24 hr prohibition police report?

[skidmark]

Originally Posted by yvrnycracer

Would this have to be done with the Datamaster (not sure of the exact name) at the station?! And would a lawyer be contacted prior to this test!?

Yes and no. You are demanding the test, so there is no need for Charter Rights to kick in. Should you blow over, then it's time for the Charter and more (mandatory) samples because you have just handed the officer reasonable and probable grounds.

[Five-Oh]

Originally Posted by skidmark

Yes and no. You are demanding the test, so there is no need for Charter Rights to kick in. Should you blow over, then it's time for the Charter and more (mandatory) samples because you have just handed the officer reasonable and probable grounds.

In my time as a police officer, of all the times I have seen a person request a breath test after being given a 24 hour suspension, I have never seen one given. It is not because the officer refuses to give it, it is because people start to rethink what they are demanding once everything is explained to them.

The person is always just getting a 24 hour suspension if they are not giving a breath sample. If they request the breath test it is then explained to them that if they do blow under, the 24 hour suspension will be lifted and they will be free to go. It is then explained to them that if they blow over, they will still be getting the 24 hour suspension and in addition to that they will likely receive an administrative driving prohibition (3 months on top of the 24 hour) as well as 2 criminal charges. Almost every single person I have seen have that explained to them has opted to just take the 24 hour suspension and not make the gamble. The people that have opted to blow only pretend to blow and never give a valid sample, so it is basically like they never blew and they still receive the 24 hour suspension (if this happens I always blow into the ASD myself after just to test that it is working properly).

[yvrnycracer]

Originally Posted by skidmark

For that you would have to ask the politicians that made the rules....

It's too bad most politicians don't think of things in the real world...

Not so. Too many 24 hour prohibitions and wave goodbye to your driver's licence for a lot longer. I must admit though, I am surprised that there are no penalty points associated with them.

Very true, that being said if you are permitted to drive by the criminal code of canada (the laws we ALL are expected to live by - just clearing that up ) with up to .08mg% of blood in our system why even have the 24 hour suspension system in place?! IF you are over point .08 you fail... simple, if you are under you are sent on your way. Not only does this create additional bureaucracy by having more rules to follow, the need for more paperwork and the need for additional civil servants to process said paperwork as well as hear appeals. And by not having some sort of penalty (aside from having to pay towing fees storage) the system seems rather pointless. Does the government of bc have some secret knowledge that the GoC does not?! Is someone with .05mg% of alcohol in their system not have the ability to operate properly a Motor Vehicle?! If this is indeed the case why is the federal law not .05 instead of .08?! Is there some other motivation (such as drug use?!) that inspires the 24 hour suspension?!

We won't hold that against you.

I am sure you don't agree with me in any way

[Five-Oh]

Speaking from personal experience, I would never operate a vehicle while at a BAC of 50mg%. Personally, I believe the legal limit should be lowered if anything.

yvrnycracer, you seem to be overly concerned on all the laws on impaired driving. My advice to you is instead of stressing out on if you are going to be over 50 or over 80, just don't drive if you have had anything to drink. Plan ahead so that you have a ride home if you are going to be drinking. There is no sense risking your life or the lives of others.

[yvrnycracer]

Originally Posted by Five-Oh

Speaking from personal experience, I would never operate a vehicle while at a BAC of 50mg%. Personally, I believe the legal limit should be lowered if anything.

I totally agree with you!

yvrnycracer, you seem to be overly concerned on all the laws on impaired driving. My advice to you is instead of stressing out on if you are going to be over 50 or over 80, just don't drive if you have had anything to drink. Plan ahead so that you have a ride home if you are going to be drinking. There is no sense risking your life or the lives of others.

On any night out the car stays home... it is not worth risking my life, the lives of others and my car, even the thought of having it on a tow truck and sitting in an impound makes me sick...

I am more interested in the inconsistencies between canadian law and those that govern our province. I am curious why in BC you will get a driving prohibition when the government of canada says it is okay... the same can be said for tint, front license plates and any other law that is NOT consistent across the country. This is why I question these things and I am grateful to have a forum where those who enforce the laws can have an open discussion about them and maybe offer knoledge that cannot be found any other way than questioning those who may know more or be educated through personal experience or other as to why things are the way they are... simple

[Five-Oh]

Originally Posted by yvrnycracer

I totally agree with you!



On any night out the car stays home... it is not worth risking my life, the lives of others and my car, even the thought of having it on a tow truck and sitting in an impound makes me sick...

I am more interested in the inconsistencies between canadian law and those that govern our province. I am curious why in BC you will get a driving prohibition when the government of canada says it is okay... the same can be said for tint, front license plates and any other law that is NOT consistent across the country. This is why I question these things and I am grateful to have a forum where those who enforce the laws can have an open discussion about them and maybe offer knoledge that cannot be found any other way than questioning those who may know more or be educated through personal experience or other as to why things are the way they are... simple

Good to know the car stays at home on the nights out, I respect that.

