73

Tedd owns a riding horse. One day, Tedd notices that his horse has somehow gotten itself drunk. Tedd has someplace where he needs to be, so he saddles up his drunken horse and rides to his destination.

Has a crime been committed?

Answers are welcome from any jurisdiction where alcohol is legal, but I'm especially interested in how the law stands in .

(Google is unhelpful here, as searches for "is it illegal to ride a drunk horse" or similar make it think I'm trying to ask it whether riding a horse is illegal if the rider is drunk, when what I'm actually interested in is the situation if the horse is drunk.)

Vikki
  • 931
  • 3
  • 9
  • 24

7 Answers7

29

In Germany, the described situation could lead to a fine up to € 2000.

As the rider of a horse, you are subject to the existing traffic rules and regulations for all vehicle traffic (§28(2) StVO).

As the 'driver' of the vehicle, it is your responsibility to ensure that the vehicle is safe to drive (§23(1) StVO).

The administrative offense for the rider of a horse is defined in §49(2) StVO and the possible fine for this offense in §24(3)(5) StVG.

  • Straßenverkehrs-Ordnung (StVO) 2013
    • Road Traffic Regulations
      • no English version of law text
    • § 23 - Sonstige Pflichten von Fahrzeugführenden

      (1)... Wer ein Fahrzeug führt, hat zudem dafür zu sorgen, dass das Fahrzeug, der Zug, das Gespann sowie die Ladung und die Besetzung vorschriftsmäßig sind und dass die Verkehrssicherheit des Fahrzeugs durch die Ladung oder die Besetzung nicht leidet. ...

      § 23 - Other obligations of vehicle drivers
      (1)... Anyone who drives a vehicle must also ensure that the vehicle, the train, the combination, the load and the occupants are in accordance with the regulations and that the road safety of the vehicle is not impaired by the load or the occupants. ...

    • § 28 - Tiere

      (2) Wer reitet, Pferde oder Vieh führt oder Vieh treibt, unterliegt sinngemäß den für den gesamten Fahrverkehr einheitlich bestehenden Verkehrsregeln und Anordnungen. ...

      § 28 - Animals
      ...
      (2) Anyone who rides horses, leads horses or cattle or drives cattle is subject to the existing traffic rules and regulations for all vehicle traffic. ...

    • § 49 - Ordnungswidrigkeiten

      (2) Ordnungswidrig im Sinne des § 24 Absatz 1 des Straßenverkehrsgesetzes handelt auch, wer vorsätzlich oder fahrlässig

      ...
      4. Als Reiter, Führer von Pferden, Treiber oder Führer von Vieh entgegen § 28 Absatz 2 einer für den gesamten Fahrverkehr einheitlich bestehenden Verkehrsregel oder Anordnung zuwiderhandelt,
      ...

      § 49 - Administrative offenses
      ...
      (2) Anyone who acts intentionally or negligently is also an administrative offense within the meaning of Section 24 (1) of the Road Traffic Act

      • [§ 24(3)(5) StVG: Fine up to € 2000]

      ...
      4. As a rider, handler of horses, drivers or handlers of cattle, contrary to § 28 paragraph 2, violates a traffic rule or order that applies uniformly to all traffic,
      ...

What is a 'vehicle' (Fahrzeug)?

Everything that is not definded in §24 StVO:

(1) Schiebe- und Greifreifenrollstühle, Rodelschlitten, Kinderwagen, Roller, Kinderfahrräder, Inline-Skates, Rollschuhe und ähnliche nicht motorbetriebene Fortbewegungsmittel sind nicht Fahrzeuge im Sinne der Verordnung. Für den Verkehr mit diesen Fortbewegungsmitteln gelten die Vorschriften für den Fußgängerverkehr entsprechend.
(2) Mit Krankenfahrstühlen oder mit anderen als in Absatz 1 genannten Rollstühlen darf dort, wo Fußgängerverkehr zulässig ist, gefahren werden, jedoch nur mit Schrittgeschwindigkeit.

