Drinking and driving laws

Moderators: Radar Identified, Reflections, admin, hwybear, Decatur, bend

tdottopcop
Member
Member
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 8:42 am

Drinking and driving laws

by: tdottopcop on
Sat Oct 01, 2011 7:47 am

I`ve been thinking about this for the past couple of days and maybe somebody can shed some more perspective on it. I know there are a lot of knowledge, experienced and educated people on this board!

1) The law states that drivers with BAC level 0.08 or higher may be arrested and charged for Over 80. This is all fair and straightforward. Within the last couple years new legislation has been introduced where drivers found to have between 0.05 and 0.08 BAC levels may have their drivers licence suspended and their vehicle impounded. This would be the `warn` on the approved screen device.

But what bothers me is that, somebody who has broken no law, still is the recipient of government sanctioned punishments! I understand the reasoning as to why their licence is suspended and their car towed, but is it really truly legal for police to do this... when the person has not actually committed any offence whatsoever- otherwise charges would be laid. If they haven`t broken the law and will not be charged with any offence, how is it that the government can deprive one of their personal property... is it just the same argument `well it`s a privilege to drive therefore the government calls the shots`... because to me that does not seem reasonable. The DEAL is .08, not 0.05.

2) I understand RIDE spot checks are technically a Charter breach and case law has stated that it is the exception to the Charter protected right to not be abritrarily detained but what jurisdiction of court made this the fact... is the Charter legislation really constantly being changed as a result of case law... are basic human rights that the Charter protects really in the hands of judges, and not legislators...

Don`t get me wrong- I do not support impaired driving in the least. In fact, I detest it. However, it bugs me when I see something like what I discussed above.

Thanks.
No, I am not the chief of Toronto Police.
No, I do not work for Toronto Police...
... it is just a name folks :)


User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:21 am
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Moderator

by: hwybear on
Sat Oct 01, 2011 3:58 pm

tdottopcop wrote:1) The law states that drivers with BAC level 0.08 or higher may be arrested and charged for Over 80. This is all fair and straightforward. Within the last couple years new legislation has been introduced where drivers found to have between 0.05 and 0.08 BAC levels may have their drivers licence suspended and their vehicle impounded. This would be the `warn` on the approved screen device..
That is inaccurate. The only difference is the length of suspension and that is it

If one blows a "warn" on the ASD that is an alcohol level between 50-99mgs.
The previous was that this driver would receive a 12 hour suspension.
Now the suspension is 3 days.
NO vehicle impoundment

The vehicle impoundment is for 7 days when someone does have a reading over 80mgs, which is test back at the police station (not a ASD test) OR the person refuses a breath test.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


Stanton
High Authority
High Authority
Posts: 2111
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 8:49 pm
Location: Ontario

by: Stanton on
Sun Oct 02, 2011 3:17 pm

tdottopcop wrote:2) I understand RIDE spot checks are technically a Charter breach and case law has stated that it is the exception to the Charter protected right to not be abritrarily detained but what jurisdiction of court made this the fact... is the Charter legislation really constantly being changed as a result of case law... are basic human rights that the Charter protects really in the hands of judges, and not legislators..
How is it in the hands of the judiciary? Legislators create the laws that may breach the charter, the judiciary acts as the check and balance to see if it's lawful. And the charter states there are "reasonable limits" to the rights required in any free and democratic society.


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics

Return to “General Talk”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests