although drinking isnt illegal in itself (as long as your old enough to purchase and consume it in your country) driving whilst being over the drink drive limit is an offence, so is underage drinking. so the answer to your question is binge drinking is not illegal in itself, unless you are underage (juvenile), or are causing a disturbance; where you can be arrested for being drunk and disorderly, or drunk and incapable.
Drunk driving can impair a driver's judgment, coordination, and reaction times, leading to an increased risk of accidents and fatalities. Enforcing laws against drunk driving helps to protect the safety of both drivers and pedestrians on the road, reducing the potential for serious injuries and fatalities. Ultimately, these laws aim to discourage individuals from driving under the influence of alcohol to promote safer roads for everyone.
In some jurisdictions, yes, you can be charged with drunk driving on your own property if you are operating a vehicle while under the influence. This is because laws against drunk driving typically apply to driving on any premises accessible to the public, including private property.
The word is "illegal" if an action goes against the law.
An ex post facto law is one that prohibits that which was formerly legal, and reaches back in time to punish that which was already done back when it was legal. It also includes retroactively increasing the punishment for past crimes. The US constitution, Art 1, sec 9, prohibits such laws. However, there is a great deal of legal controversy over whether a legal provision "punishes" the past act, and whether it is doing so retroactively. For example, suppose a state prohibits drunk driving as a misdemeanor, and you are convicted of it twice. Then the state passes a law making a third drunk driving offense a felony. Then you get caught drunk driving again. The state can punish you as a third drunk driver because the only thing that is being punished is your third act of drunk driving while having two priors, and your third act occurred after the law was passed. In Kansas v Hendrick, 521 US 346 (1997), Hendricks was convicted of a sex offense in 1984 and sentenced. While in prison in 1994, Kansas passed a law for civil commitment of "sexually violent predators." After Hendricks served his criminal sentence, he was locked up anyway (though this time in a state hospital), with his acts leading to conviction and other past acts being the basis for a finding that he continued to be dangerous to the public, allowing his continued incarceration. The US Supreme Court, by a 5-4 vote, ruled that this "civil commitment" was not "punishment" and therefore allowed it to happen. This ruling, in the eyes of many commentators, has gutted the ex post facto protection enshrined in the constitution.
illegal
No
you can't drink and the drive, it's against the law.
"It is against the law to defecate in public, even if you are drunk."
Being selfish is not against the law. All laws of the UK and the USA can be seen at the links in the Related Links area below.
yes, that is assault even if it is your child or even if your drunk it is assault .
Although what is drunk in the commercials is usually NOT actually beer, there is no criminal law against it.
Bikers Against Drunk Drivers was created in 1986.
Mothers Against Drunk Driving was created in 1980.
No. Some abolitionists did things that were against the law, but the mere fact of being an abolitionist wasn't one of them.
Mothers Against Drunk Driving.
If your questions is what my opinion on one I'd say that I'm not for it but not against it. There are to ways of looking at this. 1- When you are drunk you are most truthful so you are being true to your self whether or not you like this person or 2- You were drunk so you weren't thinking straight.
Not if the person being stoned was Jewish or Mexican.