[Normal]

Originally Posted by Altavia

What part is "The statute says that no type of vehicle may be operated by anyone who is under the influence of alcohol or drugs anywhere “within this state,” including private property." not clear?

So a grandchild is on a ATV zooming sounds the property while Grandpa is enjoying a cold one. The ATV rolls on the side of a hill and kills the child.

An "accident" is now a DUI involuntary homicide.

There goes mowing the lawn on a John Deere and cracking a cold brew.

[Shipping up to Boston]

Originally Posted by Altavia

What part is "The statute says that no type of vehicle may be operated by anyone who is under the influence of alcohol or drugs anywhere “within this state,” including private property." not clear?

So a grandchild is on a ATV zooming sounds the property while Grandpa is enjoying a cold one. The ATV rolls on the side of a hill and kills the child.

An "accident" is now a DUI involuntary homicide.

Hypotheticals are rarely effective here. Maybe show some case law, FL specific....using the OP post as a reference point. Pretty benign stuff!

[bmcgowan13]

Originally Posted by Shipping up to Boston

Hypotheticals are rarely effective here. Maybe show some case law, FL specific....using the OP post as a reference point. Pretty benign stuff!

Google Zink v State of Florida So 2d 1984

Zink recognized you can be charged with DWI even on private property--operation does not have to be a public roadway or highway. The court believes the DWI statute was written to control the condition of the operator--not the location of the offense.

[Shipping up to Boston]

Originally Posted by bmcgowan13

Google Zink v State of Florida So 2d 1984

Zink recognized you can be charged with DWI even on private property--operation does not have to be a public roadway or highway. The court believes the DWI statute was written to control the condition of the operator--not the location of the offense.

You do know we’re talking about an individual, on a 35 acre private property having a beer, right? Not drunk, not rising to a DUI. Yes, that was the context. All the other tentacles that grew out of the OP post is typical of ToTV sensationalism. No mention of grandchildren whizzing around on an ATV while grandpa operates a machine drunk and involuntary homicides. I’m sure you can dig deeper and find a case where a Karen or Darren summons law enforcement to address a neighbor riding on his Toro engaging in a chore while enjoying a cold beverage....and finds probable cause to enter private property to arrest said land owner. Can’t wait. And we wonder why we have a historic shortage of LEO in this country! Smh

[bsloan1960]

Originally Posted by mike234

next comes registering or numbering your cart. and you will pay for it too....its coming

And well it should. It's time outrageous behaviors can be reported and punished.

[biker1]

Where will the requirement come from? State, County, or CDDs? I doubt any of those entities are interested.

Originally Posted by mike234

next comes registering or numbering your cart. and you will pay for it too....its coming

[nn0wheremann]

Originally Posted by UsuallyLurking

North of 466 MMPs are owned by the individual districts. I believe that south of 466 that is the same; the difference *may* be that they are maintained by PWAC as part of common infrastructure. I have heard from Capt. Siemer (sp?), SCSO commander in The Villages area, that they cannot enforce traffic violations on the MMPs (speeding) as they are not public roads. The can enforce not stopping at a stop sign that crosses a public road, and they can enforce DUI violations anywhere.

AFIK when your cart traverses a public road they can ticket you for having an unlicensed LSV if they have observed you traveling faster than 20 MPH on the private MMP. They also ticket you for equipment violations if your cart does not have working LSV equipment such as wipers, hydraulic brakes, proper tires etc., unless you are in Marion County where all the streets are owned by the residents and maintained by CDD4. SO SLOW DOWN.

[Shipping up to Boston]

Originally Posted by biker1

Where will the requirement come from? State, County, or CDDs? I doubt any of those entities are interested.

My guess, whoever thinks it will generate the most revenue.... with little to no enforcement effort

[biker1]

Hydraulic brakes ? Nope.

Originally Posted by nn0wheremann

AFIK when your cart traverses a public road they can ticket you for having an unlicensed LSV if they have observed you traveling faster than 20 MPH on the private MMP. They also ticket you for equipment violations if your cart does not have working LSV equipment such as wipers, hydraulic brakes, proper tires etc., unless you are in Marion County where all the streets are owned by the residents and maintained by CDD4. SO SLOW DOWN.

[dewilson58]

Originally Posted by biker1

Hydraulic brakes ? Nope.

Come on....................it's fun to make stuff up.

[bmcgowan13]

Originally Posted by Shipping up to Boston

You do know we’re talking about an individual, on a 35 acre private property having a beer, right? Not drunk, not rising to a DUI. Yes, that was the context. All the other tentacles that grew out of the OP post is typical of ToTV sensationalism. No mention of grandchildren whizzing around on an ATV while grandpa operates a machine drunk and involuntary homicides.

Apologies. You are correct. I went back and re-read the thread. The OP was about the SCSO golf cart.

Somebody hijacked the thread and we all ended up on a 35-acre farm drinking beer daring the cops to do anything about it. LOL

I should have stuck to the original author's post...

I will be more respectful to the original author in the future....

[ThirdOfFive]

Odd, how common sense goes out the window whenever golf carts and law is discussed.

Just a few points:

1: If it is illegal for law enforcement to be patrolling the MMPs, it is pretty safe to assume that they wouldn’t be.

2: An MMP can be more than those nice two-way stretches of pavement having no physical contact with a public roadway. MMPs often run ON public roadways, partitioned off from automobile traffic by a solid white line. Additionally golf carts often have access to public streets where no MMP exists. As such they’re as much required to obey the rules of the road as any other vehicle. This includes driving over the legal limit (.08).

3. Any vehicle (or pedestrian for that matter) utilizing a public roadway is responsible to do so in a lawful manner.

4. More strict, equitable enforcement of law on ALL public roadways is waaaaay overdue here in TV.

[Fenster]

Originally Posted by Papa_lecki

I don’t need a point, just that I saw a sheriff’s cart on the MMP. He didn’t turn to go onto Hillsborugh Trail, stayed north on the MMP.

The cart had to cost more than $20k, that is one heck of a PR expenditure.

Fascinating

[JRcorvette]

Originally Posted by Papa_lecki

I followed a Sumter County Sherif, is a Sheriff Golf Car, with Red and Blue lights, on the MMP on Buena Vista from Eisenhower, around the gate, around the back of Mangrove, up BV, and under Buena Vista and he continued north.

Golf Car was well marked as a Sheriff’s vehicle - sherif inside had the green uniform on.

The deputy who drives it is a big guy. He said it will do 38 mph with him in it.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by JRcorvette

The deputy who drives it is a big guy. He said it will do 38 mph with him in it.

Darn! SO CLOSE to having a claim of a 40mph golf cart!