Got a drunk arrested and off the road today | Page 3 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Got a drunk arrested and off the road today

Forum Sponsor
crankcall said:
Its been available here for quite some time, however, first they go off the pills, then off the wagon, then off the rails....

Its a horrible disease if you cant control it
Click to expand...
It doesn’t work for everyone. The fam has a couple of high functioning alcoholics that tried that treatment. Just made their faces, hands and chest go fire engine red once the boozing started.

I believe the dui punishments need some revision. Good people make mistakes, first time offenders with no aggravating circumstances really suffer compared to other violent crimes.

I think first time offenders ought to get punished, but also given an opportunity to learn and get their **** together without life altering consequences. 2nd time, aggravating circumstances … no mercy.
 
Mad Mike said:
It doesn’t work for everyone. The fam has a couple of high functioning alcoholics that tried that treatment. Just made their faces, hands and chest go fire engine red once the boozing started.

I believe the dui punishments need some revision. Good people make mistakes, first time offenders with no aggravating circumstances really suffer compared to other violent crimes.

I think first time offenders ought to get punished, but also given an opportunity to learn and get their **** together without life altering consequences. 2nd time, aggravating circumstances … no mercy.
Click to expand...
I partly agree especially on the first charge, a learning experience. The second charge says the perp is a poor student. The third labels him / her as a danger to society.

As a danger to society you can ban them from driving for life. They'll buy a car in a friend's name and still drive. If there is a pursuit they may feel they have nothing to lose and kill innocent others.

What do you do with a third striker? Normal punishment isn't likely to work.

In some jurisdictions the perp gets life in prison. While that might keep the third striker from offending again it really doesn't seem to stop others from following in the DUI footprints. It's also very expensive. If we go that route, that is business we could save money on by sending them to Mexico or China.

I don't know how many types of DUI drivers there are.

One might be "It's only a couple of miles from the bar to home" a second "No one is telling me what to do"and a third "I"m not that drunk".

Example one is plain stupid. Can it be cured?

Two and three have ego issues and few people want to accept they aren't as wonderful as they think they are. Those are the problem children.
 
nobbie48 said:
I partly agree especially on the first charge, a learning experience. The second charge says the perp is a poor student. The third labels him / her as a danger to society.

As a danger to society you can ban them from driving for life. They'll buy a car in a friend's name and still drive. If there is a pursuit they may feel they have nothing to lose and kill innocent others.

What do you do with a third striker? Normal punishment isn't likely to work.

In some jurisdictions the perp gets life in prison. While that might keep the third striker from offending again it really doesn't seem to stop others from following in the DUI footprints. It's also very expensive. If we go that route, that is business we could save money on by sending them to Mexico or China.

I don't know how many types of DUI drivers there are.

One might be "It's only a couple of miles from the bar to home" a second "No one is telling me what to do"and a third "I"m not that drunk".

Example one is plain stupid. Can it be cured?

Two and three have ego issues and few people want to accept they aren't as wonderful as they think they are. Those are the problem children.
Click to expand...
For two and three, permanent ankle monitor with built in camera. Paid for by the moron that can't make good choices. If the camera sees pedals, you go to jail for a year or more. If you cover the camera to drive, you go to jail for two years or more. It only takes occasional images when you are moving quickly (either gps or accelerometer integration to decide) so it doesn't intrude on privacy. Like a bail violation, you go to JP or judge and crown shows the evidence (pics, location, speed, etc) and jp/judge decides then and there whether you did what they accused you of and off you go to jail. Do not pass go, no stalling, no expensive lawyers to drag out a trial for years, you get 30 minutes to convince JP/judge why you weren't driving when the crown said you were.
 
GreyGhost said:
For two and three, permanent ankle monitor with built in camera. Paid for by the moron that can't make good choices. If the camera sees pedals, you go to jail for a year or more. If you cover the camera to drive, you go to jail for two years or more. It only takes occasional images when you are moving quickly (either gps or accelerometer integration to decide) so it doesn't intrude on privacy. Like a bail violation, you go to JP or judge and crown shows the evidence (pics, location, speed, etc) and jp/judge decides then and there whether you did what they accused you of and off you go to jail. Do not pass go, no stalling, no expensive lawyers to drag out a trial for years, you get 30 minutes to convince JP/judge why you weren't driving when the crown said you were.
Click to expand...
Second and third get hit hard now, those are the hardcore - like career or petty criminals, deterrents are not effective.

