57 replies to this topic

[sebberry]

If I get asked to do a breath test and I haven't been drinking I will refuse.

You do realize the ****storm you'll bring on yourself if you do that...

[Bingo]

If I was involved in an accident that involved injuries, I would demand that I be given a breath test by the attending police. That would help with liability issues later on. I don't drink, so I have nothing to hide.

[yodsaker]

This one will head to the Supreme Court as a Charter challenge.

[sebberry]

This one will head to the Supreme Court as a Charter challenge.

On what grounds?

[G-Man]

It would take someone bothering to fight it that far. But since the law hasn't been broken during a suspension for lower than .08 blood levels can it even go to court?

I could see that being worthy of a court challenge. You need to have the possibility to have a matter such as this have legal recourse.

Easy fix just lower the blood alcohol level in the criminal code.

[AnonAnnie2]

On what grounds?

Random roadside breathalyzing deemed anti-constitutional

The Canadian Bar Association is warning the Harper government against a proposed new law
.........OTTAWA — Canada's lawyers are warning the Harper government against a new law to impose random sobriety tests to catch drunk drivers, saying it would breach constitutional rights and spark costly and extensive court battles when impaired driving is already more "heavily litigated" than any other alleged crime.

[sebberry]

Random roadside breathalyzing deemed anti-constitutional

The Canadian Bar Association is warning the Harper government against a proposed new law
.........OTTAWA — Canada's lawyers are warning the Harper government against a new law to impose random sobriety tests to catch drunk drivers, saying it would breach constitutional rights and spark costly and extensive court battles when impaired driving is already more "heavily litigated" than any other alleged crime.

Perfect - let's hope the SCOC gets involved and strikes this down.

[AnonAnnie2]

I went out for dinner this evening, it was lovely, would have been even lovelier if I had one glass of wine with my meal.

I'm sure the restaurant would have appreciated my purchase as well.

I would not know for certain that after 1.5 or even 2 hours of having that one glass of wine that I would not register below .5 therefore I did not partake, nor did anyone else that I was breaking bread with - 10 people.

I don't condone driving drunk and I don't believe I ever have, and certainly have never been charged or convicted of same.

I am now assured I will never be even close to .5 drunk driving, (note come close to .5) because I will never have another beverage of that nature and get behind the wheel 1.5, 2, 3 hours later. In my past, dinner and one glass of wine, driving two hours later I was ok, I would not come close to .8.

Purpose of this new law achieved - no drinking combined with driving within a 24 hour period for .5 is a very very small number - in fact I'm now worried about cough syrup.

[Koru]

Constiutional Challenges be damned. I will admit at one point in time of my life, not too many years ago driving while I more than likely should not have been as a result of alcohol consumption was something I did. I lucked out and escaped relatively unscathed, for this I am not proud, just thankful. That being said, no damn human being has the "RIGHT" to be drinking and driving, driving is not a right, its a privilege. If you can't handle that privilege, get off the road. I would be happy too because my insurance rates would go down with less drunks on the road. Anyone who argues the constitutional side of this is pushing the limits of rights as far as I am concerned. For most people one drink is not going to affect you to the point this law will cause you problems. The police need tougher laws to combat those who cannot respect the RIGHTS and SAFETY of others on the roads, sidewalks and businesses.

[VicHockeyFan]

The police need tougher laws to combat those who cannot respect the RIGHTS and SAFETY of others on the roads, sidewalks and businesses.

But is this the right way to go? When I read reports of accidents or near-accidents, the accused usually registers three, or even four times the current legal limit. I don't seem to hear of any problems with drivers at .07.

[ptolomeus]

I went out for dinner this evening, it was lovely, would have been even lovelier if I had one glass of wine with my meal.

I'm sure the restaurant would have appreciated my purchase as well.

I would not know for certain that after 1.5 or even 2 hours of having that one glass of wine that I would not register below .5 therefore I did not partake, nor did anyone else that I was breaking bread with - 10 people.

I don't condone driving drunk and I don't believe I ever have, and certainly have never been charged or convicted of same.

I am now assured I will never be even close to .5 drunk driving, (note come close to .5) because I will never have another beverage of that nature and get behind the wheel 1.5, 2, 3 hours later. In my past, dinner and one glass of wine, driving two hours later I was ok, I would not come close to .8.

Purpose of this new law achieved - no drinking combined with driving within a 24 hour period for .5 is a very very small number - in fact I'm now worried about cough syrup.

One glas of wine would not bring you to .5 and probably after 4 hours, the alcohol will be reduced to 0. All depending of your weight, naturally

[Ms. B. Havin]

One glas of wine would not bring you to .5 and probably after 4 hours, the alcohol will be reduced to 0. All depending of your weight, naturally

Good point.

A day ahead of St. Patrick's Day, MIT's Technology Review posted a super interesting video to its blog on The Chemistry of Hangovers. (It's on Vimeo here, but refuses to load - and it's not loading on the MIT blog site, either... ) I'll try to dredge up some points from memory (what remains of my brain cells after repeated soakings in alcohol, of course... )

Anyway: the thing with those tubes you blow into? It's complicated... All sorts of things can affect the reading, as ptolomeus's comment suggested - weight, metabolism, etc., but also including whether or not you're a diabetic or on a diet (those two conditions are obviously linked anyway).

That is: if you're on a low-carb diet (say, The South Beach or Atkins Diets), then you will blow elevated blood alcohol levels even if you haven't drunk very much at all.

I can't recall if the obverse is true (i.e., that if you load up on carbs, you'll lower your blood alcohol read-out), but you're definitely more likely to blow higher if you're diabetic (restricting carbs/ sugars) or on a low-carb diet.

PS: Here's another link to the Chemistry Society (with some details of what the lecture covered), but this article, too, has a link to Vimeo, and the video seems to be down.

[LJ]

I no longer have anything to drink when I go out for dinner or whatever.

I always let my wife drive before, but now I am just enjoying the savings from not buying anything to drink. I believe the restraunts will be the one to suffer from this.

[sebberry]

Drinking-driving approach dealt a blow

Only one part of B.C.'s multifaceted impaired driving crackdown is unconstitutional.

The problem is, it's the main part. It's the section which lets police suspend a licence for 90 days and trigger more than $4,000 worth of penalties and mandatory programs with next-to-no-right of appeal. All on the strength of a "fail" reading - over .08 - on a roadside screening device.

[...]

http://www.timescolo...4884/story.html


.

[kenjh]

amazing that the percentage rates don't change over the years with any significance even with half the deaths ..

[sebberry]

Faulty breathalyzers used in Port Moody drunk driving cases
Cases being forwarded to Superintendent of Motor Vehicles

PORT MOODY (NEWS1130) – Fourteen people who were given impaired driving suspensions in Port Moody in 2011 might not have been drunk at all.

An audit has found they were tested with breathalyzers that weren’t calibrated properly.


[...]

http://www.news1130....cases/#comments

--------------------------

Port Moody police reviewing over a hundred roadside tests
The breathalyzer tests were performed last year

PORT MOODY (NEWS1130) – Port Moody police are reviewing the files of more than a hundred people who were given roadside breathalyzer tests last year.

Port Moody constable Luke van Winkel says an officer had miscalibrated the devices.

“The solution used to calibrate the machine is only allowed to be used a certain number of times and unfortunately our officer was using the solution above the allotted time frame.”

[...]

http://www.news1130....roadside-tests/

[sebberry]

More than 1,100 drunk driving penalties to be overturned

VANCOUVER (NEWS1130) – More than 1,100 drivers caught up in BC’s tougher drunk driving rules before part of the law was found unconstitutional will have their penalties overturned.

Many of those drivers had to pay more than $2,600 to take driver education courses and install the ignition locks on their car. The justice ministry has not yet decided if it will issue refunds.

Lawyer Paul Doroshenko has filed legal challenges over the penalty program and says out of the 35,000 drivers who were caught during the period in question, these 1,100 are a bit different.

[...]

http://www.news1130....-be-overturned/

[kenjh]

still don't get the numbers ..14'000 charged only 140 die each year ..so 13.000 would never have caused a death or injury ...revenue or safety ?? and only 1,100 mistakes in one area ..yah I'm gonna believe that ,,,

[Bingo]

BC and Canada both have laws against drinking and driving

"This script explains what can happen if you drink and drive. Both BC and the federal government have laws against drinking and driving. Usually, only the BC law applies. Sometimes, federal law applies instead of – or in addition to – BC law. Drinking and driving is a complicated area of law with serious consequences. So if you’re not sure how much you’ve had to drink, don’t even get in the vehicle – take a taxi or call a friend for a ride."

24-hour driving prohibition and vehicle impoundment

"Instead of issuing an IRP, police can prohibit a person from driving for 24 hours and impound the person’s vehicle if they have reasonable and probable grounds to believe the person's ability to operate a vehicle is affected by alcohol, drugs, or both. They do not have to test your blood-alcohol level. You can ask for a blood test on an ASD, but if that shows you are impaired, then you face much more than the 24-hour suspension."

more;
http://www.cba.org/b...obiles/190.aspx

[sebberry]

http://www.theglobea...article9702767/

Breath-analysis machines used by police forces across B.C. are incapable of differentiating between mouth and blood alcohol, are prone to human error and should not be used to issue immediate roadside driving suspensions, according to a leading forensic scientist.

Those findings are outlined in an affidavit prepared by Nizar Shajani, a Burnaby-based forensic scientist who worked for the RCMP for 12 years and who has written numerous studies on blood-alcohol testing.

[...]