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 12-01-2011, 10:04 PM   #26
The Lone Wanderator
 
Graeme S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Burnaby
Posts: 12,089
Thanked 4,367 Times in 1,137 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by wing_woo View Post
Actually, I would occasionally have the casual drink when I go out to eat and still drive after. I think I would have been fine even if I went through a road check but now, with the tougher penalties, I dont' want to risk it.

I actually have never drove after drinking any alcohol anymore since they had the tougher laws. I actually just don't drink when I go out to eat unless my wife doesn't mind driving home that night whereas in the past, I might have one drink and still drive.
And this is (for the most part) where most of the fatalities came from and where most of the change in habits has come from.


Not meaning to target you specifically, W_W, but marginal by marginal I mean the people who previously took an action but are not necessarily in the habit of needing to do it or defending said action people like you (and admittedly me in times past) are the people who this program is targetting. There are some people who will just absolutely never stop drinking and driving, quite possibly even after they kill someone. There are, however, a lot of people who previously thought "one beer and I'll be fine to drive home", who would then get in accidents, often ending in fatalities. Those people are now worried about the inconvenience of being ticketed, losing their car for a week and being slapped with the impound fines. All of which, as I said before, happen immediately. This helps to associate the punishment with the bad behaviour--a well known necessity for people to actually cognitively realize they have done something wrong.
Advertisement
Graeme S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 09:10 AM   #27
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
I'm curious to know what the stats are regarding BAC and collisions.

Of the collisions attributable to drunk driving, how many of those drivers were in the .01-.04 range?


On another note, I'm glad the SCBC has decided that the immediate penalties are unconstitutional and that drivers are entitled to a more accurate reading.

For the record, I was never against the penalties - just the immediacy of them and the inability to contest the charge or have the reading verified.
__________________
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 12-02-2011, 11:12 AM   #28
I *Fwap* *Fwap* *Fwap* to RS
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,506
Thanked 102 Times in 61 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Graeme S View Post
And this is (for the most part) where most of the fatalities came from and where most of the change in habits has come from.


Not meaning to target you specifically, W_W, but marginal by marginal I mean the people who previously took an action but are not necessarily in the habit of needing to do it or defending said action people like you (and admittedly me in times past) are the people who this program is targetting. There are some people who will just absolutely never stop drinking and driving, quite possibly even after they kill someone. There are, however, a lot of people who previously thought "one beer and I'll be fine to drive home", who would then get in accidents, often ending in fatalities. Those people are now worried about the inconvenience of being ticketed, losing their car for a week and being slapped with the impound fines. All of which, as I said before, happen immediately. This helps to associate the punishment with the bad behaviour--a well known necessity for people to actually cognitively realize they have done something wrong.
No offense taken. Just saying that the new rules were enough for me to just decide one drink was already too much of a risk and was enough to stop me from doing it even though I felt fine after one drink. Don't miss it at all so even if they go back to having to do things the old way, I'd still continue to not drive even if it's only one drink.
wing_woo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 05:59 PM   #29
Retired Traffic Cop
 
skidmark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Nanoose Bay, BC
Posts: 9,023
Thanked 115 Times in 66 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
On another note, I'm glad the SCBC has decided that the immediate penalties are unconstitutional and that drivers are entitled to a more accurate reading.
Maybe you should read the decision. That is not what was decided at all. What the court decided was that the penalty was too harsh for the amount of recourse available to the driver.
__________________
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
Old 12-02-2011, 09:12 PM   #30
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Soundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotstan
Posts: 20,730
Thanked 12,143 Times in 3,365 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
Maybe you should read the decision. That is not what was decided at all.
Ssshhhhh, don't confuse him with the facts.
__________________
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 12-02-2011, 10:54 PM   #31
RS Peace Officer
 
zulutango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vancouver Islan
Posts: 3,850
Thanked 1,623 Times in 678 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
Maybe you should read the decision. That is not what was decided at all. What the court decided was that the penalty was too harsh for the amount of recourse available to the driver.

