'Most drivers' stopped by police will likely be tested for drunk driving: RCMP

[welfare]

Originally Posted by Great68

This is from the bill that received assent, not the proposed bill you're reading from.

Government Bill (House of Commons) C-46 (42-1) - Royal Assent - An Act to amend the Criminal Code (offences relating to conveyances) and to make consequential amendments to other Acts - Parliament of Canada

Ah yes,thank you.
Definitely just a matter of time though. Once there is the technology to accurately measure impairment.
This bill is laying the groundwork for it for sure.

[Great68]

I would welcome the technology to measure actual impairment.

Not this per se 2-5 nanograms bullshit, measured by device with a 15% false positive rate.

[welfare]

personally, i think this random testing is overreach.
but at the same time i wouldn't be entirely opposed to zero tolerance, excluding some necessary prescriptions.
kind of an odd stance i guess.

[BaoTurbo]

They passed this already right? So no one can really argue anymore. Government wins?

[The_AK]

Originally Posted by Bouncing Bettys

I'm surprised no one has posted on this story in recent days, given the VI discussion.



Speeding? Blow into this device. Is that the stock ride hight? Blow into this device.

Sober or even just a drink with dinner, better hope you don't blow a false positive.

This is my biggest concern. One beer from post work dinner and you're at risk of being sent to prison at the police officers discretion. That AND a VI.

[Great68]

Originally Posted by welfare

personally, i think this random testing is overreach.
but at the same time i wouldn't be entirely opposed to zero tolerance, excluding some necessary prescriptions.
kind of an odd stance i guess.

For a drug like Cannabis that can remain traceable in the body for up to a month how would that work?

[Great68]

Originally Posted by The_AK

This is my biggest concern. One beer from post work dinner and you're at risk of being sent to prison at the police officers discretion. That AND a VI.

Prison only happens if you blow over 0.08 and police decide to charge criminally.

Unless you're a midget, one beer from post work dinner shouldn't put you anywhere near that.

[white rocket]

Originally Posted by Great68

I would welcome the technology to measure actual impairment.

Not this per se 2-5 nanograms bullshit, measured by device with a 15% false positive rate.

Originally Posted by Great68

For a drug like Cannabis that can remain traceable in the body for up to a month how would that work?

My concern from the jump. The measurement of BAC has been around for decades so there is now a base metric to gauge with science to back it up. From what I understand there is nothing even close to that for THC level readings yet it's legal now so policing must begin. Leaving it up to the officers discretion is way too much of a dice role as that officer may base your impairment on other factors, especially now that they can "test" at will. At least with a regulated device that produces a truly accurate result it can be left at that and not some cunt cop tryna be a hero.

Tolerance is another factor as well. Since the BAC measurement is in place and solid your tolerance doesn't matter. BAC is BAC whether you are walking around looking sober after 10 beers or stumbling after 2 beers. How will that rule translate to THC? (I wonder). And for users of THC, some would be considered intoxicated 24 hours a day as they use constantly. Medical patients are a whole other conversation but can be grouped into this from a tolerance standpoint. Basically a whole group of people should just not drive anymore at all.

[Great68]

Originally Posted by white rocket

My concern from the jump. The measurement of BAC has been around for decades so there is now a base metric to gauge with science to back it up. From what I understand there is nothing even close to that for THC level readings yet it's legal now so policing must begin. Leaving it up to the officers discretion is way too much of a dice role as that officer may base your impairment on other factors, especially now that they can "test" at will. At least with a regulated device that produces a truly accurate result it can be left at that and not some cunt cop tryna be a hero

Tolerance is another factor as well. Since the BAC measurement is in place and solid your tolerance doesn't matter. BAC is BAC whether you are walking around looking sober after 10 beers or stumbling after 2 beers. How will that rule translate to THC? (I wonder). And for users of THC, some would be considered intoxicated 24 hours a day as they use constantly. Medical patients are a whole other conversation but can be grouped into this from a tolerance standpoint. Basically a whole group of people should just not drive anymore at all.

