Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiger
And so it should be that no one should be arguing this. It has shown to be a successful deterrent to drunk driving lowering death, and therefore it should be implemented.
But instead people are making arguments and forgetting to bring in probability into there scenarios. sure it could prevent deaths but there is a 0.001% chance the machine is out of calibration and it cost me some more. This is against my rights. If it saves lives and the odd person is 'fined' i'm fine with that. All systems are flawed, innocent people go to the courts and get convicted, how in this scenario is going to court going to get you out of the fine. How much are you willing to pay to fight a fine like that?
The best example I can thing of for this is if you get a speeding ticket in Montana (land of better freedoms I'm told earlier) you have to pay the ticket right away. Is that the same attack on freedoms.
|
I just re-read this. Are you saying that because all systems are flawed you're totally fine without having any due process?
Really?
You don't believe if you get a speeding ticket you should get your day in court? You realize that's exactly why radar guns are calibrated as often as they are?
Most charges don't go to trial unless the crown (DA) believes there is enough evidence to convict. So why bother going to trial? Let's save all the taxpayers money and do away with trials, just treat everyone charged as guilty. Yes, some innocent people will be harmed but it's better for the greater good.
In fairness, I'm probably reading too much into what you're saying. I don't want to put words into your mouth. Clearly I'm exaggerating here.
Again, I'm not arguing that the BAC shouldn't be lowered to 0.05, I'm not arguing that it should be. I'm just saying that if you're effectively giving people a $200 charge, and seizing their property (car) without any due process is wrong.
I'd be totally fine with getting a summary offence ticket, not being allowed to drive that night (either have a taxi called or have someone pick you up) and given the option to have someone drive your car home for you.
24 hour seizure is too much, suspension without due process is too much. Ticket the accused and let them handle it in court.
Actually under this proposal it could end up costing them more.
- ticket/charge
- possible taxi
- possible towing/impound fee
- possible lawyer
- suspension of license ($200 reinstatement fee)
- impounding of car
Under this process you get the same effect with harsher treatment, and still has due process. Wouldn't this be a better deterrent/punishment?