Automotive

Locked: Must know: new changes to driving enforcement laws

  • Last Updated:
  • Dec 8th, 2018 9:01 am
Sr. Member
Jun 12, 2009
600 posts
176 upvotes
loserga wrote:
Dec 4th, 2018 4:53 pm
I believe trying to deter people from driving drunk has been as fruitless as Prohibition. People simply want to drink, and simply want to drive. Something needs to be done to accommodate these desires so that less harm is done.
You nailed it.
I read a newspaper piece on this and some within the judicial system circles believe stiffer penalties are the means to achieve this goal. I concur. The penalties should be HEAVY though, to make a positive impact on our driving attitudes.
Deal Addict
Sep 8, 2017
1175 posts
1005 upvotes
GTA
Bunch of sovereign idiots.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Apr 21, 2004
46639 posts
12684 upvotes
So I make sure, I

pee before leaving a drinking session
wait an hour before getting behind the wheel

Another tips to hasten the metabolism of alcohol in my system?
Deal Fanatic
Aug 15, 2015
6276 posts
2307 upvotes
ON
koffey wrote:
Dec 5th, 2018 2:53 pm
Too bad this doesn't apply to distracted driving laws but while I'm all for harsh DUI laws, forcing someone to do something against their will is not actually good for anyone.

I'm against the law/government from forcing me to do something whether they feel I have done something wrong or not. Will they allowed to enter my home without a warrant if they believed I was hiding aliens?

OP has a very valid point/concern. Canada is slowly becoming the new Russia/China.
Very true. Those who trade their rights for safety will soon have neither.

As for the "carding" comparison, now that LEOs will have the right to administer a breathalyzer test at their discretion and also have the right to pull you over also at their discretion(check for insurance etc.), why wouldn't racial profiling become an issue ?

I find it funny that the same folks who are always the first to jump on the "fu#$ tha police" bandwagon when some lowlife gets shot or roughed up, are also the first to hand them more powers to abuse.
Deal Addict
Apr 30, 2011
2842 posts
304 upvotes
RICHMOND HILL
ThinkOutsideTheBox wrote:
Dec 5th, 2018 3:19 pm
I mean -- if someone is intoxicated, they cannot safely operate a vehicle. That is why alternates like taxis, carpooling, public transit, etc. exist. If people continue to drink and drive, the penalties should be as harsh as possible. Further analysis of the reasons why may facilitate future alternatives but for now, the public risk element demands that a hard stance is taken.

This hard stance is why drinking and driving related accidents and deaths have declined.
For sure, educating the population about the risk factor of drinking and driving along with the devastating consequences has gone far to reduce the instances of accidents caused by intoxication, but the campaigns have always been focusing on the greater good. None of them have addressed individual needs and wants, and I think that's why drinking and driving is so pervasive in our society.
Deal Addict
Mar 13, 2018
1340 posts
626 upvotes
Buggy166 wrote:
Dec 4th, 2018 8:06 pm
There were a ton less murders when carding was a thing. Very odd coincidence.
World temperature was also lower too. So the higher temperatures are the cause

Or it could be due to much higher pedestrian deaths from cars, maybe carding helped with pedestrian deaths by cars which far exceed shooting deaths by far

Or the lower oil prices leading to lower gas prices means gangsters have more money leftover to drive around and shoot people and also use the gas savings to buy guns. The shootings sure correlates to lower gas prices right?
Last edited by Gboard2 on Dec 5th, 2018 7:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Deal Addict
Jul 30, 2005
1163 posts
2 upvotes
loserga wrote:
Dec 5th, 2018 4:44 pm
For sure, educating the population about the risk factor of drinking and driving along with the devastating consequences has gone far to reduce the instances of accidents caused by intoxication, but the campaigns have always been focusing on the greater good. None of them have addressed individual needs and wants, and I think that's why drinking and driving is so pervasive in our society.
It's a fair point -- you're right. I think drinking, due to the impact on inhibition has drunk driving as a consequence of the lack of control that many people have in a drunken state. If you were take them in a sober state and ask them about drunk driving, my guess is that the majority of them would not defend it. The harm therefore comes from an overindulgence of liquor which I'm sure most of the population can relate to.
Deal Addict
Mar 13, 2018
1340 posts
626 upvotes
Deveno wrote:
Dec 4th, 2018 8:31 pm
What is your source of reference for this assertion? Would really appreciate stats from reputable sources.

Also, every intelligent person knows that correlation does not imply causation :)
To be fair, he never said he knew anything about stats or that he possessed even average intelligence

We can't assume people know basic stats or have functional intelligence. He could be a flat earther because he doesn't see edge of the earth
Jr. Member
Nov 10, 2018
125 posts
48 upvotes
smacd wrote:
Dec 4th, 2018 5:03 pm
Good. If you can't serve the time, don't do the crime.
Hitler/Stalin/Mao/Xi Xinping (insert dictator) would have loved you.

Rights have been established after the death of countless soldiers fighting for freedom. Your comment is beyond idiotic. There is a threshold between infringing on one's rights and personal/civil liberties and freedom. You've gone to one extreme and that's just wrong.
Penalty Box
Apr 5, 2013
3344 posts
870 upvotes
markham
angryaudifanatic wrote:
Dec 5th, 2018 8:00 pm
Hitler/Stalin/Mao/Xi Xinping (insert dictator) would have loved you.

Rights have been established after the death of countless soldiers fighting for freedom. Your comment is beyond idiotic. There is a threshold between infringing on one's rights and personal/civil liberties and freedom. You've gone to one extreme and that's just wrong.
welcome to the new free world...where the young people are made up from immigrants that came from a land and upbringing where they never understood what real freedom was , combined with the locally born and raised , who's moronic parents never never understood that freedom was fought for and take all of todays liberties for granted. None are taught to respect and protect their freedoms...so everyone as as whole.... just bend over.

Using an argument for these infringements "to make the roads safer" is the ultimate in stupidity...why not go give your DNA to prove you are not a rapist!..volunteer your prints to show you are not a criminal...and if its driving you are afraid of..why not install a speed limiter as another way to bubble wrap yourself...install a blow and go in every car...test everyone daily for drugs..mandatory!

Dam stupid immigrant misinformed ideals!..yes I said it..as your predecessors never fought for freedoms on this side of the earth and never instilled these ideals in their culture...heck i doubt most that think this way even know what remembrance day is all about (or respect it for that matter).
Moderator
User avatar
Jul 5, 2004
23281 posts
2847 upvotes
vkizzle wrote:
Dec 5th, 2018 2:26 pm
Don't drink and drive...simple!
I agree with this, although what worries me about this law is that I could be subject to a device that is far from perfect, especially in the case of THC. If those devices were perfect, I would have no issues with having to provide a breath sample. They aren't perfect though and there's no shortage of court cases proving that. Even the manufacturer of THC screening devices admits there's limitations, and of course they're not going to be completely forthcoming about the reliability of their own product.

I have no issue with being stopped/detained to provide a sample. My issue is the reliability of the devices.
Deal Expert
Aug 22, 2011
23705 posts
10132 upvotes
Ottawa
Shaner wrote:
Dec 6th, 2018 7:29 am
I agree with this, although what worries me about this law is that I could be subject to a device that is far from perfect, especially in the case of THC. If those devices were perfect, I would have no issues with having to provide a breath sample. They aren't perfect though and there's no shortage of court cases proving that. Even the manufacturer of THC screening devices admits there's limitations, and of course they're not going to be completely forthcoming about the reliability of their own product.

I have no issue with being stopped/detained to provide a sample. My issue is the reliability of the devices.
Having driven through RIDE checkpoints every year, I have yet been demanded to pull over for a sobriety test.
I guess what I'm trying to say, is there's nothing to worry about by simply not drinking at all or even smoking if you plan to drive that particular day.
Moderator
User avatar
Jul 5, 2004
23281 posts
2847 upvotes
vkizzle wrote:
Dec 6th, 2018 8:11 am
Having driven through RIDE checkpoints every year, I have yet been demanded to pull over for a sobriety test.
I guess what I'm trying to say, is there's nothing to worry about by simply not drinking at all or even smoking if you plan to drive that particular day.
I haven't been either, but the law was different then. Unless they have grounds to believe you had been drinking, they couldn't demand a breath sample. With the new law, they could in theory demand a breath sample at random, because you look tired, because they're bored, because they don't like your attitude, because it's 2 am and you just happen to be driving near a bar, etc. In the past, they would have to justify in court why they demanded the sample. I don't like my livelihood and my innocence depending on a device that has proven to be imperfect. At least before as long as I wasn't drinking, I had nothing to worry about because there would be no grounds to demand a sample. Now I could be ordered to provide a sample even if I wasn't drinking.

Just like the ion scanners at airports. I don't trust them. I use those machines at my work place and I've seen countless false positives. It's to the point where those machines are hardly trusted anymore. If the machine indicates someone has been in contact with drugs, they are typically still allowed into the penitentiary.
Deal Addict
User avatar
May 24, 2008
3109 posts
974 upvotes
Toronto
alanbrenton wrote:
Dec 5th, 2018 4:20 pm
So I make sure, I

pee before leaving a drinking session
wait an hour before getting behind the wheel

Another tips to hasten the metabolism of alcohol in my system?
You're joking, right?
4 years of pain for Ontario...
Deal Expert
User avatar
Apr 21, 2004
46639 posts
12684 upvotes
Little Tim wrote:
Dec 6th, 2018 9:48 am
You're joking, right?
No. Are you suggesting we can't have a few drinks?

What's wrong with my honest questions?

Edit:

Seems only time is our friend:
http://www.drinkfox.com/information/alcohol-metabolism

  • The rate of alcohol metabolism is remarkably constant.
  • BAC will decrease by 0.016% per hour a person stops drinking
  • There is no practical way to increase the rate of alcohol metabolism
  • Alcohol metabolism is slightly faster in someone who had a meal before they started drinking, but this increase is very small
  • Heavy drinkers metabolize alcohol faster than light drinkers or non-drinkers. However, the rate of alcohol metabolism drops substantially in advance liver disease.
  • While the rate of alcohol metabolism is constant, the rate of alcohol absorption can vary.
  • In people who do not abuse alcohol, BAC is a good gauge of how "drunk" they will feel. On the other hand, people who abuse alcohol generally require much higher BAC levels to achieve the same drunk feeling.

Top