Ontario Bill 203-Blowing A Warning Over .05

[Malibook]

On May 1, 2009 new tougher penalties will be implemented in Ontario for drivers who blow a warning between .05 and .08.

Currently the penalty is a 12 hour suspension regardless of how many times and there is nothing on your driver's record.

First offence will be a 3 day suspension.

Second offence will be a 7 day suspension and the driver must attend a remedial alcohol education program.

Third offence will be a 30 day suspension, remedial alcohol treatment program, and the installation of an ignition interlock device.

These are not criminal offences but they will be kept on your driver's record and may affect your insurance.

.05 is literally a couple of drinks for many people.
I don't see this as an indication of impairment and a dangerous driver.

Since the punishment is effective immediately and based solely on a less accurate roadside test, there would seem to be no recourse or due process of law.
I expect to see some serious challenges to this law.

 

[nottyboi]

This province is really becoming a nanny like shithole. Is there ANY evidence that drivers in the .05 and .08 range are involved in a large number of accidents?

 

[alexmst]

Unless the province installs free devices in all bars so that people can check their own alcohol level when leaving, this new change is just more of a hassle for everyone.

 

[Malibook]

Unless the province installs free devices in all bars so that people can check their own alcohol level when leaving, this new change is just more of a hassle for everyone.

I think this should always have been mandatory.

How the hell is anyone supposed to have any reference on where they are at?
Based on some obscure article on a hypothetical 100 pound woman and 200 pound man?

 

[fuji]

.05 is literally a couple of drinks for many people. I don't see this as an indication of impairment and a dangerous driver.

You shouldn't be driving after "a couple of drinks" unless you've waited for the effects to wear off.

Since the punishment is effective immediately and based solely on a less accurate roadside test, there would seem to be no recourse or due process of law.

Driving is not a right.

 

[Cassini]

Unless the province installs free devices in all bars so that people can check their own alcohol level when leaving, this new change is just more of a hassle for everyone.

They won't do that. They would have a mess of court challenges based on the repeatability of the test.

I'm not even sure the road side test is all that reliable. I seem to recall a bunch of people recommending that if you even think you are going to get charged with drunk driving, make sure you force the police to do the more accurate blood test.

 

[Malibook]

Driving is not a right.

I don't recall claiming or implying that driving is a right.

People are supposed to have the right to defend themselves against alleged charges and full due process of the law.

 

[Malibook]

They won't do that. They would have a mess of court challenges based on the repeatability of the test.

I'm not even sure the road side test is all that reliable. I seem to recall a bunch of people recommending that if you even think you are going to get charged with drunk driving, make sure you force the police to do the more accurate blood test.

I am not saying these machines should be available as grounds for a defence.
I am saying that most people have no reference to know what their blood/alcohol level is and we should be allowed to know or at least have some reasonably accurate idea.

Failing a roadside breathalyzer leads to 2 more tests at the station on a much more accurate machine.
I don't think you can demand a blood test.

This new law is based only on the less accurate roadside machine.
They should at least make sure they are calibrated to err on the driver's side so people at .04 or so can't blow a warning.
They should be set to at least .06 to allow for some error.

 

[fuji]

People are supposed to have the right to defend themselves against alleged charges and full due process of the law.

So what due process is available to you when your car gets towed for illegal parking?

 

[STASH]

Jusy more bull shit crap from Madd Canada. They lie lie lie

They are a prohibitionist goup against any alcohol....yet they run this show unimpeded

see

www.getmadd.com

 

[Malibook]

So what due process is available to you when your car gets towed for illegal parking?

One must always weigh the odds of success when deciding the cost and likelihood of beating a charge.

What if your car was legally parked and got tagged and towed by mistake?
Do you think you deserve no chance for justice?

 

[nottyboi]

You shouldn't be driving after "a couple of drinks" unless you've waited for the effects to wear off.



Driving is not a right.

But dure process is (was). More erosion of our civil liberties and risking abuse of citizen by our troubled police force.

 

[pimpin_civic]

I understand how MADD is completely against drunk drivers.

But the province has to understand that not everyone is the same.

I heard that one beer, is enough to put anyone over the limit.

 

[fuji]

One must always weigh the odds of success when deciding the cost and likelihood of beating a charge.

What if your car was legally parked and got tagged and towed by mistake?
Do you think you deserve no chance for justice?

I'm just pointing out that in both cases your car is gone up front and any justice you achieve is coming later. Your problem seems to be the immediate suspension of your license. Well, how is that different that the immediate towing of your car?

I'm sure in the case of the suspension you could appeal it and have it removed from your record if it was in error. You will be without your license during the appeal, of course, but if you win at least it would come off your record.

 

[LateComer]

I understand how MADD is completely against drunk drivers.

But the province has to understand that not everyone is the same.

I heard that one beer, is enough to put anyone over the limit.

It depends on your weight and gender. According to this calculator a 190 lb man can drink three beers in one hour and still be under .05. I stick to the one light (4%) beer per hour rule and have never had a problem.

http://www.insure.com/articles/carinsurance/blood-alcohol-calculator.html

Edit: That calculator is for American beer. 3 American beers = 2 Canadian (5%) beers.

 

[Malibook]

I'm just pointing out that in both cases your car is gone up front and any justice you achieve is coming later. Your problem seems to be the immediate suspension of your license. Well, how is that different that the immediate towing of your car?

People are being sentenced before having their day in court and being convicted.

If you think having a car towed is somehow precedent setting and makes this okay, well good for you.

 

[fuji]

If you think having a car towed is somehow precedent setting and makes this okay, well good for you.

It does seem to set a precedent, doesn't it? Anyway you haven't persuaded anybody that there's any harm here. Driving is not a right. You lose your license on the spot and anything worse that happens to you you can fix in court.

 

[Malibook]

It does seem to set a precedent, doesn't it?

I'm not sure how they got away with this bullshit but I highly doubt that it had anything to do with tow trucks.

 

[Malibook]

Anyway you haven't persuaded anybody that there's any harm here. Driving is not a right. You lose your license on the spot and anything worse that happens to you you can fix in court.

I would hope you are not one of these preachers who doesn't drink and/or doesn't even have a car.

Just like the ones who never get fucked but give someone shit for getting a girl pregnant.

 

[fuji]

I would hope you are not one of these preachers who doesn't drink and/or doesn't even have a car.

Just like the ones who never get fucked but give someone shit for getting a girl pregnant.

.... and you have no point to make .....

I guess we can conclude that while you don't like the law you actually can't find any fault with it, otherwise you would have responded to my point.

You lose your license at the roadside. That's the same as today. You then get your day in court. Just like today. Any long-term impact on you is decided in court. Short-term it's not a lot different than having to go get your car from the pound.

I just don't see what your point is honestly.