REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum


Welcome to the REVscene Automotive Forum forums.

Registration is Free!You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   REVscene Automotive Forum > Automotive Chat > Police Forum

Police Forum Police Head Mod: Skidmark
Questions & info about the Motor Vehicle Act. Mature discussion only.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-06-2011, 12:32 PM   #1
Retired Traffic Cop
 
skidmark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Nanoose Bay, BC
Posts: 9,023
Thanked 115 Times in 66 Posts
DriveSmartBC - Revise Impaired Penalties?

Our new impaired driving penalties appear to be getting the word out: drinking and driving is not acceptable here in B.C. If you do and are caught, it will be a long road to travel in order to restore your driving privileges. So be it, you knew that there could be consequences when you turned the key.

Yes, this is hurting the alcoholic beverage industry. Restaurants and pubs are suffering from a significant loss in business as people are either staying home to do their drinking or are choosing to have only one drink with a meal or even not having an alcoholic drink at all. I'm sorry that you are hurting, but I would not for a minute lower the legislated blood alcohol or penalty levels.

The provincial government, as it should, looked at how the legislation was working and decided to review it. If I understand the news coverage correctly, the Solicitor General plans to expand the review process for drivers who made a mistake to insure that they have been dealt with fairly. Since the courts do not become involved in the first instance, this is a reasonable action to take.

If your life has been touched by the actions of an impaired driver I don't have to tell you to encourage our government to continue with their strong efforts to deter drinking and driving. If it hasn't, you have been blessed. I hope that the actions of government continue to insure your safety.

Reference Links
Advertisement
__________________
Have you ever met anyone that would admit to being less than a better than average driver ??

Learn more at DriveSmartBC
skidmark is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 03-06-2011, 03:56 PM   #2
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
I don't agree with drunk driving, but not having an appeals process goes against the fundamentals of Canadian law. If murderers and rapists get to appeal their convictions, then why not drivers who blow near or at the warn and fail marks?

Now if only Rich Coleman would introduce an appeals process for the excessive speed laws.. no, wait, he won't do that. There's no lobby group losing millions of dollars because of it.

This isn't a rights issue, folks - this is the bar and restaurant lobby losing money.


There's also a major backlog for people needing to get an ignition interlock device installed in their cars. Even after their licence suspension is over, they still can't drive while they wait for the device. Something tells me this isn't having the impact on problem drinkers that it was supposed to have.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2011, 10:02 PM   #3
I bringith the lowerballerith
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: PR
Posts: 1,131
Thanked 250 Times in 128 Posts
There is an appeals process. You're allowed a 2nd ASD sample on a separate ASD. There is also a review process for the Vehicle Impound, in order that it be released early.
__________________
"Never give a match up halfway through. Never say that you do not feel up to it, that your condition is bad, and throw in the towel. Fight to the very end, always looking for your chance to break through." - Kazuzo Kudo
sho_bc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2011, 10:13 PM   #4
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sho_bc View Post
There is an appeals process. You're allowed a 2nd ASD sample on a separate ASD.
Am I entitled to see the calibration and service records for the ASD at the roadside? Am I able to verify the officer's training at the roadside?

Can I have an independent test for accuracy and proper functionality of the ASD at the roadside?

If no, then that's hardly an appeals process.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 03-06-2011, 10:17 PM   #5
I bringith the lowerballerith
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: PR
Posts: 1,131
Thanked 250 Times in 128 Posts
I can't speak for other places, but in Richmond, the dates of the next service and calibration on on the ASDs. If the officer isn't trained on the ASD, s/he won't be administering it. The independent test is the 2nd ASD. If its not functioning properly, it gives errors.
__________________
"Never give a match up halfway through. Never say that you do not feel up to it, that your condition is bad, and throw in the towel. Fight to the very end, always looking for your chance to break through." - Kazuzo Kudo
sho_bc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2011, 10:35 PM   #6
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
So I'm guessing the "appeals process" for the excessive speed charge is you get to turn around and drive towards the speed trap again?

Again, without being able to test and examine the device that is convicting me, it's hardly an appeals process.

If the second test is administered it is the value of that test which is used to convict. What if that device is calibrated incorrectly or malfunctioning? There is NO true appeal process. And I don't trust a malfunctioning device to tell me it is malfunctioning. Don't even try to pass that as a valid part of the so-called "appeals process".

