17 drunk driving cases tossed because of police.

[Trigger69]

I think its pretty simple. Those that drink too much and drive a vehicle on the roadways endanger the rest of us. I am all for the police using what means they have available to them to rid our road ways from these people. The cops are not the problem here, after all they have been given the "power" to issue IRP's by our government. Those of you that feel this is a violation of sorts you need to channel that to the proper people who can make change. Until then I say let the cops use what they have.
I would like to pose a question to all the neh sayers out there. Imagine if you had a loved one killed by a drunk driver and the attending cop does his job and crosses all of the "t's" and dots all of the "i's". The accused hires a high priced lawyer and goes to trial and for some reason, a loop hole if you will, he or she gets off. Is that really just? I say NO! I say the bad case law that has been created for what ever reason leaves enough for an accused, who is actually guilty to get off. This is not justice its actually a miscarrage of justice. Remember the accused here is actually guilty of killing someone.
I am not suggesting that anyone driving drunk and kills someone should be given an IRP. I am suggesting that the mere thought of getting an IRP may make a person think for one second and reconsider driving when they really shouldnt be. If this is the case, and I have seen it so it is so. I say good on the IRP and all that issue them and created them.
Now those that say the road side screening device is not accurate. To that I say I am not convinced. I have given samples and have passed everytime I was asked. I suggest to all of you that are going down that road, rethink it if you really do not understand the science behind them and are relying on the media and word of mouth. A word to the wise on that, people tend to lie when they are telling stories, especially if the story makes them look like they did something wrong.
A fitting end to this post would have to be, if you go out for the night and are planning on drinking, plan ahead and arrange a ride home. If you find yourself out and have consumed too much then call a cab or a ride home program availalbe at any pub, bar etc. Its all about being responsible for yourself and all that are around you.

[simnut]

I think its pretty simple. Those that drink too much and drive a vehicle on the roadways endanger the rest of us.

DITTO!!!!!

I am all for the police using what means they have available to them to rid our road ways from these people. The cops are not the problem here, after all they have been given the "power" to issue IRP's by our government. Those of you that feel this is a violation of sorts you need to channel that to the proper people who can make change. Until then I say let the cops use what they have.

Again, I fully agree with you! As you can tell by my signature line, I for one, DO NOT have issues, or blame the officers on the road doing their job and using the IRP's.....it is their boss, the government.

I would like to pose a question to all the neh sayers out there. Imagine if you had a loved one killed by a drunk driver and the attending cop does his job and crosses all of the "t's" and dots all of the "i's". The accused hires a high priced lawyer and goes to trial and for some reason, a loop hole if you will, he or she gets off. Is that really just? I say NO! I say the bad case law that has been created for what ever reason leaves enough for an accused, who is actually guilty to get off. This is not justice its actually a miscarrage of justice. Remember the accused here is actually guilty of killing someone.

The number of impaired drivers getting "off", is actually lower than a lot of people may realize. In 2010-2011, there was a 84% conviction rate for the impaired driving charges that went to court in Canada......84%!!! This is the highest conviction rate of any criminal activity that Stats Can monitors. That is pretty good performance ..... I DO have an issue however, with the penalties that are issued or reduced due to some case law and soft hearted judges.

I am not suggesting that anyone driving drunk and kills someone should be given an IRP. I am suggesting that the mere thought of getting an IRP may make a person think for one second and reconsider driving when they really shouldnt be. If this is the case, and I have seen it so it is so. I say good on the IRP and all that issue them and created them.

You can be rest assured that if someone drives impaired and kills or injures, or is even caught for the second or third time...will be processed criminally! But I don't think it's the "fear" of the IRP's, that are preventing or lowering the number of impaired drivers on the road. 2011 showed the highest police reported occurrences of impaired operation of a vehicle/vessel since 2002......over 3000 more than 2010! If the IRP's were "scaring" drivers....why is that number climbing? Quite simple in my opinion....more officer hours on the road....more of those drivers getting caught.

Now those that say the road side screening device is not accurate. To that I say I am not convinced. I have given samples and have passed everytime I was asked. I suggest to all of you that are going down that road, rethink it if you really do not understand the science behind them and are relying on the media and word of mouth.