You must have missed the previous page of this thread, but police cannot randomly test for Cannabis, only alcohol.

The concern is that the "limits" imposed on cannabis can provide false positives on people who haven't touched the drug in days, even weeks.
Police are well trained in recognizing impairment, I would far rather trust their judgement to determine impairment than some machine that has proven to be inaccurate. In fact many police departments have decided that they will not use the machines and still use drug recognition experts to determine impairment, Vancouver Police being one of them.

And for users of THC, some would be considered intoxicated 24 hours a day as they use constantly. Medical patients are a whole other conversation but can be grouped into this from a tolerance standpoint. Basically a whole group of people should just not drive anymore at all.

If you actually use cannabis you would know that's ridiculous, no you are not impaired days after smoking a joint.

[welfare]

Originally Posted by Great68

For a drug like Cannabis that can remain traceable in the body for up to a month how would that work?

the technology isn't there yet, like you'd mentioned. but if history is any indicator, it's that if there's a market for something we'll find a way to produce it.

[HansonBoy]

Originally Posted by inv4zn

The comments section on the article for this on FB was filled with cancer. People claiming it violates their charter of rights...What other reason is there to oppose this other than "I drink and drive"?

In 14 years of driving, I've been pulled over 4 times, twice because the officer couldn't see my temp license properly. For someone who has been affected by drunk driving, I'll gladly sit through the minor inconvenience of having to blow into a machine to get drunk drivers off the road.

I don't steal, doesn't mean i'm okay with getting patted down every time I leave a store.

[twitchyzero]

Originally Posted by HansonBoy

I don't steal, doesn't mean i'm okay with getting patted down every time I leave a store.

you make it sound like every time you insert a key you have to blow

[HansonBoy]

Originally Posted by twitchyzero

you make it sound like every time you insert a key you have to blow

The point is that the whole "im innocent and have nothing to hide, so neither should everyone else!" argument doesn't always fly. At least he has a personal reason to hate drunk driving, I get that, but perhaps better examples would be recent debates about government agencies eavesdropping on your calls, or hacking your emails. Some people say they have nothing to hide, so they are all for it. Thats what im against.

[underscore]

Originally Posted by HansonBoy

I don't steal, doesn't mean i'm okay with getting patted down every time I leave a store.

You walk through the anti-theft sensors though.

[twitchyzero]

all i can say is, don't give them a reason to pull you over

granted ive only been driving for around 15 years and not 40+, but it hasn't happened to me yet

and each road block interaction so far has been maybe 5 seconds long, tops

[mikemhg]

If anyone doesn't think this isn't another method of a cash grab by the RCMP, you are sorely mistaken.

[SolidPenguin]

So much misinformation...

The only "False positive" you can get is with mouth alcohol, which unless you've consumed alcohol within the previous 5 minutes will give a falsely high reading. Mouth alcohol dissipates within several minutes from last consumption.

Thats why when a demand is given, they also ask when was your last drink. If its within 15 minutes of the test, they will wait the 15 minutes to eliminate any chance of mouth alcohol.

And the amount of time this would take is under 1 minute, if you arent mucking about.

Literally, its
1) demand read (2 sentences)
2) blow into the machine (if you can sustain a normal exhale for 3-5 seconds you will have zero issues)
3) another 5 seconds for the result.

[twitchyzero]

Originally Posted by mikemhg

If anyone doesn't think this isn't another method of a cash grab by the RCMP, you are sorely mistaken.

kinda hard to set up more road blocks/pull more people over when you're stretched thin on manpower and don't even have a partner half the time

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/rcm...nder-1.4954015

[danned]

can you just wash your mouth after you consume alcohol?

[320icar]

Originally Posted by danned

can you just wash your mouth after you consume alcohol?

Does washing your mouth clean your blood?

[GS8]

Originally Posted by danned

can you just wash your mouth after you consume alcohol?

Use Listerine

[welfare]

What about the handful of pennies "trick"?
Go on. Put those dirty pennies in your mouth.

