Mandatory Breathalyzer

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by Rvsask

Next thing you know the damn fish cops will be wanting to look in my livewell. The horror.

Thx for the laugh

The inconveniences of life are staggering.

[Sledhead71]

Originally Posted by Rvsask

Next thing you know the damn fish cops will be wanting to look in my livewell. The horror.

It is unfortunate some feel the need to make fun at the overreach of this new law... The above is a far stretch from what is being discussed, if an officer can not determine the level of impairment on a road side stop, well they probably should find a new career.

I bet you would be thrilled if the fish cop pulled your minor children aside and interrogated them on how dad's day was on the water after they found nothing in your livewell. Overreach or just doing their job ?

[spoiledsaskhunter]

Originally Posted by Sledhead71

It is unfortunate some feel the need to make fun at the overreach of this new law... The above is a far stretch from what is being discussed, if an officer can not determine the level of impairment on a road side stop, well they probably should find a new career.

I bet you would be thrilled if the fish cop pulled your minor children aside and interrogated them on how dad's day was on the water after they found nothing in your livewell. Overreach or just doing their job ?

talk about overreach. hth can this in any way be compared to asking someone to blow in a roadside screening device?

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Rvsask

Next thing you know the damn fish cops will be wanting to look in my livewell. The horror.

And yet when I talked to my local F&W officer about people shooting their limit of pheasants at a release site, then putting them in their vehicle, and going hunting again, he told me that if he stops a vehicle, and they show him two pheasants, he has no probable cause to search the vehicle for more, unless someone specifically reported seeing that person shoot more than two pheasants, and place them in their vehicle.

[Ackleyman]

Most if not all cops have noses like bloodhounds. They are out in the cool air, stick their head in your drivers window a bit and they can smell booze or pot in a milli second. They can also get a read on you pretty fast. I don't think they have to test every driver. They did their check , wave you thru and don't stack up traffic.

[Sledhead71]

Originally Posted by spoiledsaskhunter

talk about overreach. hth can this in any way be compared to asking someone to blow in a roadside screening device?

The point being is "overreach", does it matter if it is restricting peoples movement due to a perceived health crisis, removing protesters by evoking the Emergency Act, or simply a mandatory breathalyzer test on all roadside stops.

When we sit back and allow bodies of government to erode our personal rights, future generations will pay a heavy price... Our great country was built on fighting for our rights, many now just play on their phones and allow our government to censor the media it provides.

If you believe in the above, you should have no problem allowing your children to be pulled aside and interrogated as to mom or dads actions on the water or in the field. Myself, it would be a cold day in hell that I would allow this, but with the way our society has gone, many probably would.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Ackleyman

Most if not all cops have noses like bloodhounds. They are out in the cool air, stick their head in your drivers window a bit and they can smell booze or pot in a milli second. They can also get a read on you pretty fast. I don't think they have to test every driver. They did their check , wave you thru and don't stack up traffic.

And yet I have been asked to blow at a check stop, even though I had not consumed any alcohol, and was alone in the vehicle. The only people that were allowed through without blowing, were taxi drivers.

[Mulehahn]

Originally Posted by Rvsask

Next thing you know the damn fish cops will be wanting to look in my livewell. The horror.

If a fish cop sees me fishing then looking in the live well would fall under probable cause and I would agree. If I am towing my boat down the highway and pulled over then no, you are not searching my boat.

To me the over reach is not only because they can compel breathalyzer for simply pulling me over but also because if I refuse I can be charged. If someone gets pulled over for expired registration; not speeding, not driving erratic in anyway, not slurring words or acting out of the ordinary in any way, they simply forgot to renew registration. They should be compelled to possibly incriminate themselves without the slightest bit of probable cause beyond a busy life or bad memory? If they refuse they are found guilty regardless? That is not something I will support.

[fishnguy]

Last year, I stopped by to grab a few beers at a liquor store. As I was leaving the parking lot (there is only the liquor store there), there was a police vehicle turning right at the intersection. I pulled out and turned left to the same road he turned right from. He made a u-turn and turned the lights on. I pulled over. Something something he said and asked if I had anything to drink or smoke. I answered no. After that he proceeded to ask me to blow into a tube. I did, he said thank you for driving sober and gave me a coupon for a free coffee at Coop (lol?). He hadn’t ruined my evening and I didn’t feel “violated”, but for what purpose?

