Driving under the legal limit? Doesn't matter, your vehicle is impounded anyway. - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

MarchHare · 11-23-2011, 10:32 AM

The neo-prohibitionists at MADD have gone way too far. They've convinced the provincial government to draft legislation that would temporarily suspend the license and impound the vehicle of anyone caught with a blood-alcohol level above .05, which is below the legal limit of .08 and considered sober. This punishment is applied entirely at the discretion of the cops, and drivers have no option for appeal or due process. Anyone who has their vehicle impounded for being caught driving under the legal limit will have to pay the towing and storage fees.

I'm all for harsher penalties against drunk drivers, especially in cases involving a fatality, but this really grinds my gears. Similar laws in other provinces have caused great harm to the restaurant industry as diners are too afraid to have even a single beer or glass of wine with their meals.

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Alb...533/story.html
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Pr...#ixzz1eXqD6X00

BlackArcher101 · 11-23-2011, 10:34 AM

Wouldn't a 24H suspension be enough?

Mean Mr. Mustard · 11-23-2011, 10:35 AM

If someone is pulled over by the police suspected of drinking and driving, I don't care if their blood alcohol level is 0.08 or 0.05 - I don't want them on the same road as me.

Coach · 11-23-2011, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

Wouldn't a 24H suspension be enough?

Yeah probably, but how can you give someone a 24 hour suspension and then let them drive their car away?

MarchHare · 11-23-2011, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

Wouldn't a 24H suspension be enough?

Why is any suspension necessary? This gives cops the discretion to punish people who have not broken the law with zero judicial oversight.

OilKiller · 11-23-2011, 10:41 AM

Under the legal limit, is under the legal limit. This law should not happen. I am completely against drunk drivers and think they should be charged as much as legally possible, but I am against this. There is a legal limit for a reason.

Bill Bumface · 11-23-2011, 10:41 AM

This doesn't change what happens right now all that much in reality.

The first breathalizer you are administered gives a readout for 0.05-0.10, and at that readout you have the option of taking a 24 hour suspension, or going for a more accurate test.

I've never heard of anyone going further with the testing from that point on.

nik- · 11-23-2011, 10:41 AM

I got this 10 years ago. Was under the limit, got a 24 and my car towed.

Mean Mr. Mustard · 11-23-2011, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Why is any suspension necessary? This gives cops the discretion to punish people who have not broken the law with zero judicial oversight.

0.07 doesn't mean sober. If the police pull someone over who has been driving recklessly (and the police rarely pull random people over), they find out there is alcohol in their system, then maybe they shouldn't be on the road to start with and a 24 hour suspension can act as a wake up call.

Mean Mr. Mustard · 11-23-2011, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nik-

I got this 10 years ago. Was under the limit, got a 24 and my car towed.

The question is will you drink that much and drive again? - if no the law appears to have worked, at least in this case.

Hilch · 11-23-2011, 10:44 AM

I'm glad this is happeneing. If you have a sip of alcohol you shouldn't be driving, don't give any grey areas for people to get out of tickets and punishment. Too many people die from drunk idiots driving and somehow the drunk idiot is never the one to die. Couldn't be happier to see tougher laws for something like this.

longsuffering · 11-23-2011, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OilKiller

Under the legal limit, is under the legal limit. This law should not happen. I am completely against drunk drivers and think they should be charged as much as legally possible, but I am against this. There is a legal limit for a reason.

You do understand that the .08 limit is not absolute and that the level of impairment varies from person to person?

It's not like at .07 a person is stone cold sober and at .08 they're magically impaired.

Some drivers may well be 'impaired' at .05, while others may not show any signs of being impaired even above .08.

I don't have a problem with police using their judgement to determine whether a driver, despite a low BAC reading, could represent a danger to other drivers on the road.

OilKiller · 11-23-2011, 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by longsuffering

You do understand that the .08 limit is not absolute and that the level of impairment varies from person to person?

It's not like at .07 a person is stone cold sober and at .08 they're magically impaired.

Some drivers may well be 'impaired' at .05, while others may not show any signs of being impaired even above .08.

I don't have a problem with police using their judgement to determine whether a driver, despite a low BAC reading, could represent a danger to other drivers on the road.

Well, sorry, I don't like judgement calls. It's like a speed limit. Is it in the judgement of the police if I'm going under the limit that I should get fined?

There is a legal limit for a reason.

And for the record, I don't ever touch a vehicle if I go out. Even if I only have one, I don't drive. Simply made the decision to not drive when I am anywhere near alcohol. It is the point of this though IMO.

malcolmk14 · 11-23-2011, 10:48 AM

Just make the legal limit .05 and get it over with already.

MarchHare · 11-23-2011, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agent86

0.07 doesn't mean sober. If the police pull someone over who has been driving recklessly (and the police rarely pull random people over), they find out there is alcohol in their system, then maybe they shouldn't be on the road to start with and a 24 hour suspension can act as a wake up call.

The legal limit is the legal limit. If you think it should be lower than .08, then lobby to have that law changed. Again, I have ZERO sympathy for drunk drivers and am all for harsher penalties for idiots who get behind the wheel when they're over the legal limit. My problem is that this bill gives cops (not the courts) the power to punish people who haven't even committed a criminal offence.

Two Fivenagame · 11-23-2011, 10:51 AM

.05? What the hell is that? A tablespoon of cough syrup?

mikey_the_redneck · 11-23-2011, 10:51 AM

Looks like the highly paid MADD lobbyists have had their way again.

I'm so sick of being considered a criminal for having a beer after work.

What's next, a .02 legal limit? When does this stop?
We are never going to eliminate drinking and driving from our society 100%, no matter how many cops you hire and how many draconian laws you lay out.

Put detection devices in all new cars already....

Joborule · 11-23-2011, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hilch

I'm glad this is happeneing. If you have a sip of alcohol you shouldn't be driving.

If someone can't handle of sip of alcohol they perhaps they shouldn't drink at all. We don't need to be THAT extreme.

burn_this_city · 11-23-2011, 10:54 AM

I support this, it's been effective in BC on cutting down the deaths from drunk drivers.

Reaper · 11-23-2011, 10:55 AM

Personally, I think MADD is aiming at overall prohibition as opposed to simply eliminating drinking and driving.