Random Breathylizer Tests Considered For Canada, page 2

reply to post by DrumsRfun

---

I don't think it has anything to do with the victims of drunk driving. This is strictly about giving the police more powers.

I was pulled over one time as a teenager because the cop said he smelled illegal contraband. Well, I didn't use any back then and I still don't. He made a note of it and proceeded to search my car, my person and the person of my passenger.

We were only teenagers so we didn't realize that it was a clear violation of our rights. The cop even put in his report that he saw 'papers' on the dashboard. But never confiscated the invisible papers to prove it. There was nothing found and we were let go, but if it wasn't for family members looking into it I would have never even known anything was done wrong. And to be honest some of them sided with the cop.

This is just one more way of police having a tool in their arsenal they can use anytime they deem fit. They already have roadblocks and can breathalyze anyone who looks drunk that passes through it, it doesn't make sense for this to become law.

I have a feeling it has to do with the new legal limit of alcohol that was changed from (I believe) .08 to .05, Now you are tempting fate by having a single beer and driving. As shown in tests some people failed the new limit while only consuming one drink. So technically, drunk drivers might not look so drunk anymore. You can blow over even if you are 90% sober.

Furthermore, MADD is a terrible organization that preys of the emotions of woman who have lost their children to drunk drivers. It is disgusting the way they operate. The pan handle pity through cold calling looking for donations and the government uses them to earn sympathy during the voting process.

If laws are too be changed it should be done on non-biased scientific review, not a pity ridden victim mentality controlled lobby group.

reply to post by threekings

---

I was pulled over one time as a teenager because the cop said he smelled illegal contraband.

Exactly...they can invent a reason.

This is just one more way of police having a tool in their arsenal they can use anytime they deem fit.

They already do that...now its just going to be legal.

If laws are too be changed it should be done on non-biased scientific review, not a pity ridden victim mentality controlled lobby group.


I agree 100% with the last sentence.

I think all this is going to do is take the power away from drunks hiding behind their rights and allow the police to quit being crafty as to attain a reason for their looking into something further.
I don't get harrassed by police and when I have it was very easy and simple to deal with.

In this day and age where rights are so important I can see why this is such a touchy subject but I can't help be happy that a few more drunk drivers might get caught.
I might be biased because I made a decision years ago to not own a car or drive so I am not as outraged as most are.

reply to post by DrumsRfun

---

So why would it be okay for them to legalize the immoral and unconstitutional acts they are currently involved in?

As I stated, the blood alcohol level in Ontario was reduced to .05 from .08 to reduce drunk driving deaths. That legislation, along with the what has been enacted for convicted drunk drivers( breathalyzer installed devices that shut a car off if the driver doesn't blow) Both haven't had time to even see a change made. And already they are talking about a new law?

There are plenty more deaths from other issues that could be tackled, so I don't see the rationale behind this possible legislation.

reply to post by mopusvindictus

---

Well spoken. This is a clear definition of our justice system. It's not like you have to look far to see the same circumstances in other laws as well. I wont mention them because its against the T&C of the forum.

reply to post by DrumsRfun

---

Seems to me, it would be easier to put technology in vehicles which would not allow a person access to operate the vehicle while under the influence of alcohol.

That would be 100% effective, for the most part.

The other way, you would only catch people when you were actively looking.

Vehicles operational computers are sophisticated enough to shut down the vehicle if low on oil, so why not excessive alcohol in the operator's blood?

Other wise you are making laws that are hard to police 98% effectively. That would probably only change things slightly. Can we send you the bill for the extra police needed to make this work effectively?

Keep the police at the road blocks, leaving the rest of the city un-protected.

It is common knowledge ..... when police set up check stops, they restrict their man power to a confined spot. That works like a diversionary tactic for law breakers.

reply to post by win 52

---

You could also put speed limiters on every car from the manufacturer and although I wouldn't like to see that happen, it actually makes more sense then the current system.

reply to post by ZombieOctopus

---

Technically, that is false. If you research Common Law and UCC Law you will understand. But it is a whole other subject altogether.

Under ever traffic act, highway act, etc. is all under UCC Law, commerce Law, which is contractual.

There is a way to travel throughout a free country with no license or restrictions. Although it puts a giant bulls eye on your back to be harassed by the authorities.

[edit on 5-10-2009 by threekings]

reply to post by threekings

---

I have often thought of this.

Speed says 50K .... you go 50K ... not 30K not 40K not 60K.

I believe cars already have the smarts to easily do this. There is just no will by manufacturers to do it.

Would eliminate speed traps and check stops.

reply to post by whistler16

---

That is the grossest thing I have ever heard. I would rather be deported back to Canada than go through that. I hope its some medical professional who takes the blood and not the cops. It just seems inherently dangerous.

I guess you guys down there are just more used to giving blood since employers can do mandatory drug tests too. Up here its considered a gross violation of privacy and not done except if your job takes you to the states (eg. truck driver) and even then its only to satisfy your American rules; nothing to do with Canada.

Boggles me how and why you have let the police state take hold down there to the extent that it has.

reply to post by whistler16

---

Having to give your blood is disgusting. There are people that wont even give blood to doctors, that is a gross violation of human rights.

The path it paves is scary too, is the blood used just to determine if someone is drinking or is it/will it be in the future used to make a database storing dna markers.

reply to post by threekings

---

and it is not like you have an alternative, ie lose your license etc

www.stltoday.com...

you HAVE to give blood, there are wheels in motion though to fight this

Alaska: Samantha Koenig Kidnapped last week.
  Posted 2 days ago with 111 member flags

Blue Spheres Fall from the Sky in the UK
  Posted 14 days ago with 81 member flags

The Chinese have seen the dragon in the sky !!
  Posted 1 days ago with 66 member flags

Strange Sounds in Sky Explained by Scientists
  Posted 11 days ago with 59 member flags

She Dialed 911. The Cop Who Came to Help Raped Her.
  Posted 4 days ago with 49 member flags

Anonymous: Revealing The Arcane Legal Trick Behind ACTA
  Posted 11 days ago with 42 member flags

NDAA Nullification: Tennessee Bills Propose Kidnapping Charges for Federal Agents
  Posted 2 days ago with 38 member flags

Anonymous reveals Haditha massacre emails | RT
  Posted 6 days ago with 33 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: