Prohibiting Carless Operation of Vehicles in the City

Home Browse Search

MEMORANDUM Subject: Validity of Careless Driving Ordinance A. Authority of Council to Legislate: R C. The enabling act states clearly: "The common council of every city shall have power to enact ordinances for the following purposes: xxx "Thirty- first. To prevent immoderate and careless riding or driving....." Burns' Ind. Ann. Stat., § 48 -1407, Cl. 31. No Pre - emption Problem: Section 9 -2402, providing that any Ordinance which purports to punish conduct made punishable by statute is void and unenforceable, is no problem. "Careless operation," being directed toward indifferent, inadvertent or, perhaps, negligent operation is no wise comparable to reckless driving, the only state statute known to me to approach the kind of factual problem involved. Numerous cases are available on the proposition that "carelessness and negligence" etc. are words', to express concepts bottomed in unintentional, non -purposive conduct, while "recklessness" focuses on purposive'abandonment� borders on "wilfulness," is equated with ''wantonness," and almost, from a psychological viewpoint, requires intent. No Problem With the Specific Statute: Burns', Section 47 -1$28 lists the 11 areas in which local authorities will not be prevented from adopting ordinances. It is entirely negative. It does not follow that; therefore, they can't regulate anything else (point being that regulating "careless driving" is not one of the listed areas), for not only do you have 48- 1407, Clause 31, you also have § 47- 1$27: