MADD With Power

[Locutus]

The NDP is proposing a bill that would allow cops to test drivers' alcohol levels without having any reasonable grounds.

video: MADD With Power - Small Dead Animals

Another reason while the dippers won't be around long in opposition. A good fight between them and the libs is good for Canada. ;-)

 

[BornRuff]

The NDP is proposing a bill that would allow cops to test drivers' alcohol levels without having any reasonable grounds.

video: MADD With Power - Small Dead Animals

Another reason while the dippers won't be around long in opposition. A good fight between them and the libs is good for Canada. ;-)

I don't see how this would be all that bad. It just really closes a loophole that allows some drunk drivers to get off the hook even if they are proven to be over the legal limit.

 

[karrie]

I don't see how this would be all that bad. It just really closes a loophole that allows some drunk drivers to get off the hook even if they are proven to be over the legal limit.

It's bad because we have the right not to be subjected to police searches without cause.

 

[petros]

The NDP is proposing a bill that would allow cops to test drivers' alcohol levels without having any reasonable grounds.

video: MADD With Power - Small Dead Animals

Another reason while the dippers won't be around long in opposition. A good fight between them and the libs is good for Canada. ;-)

Down home Conservatives in Saskatchewan introduced the harshest impaired driving laws in Canada yesterday.

Fu*cking Cons bringing down the man but still not good enough for MADD.

http://regina.ctvnews.ca/saskatchewan-tightens-rules-on-drunk-driving-1.1532293

 

[BornRuff]

It's bad because we have the right not to be subjected to police searches without cause.

Well, the charter states "Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure."

I think you could make a very strong argument that having to blow into a device wouldn't qualify as "unreasonable search".

If you are worried about police abusing their power, this really wouldn't give them any more opportunity than they already do. If they wanted to make you take a breathalyzer just because they don't like you or whatever illicit reason you may think, they can already do that right now just by saying that they thought they smelt alcohol or they thought you were acting strange. With the laws against driving while high, they can even take you back to the station for drug tests.

 

[karrie]

Well, the charter states "Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure."

I think you could make a very strong argument that having to blow into a device wouldn't qualify as "unreasonable search".

If you are worried about police abusing their power, this really wouldn't give them any more opportunity than they already do. If they wanted to make you take a breathalyzer just because they don't like you or whatever illicit reason you may think, they can already do that right now just by saying that they thought they smelt alcohol or they thought you were acting strange. With the laws against driving while high, they can even take you back to the station for drug tests.

I think being pulled over to see if you're committing a crime, is the unreasonable part, not the blowing in a device. Law abiding citizens should not be subjected to police intervention just to make sure they are in fact being law abiding citizens. Law enforcement is not a fishing expedition.

 

[petros]

The road blocks are used to look for more than just impaired drivers. It's just a great excuse to abuse powers and go beyond.

 

[grumpydigger]

The madd fanatics can not be trusted and the ndp are just trying to get cheap votes by doing this....... in their eyes anyone who does not conform and believe in made up statistics is evil and must be made to submit to the propaganda
​

 

[taxslave]

AnD tomorrow they will just enter your house Just to see if you are doing anything wrong.

 

[Zipperfish]

Well, the charter states "Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure."

I think you could make a very strong argument that having to blow into a device wouldn't qualify as "unreasonable search".

If you are worried about police abusing their power, this really wouldn't give them any more opportunity than they already do. If they wanted to make you take a breathalyzer just because they don't like you or whatever illicit reason you may think, they can already do that right now just by saying that they thought they smelt alcohol or they thought you were acting strange. With the laws against driving while high, they can even take you back to the station for drug tests.

It's a search for no reason, so I would say it's an unreasonable search.

MADD is a bunch of prohibitionist zealots who are so uptight you couldn't get a pin up their a r s e with a jackhammer.

I joined DAMM....Drunks Against MADD Mothers.

 

[BornRuff]

I think being pulled over to see if you're committing a crime, is the unreasonable part, not the blowing in a device. Law abiding citizens should not be subjected to police intervention just to make sure they are in fact being law abiding citizens. Law enforcement is not a fishing expedition.

If you are upset with the concept of Ride checks in general, that is a separate issue.

 

[taxslave]

MADD and their legislative zealot brethren have taken all the fun out of socializing. Especially in rural areas where there are no busses or taxis. Community dances are just about a thing of the past since everyone is afraid to have a drink.