[inv4zn]

Originally Posted by HansonBoy

I don't steal, doesn't mean i'm okay with getting patted down every time I leave a store.

As long as you don't wear balaclavas when you're shopping, you won't get frisked. Same thing.

Also stealing shit doesn't have the possible outcome of loss of innocent lives.

[Bouncing Bettys]

As an update to these new laws:

https://globalnews.ca/news/4832762/i...reath-samples/
Police in Canada can now demand breath samples in bars, at home
It may sound unbelievable, but Canada’s revised laws on impaired driving could see police demand breath samples from people in bars, restaurants, or even at home. And if you say no, you could be arrested, face a criminal record, ordered to pay a fine, and subjected to a driving suspension.

You could be in violation of the impaired driving laws even two hours after you’ve been driving. Now, the onus is on drivers to prove they weren’t impaired when they were on the road.

“It’s ridiculous, it’s basically criminalizing you having a drink at your kitchen table,” Paul Doroshenko, a Vancouver criminal defence lawyer who specializes in impaired driving cases, told Global News.

“If you start to drink after you get home, the police show up at your door, they can arrest you, detain you, take you back to the (police station) and you can be convicted because your blood alcohol concentration was over 80 milligrams (per 100 millilitres of blood) in the two hours after you drove.”

Changes to Section 253 of the Criminal Code of Canada took effect in December giving police greater powers to seek breath samples from drivers who might be driving while impaired.

Under the new law, police officers no longer need to have a “reasonable suspicion” the driver had consumed alcohol. Now, an officer can demand a sample from drivers for any reason at any time.

While many Canadians have heard about that part of the new legislation, lawyers said the two-hour provision has gone unreported.

“The public has completely missed this one,” said Joseph Neuberger, a Toronto criminal defence lawyer.

He described a scenario in which someone has gone home and watches a hockey game, enjoys a few beers, and gets a knock on the door from police, who received a tip about someone in the house who was driving a vehicle suspiciously.

“The person answers the door and they say, ‘Sir, we’ve had a complaint about your driving, we need you to provide a sample,” said Neuberger, noting if the person failed to provide the sample it would likely lead to arrest.

“It’s a serious erosion of civil liberties,” said Toronto criminal defence lawyer Michael Engel, whose practice focuses almost exclusively on impaired driving cases.

Engel said someone could be unjustly prosecuted. If a disgruntled business associate or spouse called police with a complaint and an officer went to investigate at the persons’ home or place of business, police could demand a breath sample.

“Husbands or wives in the course of separations would drop the dime on their partner,” Engel said, describing the potential for the law’s abuse by those calling police out of spite, for example.

“It casts the net too wide. It’s going to potentially criminalize innocent behavior.”

In an instance where someone was drinking in a public place, Doroshenko said it would be hard for someone to prove they weren’t impaired when they were driving earlier.

“If [the police] come and find you at the restaurant they can take you out of the restaurant despite the fact you’ve been drinking at the restaurant, maybe you weren’t going to drive away,” he said, arguing the rules are excessive.

“It is profoundly stupid, so most people assume it can’t be. But that’s what the law is now, you will see it happen — I guarantee it.”

The federal government brought in the revised law in an effort to reduce fatalities on roads.

“Impaired driving is the leading criminal cause of death and injury in Canada,” said Minister of Justice and Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould in December.

“I believe these reforms will result in fewer road deaths and fewer Canadian families devastated by the effects of an impaired driver. This is one of the most significant changes to the laws related to impaired driving in more than 40 years and is another way that we are modernizing the criminal justice system.”

While criminal lawyers predict the new law will be challenged, likely through appeal courts and even to the Supreme Court of Canada, they expect that process will take several years. In the meantime, they say drivers are vulnerable to unfair arrests and prosecution.

“We’re in a brave new world now,” said Engel.

I haven't had a chance to look into this, but this really seems to have potential to hurt innocent people.

[BlackV62K2]