard that there was a GW that would sit down at a local place where alot of tubers were and ppl would go kayakin and give BUI's and DUA's to the tubers. I never came into contact with him thogh



I know of a similar situation, possibly same location and wardens, but they weren't going after the beer drinkers, just the weed smokers. Staking out a popular stop on a river ride, and waiting with binoculars for the ganja to get pulled out.


----------



## Fletch_W (Mar 7, 2012)

2bbshot said:


> I put my empties back in the cooler.



And that's all fine and dandy, until the officer wants to check your cooler for fish, because you have fishing rods on board. When he sees 14 beer cans floating in your cooler, and no fish, then what are you going to do?


----------



## tentcampers (Mar 7, 2012)

I am stupid. Drinking makes me brave. Stupid, brave, and water don't mix. No thanks, I'll pass.


----------



## JustUs4All (Mar 7, 2012)

Lawnmowerman said:


> The guy, last year at Pope's Ferry, drowned trying to swim about 20 feet to the bank, from his TUBE.
> IMO, had he NOT been drinking, this young man would still be with us today.
> 
> I can't believe yall have any question about this whatsoever!!
> ...




People die driving cars, cutting grass, climbing stairs, and hunting too.  Should the Government forbid these activities because people die while doing them?

It is arguably the Government's place to protect people from the drunken behavior of others.  It is not the Government's place to protect the drunk from his own behavior.


----------



## Bhrama (Mar 7, 2012)

JustUs4All said:


> People die driving cars, cutting grass, climbing stairs, and hunting too.  Should the Government forbid these activities because people die while doing them?
> 
> It is arguably the Government's place to protect people from the drunken behavior of others.  It is not the Government's place to protect the drunk from his own behavior.



Good post sir.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 7, 2012)

We had a Game Warden make us get out of the river once while tubing with no pfd's. He said since we were using the tubes to navigate the river, we needed a pfd.


----------



## JustUs4All (Mar 8, 2012)

I guess next time you will have to tow a throwable on a line from the inner tube.  So long as it is easily accessible you should be OK.  That is unless he wants to argue that it is not  on board the tube.   

GWs come in all shapes, sizes and demeanor though.  I watched a GW on the Oconee years ago lend a PFD to a boat that was one short.  Had that guy ever needed to gave me a ticket I think I would have thankd him for it.


----------



## huntfourfun (Mar 8, 2012)

JustUs4All said:


> People die driving cars, cutting grass, climbing stairs, and hunting too.  Should the Government forbid these activities because people die while doing them?
> 
> It is arguably the Government's place to protect people from the drunken behavior of others.  It is not the Government's place to protect the drunk from his own behavior.


----------



## 2bbshot (Mar 8, 2012)

Fletch_W said:


> And that's all fine and dandy, until the officer wants to check your cooler for fish, because you have fishing rods on board. When he sees 14 beer cans floating in your cooler, and no fish, then what are you going to do?



Number one did I say I was going to drink 14 beers an paddle my canoe? Also of he looked in my cooler he wouldn't find any fish, I don't keep fish. The point was not everyone who drinks a beer throws it in the river.


----------



## justrun (Mar 9, 2012)

jcinpc said:


> glad someone littered back in the 1870`a or I wouldnt have found this English Ale bottle



Nice find.


----------



## Davis31052 (Mar 9, 2012)

Fletch_W said:


> And that's all fine and dandy, until the officer wants to check your cooler for fish, because you have fishing rods on board. When he sees 14 beer cans floating in your cooler, and no fish, then what are you going to do?



Just crush the empties and tell the GW you were picking up trash.


----------



## crackerdave (Mar 9, 2012)

JustUs4All said:


> I guess next time you will have to tow a throwable on a line from the inner tube.  So long as it is easily accessible you should be OK.  That is unless he wants to argue that it is not  on board the tube.
> 
> GWs come in all shapes, sizes and demeanor though.  I watched a GW on the Oconee years ago lend a PFD to a boat that was one short.  Had that guy ever needed to gave me a ticket I think I would have thankd him for it.



This is true! While I can say that the Conservation rangers,aka GW's in my neck of th' woods are good,honest men,there are a few around who don't even _know_ the laws they are supposed to be enforcing.

