Driving under the legal limit? Doesn't matter, your vehicle is impounded anyway.

[valo403]

I know a few of you are Alberta barred attorneys, what's the stance among people in that group regarding this law? You'd think that the Bat would be absolutely up in arms over the contemplation of a law like this.

[chemgear]

Interesting timing on this:

http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion...468/story.html

Shortly after blasting Alberta’s new drunk driving law at his riding fundraiser Saturday night, Edmonton Conservative MP Peter Goldring was charged with refusing to blow.

Premier Alison Redford’s troops can hardly hide their hilarity.
A Harper MP offering a Wildrose argument becomes the latest case for the tough Redford law.

Thomas Lukaszuk, the provincial education minister, confirms what happened at the Edmonton East event, where he was invited to give the keynote speech and ended up in a debate with the host.

“Mr. Goldring felt that the legislation is intrusive and will someday be challenged by someone in a court of law,” Lukaszuk told me Monday night. “I responded, as I would to anyone, that it ensures impaired drivers will be taken from Alberta streets. That’s a matter of higher importance than some possible, hypothetical challenge to the law.”

[jar_e]

FWIW, Rick Bell from the Sun believes this will pass tonight...

@sunrickbell rick bell


Looks like new Alberta drinking and driving law with penalties for those .05 and above will pass tonight. #ableg #yyc #calsun

[valo403]

Originally Posted by jar_e

FWIW, Rick Bell from the Sun believes this will pass tonight...

@sunrickbell rick bell


Looks like new Alberta drinking and driving law with penalties for those .05 and above will pass tonight. #ableg #yyc #calsun

Good, it can't be challenged if it's never passed

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by valo403

Good, it can't be challenged if it's never passed

But if it doesn't pass, then it doesn't effect us

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by valo403

Good, it can't be challenged if it's never passed

Considering it took BC just until last week to release a decision from their Supreme Court (and even then the part the affects people the most 0.05-0.08 was deemed constitutional) it will be here for a little while atleast.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

But if it doesn't pass, then it doesn't effect us

True, but having it hanging out there was always going to cause confusion. This at least allows for some clarity, although it will take some time to get it.

[psicodude]

As expected, the Bill officially passed tonight. Anyone know when it will take effect?

[VladtheImpaler]

Not that I needed another reason, but I am definitely not voting for these corrupt dirtbags. Moreover, I'll donate some money to the competition.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by psicodude

As expected, the Bill officially passed tonight. Anyone know when it will take effect?

Based on the way the dictators are running things, I would say it will be enforced by this weekend or the next.

[VladtheImpaler]

BTW, sorry for being ignorant, but what is the WRP's position on this law? Paging First Lady...

[GP_Matt]

I will paraphrase a bit, but the Wildrose was against a few parts of it. The speed with which it was created and passed, the constitutional issues, and the fact that it redirects police resources towards something that likely will not work.

They propose in stead to increase enforcement of existing DD laws and to push for stiffer penalties for those above 0.08.

To lift a quote from Rob Anderson

According to a 2008 report prepared for Transport Canada, 61.3% of fatalities were caused by drivers without any BAC (mostly caused by speeding or other unsafe driving practices), 22.6% of fatalities were caused by drivers at more than double the legal BAC limit of .08, 10.3% of fatalities were caused by those in the .08 to .16 BAC range, 3.6% by individuals with a BAC between .01 to .05, and only 2.2% of all fatal vehicular accidents were caused by drivers who were found to be in the .05 to .08 BAC range.

[mrkajz44]

So there are less fatalities for the .05 - .08 range than the .01 - .05 range. I wonder if that was discussed when passing the bill.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by mrkajz44

So there are less fatalities for the .05 - .08 range than the .01 - .05 range. I wonder if that was discussed when passing the bill.

Of course not. They just want to look "tough on DD's" and reach their hand a little deeper into our pocket.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by chemgear

Interesting timing on this:

http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion...468/story.html

Shortly after blasting Alberta’s new drunk driving law at his riding fundraiser Saturday night, Edmonton Conservative MP Peter Goldring was charged with refusing to blow.

Premier Alison Redford’s troops can hardly hide their hilarity.
A Harper MP offering a Wildrose argument becomes the latest case for the tough Redford law.

Thomas Lukaszuk, the provincial education minister, confirms what happened at the Edmonton East event, where he was invited to give the keynote speech and ended up in a debate with the host.

“Mr. Goldring felt that the legislation is intrusive and will someday be challenged by someone in a court of law,” Lukaszuk told me Monday night. “I responded, as I would to anyone, that it ensures impaired drivers will be taken from Alberta streets. That’s a matter of higher importance than some possible, hypothetical challenge to the law.”

These are the people that I hate. The irrational; "we're saving lives! Who cares about problems or piddly things like 'due process' or 'rights' when we're saving lives! Saving lives!"

Thanks Mrs. Lovejoy.

[Cowboy89]

If you like your civil liberties it seems that Redford isn't your choice come the spring. If you want a glimpse into the future of a Redford Majority government, just google any motherhood law ever enacted recently in other jurisdictions and assume that in some form it would come to Alberta regardless of what she campaigns on.

[return to the red]

Cab companies are going to be loving this.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Locke

These are the people that I hate. The irrational; "we're saving lives! Who cares about problems or piddly things like 'due process' or 'rights' when we're saving lives! Saving lives!"

Thanks Mrs. Lovejoy.

If you've been reading some of the 'in between the lines' discussions coming from the legislators on this one the intent is a whole lot more sinister than the word of the law. Comments like 'change the culture' et al that imply that if they had the ability they would make Alberta a zero tolerance jurisdiction.

Bottomline is that a Redford government is one where the concept of risk management is replaced with risk avoidance. It's that, 'one sip is too much attitude.'

[MarchHare]

Regarding zero tolerance, to those of you in the thread who are in favour of such a policy, what are your thoughts on this scenario:

I go to a Flames game and buy a beer before heading to my seat prior to the national anthems and opening faceoff. I finish my beer sometime during the first period. I don't have another drink for the rest of the game (~2-2.5 hours later). Am I safe to drive home at this point? Is my BAC 0.00?

[RubberDuck]

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759