These new laws came about because the court system was so clogged up with people charged with drunk driving. The whole point of this law is to BYPASS the court system and the appeals process.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 10:29 AM   #7
Banned (ABWS)
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Kits/Richmond
Posts: 4,409
Thanked 1,104 Times in 539 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
So I'm guessing the "appeals process" for the excessive speed charge is you get to turn around and drive towards the speed trap again?

Again, without being able to test and examine the device that is convicting me, it's hardly an appeals process.

If the second test is administered it is the value of that test which is used to convict. What if that device is calibrated incorrectly or malfunctioning? There is NO true appeal process. And I don't trust a malfunctioning device to tell me it is malfunctioning. Don't even try to pass that as a valid part of the so-called "appeals process".

These new laws came about because the court system was so clogged up with people charged with drunk driving. The whole point of this law is to BYPASS the court system and the appeals process.
Please stop.

Anyone going 40kmph over knows they are guilty, the rest is just arguing technicality to get off a fine they know they deserve. You have 0-39 kmph to think about not having your vehicle impounded. I suggest you use it to think rather than wasting your time arguing stupid technicalities to get off a deserved ticket.
taylor192 is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 03-07-2011, 10:53 AM   #8
Diagonally parked in a parallel universe
 
TheNewGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 1,476
Thanked 521 Times in 263 Posts
I'm fine with there being no appeal process for speeding. That's what ever. A DUI though has a fairly large impact on all aspects of your life though and to 'appeal it' currently you risk a criminal record which actually causes some people who should appeal, not to, for fear of greater charges. That's sort of the problem and really is, in my opinion, coherisive.

I had two classmates in high school die in drinking and driving incedents when I was younger, I was a member of counter attack and I have done work with MAD in the past. I totally support tough ass drinking and driving laws. But I also believe strongly in the integrity of law and preserving personal rights. I don't believe these are conflicting principles at all.

Ultimately I think it's fair to ask for a more transparent appeal process without lightening the laws.
__________________
~ Just another noob looking for a clue
TheNewGirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 11:10 AM   #9
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Soundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotstan
Posts: 20,730
Thanked 12,144 Times in 3,366 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by taylor192 View Post
Please stop.

Anyone going 40kmph over knows they are guilty, the rest is just arguing technicality to get off a fine they know they deserve. You have 0-39 kmph to think about not having your vehicle impounded. I suggest you use it to think rather than wasting your time arguing stupid technicalities to get off a deserved ticket.
Can the "Thanks" button be upgraded to allow me to click it a dozen or so times?

What gets me is all the fuss, with both these laws, over the "unfairness" of vehicles being impounded... as if it's something new and unique to these two circumstances. The fact is, police have been allowed to impound vehicles for a number of different reasons for decades. How is it any greater hardship on a family with only one vehicle, if that vehicle is impounded because the driver was drunk or speeding excessively, vs., say, the vehicle being mechanically unsafe?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira View Post
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta View Post
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
Soundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 11:16 AM   #10
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNewGirl View Post
I'm fine with there being no appeal process for speeding. That's what ever. A DUI though has a fairly large impact on all aspects of your life though and to 'appeal it' currently you risk a criminal record which actually causes some people who should appeal, not to, for fear of greater charges. That's sort of the problem and really is, in my opinion, coherisive.

I had two classmates in high school die in drinking and driving incedents when I was younger, I was a member of counter attack and I have done work with MAD in the past. I totally support tough ass drinking and driving laws. But I also believe strongly in the integrity of law and preserving personal rights. I don't believe these are conflicting principles at all.

Ultimately I think it's fair to ask for a more transparent appeal process without lightening the laws.
Clearly neither of us think drunk driving is acceptable, but am I correct in understanding that you're suggesting there should be an appeals process for the drunk and not the speeder?

You're more worried about the impact the conviction has on the drunk who is more likely to kill someone than the clear-headed speeder who is driving according to the road conditions in an area where the speed limit is grossly under-posted.

I'd much rather share the road with sober speeders than drunk non-speeders.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 11:19 AM   #11
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundy View Post
Can the "Thanks" button be upgraded to allow me to click it a dozen or so times?

What gets me is all the fuss, with both these laws, over the "unfairness" of vehicles being impounded... as if it's something new and unique to these two circumstances. The fact is, police have been allowed to impound vehicles for a number of different reasons for decades. How is it any greater hardship on a family with only one vehicle, if that vehicle is impounded because the driver was drunk or speeding excessively, vs., say, the vehicle being mechanically unsafe?
I have no problem with a mechanically unsafe vehicle being taken off the road. Speeding will not make the wheels fall off of a safe vehicle.

