Posted 5/10/2007 05:11:00 PM by Douglas

Remember the good old days when you had to do something illegal to get arrested? Me neither.

Ravens quarterback Steve McNair has been arrested in Nashville, Tennessee, and charged with owning a vehicle being driven by a drunken driver.

Police say McNair was a passenger in the silver pickup truck when police pulled the driver over for speeding early this morning.

I'm tired of ranting about how stupid DWI laws are, but isn't one of the key elements of DWI, oh, I don't know, driving? Apparently not in Tennessee

I was arrest for “DUI by Consent.” What does that mean?
In Tennessee, you can be arrested for “DUI by Consent” if you aid someone in the commission of DUI or if you assist or promote the commission of the offense or receive a benefit from the commission of the offense. If charged with “DUI by Consent” you would face the same penalties as if charged with the commission of the underlying offense.
Note: If the driver is not convicted of DUI, you cannot be convicted of “DUI by Consent.”

I was only a passenger, not the owner of the vehicle, can I still be convicted of “DUI by Consent?”
Yes. In Tennessee, ownership of the vehicle is irrelevant. Therefore, depending on the facts of your case, you could be found guilty of “DUI by Consent.” Because you would face the same penalties as the driver, it is important that you consult an attorney who is experienced in DUI defense.

I was the owner of the vehicle, but not present when the driver was arrested for DUI. Could I still be convicted?
Yes, in Tennessee, the law makes no specific requirement that the owner be present in the vehicle to be criminally responsible for the driver’s conduct. Therefore, depending upon the facts of your case, you could be found guilty of “DUI by Consent.” Because you would face the same penalties as the driver, it is important that you consult an attorney who is experienced in DUI defense.

Not only do you not have to be drinking or driving, but you don't even have to be present.

So if the car's owner is guilty for facilitating the "driving," does that mean Budweiser is equally culpable for providing the drinking? Sadly, I know where MADD comes down on that absurd extrapolation.