There are enough laws already to protect us from ourselves.I don't see the reason to write a BUI ticket for a rowed or paddled boat,any more than I can see a reason to cite a bicycle rider who's had a few,or a pedestrian - unless they are endangering someone other than themselves.
We all make our own choices - choose wrong,and you might get killed or cited.


----------



## Fletch_W (Mar 9, 2012)

Davis31052 said:


> Just crush the empties and tell the GW you were picking up trash.



Then I'd have to bring a variety pack, and that's too much trouble. And besides, if a cop hates anything more than a drunk, it's being lied to.


----------



## southernboy2147 (Mar 9, 2012)

Lawnmowerman said:


> The guy, last year at Pope's Ferry, drowned trying to swim about 20 feet to the bank, from his TUBE.
> IMO, had he NOT been drinking, this young man would still be with us today.
> 
> I can't believe yall have any question about this whatsoever!!
> ...




I didnt hear about a guy dieing last year but 2 years ago my buddy drowned down there. all kinds of rumors spread around about him being drunk and all. but the truth is he was a 18 year old kid that was floating with his fiance, her parents and sibblings along with his parents and siblings. they were not drinkin he jumped, believed he hit a rock and never came back up. he was found way down river the next day. I never heard a for sure and i dont think they ever found out exactly what happened to him. but not all deaths come from alcohol on the river.

with that said. I float popes ferry a few times every year. and alot of my buddys do as well. almost everytime we go there are at least a 100 folks on the river, 95% of which are drinkin. ive never had a problem drinkin and floatin. IMO its people who are not very good swimmers in the first place that get drunk and become horrible swimmers. That or people drink there selfs into a coma which is then not the alcohol's fault, its the person who is drinking it.


----------



## Rebel 3 (Mar 9, 2012)

There are situations where someone under the influence could put others in danger, even if they are only in a kayak or canoe.  What if they were out at night in the middle of a lake.  Being under the influence could affect their judgement and reaction time.  At night in a non-motorized vessel you are required to atleast have a hand held light.  Being under the influence could cause them to fail to use the light when other boats were around, which could put others in danger.  There are numerous other situations I could come up with.  It is all in the officer's discretion.


----------



## Throwback (Mar 10, 2012)

savage said:


> picture id is required for power boats if the operator is 16 years or older.  not tubes/kayaks.  no boating license here .......yet.



yes there is a requirement on them too



> 52-7-8.3.  Operation of watercraft; identification; operation by minors
> 
> 
> (a) A person age 16 or over may operate any vessel or personal watercraft on any of the waters of this state, and such person shall have in such vessel proper identification.



definition of vessel:



> (25) "Vessel" means every description of watercraft, other than a seaplane on the water or a sailboard, used or capable of being used as a means of transportation on water and specifically includes, but is not limited to, inflatable rafts and homemade vessels; provided, however, Code Section 52-7-18, relating to rules of the road for boat traffic, shall be applicable to sailboards.


----------



## JustUs4All (Mar 10, 2012)

Rebel 3 said:


> There are situations where someone under the influence could put others in danger, even if they are only in a kayak or canoe.  What if they were out at night in the middle of a lake.  Being under the influence could affect their judgement and reaction time.  At night in a non-motorized vessel you are required to atleast have a hand held light.  Being under the influence could cause them to fail to use the light when other boats were around, which could put others in danger.  There are numerous other situations I could come up with.  It is all in the officer's discretion.



If he didn't show the light, he would be in violation of another reg. anyway.  I would just about be willing to be that in every other situation you could come up with the drinker would be in violation of another law, ordinance, or reg. as well.  

Govt. likes to make laws and authorize regs. The simple act of two folks robbing a bank with with another in the getaway car is in violation of more laws and regs. than I have time to list.  Making another law against robbing a bank while under the influence of alcohol will not cause any fewer banks to be robbed.  

It might make you feel better, but it will not do any good.


----------



## SASS249 (Mar 10, 2012)

JustUs4All said:


> If he didn't show the light, he would be in violation of another reg. anyway.  I would just about be willing to be that in every other situation you could come up with the drinker would be in violation of another law, ordinance, or reg. as well.
> 
> Govt. likes to make laws and authorize regs. The simple act of two folks robbing a bank with with another in the getaway car is in violation of more laws and regs. than I have time to list.  Making another law against robbing a bank while under the influence of alcohol will not cause any fewer banks to be robbed.
> 
> It might make you feel better, but it will not do any good.



