Reducing blood alcohol limits has a downside

[kwtoxman]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/auto/...rticle1220204/

An informative article......

[Snobike Mike]

To bad it's a logical article and therefore unreadable by our fine gubment.

[kellen]

Politicians doing stuff without thinking? No way!

[Rob MacLennan]

Increasing penalties for blowing in the 'warn range' makes about as much sense as banning handguns, expecting that it will make gang members stop shooting each other. The logic is exactly the same in both cases; completely absent.

[Fog Ducker]

Increasing penalties for blowing in the 'warn range' makes about as much sense as banning handguns, expecting that it will make gang members stop shooting each other. The logic is exactly the same in both cases; completely absent.

Hit the nail on head with that one!

[FiReSTaRT]

By outlawing something harmless, they are turning regular folk into criminals. Same goes for the pot laws. Doesn't surprise me one bit.

[bobjohnson]

Yeah the new laws are ridiculous. Why bother to have the 0.08 limit when they can take your licence and car if youre under it?? Not to mention the new limit (is it 0.06 or 0.04?) is barely one drink to some people.. Im sorry but even if i slam 2 beers im still ok to drive physically, but legally apparently not.

Im all for getting drunks off the road but the fact i cant even have a beer at a barbeque or a glass of wine at a nice restaurant and drive home with a clear concience sucks.

[mazdubb]

Yeah the new laws are ridiculous. Why bother to have the 0.08 limit when they can take your licence and car if youre under it?? Not to mention the new limit (is it 0.06 or 0.04?) is barely one drink to some people.. Im sorry but even if i slam 2 beers im still ok to drive physically, but legally apparently not.

Im all for getting drunks off the road but the fact i cant even have a beer at a barbeque or a glass of wine at a nice restaurant and drive home with a clear concience sucks.

You can legally do it but they'll take your car and license anyway. And you don't have any way of fighting it.

[zeekat]

Great article ... this article could also be applied to the HTA 172 and going after the 'street racers'.

[Icbones]

Increasing penalties for blowing in the 'warn range' makes about as much sense as banning handguns, expecting that it will make gang members stop shooting each other. The logic is exactly the same in both cases; completely absent.

I agree with your statement. But making sense and decisions by politicians should not be in the same sentence. Politicians are like electricity, they take the path of less resistance. Therefore they find it easier to target objects i.e. guns , motorcycles, sportscars cars, etc instead of the real problem.

[Addicted]

Just like everything else... 1 % of the offenders cause the other 99 % of innocent people to pay the price .... A shame our retarded politician's don't see the difference between the actions of people who drive with High BAC and the actions of those people who are responsible enough to have 1 drink with friends.

I'm 160 lbs, and I know that 1 screwdriver will put me at a .3 BAC. Still legal yes but not far from becoming a criminal in the eyes of retared people. I guess thats the price us light weights have to pay.

[Rob MacLennan]

I agree with your statement. But making sense and decisions by politicians should not be in the same sentence. Politicians are like electricity, they take the path of less resistance. Therefore they find it easier to target objects i.e. guns , motorcycles, sportscars cars, etc instead of the real problem.

Seeing how politicians really operate is what stopped me from running for civic office.

[sonyminidiscman]

now, can someone go stalk all those politicians when they get into their car after coming out of a restaurant at night?

I wonder how long it will take to put all of them in jail.

[mat2312]

If they want to pass idiotic legislation such as the lowering of BAC limits, then ALL crown owned vehicles should have ignition interlock devices, including our politicians personal tax-payer funded vehicles.

[Jaxx]

I read that article and it seems to me like there is a need for another level of BAC above .08 for those extreme cases.

Keep the .05 and .08 but add a .12 or .14 for the stiffer penalties.

Comments?

[Rob MacLennan]

I read that article and it seems to me like there is a need for another level of BAC above .08 for those extreme cases.

Keep the .05 and .08 but add a .12 or .14 for the stiffer penalties.

Comments?

No comments, only a question. Have you seen the existing potential penalties for impaired operation?

