Between .05 and .08 fines - Page 4

260 Rem · #91 12-30-2017, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Talking moose

And if found not guilty, should the person who charged him be held accountable for associated costs? (Loss of work, towing, impound....etc.)

Yes, that would be “the crown” so funds would come out of our tax dollars. The employee of the crown is not held personally liable unless negligence or wrong doing can be proven. But, of course if the funds collected from the guilty were used to pay for the “not guilty” ... pretty good chance no tax dollars would ever be needed.

vcmm · #92 12-30-2017, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fordtruckin

I call it like I see it. Best part is I know I’m not alone in thinking this, I just happened to be the one to say it.

Personally I don’t care what you do. I couldn’t give 2 squirts if you were here today and gone tomorrow. If you get loaded and decide to drive the more power to you super chief but if you hurt or kill someone else because of your arrogance I do care about that and will help however I can to crucify you.

Boy you sure like to call other folks names. Pretty childish.

covey ridge · #93 12-30-2017, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

So is that option available for ever person who blows .05 , no matter where you are in Alberta, either urban or rural?

Yes

sns2 · #94 12-30-2017, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 260 Rem

Would be nice if the “right to trial” included the obligation to pay for all the costs associated with the trial if found guilty.

Yes and yes and yes again.

covey ridge · #95 12-30-2017, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by C2C3PO

Just so everyone is clear here, there are only but a few instances where blood would be drawn to satisfy the requirement for blood alcohol readings.

Those instances are typically where a suspect has been involved in a injury collision and is unable to provide consent ( unconscious) or unable to provide a breath test ( injury). The officer is still required to obtain a blood warrant as it is seen by the courts as a last/final solution since they deem it to be an incredibly invasive ( and rightfully so) method of gathering evidence.
You don't have the "right" to request a blood test just because you want one.
While ideally it would be great if you could the realities around the logistics of taking the blood samples is daunting.

I have personally had doctors refuse to take the samples even with a blood warrant because they do not want to be involved in court proceedings (testifying) down the road. Then there is the incredible backlog of tests waiting to be done on evidence sent to the RCMP labs......
These are but a few challenges police face when collecting this type of evidence.

In addition to a warrant being required to draw blood the person drawing the blood has to do so without using an alcohol based product for sterilizing the draw site.

sns2 · #96 12-30-2017, 05:08 PM

One of the things I find really annoying about these conversations is that whenever anyone argues in favor of a law, the crows come out and start accusing people of being in favor of taking our guns away. If that is you, grow up.

covey ridge · #97 12-30-2017, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sns2

Yes and yes and yes again.

On he surface that would seem to be right but fear of not being able to pay would infringe on that right. The right to a trial is not just for those who can afford to loose.

^v^Tinda wolf^v^ · #98 12-30-2017, 05:35 PM

I was under the impression they were going to crack down even further on impaired driving. Manditory jail time should be the new incentive not be an idiot. It looks like the fun is just beginning depending on how they go about driving while high on pot. The legal cut off limit is going to be so low a person could test positive up to twelve hours or more after smoking even half a spliff. Should get interesting. Theoretically speaking, if a person does any strenuous activity such as jogging many hours after smoking even days depending on many factors and has to do a drug test that person could test positive or possibly way over the limit. Lots of trouble looming in coming months.

fordtruckin · #99 12-30-2017, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vcmm

Boy you sure like to call other folks names. Pretty childish.

Sorry did I hurt your feelings because I said I don’t give a rip about you unless you hurt or kill someone? Yep still don’t care. But your right about the name calling thing....Superchief... will go down in history as the biggest AO name calling slam in history... I’d love to stay and chat but I gotta go, mommy’s calling me for dinner. She made my favorite grill cheese with the crusts cut off.

covey ridge · #**100** 12-30-2017, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sns2

Drunk driving is indefensible, and I am happy with infringing on the rights of people who blow over .05.

I would rather infringe on the so called rights of those who blow over .05 than allow the guy that blew .05 infringe on some else's right to life.

The law in this case allows the Police to take certain action without trial.

^v^Tinda wolf^v^ · #**101** 12-30-2017, 06:12 PM

I'm against impaired driving but with all these odd laws being put in place it does leave a lot of room for malicious human behaviour. Say you flipped that cop off days prior or how about the one law discussed where they can charge you for being impaired hours after you are in your residents. I'd like to think that our rcmp use wise judgement with the power they are granted but I have my doubts when it comes to human nature and personal opinions. They are being given to much authority in my opinion.

elkhunter11 · #**102** 12-30-2017, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by covey ridge

I would rather infringe on the so called rights of those who blow over .05 than allow the guy that blew .05 infringe on some else's right to life.

The law in this case allows the Police to take certain action without trial.

Even if that .05 reading was in error and the correct reading was actually.03? That is the point of a trial, to establish the facts, rather than rely on unproven accusations. Countries where people are not allowed a trial are called police states, if you prefer that situation, you can always move to a police state, and let the government do whatever it chooses on your behalf.

elkhunter11 · #**103** 12-30-2017, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sns2

One of the things I find really annoying about these conversations is that whenever anyone argues in favor of a law, the crows come out and start accusing people of being in favor of taking our guns away. If that is you, grow up.

Let's not forget about the dodo birds that accuse anyone rhat doesn't agree with the law of supporting impaired driving.

sns2 · #**104** 12-30-2017, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Let's not forget about the dodo birds that accuse anyone rhat doesn't agree with the law of supporting impaired driving.

They are two separate issues, Elk. There is an infraction category for derailing, and that is what it is. The OP started a thread about drunk driving, not firearm laws.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

elkhunter11 · #**105** 12-30-2017, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sns2

They are two separate issues, Elk. There is an infraction category for derailing, and that is what it is. The OP started a thread about drunk driving, not firearm laws.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

So where does the post below fall?

Quote:

I’m sorry what were we talking about again? I got confused ..... meh waste of time posting replies to you anyhow, I could say the sky is blue grass is green the sun is yellow and you’d find some way to disagree. Personally it’s a slow day and getting your knickers in a knot is the best entertainment option I have. Ooooh squirrel.... wait what were we talking about again?

kevinhits · #**106** 12-30-2017, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fitzy

Pretty simple. If you drink don't drive.

I live in a town of 600 people. Closest police station is 10 mins away. -40 last night and we walked 2 blocks home from a party. There was probably no cops out . My wife was probably ok to drive but it's not an option. We left our house with toques and mitts for the walk home.

Why risk it though?

Same as speeding and failing to stop. If you break the law expect to be penalized. If you don't agree with the law then take steps to change it.

I have zero sympathy for anyone getting a DUI there's no excuse.

I wish all our parties were 2 blocks away in the city....It would always be a great walk home

kevinhits · #**107** 12-30-2017, 07:47 PM

Sorry, playing devil's advocate here again....Lets say one driver is going home, has a couple of drinks and between .05 and .08. Driver on the other side is distracted, had zero to drink and crosses the middle line and hits head on...Does the media classify this collision as "alcohol involved collision"?

covey ridge · #**108** 12-30-2017, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kevinhits

Sorry, playing devil's advocate here again....Lets say one driver is going home, has a couple of drinks and between .05 and .08. Driver on the other side is distracted, had zero to drink and crosses the middle line and hits head on...Does the media classify this collision as "alcohol involved collision"?

They probably will. I know of a case where a drunk stopped for a stop sign and was rear ended by a sober guy. When the police arrived the drunk was very drunk and was charged with impaired and the other guy was charged with careless driving. The drunk pleaded guilty but the guy that rear ended him took his case to court claiming that the drunk was not a credible witness.

kevinhits · #**109** 12-30-2017, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolftrapper

Interesting story indeed.

This is not the first story I have ever heard over my 45 years....What ****es me off is I could pull over on the side of the road and sleep it off...NO DRIVING...but have my god damn keys on me and get an impaired...That is some bull****....

kevinhits · #**110** 12-30-2017, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by covey ridge

They probably will. I know of a case where a drunk stopped for a stop sign and was rear ended by a sober guy. When the police arrived the drunk was very drunk and was charged with impaired and the other guy was charged with careless driving. The drunk pleaded guilty but the guy that rear ended him took his case to court claiming that the drunk was not a credible witness.

I was talking about a head on collision and what the media reports...Yes, alcohol was involved, was under .08, but other sober driver was distracted and hit head on....Do you count that as an "alcohol involved accident"?

Wolftrapper · #**111** 12-30-2017, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kevinhits

This is not the first story I have ever heard over my 45 years....What ****es me off is I could pull over on the side of the road and sleep it off...NO DRIVING...but have my god damn keys on me and get an impaired...That is some bull****....

Why drive at all? You would have been driving drunk I presume in this scenario to pull off the road somewhere.
Life's tough.

kevinhits · #**112** 12-30-2017, 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolftrapper

Why drive at all? You would have been driving drunk I presume in this scenario to pull off the road somewhere.
Life's tough.

Maybe someone wants to do the right thing....Ever think of that scenario!!!

I was in that spot many years ago and I was smart enough not to continue on OH holy one....

EDIT: your an idiot!

Talking moose · #**113** 12-30-2017, 08:46 PM

Go to a bar. Get drunk. Go out to truck in parking lot and sleep it off with keys in your pocket. The charge? Care and control. Kinda stupid if you ask me.

kevinhits · #**114** 12-30-2017, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Talking moose

Go to a bar. Get drunk. Go out to truck in parking lot and sleep it off with keys in your pocket. The charge? Care and control. Kinda stupid if you ask me.

x2 ....If you are going to change any laws for drinking and driving, this would be one to look at....

Dewey Cox · #**115** 12-30-2017, 08:56 PM

Worse yet, start the car so you don’t freeze to death, and go to sleep in the back seat.
I have done this, but thanks to the lack of rural policing I didn’t get arrested.
Funny, I don’t regret breaking that law.

kevinhits · #**116** 12-30-2017, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dewey Cox

Worse yet, start the car so you don’t freeze to death, and go to sleep in the back seat.
I have done this, but thanks to the lack of rural policing I didn’t get arrested.
Funny, I don’t regret breaking that law.

x2....I did the same but I had the command start so I could warm up and the truck would shut off after 15 minutes.

Talking moose · #**117** 12-30-2017, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kevinhits

x2....I did the same but I had the command start so I could warm up and the truck would shut off after 15 minutes.

I’d suggest hiding the keys somewhere nearby and use command start. No keys no charge. Good idea for winter bar parking lot napping. Lol

sns2 · #**118** 12-30-2017, 11:03 PM

I think everyone has had the opportunity to express themselves. All sides have been expressed. It has also generated complaints that are valid. Now is a good time to wind this one up before it gets away on us.