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

[GP_Matt]

The problem is that they have changed the punishment from no punishment if you could prove you were under 0.08 to a punishment if you are between 0.05 and 0.08. The problem isn't that they are punishing people for being between 0.05 and 0.08 it is that they are punishing people without the right to a trial. As far as I am concerned if driving between 0.05 and 0.08 impairs your ability to drive by a statistically significant level than it should be illegal and those caught doing it should be punished.
My complaint is with the complete bypass of our judicial system.

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by return to the red

you do realize that blowing over .08 still carries an impaired charge right? it's that range of .05 -.08 that the penalties have changed in.

I was speaking with my brother-in-law (traffic cop who is a breath tech, about it this weekend) and he said the only reforms that are now enforcable are in the .05-.08 range and the impaired ones will come into practice starting in september. Those impaired charges are still going through some reforms and many cops are unsure of what they will all entail as they are still trying to grasp the changes associated with the .05 - .08

I could have misinterpreted what he was trying to tell me but that was what i got out of it.

Other way around...only the >0.08 changes are in use right now. The 0.05 to 0.08 change will begin in september.

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by Jebus

What would be the result if you asked to have legal counsel present before submitting to a test at roadside? If your reasoning was that you are confused by the changes to the legislation and wanted to consult counsel before submitting, is this allowed?
Would this be viewed as a refusal to submit; or a case of asking the authorities for access to legal counsel and being denied if forced to submit?

Just curious, and I know we have some legal minds on board here..

Can't have legal counsel present and failure to submit a breath sample, even with a roadside, "forthwith", and you can be charged with refusal to provide a sample.

[GP_Matt]

I haven't been paying much attention to the changes above 0.08. Are they just increased penalties or is there more to it.

[return to the red]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

I haven't been paying much attention to the changes above 0.08. Are they just increased penalties or is there more to it.

some of it is immediate seizure of vehicle, no more 21 day grace period I know that much, which I totally agree with for the record

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

I haven't been paying much attention to the changes above 0.08. Are they just increased penalties or is there more to it.

It's my understanding that you now lose your license immediately until your case is resolved. If that's true that's BS. Some people charged with 0.08 are indeed innocent but they would lose their license for months or years as the case slowly grinds through our legal system. Again it's a question of a right to a fair trial and punishment being dealt out before a conviction and without the right to defend yourself.

[GP_Matt]

Is it similar to bail where you are arrested and charged for a crime and put in jail but then a justice of the peace has the final say in whether you can be released pending the trial?

Otherwise, this whole things really makes me wonder why the PC's are so afraid of the court system.

[Jacks]

Just did a quick Google search, this was the first result.
http://www.breathalyzercanada.com/Al...12-nid-35.html

Just in time for the July 1st long weekend this year, Alberta will be introducing new drunk driving penalties that will see anyone with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) greater than 0.08 have their license suspended immediately and will not be able to have them reinstated until all charges and penalties are addressed and resolved. Alberta is the first province to introduce these quite possibly indefinite suspensions.

Little different story here.
http://www.acalgaryblog.com/2011/11/...-criminal-act/

The law as it stands

For those with 0.05% to 0.08% BAC
Police can suspend your license for 24 hours. Your vehicle is siezed, but it doesn’t appear that there are any financial charges to reinstate your license or retrieve your vehicle. You have no opportunity to appeal this penalty.
For those with 0.08% BAC and above
Police can (and presumably will) suspend your license for 24 hours immediately. You then have a 21-day grace period which is followed by a 90-day license suspension. Your vehicle is not siezed. You have an opportunity to appeal to the Alberta Transportation Safety Board.

The new law as proposed

For those with 0.05% to 0.08% BAC
Police can suspend your license for 3 days. Your vehicle is siezed for 3 days. You will incur costs of license reinstatement and costs related to towing and impounding of your vehicle. You have the opportunity for “immediate roadside appeal,” but none other than that.
For those with 0.08% BAC and above
Police can (and presumably will) suspend your license indefinitely. That suspension remains in place until the criminal charge is resolved. Your vehicle is siezed for three days. You will incur the cost of license reinstatement and costs related to towing and impounding of your vehicle. You have the opportunity to appeal this suspension to the Alberta Transportation Safety Board.

[GP_Matt]

Does it not seem odd that those who blow over 0.08 have more rights than those who blow under?

[return to the red]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

Does it not seem odd that those who blow over 0.08 have more rights than those who blow under?

I would assume because it carries a criminal charge if you are refering to the appeal process.

[ThePrince]

Question for you guys though, I've heard that if you get pulled over, and they ask to breathalyze, you can claim you would like your legal counsel present, and they have to give you time to produce them. Is this complete BS?

[Jacks]

I suppose you could ask for legal counsel but I'm pretty sure they'd charge you with failure to provide a breath sample in the meantime.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by ThePrince

Question for you guys though, I've heard that if you get pulled over, and they ask to breathalyze, you can claim you would like your legal counsel present, and they have to give you time to produce them. Is this complete BS?

I heard that if you jump out of your vehicle as soon as you are pulled over, shotgun 6 beers and a micky of rum, they can't charge you cuz, they can't prove your blood levels when you were driving.....

[Five-hole]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I heard that if you jump out of your vehicle as soon as you are pulled over, shotgun 6 beers and a micky of rum, they can't charge you cuz, they can't prove your blood levels when you were driving.....

I think you should try that. Keep us posted.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

I think you should try that. Keep us posted.

should i have used this colour.................

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by ThePrince

Question for you guys though, I've heard that if you get pulled over, and they ask to breathalyze, you can claim you would like your legal counsel present, and they have to give you time to produce them. Is this complete BS?

Yes its bs.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by ThePrince

Question for you guys though, I've heard that if you get pulled over, and they ask to breathalyze, you can claim you would like your legal counsel present, and they have to give you time to produce them. Is this complete BS?

100% BS: R v Sinclair

[T@T]

Originally Posted by jar_e

Yes its bs.

Apsolutely correct, but if you know you'll blow over it's a great option, your ticket will be "failure to blow". Which you'll have a far higher rate of dismissal in court.

[moon]

Originally Posted by T@T

Apsolutely correct, but if you know you'll blow over it's a great option, your ticket will be "failure to blow". Which you'll have a far higher rate of dismissal in court.

Is that true?

I heard from a lawyer to blow no matter what even if you know you are over as it is much easier to get a reading thrown out based on the numerous things that the Cops can do wrong then to get a refusal to blow which is pretty cut and dry.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by moon

Is that true?

No. If you fail to provide a breath sample, you are pretty much screwed, you have nothing to contest. If you do, then you can question the reliability of the test and a whole bunch of other factors. You at least have a chance.