The ASD's may be accurate when used in "laboratory" type conditions...where all parameters can be controlled. But, as you may well understand, this isn't possible on the road. Here is a good read:

http://forcon.ca/learning/approved_inst.html

There are many variables that can affect the reading the ASD gives....even to the point that if you have a slight fever, your reading will be higher than if having a normal body temperature. The machines need to be used in a set ambient temperature range......having mouthwash or a drink just before will affect it and so on. It is all these "parameters" that a driver has the right to make sure are met....and that right is not there with the appeal process that is now in place with the IRP's. Anytime there is a "human" involved, checks and balances need to be in place to make sure mistakes are not being made. I am closely involved with a case right now where procedure was blown right out of the water, and the only way to "fight" it is to take it to the Supreme Court of BC! Sure, it only involves a 24 hour prohibition, but the appeal process (the OSMV) is the same as if it were and of the administrative sanctions here in BC. Here is the kicker...well....a couple of kicks. The driver involved....EVEN AFTER the OSMV was notified that the case was filed in court....made the driver serve a 4 month suspension!!!! And here is something kind of funny.....if the Supreme Court of BC finds in "favor" of the driver, all the judge can do is ASK the OSMV to relook at the case! The highest court in BC cannot TELL the OSMV to change their decision. THIS is the issue I have with this whole IRP thing!!!!

A word to the wise on that, people tend to lie when they are telling stories, especially if the story makes them look like they did something wrong.
A fitting end to this post would have to be, if you go out for the night and are planning on drinking, plan ahead and arrange a ride home. If you find yourself out and have consumed too much then call a cab or a ride home program availalbe at any pub, bar etc. Its all about being responsible for yourself and all that are around you.

I fully agree!!! If you are going to go out and party, make arrangements....my family and your family drive on the same roads as those drunks!!! But remember, in BC, we ARE allowed to have a BAC of .05 and under...and legally drive. It is when you are in this range of BAC or close to .05.....that is when the grey areas start!

[Donald G]

So our learned men in black have determined that there is a difference between checking all of the machines and then completing all of the documents and alternating between checking a machine and filling out a document, even though there was no suggestion whatever that any individual machine was not checked and found accurate ... lord save us from legal theorists.

[Donald G]

To simnut ...

You sure do not like being called to account for your drinking and driving do you? Page after page of why you should not have been pulled off the road for drinking and driving even though you admit to doing so. It is rather like professing the ability to suck and blow at the same time.

[diggerdick]

called to account for your drinking and driving

What annoys me, are people that want to make drunk driving into a civil money grab.
With police accountability,and the court systems removed from the equation.

And then get on their self-righteous high horse pointing their finger like an all-knowing government clown.

The system was designed the way it was, because police were not intelligent enough or qualified to make a decision to prosecute any citizen.

And the citizens who believe that they are,are merely doing their bidding for their government masters with no respect for Canadian rights and freedoms.

[jerome2877]

So our learned men in black have determined that there is a difference between checking all of the machines and then completing all of the documents and alternating between checking a machine and filling out a document, even though there was no suggestion whatever that any individual machine was not checked and found accurate ... lord save us from legal theorists.

You may be right, they may have calibrated each device properly. The problem is they were not follwing the procedures and were being lazy, so why wouldn't they continue there lack of respect for procedure and their laziness and not calibrate each device?

When your relying on the readings of these toys to punish someone who could lose their job, house or more, you had better be damn sure that at the very least, all proper procedures were followed!

How bout this, if a hospitals sterilizing procedures were breached similarly to this, would you feel comfortable having an operation done using those questionable instruments?

[jerome2877]

To simnut ...

You sure do not like being called to account for your drinking and driving do you? Page after page of why you should not have been pulled off the road for drinking and driving even though you admit to doing so. It is rather like professing the ability to suck and blow at the same time.

Hmm, I don't recall simnut ever referring to himself drinking and driving. His story if you paid any attention (obviously not.. you must be an adjudicator for the OSMV ) was about someone he knows and in fact they were NOT drinking and driving! If I recall correctly they were in an accident and consumed alcohol after the accident but were still given a 24 hour by the cop who wasn't even there.