I'm not suggesting that people should have the right to drive 40 over all day long either. I'm more worried about the people who are driving according to road design and traffic conditions in areas where the limit is grossly under-posted.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 11:23 AM   #12
Banned (ABWS)
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Kits/Richmond
Posts: 4,409
Thanked 1,104 Times in 539 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNewGirl View Post
I'm fine with there being no appeal process for speeding. That's what ever. A DUI though has a fairly large impact on all aspects of your life though and to 'appeal it' currently you risk a criminal record which actually causes some people who should appeal, not to, for fear of greater charges. That's sort of the problem and really is, in my opinion, coherisive.

I had two classmates in high school die in drinking and driving incedents when I was younger, I was a member of counter attack and I have done work with MAD in the past. I totally support tough ass drinking and driving laws. But I also believe strongly in the integrity of law and preserving personal rights. I don't believe these are conflicting principles at all.

Ultimately I think it's fair to ask for a more transparent appeal process without lightening the laws.
I had several classmates die/severely injured from drinking and driving. Grew up in a small town where drinking and driving was the norm, no cabs or buses. My brother lost his license for DUI. I've had 3 friends get off their DUI charges by going to court. 2 of them blew WAY over, yet paid a lawyer (ex-cop) a lot of money ($5-10K) to get the charges dropped.

I read an article that is is very common. DUIs dropped in court for technicalities. That's why these new laws were put in place - to reduce the amount of court cases to fight those getting off via technicalities.

Most people will not blow a warn after 2 drinks in an hour. Thus you have 2 drinks to think about what you are doing wrong, and that's more than enough time. If you still make a bad decision, it should impact your life. You're making the decision to potentially impact the lives of others by drinking and driving, you should not be able to get off on a technicality.

Just like the speeding law, if you don't want to risking getting caught you have 0-39km or 0-2 drinks to think about it. After that you know you're guilty, you're just looking for a way out.
taylor192 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 11:28 AM   #13
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Soundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotstan
Posts: 20,730
Thanked 12,144 Times in 3,366 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
I have no problem with a mechanically unsafe vehicle being taken off the road. Speeding will not make the wheels fall off of a safe vehicle.
A loose nut BEHIND the wheel is far more dangerous than one holding on a wheel...
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira View Post
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta View Post
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
Soundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 11:48 AM   #14
Diagonally parked in a parallel universe
 
TheNewGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 1,476
Thanked 521 Times in 263 Posts
As I understand it, if you challenge the breath test and go back to the station for a second test, if you fail there you not only get the penelties but a criminal conviction even if you're still in the 'warn' range. I think it would be simply acceptable to have that extreme be removed and if you blow a warn at the station you suffer all the impounding and ticket and crap but not the all criminal convictions (unless you're over the .08 limit there).

Then people will feel safe challenging their results and satisfied if they blow a warn in both places that their car was rightly impounded and everyone who should be off the road is still off the road.
__________________
~ Just another noob looking for a clue
TheNewGirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 11:59 AM   #15
Banned (ABWS)
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Kits/Richmond
Posts: 4,409
Thanked 1,104 Times in 539 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNewGirl View Post
As I understand it, if you challenge the breath test and go back to the station for a second test, if you fail there you not only get the penelties but a criminal conviction even if you're still in the 'warn' range. I think it would be simply acceptable to have that extreme be removed and if you blow a warn at the station you suffer all the impounding and ticket and crap but not the all criminal convictions (unless you're over the .08 limit there).

Then people will feel safe challenging their results and satisfied if they blow a warn in both places that their car was rightly impounded and everyone who should be off the road is still off the road.
The difference between warn and fail is 0.04. The warn range has been set to 0.060-0.099 and fail to > 0.100. The legal limits are 0.050 and 0.080.

The situation you're describing can happen, yet lets look at how it could happen. Lets say someone blows a 0.070 and wants a retest hoping the alcohol wears off and is < 0.060 when retested. Instead that person now registers a 0.110 cause they pounded 3 drinks before driving and they are just now showing up in their system. That person gets charged with a fail when they would have been charged with a warn.

What is more likely is someone blowing a 0.090 and hoping that by the time the retest happens it is < 0.060. Instead the retest reads 0.105 and they fail. In reality they were already over the 0.080 limit and are just looking for a way out. While looking for a way out, they got screwed.

