Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > The Off Topic Forum
Register Forum Rules FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-14-2013, 02:00 PM   #21
dsavillian
First Line Centre
 
dsavillian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: losing CPHL bets
Exp:
Default

Kind of related:

How does everyone feel about the zero-tolerance rule for BAC for drivers with a GDL?

I'm curious if the general consensus differs from that of the 0.05 "limit" for regular drivers.
__________________
Formerly CPHL - LA Kings

Last edited by dsavillian; 05-14-2013 at 02:02 PM.
dsavillian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2013, 02:22 PM   #22
Canehdianman
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by St. Pats View Post
Personally I can't wait for the day where you have to pass a breathalyzer test to start your vehicle. The tech already exists and should be mandatory for every vehicle.
blood test too? Maybe even a semen sample?


Anyways, here is my solution to stopping drunk driving. Have the government put a couple hundred billion towards this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_driverless_car
Canehdianman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2013, 02:28 PM   #23
Table 5
Franchise Player
 
Table 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: NYYC
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SebC View Post
People who live in the Beltline don't have this problem, except when their friends want to go out to suburban drinking establishments. And that's where cabs/transit come into play (or would if Calgary had late-night transit).
That's when we start making excuses about having to work-late or watching the kids. It's come to the point where if I can't walk to the bar, and don't have a ride, chances are I'm not going. Cabs here are too much of a hassle, and transit is usually not a viable option to most suburban spots, especially at night.
Table 5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2013, 03:25 PM   #24
Makarov
Franchise Player
 
Makarov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Moscow
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joborule View Post

The only people that kill people are the actual drunk drivers that are way above the limit.
Not true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joborule View Post
Nothing is being done against them, but we continue to penalize the general citizen for the problems they cause. Such BS.
Also not true.
__________________
"Life of Russian hockey veterans is very hard," said Soviet hockey star Sergei Makarov. "Most of them don't have enough to eat these days. These old players are Russian legends."
Makarov is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Makarov For This Useful Post:
Old 05-14-2013, 04:27 PM   #25
Reaper
Franchise Player
 
Reaper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: I'm right behind you
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dsavillian View Post
Kind of related:

How does everyone feel about the zero-tolerance rule for BAC for drivers with a GDL?

I'm curious if the general consensus differs from that of the 0.05 "limit" for regular drivers.
Personally, I'm in favour of zero tolerance for drivers with a GDL. They don't have their full license yet. What makes them think they've mastered driving sober let alone with a drink in them?
__________________
Don't fear me. Trust me.
Reaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2013, 04:38 PM   #26
valo403
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Makarov View Post
Not true.



Also not true.
Obviously they aren't the only people that kill people, but the reaction in Alberta (and most jurisdictions) seems to be to go after people in the 0.05-0.08 range as opposed to those who are well over the limit. I'm pretty sure there were a few studies cited here previously that showed that the latter group was many times more likely to be in a deadly accident than the former (did a quick search and couldn't find them so I may be mistaken).

Of course the manner in which you go after those groups is completely different, with one you simply write more tickets, make more arrests and collect more fines. With the other you have to actually jail people, and incur costs, so it's not surprising to see the path most places have taken.
__________________
When you do a signature and don't attribute it to anyone, it's yours. - Vulcan
valo403 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2013, 05:13 PM   #27
CaramonLS
Retired
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Exp:
Default

Are there any distribution charts which link the level of severity to BAC? I'm honestly curious if the 0.05 crowd really causes an amount of accidents to be worried or concerned about.
CaramonLS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2013, 05:13 PM   #28
Coach
Franchise Player
 
Coach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Vancouver
Exp:
Default

They're going the wrong way this I think. I agree with Table that there should be harsher, more black and white punishments, but I don't think lowering the limit from an already pretty low limit is going to stop the people that are actually the problem. All this does is punish people having a drink after work. They should have an upper limit instead with harsher punishments.

Blow .08, automatic 6 month suspension. Blow .12, 2 year suspension

2nd time .08 automatic 2 year suspension. .12, automatic one year jail time.
__________________
Coach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2013, 07:10 PM   #29
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: California
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaramonLS View Post
Are there any distribution charts which link the level of severity to BAC? I'm honestly curious if the 0.05 crowd really causes an amount of accidents to be worried or concerned about.
One of the reasons to implement a .05 law is so that you can actually convict people who are over .08. It takes about an hour from road side blow to your second blow on the machine they use in court. So in that time period you sober up by about .02. Which means to have a realistic shot of conviction you need a person to be around .12 when they first are pulled over.

So I would be interested in seeing a distribution of accidents but you would really need to be careful in how you looked at the numbers and how they were collected.
GGG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2013, 02:00 AM   #30
driveway
A Fiddler Crab
 
driveway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago
Exp:
Default

Taiwan just put in some new drunk-driving regulations.

Under 0.15 BAC - not impaired.
0.15-0.25 - $NT 15,000 fine ($500 CAD) - But only if you have held your license for less than two years, are diving without a license, or are a cab driver. If not, no fine.

0.25-0.4 - $NT 22,500 ($770 CAD)
0.4-0.55 - $NT 45,000 ($1500 CAD)
0.55+ - $NT 67,500 ($2300 CAD) and criminal charges.

Yes, that's right, in order to get criminally charged with a DUI in Taiwan you need a BAC of 0.55 mg or more, a level of intoxication which is characterized by wikipedia as having "A high risk of poisoning and possibility of death."
driveway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2013, 05:03 AM   #31
gargamel
First Line Centre
 
gargamel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cambodia
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by driveway View Post
Taiwan just put in some new drunk-driving regulations.

Under 0.15 BAC - not impaired.
0.15-0.25 - $NT 15,000 fine ($500 CAD) - But only if you have held your license for less than two years, are diving without a license, or are a cab driver. If not, no fine.

0.25-0.4 - $NT 22,500 ($770 CAD)
0.4-0.55 - $NT 45,000 ($1500 CAD)
0.55+ - $NT 67,500 ($2300 CAD) and criminal charges.

Yes, that's right, in order to get criminally charged with a DUI in Taiwan you need a BAC of 0.55 mg or more, a level of intoxication which is characterized by wikipedia as having "A high risk of poisoning and possibility of death."
Taiwan's limits are in mg/mL, whereas BAC is usually measured in percent. To compare them, you need to move the decimal point by one place (there are approximately 1000 mg in one mL, so divide the mg of alcohol by 1000 then multiply by 100 to get the percent alcohol), so you can actually be criminally charged with a BAC of .055 percent in Taiwan. That's basically what the US is proposing to set their limit at.

The 500 CAD fine in Taiwan starts at a BAC of 0.015, which is less than a single beer for pretty much everyone. Those limits would put every non-urban bar in North America out of business.

Last edited by gargamel; 05-15-2013 at 09:47 AM. Reason: clarifying the math
gargamel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2013, 09:03 AM   #32
DuffMan
Franchise Player
 
DuffMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 127.0.0.1
Exp:
Default

I just don't understand why there is no NDDA in the US that is politically influential and is able to get the general gullible population into a frenzy about losing their rights to drive drunk.

.05 seems to be the norm in most civilized countries, these days. I think a lot of Europe is .05.

One thing I always thought was that you could get a get out of impound free or cheaper card for your car being towed if you were drunk. as in when I was younger a lot of us working dowtown or close to it would go out for drinks after work. Usually a couple of drinks led to a whole night of hard boozing. But your car is somewhere you cannot leave it overnight, so it will be towed or you're going to get a huge ticket. So you decide to move your car a couple of blocks so it will be OK, then you decide you might as well just drive it home so you don't have to leave it.
If you could put it in a parking lot over night and pay a 24 hour fee or something would help, maybe you can do that these days, I'm not sure.
I know better planning would have helped but at the time no one thought of it.
__________________
Pass the bacon.
DuffMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2013, 10:09 AM   #33
ernie
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Exp:
Default

0.05...sounds good to me. There are very clear statistics from Europe that each drop in alcohol limit has led to not only decreased fatalities but also has led to an decrease in people that far surpass the limit. It works as a universal deterrent...even for the major idiots.

Of course we all know the disdain Americans have for statistics (after all gun control "hasn't worked" in Australia or anywhere else) so it is curious why they seem to get on board with something like this. It must be because everyone knows someone whose life was ruined by drunk driving.

Last edited by ernie; 05-15-2013 at 10:14 AM.
ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2013, 06:01 PM   #34
Swarly
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Swarly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ernie View Post
....
Of course we all know the disdain Americans have for statistics (after all gun control "hasn't worked" in Australia or anywhere else) so it is curious why they seem to get on board with something like this. It must be because everyone knows someone whose life was ruined by drunk driving.

I would bet it is simply because the NRA is more powerful than any of the pro-alcohol lobby groups.
Swarly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2013, 07:42 PM   #35
Zulu29
Franchise Player
 
Zulu29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Kelowna
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattyC View Post
They're going the wrong way this I think. I agree with Table that there should be harsher, more black and white punishments, but I don't thinklowering the limit from an already pretty low limit is going to stop the people that are actually the problem.All this does is punish people having a drink after work. They should have an upper limit instead with harsher punishments.

Blow .08, automatic 6 month suspension. Blow .12, 2 year suspension

2nd time .08 automatic 2 year suspension. .12, automatic one year jail time.
.08 is not a low limit, most people would be quite tipsy if they had that much alcohol in their blood. Also, impaired driving charges are the same across Canada, impaired operation of a motor vehicle and providing a breath sample of over .08. Administratively they can different across the country if you are lower that .08 mg% as it is then a motor vehicle act offence not a criminal code offence. In Newfoundland you may receive a 24 hour driving suspension whereas in BC you may receive a 3 day driving suspension.

There seems to be a move by governments to "decriminalize" impaired driving so as to reduce the burden of court trials. There is a lot of controversy about this in BC as people feel the government is circumventing a persons presumption of innocence and right to a trial.
Zulu29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2013, 09:00 PM   #36
bc-chris
Franchise Player
 
bc-chris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Kelowna, BC
Exp:
Default

just think of all the guys that will need to change their hockey jersey number from .08 to .05
__________________
"...and there goes Finger up the middle on Luongo!" - Jim Hughson, Av's vs. 'Nucks
bc-chris is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:19 PM.

Calgary Flames
2024-25




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021 | See Our Privacy Policy