As far as the inconsistencies, I don't believe the impaired driving is an inconsistency, instead more of a varying degree of punishment. Research has shown (I will find a source later if somebody really wants it, I don't have it on my computer it was just taught to me by somebody with a masters in science on my Datamaster course) that ALL persons are impaired by alcohol at a blood alcohol content of 100mg%, which as luck would have it is where the "FAIL" sets in on the ASD. So basically that means that every single person no matter what their gender, race, size, body composition, alcohol tolerance, what they have eaten, etc will be impaired at a blood alcohol content of 100mg%. So basically at time of driving when you blow a "FAIL", you are impaired. That means that every person that gets criminal charges and a 3 month driving suspension is without a doubt impaired by alcohol.

On the other hand, you have section 215 under the BC Motor Vehicle Act. A persons ability to operate a motor vehicle is affected by alcohol at 50mg%. Notice the difference in wording, where at 100mg% (criminal charges and 3 month driving suspension) you are "impaired" by alcohol and at 50mg% (24 hour suspension) your "ability to operate a motor vehicle is affected" by alcohol. It is serious life affecting consequences when a person is impaired. It is a 24 hour suspension (no fine, usually just a tow bill) and a black mark on your driving record if you are driving while your ability is affected by alcohol. The impaired person is receiving a strict punishment for their actions whereas the person who has just had a few too many is having their license taken away for public safety concerns. I say good on the BC government for taking a tough stance on impaired driving.

As for the other stuff you mentioned, I don't feel as strongly about personally but I will throw in my 2 cents. Tinted windows, yes it looks much better without a doubt. I have my rear windows tinted legally for the look and to hide what is inside of my car. The one problem I do have with my tinted windows is on a dark and rainy night I can hardly see out the back of my car. Now if I had this on the front side windows, it would be hard to see out of them too. This would make it difficult to see my mirrors, traffic beside me, and traffic coming from side streets. I know a really light tint may not do this, but I think for the politicians it is difficult to draw a line as to what is okay and what is not, so they just make it illegal just to cover themselves. From my stand point as a police officer, when I approach a vehicle I have stopped, I like to see what is inside. There isn't many feelings worse than approaching a car with all the windows rolled up and tinted, I have no idea what is behind that window and they can see me clearly. Why this is not consistent across Canada, I can honestly say I have no idea.

Front license plates, I will admit I find them ugly too. In my opinion, the main purpose of the front plate is simply to make the car more identifiable. A situational example is say you are sitting there in your car and another vehicle runs into you head on. The vehicle that just hit you has no front plate on, slams it into reverse, peels out backwards and takes off. You never saw the back of the vehicle so you have no idea who hit you. That is $300 out of your pocket for the deductible. Change the situation a little, car that hits you still takes off, but has a front plate on it. You write down the plate number, call ICBC, and that person will be paying your deductible. Again, why it is not consistent across Canada I don't have a clue. I don't know if the reasons I just listed are why those things are laws, just my opinion on why they may be laws.

[azzurro32]

Kinda OT, but still on the same subject,

I know its all relevant to different individuals, but I want to know how many beers is enough to push a person into a '24 hour suspension' situation.

Personally, I am not a big drinker, so if I have a beer or two, I may not exactly be drunk, but I could still drive a car (I choose not to at times since I am not comfortable). If I were to get stopped with having 1-2 beers a few hours earlier, is that in the proximity of a 24 hour suspension?

[yvrnycracer]

Originally Posted by azzurro32

Kinda OT, but still on the same subject,

I know its all relevant to different individuals, but I want to know how many beers is enough to push a person into a '24 hour suspension' situation.

Personally, I am not a big drinker, so if I have a beer or two, I may not exactly be drunk, but I could still drive a car (I choose not to at times since I am not comfortable). If I were to get stopped with having 1-2 beers a few hours earlier, is that in the proximity of a 24 hour suspension?

If I am not mistaken... ONE drink could get you a 24 hour suspension...

[Deezel85]

bringing this thread back...

I received a first time 24hour last night and am a little uncertain what's happening next.


First time offence. Clean driving record up until now. Not even any recent MVA tickets. Blew "FAIL" at Roadside test. Agreeded to take 2 breath samples at the station. Both were over 100mg% Was sent home with no tickets or fines.


What should I be doing now? I can reapply for my new "short term 2 year" licence? I should file a review to the superintendant?

Am I looking at a 3 month suspension for a first time offence?

[CRS]

What license do you have?

[Deezel85]

Class 5.

[zulutango]

FYI concerning 24 hr suspensions..recent BC Court decision says that issuing a VT for driving without due care is an appropriate charge for blowing a "warn" on a roadside screening device, in addition to the 215 suspension.

Google this link

http://www.provincialcourt.bc.ca/jud...2/p08_0241.htm

[skidmark]

You are not out of the woods yet. There is still the possibility of receiving a summons to court and impaired driving charges being laid. The ADP can also be issued at a later date.