Apparently, DWI laws in Minnesota are so broad that they apply to a privately-owned and operated sports complex in which no “driving” takes place on a “public road”. Wow. I can see terminating the operator’s (he is not a “driver”) employment and witholding his wages to compensate for damage to the rink or the zamboni. I can even see charging him with criminal reckless endangerment if skaters were on the ice or at risk of harm. But to bring criminal charges against him for DWI is absurd and unethical by the DA. These laws are intended to apply to public roads because of the threat of harm to the health and welfare of individuals and their property.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Apparently, DWI laws in Minnesota are so broad that they apply to a privately-owned and operated sports complex in which no “driving” takes place on a “public road”. Wow. I can see terminating the operator’s (he is not a “driver”) employment and witholding his wages to compensate for damage to the rink or the zamboni. I can even see charging him with criminal reckless endangerment if skaters were on the ice or at risk of harm. But to bring criminal charges against him for DWI is absurd and unethical by the DA. These laws are intended to apply to public roads because of the threat of harm to the health and welfare of individuals and their property.