How about this one:  Boater under the influence, maybe not even legally drunk, overturns and gets caught in a rapid.  Friends call for help, swiftwater rescue team responds and in trying to rescue him one of them is injured and/or dies.  If he was not legally drunk then I don't see he violated anything but it does not take being legally drunk to be impaired mentally and physically.

Sorry, been on too many search and rescue events where alcohol played a role, maybe not the only role but was part of the problem.  Every search and rescue puts other people at risk for something YOU did.

I probably have spent more time on rivers in canoes than most and my one rule for anyone with me:  No alcohol on the water.  Done for the day then sure but not on the water.

Not interested in arguing about whether BUI makes sense for non-powered vessels, but ask yourself:  If I get in trouble at least partly because of drinking am I going to call for help?  If so do I have a right to put other people in danger because of something I did that could have been avoided?

I agree you can pass all the laws you want and some people will ignore them, but as far as I am concerned no alcohol when on the water just makes sense.


----------



## injun joe (Mar 10, 2012)

"If so do I have a right to put other people in danger because of something I did that could have been avoided?"

Doesn't this question pertain to every situation, regardless of drinking? We could avoid ever putting anyone in harms way simply by outlawing use of the river by citizens. I'm surprised someone hasn't already thought of it.


----------



## JustUs4All (Mar 10, 2012)

SASS249 said:


> How about this one:  Boater under the influence, maybe not even legally drunk, overturns and gets caught in a rapid.  Friends call for help, swiftwater rescue team responds and in trying to rescue him one of them is injured and/or dies.  If he was not legally drunk then I don't see he violated anything but it does not take being legally drunk to be impaired mentally and physically.
> 
> Sorry, been on too many search and rescue events where alcohol played a role, maybe not the only role but was part of the problem.  Every search and rescue puts other people at risk for something YOU did.
> 
> ...




Whether the boater in distress is intoxicated or not, your choice to attempt a rescue is just that, your choice.  If you are harmed in the effort It is not the responsibility of the boater in distress.


----------



## Throwback (Mar 10, 2012)

JustUs4All said:


> If he didn't show the light, he would be in violation of another reg. anyway.  I would just about be willing to be that in every other situation you could come up with the drinker would be in violation of another law, ordinance, or reg. as well.
> 
> Govt. likes to make laws and authorize regs. The simple act of two folks robbing a bank with with another in the getaway car is in violation of more laws and regs. than I have time to list.  Making another law against robbing a bank while under the influence of alcohol will not cause any fewer banks to be robbed.
> 
> It might make you feel better, but it will not do any good.





in  a perfect libertarian dream world it always works out because reality isn't a factor.






T


----------



## savage (Mar 11, 2012)

*i.d.*

I stand corrected.............i will pick up my "punk card" from you at next region meeting.


----------



## centerc (Mar 11, 2012)

My uncle got one years ago at a corps campground in a canoe> Him and my Aunt were fighting and raising cane late at night he was paddling around when the rangers showed up.


----------



## Throwback (Mar 11, 2012)

savage said:


> I stand corrected.............i will pick up my "punk card" from you at next region meeting.


----------



## southernboy2147 (Mar 12, 2012)

SASS249 said:


> How about this one:  Boater under the influence, maybe not even legally drunk, overturns and gets caught in a rapid.  Friends call for help, swiftwater rescue team responds and in trying to rescue him one of them is injured and/or dies.  If he was not legally drunk then I don't see he violated anything but it does not take being legally drunk to be impaired mentally and physically.
> 
> Sorry, been on too many search and rescue events where alcohol played a role, maybe not the only role but was part of the problem.  Every search and rescue puts other people at risk for something YOU did.
> 
> ...



people who are "rescuers" know there risk going into it. its there choice and they know this...


----------



## savage (Mar 14, 2012)

*throw-up*

u aint right.  Get 10-8!


----------



## Nitram4891 (Mar 14, 2012)

Nicodemus said:


> What do all these folks do with their cans and bottles?



Empties go back in the cooler.