(1) sliding and push rim wheelchairs, toboggans, strollers, scooters, children's bikes, inline skates, roller skates and similar non-motorized means of transportation are not vehicles for the purposes of the regulation. For the marketing of these means of transport regulations for pedestrian traffic apply accordingly.
(2) With wheelchairs or with other as mentioned in paragraph 1 wheelchairs may be driven where pedestrian traffic is allowed, but only at walking speed.

What is a 'Motor vehicle' (Kraftfahrzeug)?

§1 - Zulassung - Straßenverkehrsgesetz (StVG)
...
(2) Als Kraftfahrzeuge im Sinne dieses Gesetzes gelten Landfahrzeuge, die durch Maschinenkraft bewegt werden, ohne an Bahngleise gebunden zu sein.

(2) Motor vehicles within the meaning of this Act are land vehicles that are moved by machine power without being tied to railway tracks.

Glorfindel
  • 439
  • 1
  • 7
  • 18
Mark Johnson
  • 5,634
  • 1
  • 14
  • 31
  • 25
    From your cites I can't see that riding a drunken horse is an offence, unless we assume that a drunken horse is unsafe or that there is a regulation stating that a horse must be sober to be ridden. – Pere May 22 '22 at 11:52
  • 18
    @Pere A Pre-condition to recieve and retain a drivers licence is the knowlage that one is required to check the road safety of the vehicle before driving. Two of these conditions, not explicidly stated in this law, is that the steering wheel and brakes must function correctly. If you tell a Judge that because the road safety of a horse is (also) not explicidly cited, then that judge may come to the conclusion that you pose a greater threat to the public saftey than the drunken horse. What then happens is up to the Judge. – Mark Johnson May 22 '22 at 13:21
  • 7
    @MarkJohnson: Unless the horse being drunk adversely affects its controllability (I don't know if it does or not, just throwing this out there), one could make an argument that the horse being drunk doesn't make it unsafe to ride. – Vikki May 22 '22 at 14:47
  • 1
    @Vikki Interesting thought, but in the end I doubt that the percentage of cases are very high where a judge would agree to that hypothesis. – Mark Johnson May 22 '22 at 17:00
  • 1
    I'm confused. Is the horse riding the human? – Harper - Reinstate Monica May 22 '22 at 21:46
  • 2
    @Harper-ReinstateUkraine No, the horse is a vehicle that is not safe to 'drive' since the rider may not be capable of controlling it properly. – Mark Johnson May 22 '22 at 22:39
  • 1
    @Vikki I expect not knowing the effect of drunkenness on horses is fairly commonplace. On this reading of German law I think it would be held that, assuming the rider didn't have unusually extensive knowledge of the behaviour of drunk horses, they would have been unable to "ensure" the horse was safe to "drive". – Will May 23 '22 at 13:55
  • 17
    This answer really puts the cart before the drunken horse. It could very well be the case that some alcohol may make an otherwise skittish horse less skittish, and thus safer. You whole answer is based on the assumption that a drunk horse (presumably over some legal limit calibrated to the human body) is unsafe to ride, or represents an unsafe vehicle. – Gregory Currie May 23 '22 at 16:54
  • 1
    @GregoryCurrie I don't think that's true. The burden is on the driver to ensure that their vehicle is safe, not to avoid knowing if the vehicle is unsafe. In the case of a sober horse this is achieved by training on private land and knowing the horse's abilities and temperament before taking it on a road. If drunkenness is an unknown change in mental state, the possibility of it being an improvement rather than a deterioration is immaterial. Nice pun though! – Will May 24 '22 at 11:05
  • 1
    @GregoryCurrie Yes, a fine would be imposed if the authority came to the conclusion that the horse was not fit to be ridden on public roads. The OP stated that the rider noticed that the horse was drunk, but rode it anyway. This would be an additional factor. – Mark Johnson May 24 '22 at 11:23
  • 1
    @MarkJohnson: There is a line of reasonability here. A rider cannot know everything about a horse, whether we're talking medically or in relation to how a horse may or may not choose to respond. You cannot reasonably expect a driver to have perfect knowledge (nor control) over a horse, which means that it is very much up for debate how drunk a horse would need to be for a rider to be considered to willfully and knowingly ride a provably unsafe "vehicle". While the rider would presumably remain liable for the damages caused by whatever goes wrong, that's not the same as calling it a crime. – Flater May 24 '22 at 14:33
  • 1
    Setting aside whatever reasonable objections one might raise regarding safe limits for consumption, by horses, of alcohol...this interpretation would also seem to imply that, under existing regulations, all horses must come equipped with serviceable seat belts and two brake lights. For that reason alone, I find it unlikely that this interpretation is accurate. – Andrew Coonce May 24 '22 at 18:30
  • 3
    @AndrewCoonce The requirement for 'serviceable seat belts and two brake lights' are defined in §§ 35a,53 Straßenverkehrs-Zulassungs-Ordnung (StVZO) for Kraftfahrzeuge (Motor vehicles). Since a horse is not a Motor vehicle by definition in §1(2) StVG ('land vehicles that are moved by machine power without being tied to railway tracks'), this answer does not imply that anything that applies only to a Motor vehicle also applies to a horse. The road safety of the vehicle applies, however, to all vehicles (and thus also to a horse). – Mark Johnson May 24 '22 at 20:52
24

169A.20 MN Stat. states that

It is a crime for any person to drive, operate, or be in physical control of any motor vehicle, as defined in section 169A.03, subdivision 15, within this state or on any boundary water of this state when: (1) the person is under the influence of alcohol...

A horse is a motor vehicle under Minnesota law, but the prohibition applies specifically to the person who drives the motor vehicle. It is therefore not even illegal for a drunk horse to drive motor vehicle (including another drunk horse).

You posit that Teddd "notices that his horse has somehow gotten itself drunk", which can only reasonably be interpreted to mean that he did not cause the horse to get intoxicated. §343.21 defines the crime of mistreating animals. Nothing in the statute clearly states that it is a crime to make an animal do ordinary animal-work when the animal is in an impaired state. Subd. 7 requires that

No person shall willfully instigate or in any way further any act of cruelty to any animal or animals, or any act tending to produce cruelty to animals.

We turn to §343.20 to determine what "cruelty" is:

"Torture" or "cruelty" means every act, omission, or neglect which causes or permits unnecessary or unjustifiable pain, suffering, or death.

I assume that the horse did not die from getting ridden. It then depends on whether riding a horse while it is drunk causes, beyond reasonable doubt, the horse to suffer or experience pain. And then the state would have to prove that the suffering was unnecessary.

