Quote:
Originally Posted by pylon
??? 
Because you didn't get 'properly' caught doesn't change the fact a law was broken. It is a pretty cut and dry law with GDL drivers and drinking even a drop of alchohol before getting behind the wheel.
Using an extreme example, if you kill someone, but aren't caught, it does not change the fact the law was still broken, especially if there is an admission of guilt. I suppose however, those that chose to drink and drive will look for all of the legal loopholes they can so as that they don't have to pay the price for endangering everyone. Typical no personal accountability bs. Lets all just go out and break every law, there aren't nearly enough officers out there to catch everyone doing everything, its only illegal if you get caught right?
And yes, I can stand on my soapbox and claim to be holier than thou, as I have never driven a car after more than one drink. Losing relatives to people that think they are in complete control after downing a six pack tends to do that to you. |
The point being in this case there is two separate punishments. A 24 hr suspension and a 30 day suspension. If you are to be found guilty of the 30 day suspension you require a breathalyzer. Seems to me this has been mentioned time and time again in this thread.
He should have been given the 24 hr suspension and/or been given a breathalyzer with a 30 day suspension. The problem is he is being charged for a crime that nobody really knows occured or not. It is like being pulled over for speeding and the cop saying "You lose your license for going over double the speed limit". If he has not somehow clocked you going that fast were you actually going that fast? Maybe a charge for reckless driving or even a lesser charge would be more appropriate if proof cannot be provided. Even if you admitted to going over the speed limit, the cop can't claim what speed you were going without proof.