Automotive

Locked: Must know: new changes to driving enforcement laws

  • Last Updated:
  • Dec 8th, 2018 9:01 am
Deal Addict
May 30, 2012
3285 posts
476 upvotes
Montreal
It's already working....look at these guys here worrying about getting caught for DUI....lol...
Penalty Box
Dec 27, 2013
7710 posts
3555 upvotes
Toronto
of course all the basement trolls are coming out to say "this is a good thing".
no it's not. It a dumb thing.

because if it's applied to the RIDE program, as per the OPs original post, then yes, we do have a problem.
1) longer line ups at ride.
2) blowing into a breathalyzer exposes you to RISK... that means your future depends on what type of cop is holding the breathalyzer stick.

Why should I have to be put in a position to defend my self because cop XYZ decided to breathalyze everyone. What if the test makes a mistake? What if you blow a BAC level because maybe your liver doesn't process alchohol as good, but you're not intoxicated at all?
Where otherwise, you would be ZERO risk to other drivers, but now have to deal with this non-sense.

I'm a G class driver. I can literally have 1 drink maybe every 1.5 hours or so to be on the safe side. I hardly have any drinks when i drive though because of this non-sense. Please, 1 beer does not impair a full grown adult male.
Sure 3 beers in 1 hour, that's excessive.

But now, I have 2 beers in 3 hours, and maybe my BAC level blows 0.035 at a stupid RIDE program, and I get a road side suspension? Meanwhile I'm perfectly sober, but because I didn't drink 2 glasses of water, my body didn't process it fast enough.

ridiculousness.

Also, at RIDE programs, a cop would be pretty dumb to make people that don't smell like booze blow into breathalyzers. I mean, it's pretty easy to smell alcohol in a car from someone that is drunk. So this is great for DD's now too..... so when your car is full of drunk people, and your car smells like booze, but you don't.. Well you're blowing on breathalyzer..

again, exposing yourself to risk for no reason.
Penalty Box
Dec 27, 2013
7710 posts
3555 upvotes
Toronto
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.
exactly.
why do i need to be put into a position where i have to PROVE MY SELF innocent, and the can of worms that comes with it?

It's beyond ridiculous.

My issue is the device, and the hands holding the device.

Shaner wrote:
Dec 6th, 2018 8:31 am
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.
thank you. the only one that seems to get it.
Jr. Member
Nov 10, 2018
172 posts
65 upvotes
alanbrenton wrote:
Dec 6th, 2018 9:49 am
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.
Breathalyzers can easily be beaten.

All you have to do is hyperventilate (or just take deep breaths and empty your lungs as much as you can for a few breaths) without garnering attention from the officer and then blow into a roadside breathalyzer. It drops your BAC considerably based on how those devices work.

This is public information and has been for a while. This is also why if you fail the roadside breathalyzer test that the BAC level that is shown by the device is not admissible in court. The fancy machine back at the station or a blood test is what is required.
Jr. Member
Nov 10, 2018
172 posts
65 upvotes
As far as this goes: "There is no practical way to increase the rate of alcohol metabolism" - yes, there is, actually. Marginally at best, but yes. If one were to stay stationary and on a couch, alcohol is metabolized slower than if someone went for a run. The faster your heart works and the more blood gets pumped around, the applicable organs would be metabolizing that alcohol quicker.

Is it faster to the point of helping you pass a roadside test? I have no idea, but basic science comes to mind here.
Deal Addict
User avatar
May 24, 2008
3110 posts
974 upvotes
Toronto
alanbrenton wrote:
Dec 6th, 2018 9:49 am
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.
Big difference between honest and ignorant...
4 years of pain for Ontario...
Deal Expert
User avatar
Apr 21, 2004
46681 posts
12702 upvotes
Little Tim wrote:
Dec 6th, 2018 12:21 pm
Big difference between honest and ignorant...
You didn't even have the answer yourself duh...

Big difference between helpful and helpless/useless.

