80 mg/l > 50 mg/l of EtOH

[gsxr guy]

These two issues are not related in the way you're implying.

Hypocritical is a guy being busted and convicted of possessing and/or smoking a joint and after court proceedings, the cop enjoying a beer with his buddies while watching a Jays game and the judge a snifter of brandy in his chambers or a fine Merlot over dinner after a long day of convicting others.

Getting behind the wheel while under the influence (of alcohol, prescription medication, pot etc) is a separate issue from the intoxicants themselves.

I agree.

 

[nobbie48]

In my theoretical scenario where they get to keep your car if convicted, if they gave it back to you before trial, most people would hide it or otherwise make it unavailable for seizure. If you didn't get convicted, they should give you the vehicle back for free (you didn't do anything wrong, let the government pay for the improper charge). It's just an idea on how to try to even out the pain among citizens. Again, this only works if the trial date is very shortly after the charge.

Even geared to income is problematic as many super rich people have little declared income and huge net worth. Net worth is far to complicated to assess. Losing the vehicle you were driving eliminates all of the hassle of establishing net worth or income, or whatever other metric is based on ability to pay.

Half the people surveyed said they lived paycheck to paycheck. A week or two of being without transportation could have serious consequences for an innocent party.

Seize the ownership but not the vehicle so it can't be sold. If convicted the vehicle is surrendered or a court order is issued and contempt of court is added to to any punishment if the vehicle doesn't show up. Sit in jail until it does and then start the punishment for the actual offense.

Innocent until proven guilty.

The problem is weak sentences after conviction and unrealistic court delays. Fix that.

If it's a one vehicle family living in the boonies everyone loses their job. A proper legal system only hammers the bad guy.

 

[GreyGhost]

Seize the ownership but not the vehicle so it can't be sold. If convicted the vehicle is surrendered or a court order is issued and contempt of court is added to to any punishment if the vehicle doesn't show up. Sit in jail until it does and then start the punishment for the actual offense.

Innocent until proven guilty.

The problem is weak sentences after conviction and unrealistic court delays. Fix that.

If it's a one vehicle family living in the boonies everyone loses their job. A proper legal system only hammers the bad guy.

I like your modification. Like I said, it was just the beginning of an idea.

 

[micelli.i]

OP here. Some suggest that if you smoke pot, there is still some residue in your system days afterwards. So, how can authorities tell when was the last time a person smoked pot?

 

[GreyGhost]

OP here. Some suggest that if you smoke pot, there is still some residue in your system days afterwards. So, how can authorities tell when was the last time a person smoked pot?

Feds are working on some type of cheek swab or saliva test. Theoretically, this will indicate the presence of drugs.

 

[Flywheel]

Don't take this as being a personal endorsement for DUI - to the contrary I'm very much against such, but I always question things from a science based standpoint.

And like others, when in the cage I'll have a single beer with dinner, but on the scoot - it's nada, none, zero.

Is the beer with dinner + driving vs no beer with dinner + riding a scientific standpoint? If mild intoxication statistically increases the chance of an accident regardless, then choosing a car over a motorcycle is more about mitigating the effects of a possible collision. It's not a dig at you personally. I think we all share similar sentiments, but upon examination I don't think it holds up.

 

[GreyGhost]

Is the beer with dinner + driving vs no beer with dinner + riding a scientific standpoint? If mild intoxication statistically increases the chance of an accident regardless, then choosing a car over a motorcycle is more about mitigating the effects of a possible collision. It's not a dig at you personally. I think we all share similar sentiments, but upon examination I don't think it holds up.

Choosing a car over a bike also reduces the processing load on your brain. In addition to mitigating the effects of a crash, driving makes you statistically less likely to get in a crash in the first place.

My theory is something along the lines of a bike is 4 times as likely to crash as a car, a drink increases your chance of crashing by 10%. Using a stone sober car driver as the baseline, a bike rider with a drink would now be at 4.4x the risk of a collision. If they had chosen to drive, the risk would only be 1.1x a sober driver. Obviously these are made up percentages, scientific data would probably support the trend, but I'm not sure where the actually percentages would lie.