If you are upset with the concept of Ride checks in general, that is a separate issue.

More like upset with unwarranted searches. Seat belt checks are the same idea. It is just an excuse for police to go probing in your vehicle to see if they can hand out a fine.

 

[BornRuff]

It's a search for no reason, so I would say it's an unreasonable search.

MADD is a bunch of prohibitionist zealots who are so uptight you couldn't get a pin up their a r s e with a jackhammer.

I joined DAMM....Drunks Against MADD Mothers.

This isn't really just an NDP issue. The Conservatives have also talked quite a bit about being much harsher on drinking and driving.

As far as the "search for no reason" issue goes, their right to perform spot checks like Ride is already well established. This is just another tool that is part of the same program.

 

[taxslave]

This isn't really just an NDP issue. The Conservatives have also talked quite a bit about being much harsher on drinking and driving.

As far as the "search for no reason" issue goes, their right to perform spot checks like Ride is already well established. This is just another tool that is part of the same program.

ANd that whole program is wrong. THe cons are no different than anybody else, they will say whatever they think will buy votes. And there are a lot of MADD members in their voter base.

 

[BornRuff]

MADD and their legislative zealot brethren have taken all the fun out of socializing. Especially in rural areas where there are no busses or taxis. Community dances are just about a thing of the past since everyone is afraid to have a drink.

I'm sorry to hear that, but I find it hard to have sympathy for your complaint that you don't feel that you can socialize without putting other people's live's in danger by drinking and driving.

More like upset with unwarranted searches. Seat belt checks are the same idea. It is just an excuse for police to go probing in your vehicle to see if they can hand out a fine.

This bill really doesn't change this.

 

[taxslave]

I'm sorry to hear that, but I find it hard to have sympathy for your complaint that you don't feel that you can socialize without putting other people's live's in danger by drinking and driving.



This bill really doesn't change this.

Actually it does. It is making a bad situation worse.

 

[petros]

This isn't really just an NDP issue. The Conservatives have also talked quite a bit about being much harsher on drinking and driving.

As far as the "search for no reason" issue goes, their right to perform spot checks like Ride is already well established. This is just another tool that is part of the same program.

When cars are lined up for road construction for long periods of time, highway side Tim's parking lots, rest areas and various other venues cops dressed as tourists "walk their dogs". Down the road vehicles that have dog hits are pulled over for a flickering tail or headlight and alleged signs of impairment.

 

[Zipperfish]

This isn't really just an NDP issue. The Conservatives have also talked quite a bit about being much harsher on drinking and driving.

As far as the "search for no reason" issue goes, their right to perform spot checks like Ride is already well established. This is just another tool that is part of the same program.

They should be harsh on drinking and driving. I have no issue with that. But the police are already amply provided with people, money and power to fulfill their duties.

Random spot checks have been deemed by the Supreme Court as a viol;ation of S 9 of the Charter (protecting against arbitrary detainment) but saved by S 1 of the Charter (reasonable limitations). The Courts will scrutinize all Charter violations, so saying, as you seem to, that "since the police have already been granted the power to violate one Charter right therefore they can violate orthers" isn't valid, in my opinion.

 

[karrie]

If you are upset with the concept of Ride checks in general, that is a separate issue.

It's not a separate issue... each action is a wedge pushing the door further and further open to violate our rights.


Police should not be able to search without cause.

 

[BornRuff]

They should be harsh on drinking and driving. I have no issue with that. But the police are already amply provided with people, money and power to fulfill their duties.

Random spot checks have been deemed by the Supreme Court as a viol;ation of S 9 of the Charter (protecting against arbitrary detainment) but saved by S 1 of the Charter (reasonable limitations). The Courts will scrutinize all Charter violations, so saying, as you seem to, that "since the police have already been granted the power to violate one Charter right therefore they can violate orthers" isn't valid, in my opinion.

It isn't that they were given the right to violate the charter. It is that those actions were deemed not to violate the charter. Given that this is in the exact same vein, and arguably less intrusive and disruptive than the act of making you stop for the ride check in the first place, I think it is very reasonable to believe that this would also be deemed not to violate the charter.

It's not a separate issue... each action is a wedge pushing the door further and further open to violate our rights.


Police should not be able to search without cause.

Rights are always a balancing act. You don't want the government intruding into your life, but I don't want to be killed by some ******* driving drunk. To that end, it has been established that Ride checks are a reasonable way to reduce drinking and driving and keep people safe.