Beer store baiting: unassuaged pullovers?

[KL3-Something]

Ass-U-Me

Assumptions, Mike, are not a benefit to police investigations.

[MAPearce]

Ass-U-Me

Assumptions, Mike, are not a benefit to police investigations.

Oh C'mon Kl .. You're going to tell me that the cops have NEVER sat out front of the Corral CB&W in the big dark coloured SUV and ran licence plates looking for drivers who've had previous IRP's , 24hr prohibitions or other driving infractions ?

Next , you're going to tell me that because there is only one person in the vehicle , the cops have a hard time proving who was driving that vehicle when it pulled in ??

Not going to buy that Kl ...

I don't have a problem with cops staking out liquor outlets of ANY kind , and you know that .. What I have a problem with is cops letting them leave that lot if they are impaired..

You know THAT too.

[goatboy]

Oh C'mon Kl .. You're going to tell me that the cops have NEVER sat out front of the Corral CB&W in the big dark coloured SUV and ran licence plates looking for drivers who've had previous IRP's , 24hr prohibitions or other driving infractions ?

Next , you're going to tell me that because there is only one person in the vehicle , the cops have a hard time proving who was driving that vehicle when it pulled in ??

Not going to buy that Kl ...

I don't have a problem with cops staking out liquor outlets of ANY kind , and you know that .. What I have a problem with is cops letting them leave that lot if they are impaired..

You know THAT too.

Mike, do you have any idea how bad case law has made it extremely onerous on the police to prove impaired driving? It's not just about proving who was driving when they pulled into the parking lot but they also have to prove that the person did not have the ability to have anything to drink from when he left the vehicle to when he returned to it and doing that when the person is in a liquor store is almost impossible. Unless of course you want them to lie in court, and I'm sure you're not suggesting that.

You also have a problem with police letting them leave the parking lot if they are impaired but you have not suggested how they are supposed to tell if they are impaired before they have them pulled over. The court says they cannot stop and ask them while they're walking through the parking lot.

[HoboJo]

I still think pulling over every vehicle that leaves that lot at 2pm for "inspections" is wrong. I would not have started this thread if I hadn't been pulled over three times in three weeks.

Hell, one lady pulled me over 30ft from a safe pull out (Spall, across the tracks, golf course rd), Used her speaker to override my hand signals and then wanted me to stand in front of her cruiser so I was kept on film.

Great I say. Film the ****** but for the love of all that is holy, let's both get somewhere safe.

Ahh, the fun as I kept jumping to the side of the road (instead of directly in front of the camera/cruiser parked in the right lane of a busy Spall Rd. ). Sir, you must stay in front of the car. Ma'm, that is crazy, I will stick to the shoulder please...

She was angry. I was not compliant enough? I did my best to smile at the camera but for *&*&** sakes...


Mostly I started this thread because I was upset that my time was being wasted (2+ hours/ month) and that the "urgency" and total lack of safety may have been lacking.

I stopped reading this thread because a whack of you are whacked. * . Also * people who think that these people are truly using their resources.

(edited Spingfield for Spall)

[Donald G]

Postby goatboy » Feb 23rd, 2015, 8:59 pm

Mike, do you have any idea how bad case law has made it extremely onerous on the police to prove impaired driving? It's not just about proving who was driving when they pulled into the parking lot but they also have to prove that the person did not have the ability to have anything to drink from when he left the vehicle to when he returned to it and doing that when the person is in a liquor store is almost impossible. Unless of course you want them to lie in court, and I'm sure you're not suggesting that.

Very true goatboy. One of the great theoretical defenses used in our modern day theoretical Criminal Courts.

[HoboJo]

I prefer the breath toy (analyzer? sp). Blew three times in three weeks....

I also like those cameras that track plates, hell I like it all. BFFS use the technology to not pull over the same sad old *. And; Especially and; don't force us over onto a busy street when safer options are available. 100M would have been home free and may not have triggered this post.

[MAPearce]

Mike, do you have any idea how bad case law has made it extremely onerous on the police to prove impaired driving? It's not just about proving who was driving when they pulled into the parking lot but they also have to prove that the person did not have the ability to have anything to drink from when he left the vehicle to when he returned to it and doing that when the person is in a liquor store is almost impossible. Unless of course you want them to lie in court, and I'm sure you're not suggesting that.

We are talking about BEER STORE PARKING LOTS , right G ?? How much can on have to drink while in line at the cash register ??

Over to you D....

Very true goatboy. One of the great theoretical defenses used in our modern day theoretical Criminal Courts.

Think the cops might have a problem convincing a judge that there just isn't enough time to get hammered in line ??

[techrtr]

Don't care about that, but if I was the police, I would do spot checks of the vehicles pulling out of the parking of the softball fields next to the Mission Sports Fields. The amount of drinking that goes on in that parking lot is astonishing. Trucks loaded with 24's, people wandering around openly drinking, yelling and swearing, urinating in the parking lot while kids are playing soccer on the field beside the parking lot. It's pretty disgusting.

[Bsuds]

Think the cops might have a problem convincing a judge that there just isn't enough time to get hammered in line ??

I would think it's more likely the ones who are impaired have been drinking beforehand and went to the store to get more.

[goatboy]

We are talking about BEER STORE PARKING LOTS , right G ?? How much can on have to drink while in line at the cash register ??

Over to you D....



Think the cops might have a problem convincing a judge that there just isn't enough time to get hammered in line ??

Defence only needs to raise the reasonable doubt that the little bit they did drink was enough to put them over the limit.

You would be amazed at what gets you out of on an impaired charge.

[GordonH]

Majority of drivers (if not all) know driving while impaired is really bad idea, for some stupid reason a percentage continue to do just that.
Whatever the reason just grow up and stop it. It's really just that easy to do.

[Donald G]

Postby HoboJo » Nov 27th, 2013, 8:05 pm

Four times this year I have been pulled over simply for frequenting a local beer store.

I am no more likely than the rest of you to support drunk driving but I am starting to think that the RCMP ought not be targeting this particular store.

Is this baiting? Are they winning?

If they are getting drunks off the road then I am in favour. The two and a half hours I have had to spend coming out of said store and dealing with the RCMP should be paid in kind.... or cash.

No-one wants to be frantically waived to the side of a busy road and made to stand in front of a camera every time they purchase some beer.

(Highest test so far is 0.02)/ of 4

I am truly surprised at your attitude toward alcohol and driving HoboJo. I appreciate your frustration at being inconvenienced, but since it saves many lives in BC I am inclined to think it is a small price to pay. What do you think your reading would have been when you got in your car and started driving toward the liquor store to get more liquor if it was still .02 when you came out of the liquor store and waited a period of time to be tested ?? Food for thought.

[MAPearce]

I would think it's more likely the ones who are impaired have been drinking beforehand and went to the store to get more.

Right... I'd think that a judge would have NO problem convicting a person like that . It's simple really , a drunk pulls into a beer store and goes to reload.. Cops wait til the drunk puts his poison into the car and then puts their *bleep* into the drivers seat to "stop" him.

Drunk goes to jail before he gets to put the keys in the ignition and attempt to carry on with the carnage..

Why is that so hard to understand ?

[goatboy]

Right... I'd think that a judge would have NO problem convicting a person like that . It's simple really , a drunk pulls into a beer store and goes to reload.. Cops wait til the drunk puts his poison into the car and then puts their *bleep* into the drivers seat to "stop" him.

Drunk goes to jail before he gets to put the keys in the ignition and attempt to carry on with the carnage..

Why is that so hard to understand ?

Mike, do you know what care and control is? It's part of an impaired charge and is why your scenario is so hard to understand.

[MAPearce]

We've been through this before G... To the cops. Care and control means having the keys and as stated earlier in this thread by Trunk Monkey the police can issue a 24 hr prohibition to someone on their belief that that person might drive .. I myself got one for going to my car in boxers and a T-shirt to get my phone and a pack of smokes from the glove box.

My position is the same as always..if cops are going to patrol beer store parking lots , so be it. I'm more than good with it. Just get the drunks BEFORE they drive out of them.