Punishment


255. (1) Every one who commits an offence under section 253 or 254 is guilty of an indictable offence or an offence punishable on summary conviction and is liable,
(a) whether the offence is prosecuted by indictment or punishable on summary conviction, to the following minimum punishment, namely,

(i) for a first offence, to a fine of not less than $1,000,

(ii) for a second offence, to imprisonment for not less than 30 days, and

(iii) for each subsequent offence, to imprisonment for not less than 120 days;

(b) where the offence is prosecuted by indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years; and

(c) if the offence is punishable on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term of not more than 18 months.



Impaired driving causing bodily harm


(2) Everyone who commits an offence under paragraph 253(1)(a) and causes bodily harm to another person as a result is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years.

Blood alcohol level over legal limit — bodily harm


(2.1) Everyone who, while committing an offence under paragraph 253(1)(b), causes an accident resulting in bodily harm to another person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years.

Failure or refusal to provide sample — bodily harm


(2.2) Everyone who commits an offence under subsection 254(5) and, at the time of committing the offence, knows or ought to know that their operation of the motor vehicle, vessel, aircraft or railway equipment, their assistance in the operation of the aircraft or railway equipment or their care or control of the motor vehicle, vessel, aircraft or railway equipment caused an accident resulting in bodily harm to another person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years.

Impaired driving causing death


(3) Everyone who commits an offence under paragraph 253(1)(a) and causes the death of another person as a result is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life.



Blood alcohol level over legal limit — death


(3.1) Everyone who, while committing an offence under paragraph 253(1)(b), causes an accident resulting in the death of another person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life.



Failure or refusal to provide sample — death


(3.2) Everyone who commits an offence under subsection 254(5) and, at the time of committing the offence, knows or ought to know that their operation of the motor vehicle, vessel, aircraft or railway equipment, their assistance in the operation of the aircraft or railway equipment or their care or control of the motor vehicle, vessel, aircraft or railway equipment caused an accident resulting in the death of another person, or in bodily harm to another person whose death ensues, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life.

[82Seca750]

the only reason that article made sense is because the author didn't bother contacting the prohibitionists at MADD for their thoughts.....something our politicians fail at miserably

[FiReSTaRT]

the only reason that article made sense is because the author didn't bother contacting the prohibitionists at MADD for their thoughts.....something our politicians fail at miserably

Thoughts? They've fried what was left of their brains with crack a LONG time ago.

[rmemedic]

My friend's dad is a cop, and he absolutely HATES this law (AND he doesn't support 203 either!) because it puts way too much control in the hand of an officer.
I might be at .07 one day (not likely) and the cop decided to be a dick and now, I'm a criminal... Or maybe, he's having a nice day and I'm free to go untouched...
Laws need a defined line of what is right and what is wrong for them to properly control the population.
Cops aren't there to be convicting anyone of anything, that is NOT their job, they didn't do 7 years of law, the don't have the background to convict, and they don't have the proper process to do it.
I am innocent untill a Judge says I am not. Therefore, I am free to keep my vehicle and license untill it's proven I broke a legitimate law.
.08 is a defined line, and THAT is enough to be convicted. .05 to .08 is NOT defined as totally illegal, it only is if the officer is a ****** bag.
I agree, put a breathalizer in all privately driven government vehicles and see how long this lasts.

[mazdubb]

My friend's dad is a cop, and he absolutely HATES this law (AND he doesn't support 203 either!) because it puts way too much control in the hand of an officer.
I might be at .07 one day (not likely) and the cop decided to be a dick and now, I'm a criminal... Or maybe, he's having a nice day and I'm free to go untouched...
Laws need a defined line of what is right and what is wrong for them to properly control the population.
Cops aren't there to be convicting anyone of anything, that is NOT their job, they didn't do 7 years of law, the don't have the background to convict, and they don't have the proper process to do it.
I am innocent untill a Judge says I am not. Therefore, I am free to keep my vehicle and license untill it's proven I broke a legitimate law.
.08 is a defined line, and THAT is enough to be convicted. .05 to .08 is NOT defined as totally illegal, it only is if the officer is a ****** bag.
I agree, put a breathalizer in all privately driven government vehicles and see how long this lasts.

Sounds to me like he's one of those officers that got into the profession to uphold the spirit of law rather than the rule of law.