I don't think you know what happens when you assume, do you? lol

[goatboy]

Hmm, I don't recall simnut ever referring to himself drinking and driving. His story if you paid any attention (obviously not.. you must be an adjudicator for the OSMV ) was about someone he knows and in fact they were NOT drinking and driving! If I recall correctly they were in an accident and consumed alcohol after the accident but were still given a 24 hour by the cop who wasn't even there.

I don't think you know what happens when you assume, do you? lol

Oh right, that was the story where the driver "claims" to not have had anything to drink prior to the crash but then thought it might be a good idea to have a beer right after. Now I remember.

[simnut]

To simnut ...

You sure do not like being called to account for your drinking and driving do you? Page after page of why you should not have been pulled off the road for drinking and driving even though you admit to doing so. It is rather like professing the ability to suck and blow at the same time.

You are doing SUCH a good job of assuming yourself....see how easy it is??

[simnut]

Oh right, that was the story where the driver "claims" to not have had anything to drink prior to the crash but then thought it might be a good idea to have a beer right after. Now I remember.

Ok Goatboy, see....you are assuming!!! Please read the "other" thread!

[Trigger69]

called to account for your drinking and driving

What annoys me, are people that want to make drunk driving into a civil money grab.
With police accountability,and the court systems removed from the equation.

And then get on their self-righteous high horse pointing their finger like an all-knowing government clown.

The system was designed the way it was, because police were not intelligent enough or qualified to make a decision to prosecute any citizen.

And the citizens who believe that they are,are merely doing their bidding for their government masters with no respect for Canadian rights and freedoms.

I could not disagree with you more and I am not doing anyone`s bidding. The way I see the IRP system is pretty simple and I do not buy all the BS about cops not being intelligent enough or the ASD`s only working in a lab setting...to me that is all you and others doing your own bidding on something you THINK you understand and really do not.
The IRP`s are a systematic approach to getting drunk drivers off of the road in an efficient manner. Does this make money for the gov`t, damn right its does and I say good on someone in that same gov`t for having the balls to create such a process. Its about time people pay for their stupid choices and not make the all mighty tax payer pay for it by putting them in jail or the cost of an expensive trial. I say good on the gov`t and the cops for dishing out the IRP`s to the people that are drunk and caught driving when an IRP is applicable. Maybe you should really worry about yourself and not something your are only seeing one side of because you are bitter. Open your eyes and realize the bad case law and the soft judges are the real problem here as well as the moron who drives drunk in the 1st place.

[zzontar]

There has never been a case of any sort where the person charged has actually been innocent. I don't even know why when the death penalty is brought up, people say what about the ones proven innocent afterwards? Ha! As if anyone could actually be innocent when the idea of being charged for whatever they were charged for is a good idea.

[Donald G]

TO simnut ...

The point of the matter is the same regardless of who was taken off the road for drinking and driving. Drinking and driving is dangerous and contributes to the death of about 1,250 innocent mothers, fathers and children each year across Canada. Arguing over whether an identified drinking driver should be actually found to have been drinking and driving or not is, in my opinion, the same as attempting to justify the deaths of so many innocent people in the name of the rights of drinking drivers to escape detection and consequences for their actions. This is my last post regarding the point under discussion.

[goatboy]

There has never been a case of any sort where the person charged has actually been innocent. I don't even know why when the death penalty is brought up, people say what about the ones proven innocent afterwards? Ha! As if anyone could actually be innocent when the idea of being charged for whatever they were charged for is a good idea.

Luckily, no one is charged with anything when they receive an IRP then, isn't it? All they receive is a monetary penalty and a suspension of a privilege that they had to earn in the first place. You're arguing apples and oranges. If you don't like the system you're more than welcome to not participate in it. Driving is not a right, is it?

[Donald G]

To Trigger69 ...

I agree with any number of your comments regarding drining and driving and the right of society to remove such people from the road using any reasonable means given them. Those commenting who can not accurately determine their own MAXIMUM alcohol content without being tested by the police should not be driving after drinking. Any normally intelligent person who can count up to 100 can easily determine their BTA reading by knowing their sex, their weight, the accurate amount consumed, the class of liquor consumed and the time period over which the beverage is consumed.