----------



## Nitram4891 (Mar 14, 2012)

SASS249 said:


> How about this one:  Boater under the influence, maybe not even legally drunk, overturns and gets caught in a rapid.  Friends call for help, swiftwater rescue team responds and in trying to rescue him one of them is injured and/or dies.  If he was not legally drunk then I don't see he violated anything but it does not take being legally drunk to be impaired mentally and physically.
> 
> Sorry, been on too many search and rescue events where alcohol played a role, maybe not the only role but was part of the problem.  Every search and rescue puts other people at risk for something YOU did.
> 
> ...



Really?    You stick to your rules, which you have the freedom to make.  I'll stick to my rules, which I have the freedom to make.  We should probably ban eating king crab too, because going out in Alaska and fishing for those is way too dangerous, and we are forcing too many fishermen to lose their lives just so we can dunk some king crab in some butter.


----------



## karlfishing (May 10, 2012)

I am still wondering is it illegal to drink and paddle a kayak?  what does the law say?


----------



## Throwback (May 10, 2012)

karlfishing said:


> I am still wondering is it illegal to drink and paddle a kayak?  what does the law say?



that its illegal to operate a vessel while under the influence. 

T


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (May 10, 2012)

Throwback said:


> that its illegal to operate a vessel while under the influence.
> 
> T



So simple a caveman can understand it.


----------



## Throwback (May 10, 2012)

definition of "vessel" in title 52:
 (25) "Vessel" means every description of watercraft, other than a seaplane on the water or a sailboard, used or capable of being used as a means of transportation on water and specifically includes, but is not limited to, inflatable rafts and homemade vessels; provided, however, Code Section 52-7-18, relating to rules of the road for boat traffic, shall be applicable to sailboards.

definition of "operate" under title 52:
 (14) "Operate" means to navigate or otherwise use a vessel which is not at anchor or moored, _including vessels which are being paddled_, are drifting, or are being powered by machinery.




title 52 ref. operating above under the influence. 



52-7-12.  Operation of watercraft while under influence of alcohol or drugs; legal drug use not exempted; blood and other chemical tests; test refusal; owner's liability for allowing another to operate while intoxicated; civil and criminal actions; child endangerment 


   (a) No person shall operate, navigate, steer, or drive any moving vessel, or be in actual physical control of any moving vessel, nor shall any person manipulate any moving water skis, moving aquaplane, moving surfboard, or similar moving device while:

   (1) Under the influence of alcohol to the extent that it is less safe for the person to operate, navigate, steer, drive, manipulate, or be in actual physical control of a moving vessel, moving water skis, moving aquaplane, moving surfboard, or similar moving device;

   (2) Under the influence of any drug to the extent that it is less safe for the person to operate, navigate, steer, drive, manipulate, or be in actual physical control of a moving vessel, moving water skis, moving aquaplane, moving surfboard, or similar moving device;

   (3) Under the combined influence of alcohol and any drug to the extent that it is less safe for the person to operate, navigate, steer, drive, manipulate, or be in actual physical control of a moving vessel, moving water skis, moving aquaplane, moving surfboard, or similar moving device;

   (4) The person's alcohol concentration is 0.10 grams or more at any time within three hours after such operating, navigating, steering, driving, manipulating, or being in actual physical control of a moving vessel, moving water skis, moving aquaplane, moving surfboard, or similar moving device from alcohol consumed before such operating, navigating, steering, driving, manipulating, or being in actual physical control ended; or

   (5) Subject to the provisions of subsection (b) of this Code section, there is any amount of marijuana or a controlled substance, as defined in Code Section 16-13-21, present in the person's blood or urine, or both, including the metabolites and derivatives of each or both without regard to whether or not any alcohol is present in the person's breath or blood.

(b) The fact that any person charged with violating this Code section is or has been legally entitled to use a drug shall not constitute a defense against any charge of violating this Code section; provided, however, that such person shall not be in violation of this Code section unless such person is rendered incapable of operating, navigating, steering, driving, manipulating, or being in actual physical control of a moving vessel, moving water skis, moving aquaplane, moving surfboard, or similar moving device safely as a result of using a drug other than alcohol which such person is legally entitled to use.

(c) Upon trial of any civil or criminal action or proceeding arising out of acts alleged to have been committed by any person while operating, navigating, steering, driving, manipulating, or being in actual physical control of a moving vessel, moving water skis, moving aquaplane, moving surfboard, or similar moving device while under the influence of alcohol or drugs, evidence of the amount of alcohol or drug in a person's blood, urine, breath, or other bodily substance at the alleged time, as determined by a chemical analysis of the person's blood, urine, breath, or other bodily substances, shall be admissible. Where such chemical test is made, the following provisions shall apply:

   (1) Chemical analysis of the person's blood, urine, breath, or other bodily substance, to be considered valid under this Code section, shall have been performed according to methods approved by the Division of Forensic Sciences of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation and by an individual possessing a valid permit issued by the Division of Forensic Sciences for this purpose. The Division of Forensic Sciences of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation is authorized to approve satisfactory techniques or methods to ascertain the qualifications and competence of individuals to conduct analyses and to issue permits, which shall be subject to termination or revocation at the discretion of the Division of Forensic Sciences;

   (2) When a person shall undergo a chemical test at the request of a law enforcement officer under subsection (e) of this Code section, only a physician, registered nurse, laboratory technician, emergency medical technician, or other qualified person may withdraw blood for the purpose of determining the alcoholic content therein, provided that this limitation shall not apply to the taking of breath or urine specimens. No physician, registered nurse, laboratory technician, emergency medical technician, or other qualified person or employer thereof shall incur any civil or criminal liability as a result of the medically proper obtaining of such blood specimens when requested in writing by a law enforcement officer;

   (3) The person tested may have a physician or a qualified technician, chemist, registered nurse, or other qualified person of his or her own choosing administer a chemical test or tests in addition to any administered at the direction of a law enforcement officer. The justifiable failure or inability to obtain an additional test shall not preclude the admission of evidence relating to the test or tests taken at the direction of a law enforcement officer; and

   (4) Upon request of the person who shall submit to a chemical test or tests at the request of a law enforcement officer, full information concerning the test or tests shall be made available to such person or such person's attorney. The arresting officer at the time of arrest shall advise the person arrested of his or her rights to a chemical test or tests according to this Code section.

(d) Upon the trial of any civil or criminal action or proceeding arising out of acts alleged to have been committed by any person while operating, navigating, steering, driving, manipulating, or being in actual physical control of a moving vessel, moving water skis, moving aquaplane, moving surfboard, or similar moving device while under the influence of alcohol, the amount of alcohol in the person's blood at the time alleged, as shown by chemical analysis of the person's blood, urine, breath, or other bodily substance, shall give rise to the following presumptions:

   (1) If there was at that time an alcohol concentration of 0.05 grams or less, it shall be presumed that the person was not under the influence of alcohol, as prohibited by paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of subsection (a) of this Code section;

   (2) If there was at that time an alcohol concentration in excess of 0.05 grams but less than 0.08 grams, such fact shall not give rise to any presumption that the person was or was not under the influence of alcohol, as prohibited by paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of subsection (a) of this Code section, but such fact may be considered with other competent evidence in determining whether the person was under the influence of alcohol, as prohibited by paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of subsection (a) of this Code section;

   (3) If there was at that time an alcohol concentration of 0.08 grams or more, it shall be presumed that the person was under the influence of alcohol, as prohibited by paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of subsection (a) of this Code section; and

   (4) If there was at that time or within three hours after operating, navigating, steering, driving, manipulating, or being in actual physical control of a moving vessel, moving water skis, moving aquaplane, moving surfboard, or similar moving device from alcohol consumed before such operating, navigating, steering, driving, manipulating, or being in actual physical control ended an alcohol concentration of 0.10 or more grams, the person shall be in violation of paragraph (4) of subsection (a) of this Code section.

(e) The State of Georgia considers that persons who are under the influence of alcohol or drugs while operating a vessel on the waters of this state constitute a direct and immediate threat to the welfare and safety of the general public. Therefore, any person who operates a vessel upon the waters of this state shall be deemed to have given consent, subject to subsections (c) and (d) of this Code section, to a chemical test or tests of his or her blood, breath, or urine or other bodily substances for the purpose of determining the alcoholic or drug content of his or her blood if arrested for any offense arising out of acts alleged to have been committed while the person was operating, navigating, steering, driving, manipulating, or in actual physical control of a moving vessel, moving water skis, moving aquaplane, moving surfboard, or similar moving device while under the influence of alcohol or any drug. The test or tests shall be administered at the request of a law enforcement officer having reasonable grounds to believe that the person has been operating or was in actual physical control of a vessel upon the waters of this state while under the influence of alcohol or any drug. Subject to subsections (c) and (d) of this Code section, the requesting law enforcement officer shall designate which of the aforesaid tests shall be administered.

