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 07-12-2012, 07:25 PM   #51
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
The law, penalties, process.. whatever it was that was overturned because it was deemed unconstitutional.
"Whatever it was"??

There you have it, folks: proof that sebberry just rants madly against The Man without actually having a clue what he's ranting about. It's been explained many times in this thread and others, but he can't be bothered to actually learn what it's about, he just babbles.

THE LAW was not overturned.

THE PENALTIES were not declared unconstitutional.

PART of the process was declared unconstitutional. Not all of it, not the law behind the it, not the penalties resulting from it, only PART of the PROCESS. Procedural changes, nothing more.

Furthermore, this was the Supreme Court's decision... NOTHING TO DO with the Government or whether or not they're misguided.
Advertisement
__________________
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
This post thanked by:
Old 07-12-2012, 08:26 PM   #52
Even when im right, revscene.net is still right!
 
Yodamaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Burnaby, BC
Posts: 1,324
Thanked 1,481 Times in 465 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevenDuang View Post
Yup, there is still alcohol content... but I am answering to someone that says 0 alcohol.
Where is your common sense?

You know that there might be alcohol left in the food, yet you eat it anyway, knowing that you're going to drive later?

Any alcohol, any at all, is too much when you're driving. I don't give a fuck how little it changes your ability to drive, if you know you have alcohol in your system and you drive, you deserve EVERYTHING coming at you.


The government is lenient when it comes to drunk drivers, if you knowingly drive with alcohol in your system, you don't deserve the privilege of driving.
Yodamaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2012, 08:27 PM   #53
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
Furthermore, this was the Supreme Court's decision... NOTHING TO DO with the Government or whether or not they're misguided.

You do remember that the courts warned the government that they were entering murky waters with the way they were administering the tests and issuing penalties, right?
__________________
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 07-12-2012, 08:34 PM   #54
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yodamaster View Post
Any alcohol, any at all, is too much when you're driving. I don't give a fuck how little it changes your ability to drive, if you know you have alcohol in your system and you drive, you deserve EVERYTHING coming at you.
Have you ever driven while a little bit tired after a long day at work on a dark day? Have you ever driven while mad or angry at something?
__________________
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 07-12-2012, 08:45 PM   #55
Even when im right, revscene.net is still right!
 
Yodamaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Burnaby, BC
Posts: 1,324
Thanked 1,481 Times in 465 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
Have you ever driven while a little bit tired after a long day at work on a dark day? Have you ever driven while mad or angry at something?
No, I'm not that stupid.


If you can't govern yourself to ensure the safety of yourself and others around you, take the bus, call a cab, I don't care.

Driving is not a right, act like it.
Yodamaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2012, 08:58 PM   #56
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yodamaster View Post
No, I'm not that stupid.
And how many times have you taken a cab home from work after an 8 hr shift, leaving your car at work?
__________________
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 07-12-2012, 09:04 PM   #57
Even when im right, revscene.net is still right!
 
Yodamaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Burnaby, BC
Posts: 1,324
Thanked 1,481 Times in 465 Posts
I haven't had to, I've made sure that I got into a workplace that wouldn't put me in that situation.

Being tired is natural, eight hours of work will do that to you.

The way you're making it seem is, so tired that I can't concentrate on driving.


Which is it?

If it's so tired that you can't concentrate, then you should take a cab. Semi-truck drivers are mandated to rest after a certain amount of driving, I fail to see why the regulations don't apply to regular motorists.
Yodamaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2012, 09:49 PM   #58
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yodamaster View Post
Being tired is natural, eight hours of work will do that to you.
But you're suggesting that someone shouldn't be allowed to drive if their BAC registers in the .01-.03 range, which is about as impaired as someone might be after 8 hrs of work.
__________________
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 07-12-2012, 10:16 PM   #59
Even when im right, revscene.net is still right!
 
Yodamaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Burnaby, BC
Posts: 1,324
Thanked 1,481 Times in 465 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
But you're suggesting that someone shouldn't be allowed to drive if their BAC registers in the .01-.03 range, which is about as impaired as someone might be after 8 hrs of work.
There is a difference between knowing that there's alcohol in you and driving, and working for a day and driving.

Whether you want to argue that it's a personal thing or not, I do not want people with any alcohol at all driving, period.

It's also a matter of respect, I have it for people that work hard, I don't for people that want to drive with alcohol in them.
Yodamaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2012, 02:21 PM   #60
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Drink-driving amongst new drivers is up, at least in Vancouver:

More and more

I wonder if the passenger restriction for N drivers needs to be looked at. You can no longer carpool if you've been drinking if your DD is a new driver and I don't think that's helping.

Way back when I had my N I was always the DD, now that isn't as easy to do.
__________________
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 07-18-2012, 02:40 PM   #61
I am grateful grapefruit
 
gars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 4,094
Thanked 831 Times in 392 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
Drink-driving amongst new drivers is up, at least in Vancouver:

More and more

I wonder if the passenger restriction for N drivers needs to be looked at. You can no longer carpool if you've been drinking if your DD is a new driver and I don't think that's helping.

Way back when I had my N I was always the DD, now that isn't as easy to do.
This law isn't new. If drinking and driving is up among new drivers, they should figure out why it's happening this year as opposed to when the law was first enacted. (or when the 1 passenger rule was first put into place).
__________________
Proud member of GRAPE Great Revscene Action Photographers Enthusiasts
gars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2012, 02:47 PM   #62
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Nope, the law isn't, but despite harsher penalties it would seem that more people are breaking it.