user6726
  • 214,947
  • 11
  • 343
  • 576
  • 11
    Interesting answer. Can you elaborate on "A horse is a motor vehicle under Minnesota law"? That sounds weird, since horses have been in Minnesota long before there were cars and obviously were known when that law was written. – PMF May 22 '22 at 08:22
  • 10
    "A horse is a motor vehicle under Minnesota law," OK, I know laws can end up with lots of weird stuff in them, but this really made me ROFL. Now I can't mentally unsee a whole bunch of hypothetical images about "motorized horses". You made my day! – LorenzoDonati4Ukraine-OnStrike May 22 '22 at 11:29
  • 12
    Regarding the horse-as-motor-vehicle issue, a quick google for "horse dui minnesota" brings up a whole bunch of results from both lawyers and law enforcement that seem fairly certain that, while horses may count as vehicles under Minnesota law, they do not count as motor vehicles (and, thus, you can't get a DWI for riding one drunk). – Vikki May 22 '22 at 14:16
  • 14
    A horse is a motor vehicle with a one horsepower (1 hp) motor. – President James K. Polk May 22 '22 at 14:41
  • Definitions §169a, "Motor vehicle" means every vehicle that is self-propelled, which a horse clearly is. – user6726 May 22 '22 at 15:14
  • 2
    @user6726 it's self propelled but is it a vehicle in that sense? I think to be sure it's a motor vehicle under Minnesota law we'd need to see records of the courts treating it as a vehicle. – bdsl May 22 '22 at 15:22
  • We first look to the statutes, which is what the courts do. See 169.011.92: '"Vehicle" means every device in, upon, or by which any person or property is or may be transported or drawn upon a highway'. There doesn't appear to be case law one way or the other on the question, so we would need a volunteer for a test. I don't see a "sense" involved in the motor vehicle definition: vehicle means vehicle, as defined in 169.011.92 – user6726 May 22 '22 at 15:28
  • 3
    I doubt that "device" includes animals. – phoog May 22 '22 at 16:13
  • 2
    @bdsl I can picture the defendant: "It's a motor vehicle! There was no gas station nearby, so I entered that supermarket and got the first thing similar to gasoline I could find, Your Honor." – LorenzoDonati4Ukraine-OnStrike May 22 '22 at 16:17
  • 3
    Do the laws recognize sitautions where e.g. a horse might be trained to go to a particular location if the rider falls unconcious and might do so even though not under any kind of direct deliberate control by the rider? – supercat May 22 '22 at 17:11
  • 3
    I can’t imagine riding a horse drunk constitutes torture or cruelty. I for one am most likely to give my friends or family members piggybacks when I’m drunk. – Greenstick May 22 '22 at 19:16
  • 3
    If we assume a drunk horse poses a danger to traffic, then wouldn't this be reckless endangerment or something? – towr May 22 '22 at 20:09
  • 8
    @PresidentJamesK.Polk According to data from the data from the 1925 Iowa State Fair, an average horse can expert up to 14.9 horsepower, with theoretical limits around 24 horsepower. This apparent discrepancy is due to peak power vs. sustained power. – gerrit May 23 '22 at 09:46
  • If the horse is at the falling-down drunk stage, then riding it would undoubtedly cause needless suffering. – user_1818839 May 23 '22 at 14:13
  • @supercat I think you might be drawing a distinction between self-propelled and self-driving there? :) – Caius Jard May 23 '22 at 16:14
  • 2
    I'm pretty sure it's not legal for a sober horse to drive a motor vehicle, so adding alcohol isn't going to improve that situation. (And before someone invokes the "Air Bud" defense, okay, maybe there isn't an actual law, but a horse can't get a driver's license, so at the very least, it would fall under operating a vehicle without a license.) – Darrel Hoffman May 24 '22 at 13:50
  • 3
    @supercat if a horse is defined as a motor vehicle and also has the ability to direct itself on where to go without input from the rider, does that make it a self-driving vehicle? (As a Minnesotan, I am intrigued by this whole conversation) – Seth R May 24 '22 at 17:31
  • 1
    @SethR: Newer self-driving vehicles would likely be much more capable of navigating the freeway than the ones of a century ago, but the older ones could probably deal with many situations that would leave newer ones completely flummoxed. Perhaps what's needed is a requirement that the state show at least prima facie evidence that someone was directing or attempting to direct a vehicle in a manner that would would likely injure someone on a public road. A horse walking slowly, or a car which is parked with the heater on, would not qualify, but a horse pulling a wagon at speed would. – supercat May 24 '22 at 20:01
10

It’s legal to ride a drunk horse:

Drink riding?

It’s possible to be convicted of ‘horse riding under the influence of alcohol’ or ‘horse riding under the influence of drugs’. Strangely, these restrictions only apply to the rider, as there is no law against riding a drunk horse!

Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics

Tim
  • 1,118
  • 1
  • 12
  • 22
  • 1
    I think some more context is needed for this answer... the linked article is not particularly serious (e.g. " Most public servants know from personal experience in pubs and clubs that many people have committed the offence ‘resist government officer’, but none were ever charged. Why is that?") – Alex Reinking May 30 '22 at 22:06
10

For a horse on the road, Oregon law says: (emphasis added)

Every person riding an animal upon a roadway and every person driving or leading any animal is subject to the provisions of the vehicle code concerning vehicle equipment and operation of vehicles except those provisions which by their very nature can have no application.

“[T]he provisions of the vehicle code concerning [...] operation of vehicles” include the offense of operation of unsafe vehicle:

Drives or moves on any highway any vehicle which is in such unsafe condition as to endanger any person.

