Drunk sends young girl to hospital

[Graphite]

I've seen that IRSU staking out bank parking lots looking for seatbelt infractions in the middle of the afternoon in Penticton. The big Black suburban or escalade or whatever... real bang up job keeping the roads safe there lol
I know the Cops are good at keeping it real during the holidays and at night in the downtowns where the trouble is but seriously sometimes it really really seems like its all about collecting fines.

Maybe all the trouble starts from people's speculative opinions.

[Roadster]

I've seen that IRSU staking out bank parking lots looking for seatbelt infractions in the middle of the afternoon in Penticton. The big Black suburban or escalade or whatever... real bang up job keeping the roads safe there lol
I know the Cops are good at keeping it real during the holidays and at night in the downtowns where the trouble is but seriously sometimes it really really seems like its all about collecting fines.

You might be surprised at how many drunks they snag in those seatbelt checks in the day time,,, also I remember once they were doing a seatbelt check near Harvey quite a few years back and came across someone they were looking for who ended up fleeing and they caught him,,, kinda nice how things sometimes come into play when you least expect it.
If you got caught once or twice without a seatbelt its no reason to hate them for doing it,,, its a good reminder,,, do ya know how many die because a seatbelt wasnt keeping them in the car when in a crash?
They do checks on all levels of road rules and seatbelts happens to be one of them, why ignore it?
In all reality a check is a check is a check,,, as long as they are out there checking and snagging people doing things they shouldnt.

[sooperphreek]

i guess some people like living in a nanny state. the other side states that its a form of natural selection. if you are dum and dont wear one you die. and you wont be here to be able to do that any more.

[ukcanuck]

i guess some people like living in a nanny state. the other side states that its a form of natural selection. if you are dum and dont wear one you die. and you wont be here to be able to do that any more.

Although that's a bit extreme, I definitely lean toward letting the gene pool decide.

But aside from that I do think it would make more sense to put road blocks where children are. One alcoholic driving during the day is a lot scarier than some *bleep* at 3 am.

[Fancy]

i guess some people like living in a nanny state. the other side states that its a form of natural selection. if you are dum and dont wear one you die. and you wont be here to be able to do that any more.

If looking after those that can't look after themselves means living in a nanny state then I am okay with that. I'm all for trying to keep people safe and out of the hospitals and morgues.

If people would only spend a 10th of their energy making plans to either not drink and drive period or have a way home after drinking...all of this non sense would fall by the way side

Taking turns being designated driver or budgeting for bus/cab makes much more sense.

[Roadster]

i guess some people like living in a nanny state. the other side states that its a form of natural selection. if you are dum and dont wear one you die. and you wont be here to be able to do that any more.

Same here, if a nanny state is what helps stop the idiots from doing stupid things I am all for it. It wont affect me any because I dont do stupid things behind the wheel of my car so let the idiots carry on the way they do and the cops find them, its what we pay them for. If it wasnt happening we wouldnt be needing the cops to do checks like that. People dont get it.

[ukcanuck]

i guess some people like living in a nanny state. the other side states that its a form of natural selection. if you are dum and dont wear one you die. and you wont be here to be able to do that any more.

Same here, if a nanny state is what helps stop the idiots from doing stupid things I am all for it. It wont affect me any because I dont do stupid things behind the wheel of my car so let the idiots carry on the way they do and the cops find them, its what we pay them for. If it wasnt happening we wouldnt be needing the cops to do checks like that. People dont get it.

I beg to differ on the people don't get it bit it's absolutely clear people get it in big numbers about the dangers of driving impaired.

I'd like to hear from one of the learned cop's perspective over the question of law enforcement versus social education.
If its given that almost all citizens (99.9%) are thinking rational human beings then, what has done more to curb drinking and driving because 124 deaths out if 4 million must be a significant improvement than when the first counterattack programs started in the seventies. As I said before, society has clearly changed when it comes to drinking and driving. Whole industries have been changed.
The number of night clubs and bars that no longer exist in an Okanagan that's grown leaps and bounds is testament to the change in drinking habits alone.
I guess for me it boils down to a hatred of blind legislation
To me there ought to be a law against people saying there ought to be a law...so ...
I want to know what's more effective, explaining why having one too many is morally wrong, or threatening someone with a big stick if they don't change their ways...

[Verminator]

I want to know what's more effective, explaining why having one too many is morally wrong, or threatening someone with a big stick if they don't change their ways...

The answer to your question is both. Most of us learn right from wrong as we're growing up, but too often, as with drunk driving, we don't really understand - or care - until too much damage has already been done. The law is supposed to be there to deter us from deviant and dangerous behavior like drunk driving and to punish us when we ignore it, but the 'stick' apparently needs to be a lot bigger before some folks 'get it'.

[Fancy]

If the big stick takes one drunk off the road, I'm all for it. Too many innocents are killed because of this behaviour.

[ukcanuck]

If the big stick takes one drunk off the road, I'm all for it. Too many innocents are killed because of this behaviour.

That's the knee jerk response that scares me. I don't drink at all, so I have no worries if the penalty was for the officer to put down the breathalyzer and pull out his gun and immediately put a bullet in the offenders temple.

But I know two things, deterrence does not work, otherwise there would be no murder in states that have the death penalty;
And absolute logic like that with no room for error on either side is the slippery slope that dictatorships and totalitarian governments comes from...

I Seriously seriously doubt any drunk ever turned the key off and got out from behind the wheel to call a cab because he or she was afraid of the penalty. Not unless they could see the red and white and blue flashing lights from the bar parking lot at any rate.

To me the greatest and possibly the only weapon we have that works is education and moral indignation, by the rest of us. drunks have friends and family, reach out and take the keys, lay down a lecture, give them some AA literature.

Just Leave the posse at home, lynchings went out of style with the civil rights movement.

[Fancy]

Getting a little melodramatic aren't we? This isn't about lynching or putting a bullet to someone's head. Be realistic. Saving a child's life, or anyone's for that matter, should be paramount.

You do realize the penalities are there to deal with drinking and driving causing bodily harm. I have no problem with more roadchecks to get impaired drivers off the road.

[my5cents]

A couple of good points brought up. "ukcanuck" asking what's more effective, explaining what's wrong with breaking a law, or threatening someone with a severe punishment for non-compliance.

How many of us are guilty of demonstrating to our children, our own disobedience to laws ? Walking across against a traffic light because no cars are coming. Speeding with children in the car (forget the topic of the obvious danger to them), then slowing to avoid a speed check, then speeding up, all with their little eyes watching.

How do we feel and what do we do when we are standing at a red light at an intersection, no cars coming and several other pedestrians cross against the light. Do we go, or wait. Or are we the ones crossing while others wait ?

How do we feel when driving, on the highway, (Trout Creek, between Summerland and Pentiction [100 KMH to 70, 60 N/B and 90 KMH to 60 S/B], comes to mind) and slowing in an area of a reduced speed limit to near or to the speed limit as (it seems) the whole world roars by, including little old ladies driving 4 door K cars.

The compliance to drinking and driving laws is very complex.

It seems the only time all the traffic obeys the lower limit thru Trout Creek, including the little old ladies, is when there's a cop there. What's that tell you ?

[ukcanuck]

A couple of good points brought up. "ukcanuck" asking what's more effective, explaining what's wrong with breaking a law, or threatening someone with a severe punishment for non-compliance.

How many of us are guilty of demonstrating to our children, our own disobedience to laws ? Walking across against a traffic light because no cars are coming. Speeding with children in the car (forget the topic of the obvious danger to them), then slowing to avoid a speed check, then speeding up, all with their little eyes watching.

How do we feel and what do we do when we are standing at a red light at an intersection, no cars coming and several other pedestrians cross against the light. Do we go, or wait. Or are we the ones crossing while others wait ?

How do we feel when driving, on the highway, (Trout Creek, between Summerland and Pentiction [100 KMH to 70, 60 N/B and 90 KMH to 60 S/B], comes to mind) and slowing in an area of a reduced speed limit to near or to the speed limit as (it seems) the whole world roars by, including little old ladies driving 4 door K cars.

The compliance to drinking and driving laws is very complex.

It seems the only time all the traffic obeys the lower limit thru Trout Creek, including the little old ladies, is when there's a cop there. What's that tell you ?

Well for starters that tells me that the limit through there is unrealistic as it all throughout hwy 97. another example how dumb laws don't work.
But getting back to the issue, while totally agree with you that hypocrisy is alive and well especially here on castanet, the examples you give are a little different and not as dire, you can't sell people I. The evils of jaywalking like you can on Drunk driving or smoking or seatbelts all of which have drastically declined over the years and the penalties for smoking and seatbelts are nowhere near as costly ...well if you don't count lung cancer as penalty anyway lol .

So I'm still not really sold that the solutions suggested here, like attempted murder charges, banning for life, long prison terms etc are the answer.

[ukcanuck]

Duplicate Post

[ukcanuck]

Getting a little melodramatic aren't we? This isn't about lynching or putting a bullet to someone's head. Be realistic. Saving a child's life, or anyone's for that matter, should be paramount.

You do realize the penalities are there to deal with drinking and driving causing bodily harm. I have no problem with more roadchecks to get impaired drivers off the road.

Actually I think that's exactly what a "big stick" is, extreme punishment for an extreme crime... That's what you want as long as it saves one life right?
but what if it ruins more lives than it saves?
Life is always more complicated than a perpetrator and victim...