That was the second time I had to blow into one of those things in my life. The first was back in Ontario, where I ran into a ride program (equivalent of a checkstop) and it smelled like wine in my car because I gave a ride to my friends after dinner at my place and they had some wine. I didn’t get a thank you and coupon that time, lol.

To the noses comment and they can smell, half the vehicles nowadays smell like alcohol because of hand sanitizer.

And why are taxi drivers exempt from the checkstop? I haven’t heard about it before.

[Ackleyman]

10 shots of Whiskey is a hell of a lot stronger then any dried up hand sanitizer

[Phil McCracken]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

You go to a lounge to meet friends for wings and hockey.
You don’t drink anything.
Your vindictive ex drives by and sees your truck leaving.
She phoned cops annonomously saying your drunk and swerving all over.

Meanwhile your back at home drinking now for the last hour.

Some people would do such a thing.

I am using your example.

So please tell me what the reasonable and probable grounds are for a Police Officer to simply walk into your house and "demand" a breath sample? After a complaint made some hour(s) by a vindictive x after the fact?

Ain't gonna happen.

How could they prove you were "impaired" at the time of the "alleged complaint"...think about this one for a second...

[IR_mike]

Originally Posted by Phil McCracken

I am using your example.

So please tell me what the reasonable and probable grounds are for a Police Officer to simply walk into your house and "demand" a breath sample? After a complaint made some hour(s) by a vindictive x after the fact?

Ain't gonna happen.

How could they prove you were "impaired" at the time of the "alleged complaint"...think about this one for a second...

Wrong...it happens.

[MountainTi]

Originally Posted by Phil McCracken

I am using your example.

So please tell me what the reasonable and probable grounds are for a Police Officer to simply walk into your house and "demand" a breath sample? After a complaint made some hour(s) by a vindictive x after the fact?

Ain't gonna happen.

How could they prove you were "impaired" at the time of the "alleged complaint"...think about this one for a second...

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...warn-1.4975008

[hogie]

Originally Posted by Phil McCracken

I am using your example.

So please tell me what the reasonable and probable grounds are for a Police Officer to simply walk into your house and "demand" a breath sample? After a complaint made some hour(s) by a vindictive x after the fact?

Ain't gonna happen.

How could they prove you were "impaired" at the time of the "alleged complaint"...think about this one for a second...

Read the news article

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...EOSKzeP74gLl-b

Police are given powers to come to your house up to two hours after complaint.

[Talking moose]

Originally Posted by Phil McCracken

I am using your example.

So please tell me what the reasonable and probable grounds are for a Police Officer to simply walk into your house and "demand" a breath sample? After a complaint made some hour(s) by a vindictive x after the fact?

Ain't gonna happen.

How could they prove you were "impaired" at the time of the "alleged complaint"...think about this one for a second...

Thought about it. Your turn…..
Honestly not sure if it happens or not.
But they wanted it to happen so bad they made a law for it.
So it probably happens.

[esher]

Originally Posted by Phil McCracken

I am using your example.

So please tell me what the reasonable and probable grounds are for a Police Officer to simply walk into your house and "demand" a breath sample? After a complaint made some hour(s) by a vindictive x after the fact?

Ain't gonna happen.

How could they prove you were "impaired" at the time of the "alleged complaint"...think about this one for a second...

They dont need to prove anything, after walking for 8 plus months and a years wages in lawyer bills you may win the court case after you lost your job and family. Nothing to see here folks, just move on.

[Rvsask]

Originally Posted by Sledhead71

It is unfortunate some feel the need to make fun at the overreach of this new law... The above is a far stretch from what is being discussed, if an officer can not determine the level of impairment on a road side stop, well they probably should find a new career.

I bet you would be thrilled if the fish cop pulled your minor children aside and interrogated them on how dad's day was on the water after they found nothing in your livewell. Overreach or just doing their job ?

They would just likely learn that we caught some big fish that we let go. They might even show photos.

[Rvsask]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

And yet when I talked to my local F&W officer about people shooting their limit of pheasants at a release site, then putting them in their vehicle, and going hunting again, he told me that if he stops a vehicle, and they show him two pheasants, he has no probable cause to search the vehicle for more, unless someone specifically reported seeing that person shoot more than two pheasants, and place them in their vehicle.