Before the 1 passenger rule, carpooling was one option young drunks had to get home.

I think that if young drivers have passed a driving test and are trusted to drive by themselves with no supervision at any time of day or night then it's as if the province is treating them as regular class 5 licence holders. I understand the reasoning behind the passenger restrictions, but I can't help but think the passenger restriction is having some effect on the drink-driving rate among younger drivers.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.

Last edited by sebberry; 07-18-2012 at 02:52 PM.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2012, 10:43 AM   #63
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
It's baaaaaaaack and working not too well...


After one night and two crashes, police warning of impaired driving
Officers note resurgence of daytime and evening drinking and driving


Quote:
After two overnight crashes involving impaired driving, Saanich and Victoria police on Thursday stressed the dangers of drinking and driving.

"Despite the fact that the province is leading the way with the toughest anti-drink and driving rules in the country, people still seem to think it's socially responsible - it's not," said Victoria Const. Andy Dunstan.

The first crash occurred at 10 p.m. Wednesday when a car failed to make a turn from Selkirk Avenue onto Coventry Avenue and crashed into two parked cars.

[...]

Police are seeing impaired drivers from two groups: men between 18 and 28, and men and women between 40 and 60.

Read more: After one night and two crashes, police warning of impaired driving
__________________
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 08-21-2012, 03:21 PM   #64
Need my Daily Fix of RS
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Van Island
Posts: 261
Thanked 130 Times in 50 Posts
Times are changing I heard from some old folks back in the old times drinking and driving was perfectly acceptable. Cops would just let the most sober one drive the drunks back home.

Anyone know the laws regarding riding a bicycle while drunk?
tarobbt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2012, 03:53 PM   #65
Where's my RS Christmas Lobster?!
 
z3german's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Richmond
Posts: 1,109
Thanked 877 Times in 279 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarobbt View Post
Times are changing I heard from some old folks back in the old times drinking and driving was perfectly acceptable. Cops would just let the most sober one drive the drunks back home.

Anyone know the laws regarding riding a bicycle while drunk?

z3german is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2012, 04:00 PM   #66
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarobbt View Post
Anyone know the laws regarding riding a bicycle while drunk?
Well considering the MVA requires cyclists to follow the same rules as car drivers, I'll let you figure it out for yourself
__________________
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 08-21-2012, 07:28 PM   #67
Need my Daily Fix of RS
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Van Island
Posts: 261
Thanked 130 Times in 50 Posts
the only thing officers can do is ticket you correct? unless they could also ask u to blow for operating a bicycle and suspend your license.

ignition interlock installed on your bicycle anyone?
tarobbt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2012, 09:22 PM   #68
RS Peace Officer
 
zulutango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vancouver Islan
Posts: 3,850
Thanked 1,623 Times in 678 Posts
How about a stick thru your spokes?
zulutango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2012, 11:14 PM   #69
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Why not go all the way and use our draconian civil forfeiture laws to seize cars being driven by someone who had been drinking?

Why not apply that to texting and driving too as that has been proven to be as dangerous as driving while drunk?

Any violation of an act where there's a risk of injury qualifies for civil forfeiture. Hell, apply it to speed 10kph over the limit too.
__________________
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 08-23-2012, 06:55 PM   #70
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
WHY THE F*** CAN'T WE HAVE A FAIL BUTTON IN HERE??
__________________
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 08-23-2012, 07:16 PM   #71
Survivor MOD
 
T4RAWR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Richmond
Posts: 2,031
Thanked 1,504 Times in 525 Posts
if not a fail button, certainly a butthurt button would be most useful.
T4RAWR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2012, 05:46 PM   #72
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
WHY THE F*** CAN'T WE HAVE A FAIL BUTTON IN HERE??
What are you saying, Soundy? You've always been anti-speed, pro enforcement - I thought you'd like that idea.
__________________
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 08-26-2012, 09:46 PM   #73
Rs has made me the man i am today!
 
ninjatune's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: LMD
Posts: 3,145
Thanked 228 Times in 71 Posts
Because seberry = a big fail and you need a fail button.

I thought civil forfeiture was only for criminal offences, not speeding. I believe chronic impaired driver's have had their vehicles seized under civil forfeiture, there was a recent case on the island...
ninjatune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2012, 10:27 PM   #74
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
There's no criminal burden of proof required for civil forfeiture.

Any item used in the commission of, or derived as proceeds of crime can be seized under the civil forfeiture act.

Quote:

"instrument of unlawful activity" means any of the following:

(a) property that has been used to engage in unlawful activity that, in turn,

(i) resulted in or was likely to result in the acquisition of property or an interest in property, or

(ii) caused or was likely to cause serious bodily harm to a person;

(b) property that is likely to be used to engage in unlawful activity that may

(i) result in the acquisition of property or an interest in property, or

(ii) cause serious bodily harm to a person;

(c) property that is realized from the disposition of property described in paragraph (a) or (b) under an order of the court under section 8 (3) (d) [interim preservation order];
Quote:
"unlawful activity" means an act or omission described in one of the following paragraphs:

(a) if an act or omission occurs in British Columbia, the act or omission, at the time of occurrence, is an offence under an Act of Canada or British Columbia
So all the civil forfeiture office really needs is some proof that a violation of an "act" (such as motor vehicle act, etc...) has taken place and it was likely to cause serious harm.

Bottom line: You have to prove that you didn't do what you're being accused of, unlike in criminal court where the crown has to prove that you did do what they're accusing you of.
__________________
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
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 02:14 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