BC should use Norway's drunk driving laws

[Graphite]

Would this debate be considered a social concern topic? Has this thread been derailed?

[Donald G]

Like drunk drivers in Norway or Canada the path on this thread seems to wander on and off of the main road at times. The fact that drinking drivers injure and kill about 1,250 innocent mothers, fathers, sons and daughters each year in Canada, IMO, makes it both a social and legal concern.

[Treblehook]

All of this debate distracts from the rationale for enacting laws with penalties for driving while ones ability is impaired by alcohol or drugs, or for driving while one is significantly distracted [as when using a cell phone or texting] when driving. The statistics show these are deadly activities. The impaired driving and distracted driving laws were enacted to deter people from doing these things to reduce the carnage. It seems the tickets and fines being levied for distracted driving have not be effective to this point. Our legislators are increasing the penalty to include demerit points and discussing increasing the fines. What is the issue here? Do some people feel threatened because they like to drink and drive, or they like to use their cell phone to talk and/or text while driving. The daily concern should be: Am I going to be maimed or killed by somebody who insists on doing these things?

[Donald G]

To Treblehook ...

Or am I going to be completely immature and irresponsible enough to drink and drive or choose to drive while distracted by performing another function??

As far as I am concerned the fine should be $1,000.00 for distracted driving and $5,000.00 for driving while impaired. Plus a six month driving suspension and a red marker placed on your vehicle during the length of your suspension.

[wanderingman]

To Treblehook ...

Or am I going to be completely immature and irresponsible enough to drink and drive or choose to drive while distracted by performing another function??

As far as I am concerned the fine should be $1,000.00 for distracted driving and $5,000.00 for driving while impaired. Plus a six month driving suspension and a red marker placed on your vehicle during the length of your suspension.

the trouble with impaired is the COP should have to perform sobriety test like the us cops do,One person whom blows .08 could actually be 100% fine and the next person not so.Just because a person is .08 does not mean their falling down drunk
I think putting the entire fate of a driver on some mouth/breath activated device as chief, judge and jury is wrong
There need to be a physical field sobriety tests done before any impaired charges are given.

[zzontar]

To Treblehook ...

Or am I going to be completely immature and irresponsible enough to drink and drive or choose to drive while distracted by performing another function??

As far as I am concerned the fine should be $1,000.00 for distracted driving and $5,000.00 for driving while impaired. Plus a six month driving suspension and a red marker placed on your vehicle during the length of your suspension.

Distracted driving causes more collisions and deaths than impaired driving, so why do you want the one that causes less collisions and deaths to cost 5X as much as the other?

[kgcayenne]

Drunk driver – Take away his/her freedom
Driver using a mobile device – Take away the device. Well, take away the use of the device by way of forcing them to have a jammer installed in their vehicle to disallow transmission of any and all communication.

One more thing: Don’t give me that ‘oh what if there’s an emergency’ BS. We spent decades driving around without the ability to make a phone call whilst sitting on our *bleep* in a cars.

[zzontar]

Like drunk drivers in Norway or Canada the path on this thread seems to wander on and off of the main road at times. The fact that drinking drivers injure and kill about 1,250 innocent mothers, fathers, sons and daughters each year in Canada, IMO, makes it both a social and legal concern.

There are generally more innocent mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters killed by sober drivers who's driving is as dangerous as impaired drivers. Even if there were no impaired drivers, these people will still be out there maiming and killing... but let's not concern ourselves with that.

[zzontar]

Drunk driver – Take away his/her freedom
Driver using a mobile device – Take away the device. Well, take away the use of the device by way of forcing them to have a jammer installed in their vehicle to disallow transmission of any and all communication.

One more thing: Don’t give me that ‘oh what if there’s an emergency’ BS. We spent decades driving around without the ability to make a phone call whilst sitting on our *bleep* in a cars.

Do you think the penalties should be the same for all distracted driving?

[kgcayenne]

Ugh, I know, I know, I thought of that. I'm inclined to believe that a person who is going be distracted by a phone will be in the habit of putting any of their own activities ahead of the safety of others on the road. So, maybe it should. Maybe if some twinkie is applying mascara, she may be motivated to stop being a goof if her beloved phone abilities, including hands-free, were to be taken away. Maybe if some business narcissist who thinks he can eat a sloppy burger while driving with his knees were prohibited from even using his speaker phone, he may schedule his time better and not be distracted that way.

I could go on.

[zzontar]

Ugh, I know, I know, I thought of that. I'm inclined to believe that a person who is going be distracted by a phone will be in the habit of putting any of their own activities ahead of the safety of others on the road. So, maybe it should. Maybe if some twinkie is applying mascara, she may be motivated to stop being a goof if her beloved phone abilities, including hands-free, were to be taken away. Maybe if some business narcissist who thinks he can eat a sloppy burger while driving with his knees were prohibited from even using his speaker phone, he may schedule his time better and not be distracted that way.

I could go on.

What if you deem your distracted driving as necessary and unavoidable?

[kgcayenne]

Excuses would need to be presented just like they are now to get out of a ticket and/or other disciplinary driving measures.

[zzontar]

Excuses would need to be presented just like they are now to get out of a ticket and/or other disciplinary driving measures.

Having excuses work for you is usually dependent on the officer, not the law... which is obvious with the number of women I know who get out of tickets by the blinky eye or teary eye method. Do you think it should be law or up to the officer?

[kgcayenne]

I’ve never been an officer.

I’ve never been a lawmaker or a lawyer.

I have, however mourned death.

The first thing that comes to mind is officer first due to context, then law second. Isn’t that how traffic violations are handled now? It's been 20 years since I've had a violation ticket.

I’m not a cop-hater, so I’m not willing to engage in that debate, FYI.

[zzontar]

I’ve never been an officer.

I’ve never been a lawmaker or a lawyer.

I have, however mourned death.

The first thing that comes to mind is officer first due to context, then law second. Isn’t that how traffic violations are handled now? It's been 20 years since I've had a violation ticket.

I’m not a cop-hater, so I’m not willing to engage in that debate, FYI.

I agree, for example:

http://www.medicaldaily.com/kids-cars-1 ... nes-263995

Driving with children isn’t just slightly more dangerous; it’s a full 12 times more dangerous, according to the study. When researchers installed cameras in the cars of 12 families over a three-week period, they found talking on the phone only accounted for one percent of distractions. Distractions from children, meanwhile, accounted for 12 percent of all distractions. Over the course of an average 16-minute trip, parents that had kids present spent three minutes and 22 seconds with their eyes not on the road.

There can be someone with kids in the car who's not distracted, someone who talks on their phone while it's put down on speakerphone, and someone who's had a few drinks but is not impaired. Then there are the ones who's driving is impaired while their bodies are twisted around tending to kids in the backseat, or have their rearview mirror tilted down to constantly watch their kid in the back, or people who drive while staring at their phone, or who've had a few and are impaired. The ones who's driving is impaired should be the ones who suffer the consequences, not the ones who's driving is not impaired.