(f) Any person who is dead, unconscious, or otherwise in a condition rendering him or her incapable of refusal shall be deemed not to have withdrawn the consent provided by subsection (e) of this Code section, and the test or tests may be administered subject to subsections (c) and (d) of this Code section.

(g) If a person refuses, upon the request of a law enforcement officer, to submit to a chemical test designated by the law enforcement officer as provided in subsection (e) of this Code section, no test shall be given; however, such refusal shall be admissible in evidence.

(h) In the event of a boating accident involving a fatality, the investigating coroner or medical examiner having jurisdiction shall direct that a chemical blood test to determine blood alcohol concentration (BAC) or the presence of drugs be performed on the dead person or persons and that the results of such test be properly recorded in his or her report.

(i) It shall be unlawful for the owner of any vessel knowingly to allow or authorize any person to operate such vessel or to manipulate any water skis, aquaplane, surfboard, or similar device being towed by such vessel when the owner knows or has reasonable grounds to believe that said person is intoxicated or under the influence of alcohol or drugs in violation of this Code section.

(j) In any civil or criminal action or proceeding arising out of acts alleged to have been committed by any person in violation of subsection (k) of this Code section, if there was at that time or within three hours after operating, navigating, steering, driving, or being in actual physical control of a moving vessel or personal watercraft from alcohol consumed before such operating, navigating, steering, driving, or being in actual physical control ended an alcohol concentration of 0.02 grams or more in the person's blood, breath, or urine, the person shall be in violation of subsection (k) of this Code section.
   (k)(1) A person under the age of 21 shall not operate, navigate, steer, drive, or be in actual physical control of any moving vessel, moving water skis, moving aquaplane, moving surfboard or similar moving device, or personal watercraft while the person's alcohol concentration is 0.02 grams or more at any time within three hours after such operating, navigating, steering, driving, or being in actual physical control from alcohol consumed before such operating, navigating, steering, driving, or being in actual physical control ended.

   (2) No plea of nolo contendere shall be accepted for any person under the age of 21 charged with a violation of this Code section.

(l) A person who violates this Code section while transporting in a moving vessel or personal watercraft or towing on water skis, an aquaplane, a surfboard or similar device a child under the age of 14 years is guilty of the separate offense of endangering a child by operating a moving vessel or personal watercraft under the influence of alcohol or drugs. The offense of endangering a child by operating a moving vessel or personal watercraft under the influence of alcohol or drugs shall not be merged with the offense of operating a vessel under the influence of alcohol or drugs for the purposes of prosecution and sentencing. An offender who is convicted of a violation of this subsection shall be punished in accordance with the provisions of subsection (d) of Code Section 16-12-1, relating to the offense of contributing to the delinquency, unruliness, or deprivation of a child.

HISTORY: Ga. L. 1968, p. 487, § 10; Ga. L. 1973, p. 1427, § 11; Ga. L. 1986, p. 612, § 1; Ga. L. 1987, p. 3, § 52; Ga. L. 1992, p. 2075, § 3; Ga. L. 1994, p. 680, § 5; Ga. L. 1998, p. 672, § 1.


----------



## fish hawk (May 10, 2012)

I watched quite a few drunks on the Flint this past Saturday.Stumbling, bumbling,wobbling,slipping down falling on rocks,hanging on to the side of there canoes because they couldn't manage to get themselves into them....I hate a bunch of drunks!!!


----------



## SigEp614 (May 11, 2012)

injun joe said:


> "If so do I have a right to put other people in danger because of something I did that could have been avoided?"
> 
> Doesn't this question pertain to every situation, regardless of drinking? We could avoid ever putting anyone in harms way simply by outlawing use of the river by citizens. I'm surprised someone hasn't already thought of it.



This is true. If you look at it this way, we should outlaw the use of cars because every time you drive one, you risk putting someone at risk for trying to help you if you cause an accident.


----------