I don't drink much so it's not really an issue for me. I don't have to know all the answers to life after the fact. I can find them out before.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Oct 6, 2010
9832 posts
4204 upvotes
Toronto
alanbrenton wrote:
Dec 6th, 2018 12:22 pm
You didn't even have the answer yourself duh...

Big difference between helpful and helpless/useless.

I don't drink much so it's not really an issue for me. I don't have to know all the answers to life after the fact. I can find them out before.
OR, you can wait until some RFDer posts from the afterlife to tell you. Surely, rfders have all the answers or they like to believe they do.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Apr 21, 2004
46681 posts
12702 upvotes
koffey wrote:
Dec 6th, 2018 12:26 pm
OR, you can wait until some RFDer posts from the afterlife to tell you. Surely, rfders have all the answers or they like to believe they do.
Maybe little tim is posting in his after life. Sad to be that guy. He might as well apply to be a mod (not that current mods here are sad and pathetic) if he is a know it all.
Member
Dec 19, 2015
460 posts
231 upvotes
Calgary, AB
vkizzle wrote:
Dec 5th, 2018 2:26 pm
Don't drink and drive...simple!
Exactly. It's a pretty easy solution.

I (and a lot of younger people I know) work on the premise that if I plan on driving in the next few hours/half a day then I don't touch a drop of alcohol. A simple way of never being over the limit (unless you really like to pound back the drink and are one of those that are still drunk the day after).
Deal Expert
Aug 22, 2011
23728 posts
10147 upvotes
Ottawa
Andy34 wrote:
Dec 6th, 2018 2:18 pm
Exactly. It's a pretty easy solution.

I (and a lot of younger people I know) work on the premise that if I plan on driving in the next few hours/half a day then I don't touch a drop of alcohol. A simple way of never being over the limit (unless you really like to pound back the drink and are one of those that are still drunk the day after).
It's definitely hard, as it is socially acceptable to have "a drink" and drive.
Member
Dec 19, 2015
460 posts
231 upvotes
Calgary, AB
cardguy wrote:
Dec 6th, 2018 6:12 am
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).
Are you a first nation member?
Member
Dec 19, 2015
460 posts
231 upvotes
Calgary, AB
vkizzle wrote:
Dec 6th, 2018 2:26 pm
It's definitely hard, as it is socially acceptable to have "a drink" and drive.
I think that is changing though. It's a lot less socially acceptable among millenials than older people - at least in my experience.
Deal Fanatic
Aug 15, 2015
6280 posts
2312 upvotes
ON
Little Tim wrote:
Dec 6th, 2018 12:21 pm
Big difference between honest and ignorant...
You should know...
His question is very valid. Your assumptions that he's trying to "game the system" however aren't .

Just because you've been drinking, doesn't necessarily mean you're impaired to the point where you should not be driving. The current BAC is pretty arbitrary and it doesn't reflect the actual impairment one might be experiencing . With THC is even worse.
If they come up with a reliable system to test actual impairment, then I'd be willing to concede that they have achieved something, but for now is nothing more than a legalized witch hunt.

A lot of accidents happen because of impairment from sleep deprivation, emotional distress or other medical conditions.
A person with diabetes can exhibit the exact same symptoms of impairment without drinking if they're hypoglycemic.
How would the authorities go about detecting that ? Why is it considered socially and legally acceptable to drive under those conditions but having a drink isn't ?
Last edited by dilligafeh on Dec 6th, 2018 2:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Deal Fanatic
Aug 15, 2015
6280 posts
2312 upvotes
ON
Andy34 wrote:
Dec 6th, 2018 2:27 pm
Are you a first nation member?
Why is that relevant ? Would it make him "more Canadian" if he were ?
We all have equal rights to be here, and the discussion is about protecting these rights and freedoms we currently are signing away not entitlement.
I doubt anyone can claim their ancestors didn't immigrate to this country at some point including natives, they just did it earlier than most.

Top