I don't feel sorry for these people, they only have themselves to blame for their poor mistakes. They rolled the dice, and they lost. There's no need for due process when you gamble - if you gamble, you have to be willing to lose. If you're not willing to lose, don't gamble.
taylor192 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 06:05 PM   #16
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundy View Post
A loose nut BEHIND the wheel is far more dangerous than one holding on a wheel...
I tend to agree. But I still don't want wheels falling off on the highway. I saw that once and it wasn't pretty.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 07:28 PM   #17
I *heart* Revscene.net very Muchie
 
jlenko's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Burnaby, BC
Posts: 3,562
Thanked 330 Times in 163 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
I tend to agree. But I still don't want wheels falling off on the highway. I saw that once and it wasn't pretty.
I've seen way more than one drunk driver, and it wasn't pretty either.

If you don't want to worry about the appeals process, then don't break the law. End of story.
__________________
Don't be the next RS.net statistic - If you drink, don't drive. You'll lose your licence, and the rest of us will laugh at you.
jlenko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 07:50 PM   #18
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Officers: What are some of the technicalities accused drunk drivers are getting off on?

If this is a response to too many people getting off on technicalities then it's pretty clear to me that there is legitimate cause for concern that some of those accused are in fact innocent.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2011, 07:55 AM   #19
I contribute to threads in the offtopic forum
 
jasonturbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: North Van
Posts: 2,734
Thanked 6,667 Times in 1,188 Posts
I think that the penalties should be very strict and I advocate a compete zero tolerance policy... I would prefer to see a mandatory 5 year license suspension for first offenders.

I can't thank OP's post enough.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasonturbo
Follow me on Instagram @jasonturtle if you want to feel better about your life
jasonturbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2011, 12:22 PM   #20
Prince of the Apes
 
bloodmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Abbotsford
Posts: 2,469
Thanked 3,046 Times in 672 Posts
I still see this as an easier way for cops to target more innocent people. We should be targeting the source before the fact not after.
__________________
There's times in life where I want a relationship, but then I cum.
Quote:
[23-08, 13:17] nabs i've gripped ice boy's shaft before
Quote:
[26-08, 13:50] Jesusjuice is this a sports car forum? why are there so many hondas?
bloodmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2011, 03:11 PM   #21
Banned (ABWS)
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Kits/Richmond
Posts: 4,409
Thanked 1,104 Times in 539 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloodmack View Post
I still see this as an easier way for cops to target more innocent people. We should be targeting the source before the fact not after.
Innocent people will blow under, and be no more inconvenienced than currently.
taylor192 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2011, 03:48 PM   #22
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Soundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotstan
Posts: 20,730
Thanked 12,144 Times in 3,366 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloodmack View Post
I still see this as an easier way for cops to target more innocent people. We should be targeting the source before the fact not after.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira View Post
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta View Post
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
Soundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2011, 03:51 PM   #23
I am grateful grapefruit
 
gars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 4,094
Thanked 831 Times in 392 Posts
I think he means it'll be like the Minority Report. We'll arrest people who will drive drunk before it actually happens. even BEFORE they actually step foot in the bar and have their first drink.
gars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2011, 05:08 PM   #24
RS.net, helping ugly ppl have sex since 2001
 
Great68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Victoria
Posts: 8,510
Thanked 2,597 Times in 849 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by taylor192 View Post
Please stop.

Anyone going 40kmph over knows they are guilty, the rest is just arguing technicality to get off a fine they know they deserve. You have 0-39 kmph to think about not having your vehicle impounded. I suggest you use it to think rather than wasting your time arguing stupid technicalities to get off a deserved ticket.
Bullshit.

I have a first hand experience in a case where someone who was completely innocent (I was in the car when it happened) was charged with excessive speeding because a police officer couldn't tell the difference between a 1984 Mercury Capri and a 1984 Ford Mustang.

In that case, I say it was absolutely necessary to have the right to appeal.

Sorry I think It's rediculous that a person should suffer penalties financial or otherwise BEFORE they have their day in court.
__________________
1968 Mustang Coupe
2008.5 Mazdaspeed 3
1997 GMC Sonoma ZR2

A vehicle for all occasions
Great68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2011, 06:42 PM   #25
Banned (ABWS)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Delta
Posts: 864
Thanked 47 Times in 36 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by taylor192 View Post
Please stop.

Anyone going 40kmph over knows they are guilty, the rest is just arguing technicality to get off a fine they know they deserve. You have 0-39 kmph to think about not having your vehicle impounded. I suggest you use it to think rather than wasting your time arguing stupid technicalities to get off a deserved ticket.
this is why i make a mental note every time i speed, stay below 40 over.....
and constantly check the speedo..
baggdis300 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net