This is a class B traffic violation.

Another law that the rider might be cited under is failure to perform duties of person in charge of livestock on roadway.

When riding or leading a horse or other livestock on the highway, a person must keep a lookout for vehicles and use caution to keep the animal under control. [...]

This is a class B traffic violation.

More gravely, if this falls below the standard of “minimum care” of the animal, it would constitute animal neglect in the second degree, and if this led to the injury or death of the horse, animal neglect in the first degree.

“Minimum care” means care sufficient to preserve the health and well-being of an animal and, except for emergencies or circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the owner, includes, but is not limited to, [...]

If this recklessly causes an injury to the animal, it could rise to the level of a criminal misdemeanor:

A person commits the crime of animal abuse in the second degree if, except as otherwise authorized by law, the person intentionally, knowingly or recklessly causes physical injury to an animal.

“Recklessly,” when used with respect to a result or to a circumstance described by a statute defining an offense, means that a person is aware of and consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the result will occur or that the circumstance exists. The risk must be of such nature and degree that disregard thereof constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the situation.

It might potentially be considered careless or even reckless driving. The latter is a class A misdemeanor.

A person commits the offense of reckless driving if the person recklessly drives a vehicle upon a highway or other premises described in this section in a manner that endangers the safety of persons or property.

Section 811 of the Oregon Revised Statues is part of Title 59, the Vehicle Code referenced above, and thus applies to riding an animal on a roadway.

Davislor
  • 2,884
  • 9
  • 22
8

The UK's Highway Code states in relation to using horses and horse drawn vehicles:

Rule 52

Before you take a horse or horse drawn vehicle on to the road, you should

  • ensure all tack fits well and is in good condition
  • make sure you can control the horse

Many of the rules of the Highway Code are legal requirements, and if you break those that are not, you may still be charged for using the roads "without due care and attention".

The vehicular equivalent would be "driving an unroadworthy vehicle."

You’re responsible for making sure your vehicle is always safe to drive (‘roadworthy’).

Weather Vane
  • 2,560
  • 7
  • 22
  • 6
    Yes, many of the rules of the highway code are legal requirements, but not the ones introduced with the word "should". Legal requirements use are introduced with the word "must" instead. – bdsl May 22 '22 at 10:17
  • 1
    Drunk in charge of a horse - Fined under the Licencing Act; https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/842999/Lumberjack-court-old-law-drunk-on-horse – Richard May 22 '22 at 14:29
  • @Richard: That's a case of the rider being drunk. The question is about the horse being drunk. – Vikki Jul 31 '22 at 15:26
  • @Vikki - Gosh, well I'll have to turn that into a comment instead of an answer then. – Richard Jul 31 '22 at 16:04
5

Note there is a wide difference between "riding a drunk horse" and "riding a horse, drunk," whether the rider or the horse is intoxicated. Public intoxication and operating a vehicle while drunk generally have limits understood in most localities.

So far as an intoxicated animal, in the states, with its wild patchwork of law and regulation, it may be very hard to say that there aren't specific statutes that would apply. But under the normal discretion an officer and the courts have, the rider might be charged under more general laws:

  • Public order or public nuisance laws
  • Proper, safe maintenance of a vehicle
  • Animal welfare or animal cruelty statutes

Much would depend on the officer, how amused they might be, and how dangerous the actual situation had been allowed to become.

sasguy
  • 51
  • 3
-3

In Ukraine DUI is a misdemeanor only for driving motor vehicles. That is because the main punishment is suspending driver license and it isn't possible to suspend driver license for horse or bicycle. What about drunk horse. Even if it was forbidden in Ukraine, cop would have to provide horse to vet to get alcohol blood test and this procedure would be too expensive.

Feanor
  • 5
  • 1
  • 3
    Your answer could be improved with additional supporting information. Please [edit] to add further details, such as citations or documentation, so that others can confirm that your answer is correct. You can find more information on how to write good answers in the help center. – Community May 24 '22 at 16:28