Weird, I’ve been checked more thoroughly. I’m not a fish pig so I don’t overly care.



I feel being angry about such stuff doesn’t make life more enjoyable but to each their own.

Isn’t this law line for years old already?

[Phil McCracken]

With the passing of this new law, the government included a subsection that provides that:

"No person commits an offence under paragraph (1)(b) if they consumed alcohol after ceasing to operate if they had no reasonable expectation that they would be required to provide a sample of breath or blood."

I agree police can make a demand after the fact.

But as I stated before, they still need the "grounds" to do so. For example, they are investigating a hit and run, and a witness scored your plate number. Then they show up at your door. Demand is lawful within the prescribed time.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

Thought about it. Your turn…..
Honestly not sure if it happens or not.
But they wanted it to happen so bad they made a law for it.
So it probably happens.

Exactly, you don't create a new law, unless you plan to exploit that new law.

[58thecat]

Bla bla bla

The thread was about an additional little bit of time to ensure we limit the impaired drivers on the road

This is a good thing

Period


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sledhead71]

Originally Posted by 58thecat

Bla bla bla

The thread was about an additional little bit of time to ensure we limit the impaired drivers on the road

This is a good thing

Period


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Many feel the same way about removing various restricted weapons from the hands of law abiding citizens... It is about safety right ?

Really the thread is about over reach, not a little bit of time.

[MountainTi]

Originally Posted by Sledhead71

Many feel the same way about removing various restricted weapons from the hands of law abiding citizens... It is about safety right ?

Really the thread is about over reach, not a little bit of time.

The similarities are so close yet many fail to see it.
Easy to see how control is achieved

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by MountainTi

The similarities are so close yet many fail to see it.
Easy to see how control is achieved

This thread makes it very easy to understand how easy it is to remove freedoms and rights, in the name of public safety

[cacty]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

This thread makes it very easy to understand how easy it is to remove freedoms and rights, in the name of public safety

I could not agree more.

[JB_AOL]

Oh man.. the irony is strong..

Go take a look at the covid thread and see which posters were complaining about rights and freedoms (hint.. it's not the same group as here.. lol). Odd..

[58thecat]

Maybe just a little paranoid when there is no reason to be.

Get the drunks off the road, safe just one life is worth your little additional time at a check stop.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fallen1817]

So keeping in mind driving is a privilege and not a right....

A large majority seem to have an issue with having to prove they are sober while driving...

But no one seems to have an issue proving they're a competent driver to get an Operator's License...

I wonder if when they implemented Operator's Licenses, there was this much outrage?

Not that anyone asked or cares, but I'm of the opinion that everyone should blow. End of story. It takes only a few seconds, and while there may be numbers thrown around about only 23 impaired charges on 12,000 drivers or whatever the figure was, what people don't look at is that (arguably) 100% of the impaired drivers that went through these check stops were taken off of the road.

Again, Driving is a privilege and not a right. Play by the rules or don't play at all.

[bat119]

Alberta RCMP issues more than 2,500 traffic safety tickets in support of #OperationImpact2022
This Thanksgiving long weekend, police forces across Canada led #OperationImpact2022, an initiative organized by the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police to encourage safe driving behaviours. Over the course of the holiday weekend, Alberta RCMP issued 2,653 tickets in support of the campaign and traffic safety enforcement.
Between Oct. 7-10, there were 0 fatalities as a result of motor vehicle collisions across Alberta RCMP jurisdiction. Twenty-one motor vehicle collisions resulted in injury.
Alberta RCMP members patrolled provincial roads and highways, issuing tickets for traffic safety offences including 1,328 speeding charges, 18 excessive speeding charges (more than 50 km/h over the posted limit), 58 driving without a seatbelt charges, and 65 distracted driving charges. Additionally, 88 impaired drivers were removed from the roadways.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by JB_AOL

Oh man.. the irony is strong..

Go take a look at the covid thread and see which posters were complaining about rights and freedoms (hint.. it's not the same group as here.. lol). Odd..

I am against the loss of rights and freedoms in both situations. When the government starts taking away rights and freedoms in one situation, they don't usually stop there, they continue on taking away rights and freedoms, whether it's vaccine passports, firearms confiscation, or mandatory breathalizer testing. And if they can get part of the population to support them, it just ,makes it easier to continue to take away more rights and freedoms.