The real truth about the new .05 drinking laws.

[Al Czervic]

I realize that there is already a thread on this, however after extensive study of the new laws I feel it is critically important that people be aware of what has really changed, and what has not changed. I submit the following for your information….

After doing a fair bit of research on this new law I have discovered that the media and public reactionis not entirely accurate (much as was the case with the HST). Here is what you need to know.

For Social Drinkers. (on a first offence)
I am defining as social drinker as anyone who drinks and is under .08 percent blood alcohol level.
The .05 blood alcohol level has not, in any way changed. For the past 20 years if you were between .05 to .08 the RCMP issued a 24 hour roadside driving suspension. This is what the yellow light on a roadside breathalyzer or “warning” range was all about; being between .05 up to .08. The RCMP also had the option of impounding your car for those 24 hours as well, and naturally if you were over .08 you could face criminal charges.

Believe it or not the new law does not alter any of this. What the new law does change is to basically increase the penalties for what existed previously if your blood alcohol content is between the same .05 to .08 as it was before. In other words if you were in the warning range before and got a suspension you will get the same today. Only in the past you got a 24 hour suspension before, today you will get a 72 hour driving suspension instead of just 24 hours. You also face the same possibility that your vehicle MAY be impounded for those three days just as this was a discretionary decision before, so obviously no change other then everything is now subject to 72 hours (three days) instead of the former 24 hours (one day) Naturally there is now $ 450 in related fines that go along with a 72 hour suspension, so that is an increase.

For Drunk Drivers.
If you are above .08 you will now face an immediate 90-day driving ban, $750 in related administrative and drivers licence reinstatement fees, automatic 30-day vehicle impoundment, towing and impoundment costs, mandatory participation in the Responsible Driver Program (this costs around $ 1,000), mandatory use of an Ignition Interlock device (estimated between $ 600-700) for one year and possibly you face criminal charges. Obviously some pretty big changes here, the biggest being cost as you are looking at close to $ 2500 in fines and fees, and of course a full 90 day ban and related towing and vehicle impoundment costs, that will also likely be in the thousands. All of this occurs even if you are ultimately charged criminally and are found not to be guilty.

The presumption of guilt and the structure of above .08 is truly serious. It is no secret that the RCMP dislike being in the courtroom. So given that not charging you with drunk driving basically carries more automatic penalties then the court system ever would burden you with why even both going to court if you are the RCMP ? Not to mention the courts are bogged down with drunk driving cases as it is. Clearly this new legislation will result in fewer charges being laid against drunk drivers.

Summary? In spite of all the hype I think this new law is misunderstood and illustrates another failure of Gordon Campbell to effectively communicate his government policy to the people of B.C.. All across B.C. pubs and bars are hurting and as you can see there is no reason for this. Social Drinkers are being held to the exact same standard today as they were before, if you are in the .05-.08 range you can expect a suspension no difference then you would have expected prior to the new regulations. The only change is that the suspension will increase from 24 hours to 72 hours and you will pay more in fines. The risk of vehicle impoundment is discretionary today just as it was prior so the risk remains the same. That is about it as far as social drinkers are concerned, for drunk drivers there are some huge changes but I think all of us agree about time on that one.

Respectfully submitted,

Al.

[Merry]

Although I'm totally opposed to driving drunk, and think the law should "throw the book" at drunk drivers, it isn't right that someone found not guilty of commiting an offense should still be subject to $2500 in various fees, as well as being denied driving privleges for 90 days. If someone is found not guilty by a court of law, the fees should be refunded. And the 90 day suspension should be suspended until AFTER they've been found guilty, because these days denying someone the right to drive can also result in denying them the right to work. So such a serious punishment should ONLY be meted out by the courts, and not on the whim of a policeman performing a random roadside stop.

Ditto for those blowing between .05 and .08. If the law states your not impaired until you hit .08 then anything below that should require a verbal and written warning that you are close to reaching the legal limit AND THAT IS ALL. Either you're impaired, or your not. If .08 is not low enough to render you safe to drive, then the limit should be lowered to .05, but to say that your not impaired until .08 but we're going to punish you anyway if your above .05 is ridiculous.

Finally, if we are going to allow people to have a very low limit of alcohol in their blood streams and still drive, then we need to allow people access to police breathalyzers on a voluntary basis in order to allow them to determine what their personal legal limit is. It's simply not fair to require people to adhere to a standard when that they have no way of knowing what that standard is. People should be allowed to walk into a police station and ask to be breathalyzed so that they can find out just how many is TOO many in their own individual case. And if society is not prepared to allow this, then maybe we should move to ZERO tolerance (which is what I believe many of the advocates of this new system would like to see anyway).

[Logitack]

I am sure some enterprising capitalist will or has already come up with a consumer version of the breathalizer.

ETA: http://www.martinrothonline.com/persona ... _guide.htm
http://stores.ebay.com/Breathalyzer-net
http://www.breathalyzer.net/consumer-breathalyzers.html
http://stores.ebay.ca/Breathalyzer-net

The thing is, if you dont want to be caught, charged, and/or have other penalties brought against you, dont drink and drive, period! Following this simple guideline will ensure you are able to drive to work and therefore will not impede you from earning a living. Whats the big deal!!!

[grumpydigger]

is truly quite frightening, that a supposedly intelligent man such as yourself actually believes that nothing has really changed.

the .05% alcohol Law, has allowed extremely severe penalties to be issued,and gives no recourse to the courts for the person to fight it.yes I realize they will give you a hearing but that is only some bureaucrat hacks sitting in a chair making a decision for the government....there is a reason the RCMP lose so many impaired driving cases when they go to court sure you still go to court if you're charged with .08 simply because it's a criminal offense.

The other problem I have, is that they can charge you and give you all these heavy fines and suspensions using a simple hand-held Breathalyzer. They do not have to take you back to a police station and give you a true accurate Breathalyzer.

is there a reason why the RCMP want to get away from the true accurate Breathalyzer at the police station and they want to stay out of court.

of course there is, time and money and accuracy.

[Al Czervic]

I am sure some enterprising capitalist will or has already come up with a consumer version of the breathalizer.

ETA: http://www.martinrothonline.com/persona ... _guide.htm
http://stores.ebay.com/Breathalyzer-net
http://www.breathalyzer.net/consumer-breathalyzers.html
http://stores.ebay.ca/Breathalyzer-net

The thing is, if you dont want to be caught, charged, and/or have other penalties brought against you, dont drink and drive, period! Following this simple guideline will ensure you are able to drive to work and therefore will not impede you from earning a living. Whats the big deal!!!

You are correct....

http://www.news1130.com/news/local/arti ... -dui-rules

[Al Czervic]

is truly quite frightening, that a supposedly intelligent man such as yourself actually believes that nothing has really changed.

the .05% alcohol Law, has allowed extremely severe penalties to be issued,and gives no recourse to the courts for the person to fight it.yes I realize they will give you a hearing but that is only some bureaucrat hacks sitting in a chair making a decision for the government....there is a reason the RCMP lose so many impaired driving cases when they go to court sure you still go to court if you're charged with .08 simply because it's a criminal offense.

The other problem I have, is that they can charge you and give you all these heavy fines and suspensions using a simple hand-held Breathalyzer. They do not have to take you back to a police station and give you a true accurate Breathalyzer.

is there a reason why the RCMP want to get away from the true accurate Breathalyzer at the police station and they want to stay out of court.

of course there is, time and money and accuracy.

Please go back and re-read what I have written. I am NOT suggesting that things have not changed, what I am pointing out is all of the changes and also that in a few areas, very little has changed. No argument from me that there have been changes.

P.S. And whoever said I was “intelligent?”

[Merry]

I am sure some enterprising capitalist will or has already come up with a consumer version of the breathalizer.

ETA: http://www.martinrothonline.com/persona ... _guide.htm
http://stores.ebay.com/Breathalyzer-net
http://www.breathalyzer.net/consumer-breathalyzers.html
http://stores.ebay.ca/Breathalyzer-net

The thing is, if you dont want to be caught, charged, and/or have other penalties brought against you, dont drink and drive, period! Following this simple guideline will ensure you are able to drive to work and therefore will not impede you from earning a living. Whats the big deal!!!

The big deal is that either someone is impaired or they are not. If it has been determined that .08 is the level at which one becomes impaired, then as far as I'm concerned anyone blowing above that should lose their license for life, not just 90 days. However, that said, if they blow below that (and are therefore NOT impaired) they should not be subject to any penalty other than a warning that they are close to being impaired (when they blow between .05 and .08). BUT, if it is considered that one is impaired at the .05 level, then the law should be changed to make that the legal limit.
The point I'm trying to make is that a determination should be made as to what constitutes impaired (.08 or .05), and then serious punishments should be meted out to any who violate that level, but people who blow BELOW that level should not have to pay fines and have their driving privileges suspended because if they're not driving impaired then they haven't done anything wrong. But it doesn't seem right to me to say that if your below .08 your not impaired, but we're going to punish you anyway. If you ARE impaired when your blood alcohol level is between .05 and .08 then why the hell is the legal limit .08? It needs to be lowered. But if you're NOT impaired when your level is between .05 and .08 then why are you being treated as if your doing something wrong? Society cannot have it both ways. Either you ARE impaired above the .05 level, or you are not. Which is it?

[grumpydigger]

very little has changed. No argument from me that there have been changes.

P.S. And whoever said I was “intelligent?”

the changes have been massive.and the fact that is being proven over and over again that many of these police officers cannot handle the extra power that is given to them.

that is the power to destroy someone's life, because of a single drink.

unlike police officers when they're charged, citizens do not get suspended with pay.

it'll be interesting to see, what loopholes the police have found to protect their officers when one of them get nailed for .05.

[wthwyt]

After reviewing these changes Al Czervic, it will have no change in habits for me. I take a cab before and I will take a cab now. So BC general revue will not get a dime.

[my5cents]

For Social Drinkers. (on a first offence)
I am defining as social drinker as anyone who drinks and is under .08 percent blood alcohol level.
The .05 blood alcohol level has not, in any way changed. For the past 20 years if you were between .05 to .08 the RCMP issued a 24 hour roadside driving suspension. This is what the yellow light on a roadside breathalyzer or “warning” range was all about; being between .05 up to .08. The RCMP also had the option of impounding your car for those 24 hours as well, and naturally if you were over .08 you could face criminal charges.

I'm not sure when the limit for a 24 hour suspension went down, I didn't think it was 20 years ago, but you may, and quite probably are correct.

I'd like to point out that the 3 day prohibition is ONLY FOR THE FIRST TIME. If someone is caught over 50 mgs and below 80 mgs a second time it's 7 days and the admin and reinstatement fees are $550, and any subsequent times it's 30 days with the admin and reinstatement fees of $650, plus with any prohib of 30 days or more there is the responsible driver program that cost just under $900 plus an ignition interlock for one year, that's about $1750.

If you go 5 years clean, to can get another 3 day.

The vehicle "MAY" be impounded for a 3 day or 7 day prohib, but for 30 and more it "MUST" be impounded.

All that and you HAVEN"T blown over 80 mg.

So, conceivably you could get caught three times and every time you were well below the *80 mgs Criminal Limit (*which is really 100 mg [see below])
You would be paying:
Vehicle Towing and storage - $700 (approx)
Admin penalty - $400
DL reinstatement fee - $250
New DL - $31
Responsible driver course - $880
Ign Interlock -$1730
Total -$3,991

Naturally there is now $ 450 in related fines that go along with a 72 hour suspension, so that is an increase.

The other change is that in all cases of a roadside prohibition your driver's license is cancelled by Victoria. Unlike the 24 hour prohib, where you picked it up at the police station after 24 hours. A prohibited driver has to attend at a driver's license office and reinstate their license, the old one, no matter how many months or years was left on it, is voided. You pay a $31 fee for a new DL (yes on top of all the other fees) The new DL is only good for two years, not the normal 5 years.

So for me, if I got a prohibition today, my DL has 5 years left on it, which I just paid, I think $125 (it's an enhanced to cross the border), that's gone, so add $125 to the fines.

The other thing I'd like to point out is that a reading of 80 mgs is not an impaired charge. There are two basic charges under the criminal code. (forgetting causing injuries etc)
Over 80 mgs and Impaired Driving.
Actually "over 80 mgs" is not reality. There isn't a Crown Counsel in BC that would approve a charge of over 80 mgs, unless the reading was 100 mgs.

I don't know what you'd have to do to get a criminal charge in BC now.

The police can crank these out like speeding tickets, there is no court at all, their done.

If they can do all this (the fines, the vehicle seizure, course, interlock) without a trial. Why does the government let us dispute a measly speeding ticket ????

When the police were just taking away a DL and a vehicle for 24 hours and basically giving the average guy a break, not charging them with over 80 mgs or Impaired, the prohibition without a trial was reasonable.

When a cop can basically fine someone over $4000 without a trial they've overstepped their authority.

Yes, and there will be those who say "just don't drink and drive and you'll have nothing to worry about".

Scenario :
You are at home all evening watching a ball game. Your wife takes the car and goes to an event. You consume enough to be over 80 mgs during the evening. But that's OK you're not driving.
Wife comes home. She's tired and heads for bed.
You ask her if she brought in, from the car, your expensive camera that she took with her, no,,, she forgot it in the car.
She just getting undressed so you decide to go out to the car to get the camera.
As you get to your silver SUV that’s parked on the street in front of your house a silver SUV drives by quite fast.
You get the camera out of your car and close the door, just as an RCMP car pulls up behind your car.
You explain, but he "knows" you were the silver SUV he was trying to catch up with.
You tell him your wife will vouch for you. He says his wife would vouch that he was home all night too.

You don't get a trial

[Captain Awesome]

Summary? Social Drinkers are being held to the exact same standard today as they were before, if you are in the .05-.08 range you can expect a suspension no difference then you would have expected prior to the new regulations. The only change is that the suspension will increase from 24 hours to 72 hours and you will pay more in fines.

Absolutely correct. I see no reason for anybody to freak out.

[JLives]

I think the new law is a joke and just a cash grab. I'm just thankful I live within walking distance of so many places so I can have 2 beers with dinner and not risk losing my vehicle for 3 days.

[fvkasm2x]

I think the new law is a joke and just a cash grab. I'm just thankful I live within walking distance of so many places so I can have 2 beers with dinner and not risk losing my vehicle for 3 days.

No offense, but you shouldn't be driving after 2 beers within 1.5 hours. I'm a full grown man and I know my limit is 2 with dinner, because 3 causes me to be "slightly" impaired. As in, I can sense I have had a few beer. If I shouldn't drive with 3, you sure as hell can't. Unless you're built like Oprah or drink like a rock star.

[Al Czervic]

Summary? Social Drinkers are being held to the exact same standard today as they were before, if you are in the .05-.08 range you can expect a suspension no difference then you would have expected prior to the new regulations. The only change is that the suspension will increase from 24 hours to 72 hours and you will pay more in fines.

Absolutely correct. I see no reason for anybody to freak out.

I do think there are some things to worry about. For example the significant new penalties if the RCMP believe you are above .08 are very troubling and the new system is stacked so the RCMP is more likely to hit you with the 90 day suspension and related fines and impounding fees instead of actually charging you. After all why bother charging you when they can do far worse without the petty need for a trial (that will also inconvenience an RCMP officer and put his or her work on trial) ?


Given the numerous example of poor conduct lately by the RCMP and the lack of accountability in general shown by the force I do think this is a serious concern. I am hopeful that either the government will come to it’s senses (unlikely) or there will be a constitutional challenge. This one I believe even VanderZalm COULD win.

As far as for social drinkers I think the .05 to .08 range is no different then it was before it is, as stated previously, only an increase in the applied fees and penalties.

[JLives]

Well maybe I have a higher tolerance but 2 Coors Light with a steak dinner does not affect me in any way that would be detrimental to the public.