The everyday good guy/gal that makes a mistake suffers a huge penalty. If the punishment was aligned with other equally dangerous offences/mistakes I could accept that - but only if there are no aggravating circumstances.

For many the family takes a huge hit too, not just financially.

I can’t see it ever getting changed, the political will and political capital needed are just too great.
 
An honest person can't think like a criminal and therefore won't act like a criminal. A responsible driver is similar. All of our laws have been written by honest sober people which isn't all that much different from a cager writing a motorcycle manual.

TBH the odds of getting home safe while DUI are really in your favour. It isn't like Russian roulette. Alcohol dims the mind "I'm not that drunk. I can make it." Therefore a lot of people take the risk. The hard part is they take innocent victims with them when they play the odds.

One change I'd like to see made is sentencing:

If the sentence is a year in jail it is served a month a year for twelve years. It makes it harder to forget. You can still be a wage earner and contribute to society. The victim suffers for years or forever. Why does the perp get off sooner?
 
nobbie48 said:
An honest person can't think like a criminal and therefore won't act like a criminal. A responsible driver is similar. All of our laws have been written by honest sober people which isn't all that much different from a cager writing a motorcycle manual.

TBH the odds of getting home safe while DUI are really in your favour. It isn't like Russian roulette. Alcohol dims the mind "I'm not that drunk. I can make it." Therefore a lot of people take the risk. The hard part is they take innocent victims with them when they play the odds.

One change I'd like to see made is sentencing:

If the sentence is a year in jail it is served a month a year for twelve years. It makes it harder to forget. You can still be a wage earner and contribute to society. The victim suffers for years or forever. Why does the perp get off sooner?
Click to expand...
I was laughing that you think our politicians are "honest sober people". I like your sentencing idea.
 
nobbie48 said:
A responsible driver is similar. All of our laws have been written by honest sober people which isn't all that much different from a cager writing a motorcycle manual.
Click to expand...

You haven't hung out with politicians have you? Once the cameras are out of sight, the booze pours, and they all drive drunk home themselves. :ROFLMAO:
 
GreyGhost said:
I was laughing that you think our politicians are "honest sober people". I like your sentencing idea.
Click to expand...
Yeah, kinda of off the mark on that one. IIRC history has it that Sir John A's water pitcher had gin in it.

A neighbour used to attend parties at the PM's residence (PET) and was offered a joint. They were served on silver trays.

Still, too many of the righteous think that a brutal prison makes people better.
 
Grrr. On the upside, this pretty much wipes out the stupid being charged with DUI up to two hours after driving.


driving.ca

Ontario court ruling should be a big relief to impaired drivers

Superior Court gives a pass because defendant had made it to their own driveway
driving.ca driving.ca

“Justice Hourigan expressed concern that the majority ruling to acquit would result in impaired drivers now having a “sanctuary” if they pulled off the highway and onto private property when they spot a police cruiser.”

“This property need not be a place to which they have any connection or even a legal right to visit. It matters not that a police officer wished to conduct the random stop on a public highway. As long as the driver gets their vehicle onto a stretch of private property, sanctuary applies, and they are ‘home free,’” wrote Justice Hourigan.

“For drivers who are in the process of being pulled over as part of a random stop, if they can pull onto private property as the safe spot to stop their vehicle, arguably they too will have reached sanctuary. In many cases, this sanctuary will be fleeting, as the impaired driver will stay on the private property only for as long as the police cruiser is in the area. Once it is out of sight, the driver will be free to re-enter the public highway and continue to endanger public safety.”
 
Evoex said:
Wasn’t there recently legislation that allows police to pursue and demand breathalyzer tests even if you’re sitting on the couch?
Click to expand...
Yes and this seems to negate it. Justice Hourigan was against the verdict.

Who appointed the other clowns on the bench and how do we get this decision reversed?

All supreme courts screw up from time to time so what is the procedure? Is the decision like a Papal edict that can never be changed?
 
nobbie48 said:
Yes and this seems to negate it. Justice Hourigan was against the verdict.

Who appointed the other clowns on the bench and how do we get this decision reversed?

All supreme courts screw up from time to time so what is the procedure? Is the decision like a Papal edict that can never be changed?
Click to expand...
This was ontario court. Govt basically has to kick it up to federal court as this interpretation almost eliminates impaired driving charges. It wont take long for the drunks to all take advantage of this gaping hole.
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom