Is the prince ok?
this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2025
229 points (97.9% liked)
Not The Onion
18646 readers
1004 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I thought he'd ran over the actual Prince George for a minute until I read the article and realised it was a place
Thanks! I was somewhat confused before reading the article, too.
I now still have to find out what a "DUI" is...
Driving under influence. Of alcohol usually
So just a drunk doing stupid drunk things in traffic?
Not even half as funny any more...
Well, with a toy Barbie Jeep. The funny part is getting the DUI for driving a toy car, rather than for driving a real car (which is not funny and endangers others). This is akin to getting a ticket for walking drunk, because the toy car in question can't go very fast, nor does it fall over like a bicycle, so it's actually safer than drunk cycling.
I had a friend in college who was ticketed for riding his bike while drunk.
No, it’s Donkey’s Uncle Ian.
Just a heads up this story is over two months old. That said, here are some key points:
- The accused, Kasper Lincoln, is officially titled "Barbie Jeep Driver."
- Kasper Lincoln just wanted to get a slurpee and his license was suspended.
- He was driving on the sidewalk until it ended.
- He was arrested by an unmarked police car. A Ghost Car, if you will.
- The lawyer has, among her certificates, a "Bad Ass Award" and a "DUI Defense" certificate. They're next to each other.
- Kasper Lincoln did his hand signals and everything.
Suspended license for having a previous dui, is it not?
Give the man a slurpee and a high five, not a DUI. What the fuck
Shit like this just lowers the seriousness of DUI. DUI is bad because real cars (and lesser extent motorbikes) have enormous potential for carnage and death. A pink toy jeep does not.
Surely a public intoxication or nuisance charge exists that would better suit?
It's no different to riding a horse. Drunk riding is a thang
I had a buddy back in the day. Get a DUI on a bicycle.
I feel like that could be a sport on the ocho
Given he was operating it on the road, he would be a hazard to himself and a distraction/hazard to other drivers.
I'd say it doesn't lessen the seriousness of a DUI. They take the DUI so seriously they'll even get you in the pink barbie jeep.
It would be equivalent to him walking, re: speed and general safety. Hell, it's a pink "car", which is great for visibility! It's nonsense to charge him with a DUI. They gonna do the same to someone drunk while in a motorized wheelchair?
Also, this whole situation is just an extension of our stupid car-centric societies: the damned sidewalks stopped existing on his path to the store. He was otherwise just fine using the sidewalk until he couldn't. That's neglect on the city's part.
Edit: downvote all you want, the cars were a danger to him, not the other way round.
If it was just as fast to walk, then he should have walked. But by taking a vehicle into the street while intoxicated he enters DUI territory.
As for your wheelchair comment i think the context matters. I doubt they would charge someone who needs the wheelchair with a DUI in the scenario but someone just taking a motorized wheelchair for a drunken joyride down the road will likely end up with a DUI.
The punishment must fit the crime. Minimum sentence in Canada for a DUI is apparently 1000 rupees and 12 months driving prohibition. That punishment makes sense for the crime of negligently operating heavy machinery that can and does kill thousands every year. Not for operating light low-power electric vehicles where killing a third-party is only a remote (though real) possibility. That minimum sentence being applied equally is not just when the danger posed to society is so unequal. I would also expect a truck driver to have a higher minimum sentence for the same reasons.
On top of the justice concerns, if the punishment is the same for everyone, a drunk college dickhead who would have ridden a bicycle home (still a reprehensible crime mind you) might decide to drive their car instead if they feel like they're less likely to get caught and it would be punished the same anyway. Especially as cases like this get media attention.
That's the pitfall with blind and strict rules, if I know I'll be getting expelled from school for getting punched by a bully, then I'm incentivized to cave their face in before the grown-ups get here.
It lessens it in the sense that he can make jokes about it.
I got a DUI, but its okay, I was in a barbie jeep. Lol.
That its posted here is proving my point, its been treated as a joke. We are both sensible people, we know its serious, but others will just see it as a joke. I'd rather they charged him with something else. He's just as much a hazard if he was sober.
It's to protect the everyone on the road, including the person in the pink plastic car. Rules on the road are different than the rules on private property.
I know a guy that got a DUI riding a bicycle. This doesn't surprise me at all.
I know a guy who got a DUI for sleeping in his car.
Happened to a friend if mine.
Once it went to court his lawyer made the cop look like a tool.
Still cost him a bunch, just not an actual DUI.
Also had cops arrest a friend who was a passenger in a car, and tried to give him a DUI, too. The judge blasted that cop pretty bad.
ACAB
Class traitors.
Blast all they want, the cop will repeat his behavior because the judge will issue no fines or punishments to the cop
I'm way oversimplifying here:
Judges can only make decisions within their scope, the extent of the law, and on the evidence before them. They do have some jurisdiction within their court, like holding someone in contempt, but they can't convict when no charges have been laid.
Cops can be sued civilly, but since we're talking criminal law the charges would be determined by a crown. The problem is the whole criminal court process usually starts with cops arresting someone and presenting their reports, so good luck finding cops who will rat on a buddy. Or, a crown who wants to risk losing the cooperation of the police. I know one who moved to practice in another province after they went after an extremely corrupt detachment.
The CCLA has done a bunch of work taking up cases to hold cops accountable, but the whole judicial foundation isn't just cracked, it's crumbling. Ask any half decent crown, judge, or lawyer in private what they think of the police if you want to get stuck down a depressing rabbit hole.
He probably would have gotten away with it but one of the Jeep's taillamps was out.
Come on, Barbie, let's go party.
I thought this was (North) America!
Is the Prince okay?
Typical PG...
This sounds like a headline from The Day Today.