who blew over .08 (actually .09)
zulutango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 11:04 PM   #32
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
Maybe you should read the decision. That is not what was decided at all. What the court decided was that the penalty was too harsh for the amount of recourse available to the driver.
And you think for a minute that the BC Government will reduce the punishments? No, they'll add some form of appeal process, either a court date or a proper breathalyzer, not just a roadside blow-job into some hand held toy.
__________________
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 12-03-2011, 09:02 AM   #33
Retired Traffic Cop
 
skidmark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Nanoose Bay, BC
Posts: 9,023
Thanked 115 Times in 66 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
And you think for a minute that the BC Government will reduce the punishments? No, they'll add some form of appeal process.
That's exactly what I would like to see happen.
__________________
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
Old 12-03-2011, 10:30 AM   #34
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
I have no problem with the punishments, and that's essentially what the judge is saying - add an appeal process or some form.

So yes, I do understand the ruling.
__________________
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 12-03-2011, 10:31 AM   #35
The Lone Wanderator
 
Graeme S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Burnaby
Posts: 12,089
Thanked 4,367 Times in 1,137 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
And you think for a minute that the BC Government will reduce the punishments? No, they'll add some form of appeal process, either a court date or a proper breathalyzer, not just a roadside blow-job into some hand held toy.
Do you think that's a bad thing? Because to be honest, that's what it sounds like you're implying in your post.
Graeme S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2011, 10:42 AM   #36
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Graeme S View Post
Do you think that's a bad thing? Because to be honest, that's what it sounds like you're implying in your post.
I've said all along that my biggest issue here is the inability to challenge the reading before being subject to the punishments.
__________________
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 12-10-2011, 12:04 PM   #37
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
In BC, are you allowed to request that a blood sample be drawn instead of blowing into the datamaster to determine BAC?
__________________
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 12-10-2011, 12:44 PM   #38
I bringith the lowerballerith
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: PR
Posts: 1,131
Thanked 250 Times in 128 Posts
No. An even under the criminal code, it is used only when a person is not resonably able to provide a sample (ex. Broken jaw/neck/etc, unconscious etc after an mvi).

Can't link it easily right now with my phone, but its Section 254(3)(a)(ii).
Posted via RS Mobile

Last edited by sho_bc; 12-10-2011 at 12:52 PM.
sho_bc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2011, 05:52 PM   #39
RS Peace Officer
 
zulutango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vancouver Islan
Posts: 3,850
Thanked 1,623 Times in 678 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
In BC, are you allowed to request that a blood sample be drawn instead of blowing into the datamaster to determine BAC?
I don't think any impaired person would want to volunteer for a blood sample over a Datamaster or ASD test. The blood sample is far more accurate and would very likely show higher alcohol levels than the breath test. In New Zealand you get arrested and taken to the Cop shop. They take 1 breath sample and a blood sample on the spot. None of this playing lawyer roulette delaying tactics stuff. If you don't agree to testing you don't get a driver's licence. Canada is one of the few places where agreement to random, groundless breath testing is not required to get a DL
zulutango is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 12-11-2011, 03:13 PM   #40
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Soundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotstan
Posts: 20,730
Thanked 12,143 Times in 3,365 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
I've said all along that my biggest issue here is the inability to challenge the reading before being subject to the punishments.
What inability? You're allowed to request a second reading from a second ASD... what are you going to challenge if both of them give the same results?
__________________
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 12-11-2011, 05:31 PM   #41
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
What inability? You're allowed to request a second reading from a second ASD... what are you going to challenge if both of them give the same results?
And how can I verify that they've both been calibrated correctly? And let's not forget that if you do blow a second time and for some reason it reads higher, it is the measurement from the second device that is taken. Bit of a lottery if you ask me.

What about diabetics? If their blood sugar isn't well controlled and they blow high on one, they'll blow high on the other as well.
__________________
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 12-11-2011, 06:01 PM   #42
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Soundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotstan
Posts: 20,730
Thanked 12,143 Times in 3,365 Posts
What about Vulcans? Their blood sugar would mean they could be completely smashed and still blow under...

__________________
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 12-11-2011, 06:17 PM   #43
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Whatever floats your dingy.
__________________
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 12-11-2011, 07:42 PM   #44
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Soundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotstan
Posts: 20,730
Thanked 12,143 Times in 3,365 Posts
Wow, finally came up with something Sebberry doesn't have a response for...
__________________
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
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 10:09 PM.


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