Want you car impounded come to bc


damngrumpy
#1
Hundreds of vacationing Albertans' cars have been impounded in B.C. under the province's tough drunk driving and speeding laws, according to statistics provided by the Ministry of Public Safety.



From last Sept. 20 to the end of June, 216 Alberta vehicles were impounded for impaired driving and another 171 were impounded for excessive speeding. Combined they make up about five per cent of total vehicles seized for drinking or speeding during that period.
Under B.C. law, drivers with blood-alcohol content between .05 and .08 can be prohibited from driving and have their vehicle impounded for three days. Drivers who blow over .08 can have their vehicle impounded for 30 days.
Premier Christy Clark defended the laws on Sunday, boasting that "the number of fatalities as a result of alcohol have been cut in half... it's pretty hard to argue with those statistics."



Those who break the posted speed limit by 40 kilometres in B.C. face a mandatory seven-day impoundment for a first offence -- but cars are only impounded in Alberta if a driver is caught disobeying a driving suspension, and seizing vehicles for speeding is uncommon throughout most of Canada.



Jack, a dispatcher at a towing business in Abbotsford, said his company is constantly dealing with out-of-province drivers who are indignant at having their vehicle impounded on the spot for speed.



"I would say surprised is generally the reaction of most people," he said. "They can be pretty aggressive. Most times we refer them to the police department that is involved because it's their decision."



"I appreciate that the idea is to get dangerous drivers off the road," Jack said, adding that "I think [drivers are] entitled to be upset."



Drivers caught speeding excessively also face a fine of $368 to $483.



Ontario has enacted a similar law impounding vehicles caught going more than 50 kilometres over the posted speed limit. The drivers also face a minimum fine of $2,000.



The Ministry of Public Safety says a total of 13,977 vehicles were impounded for impaired driving and 4,279 for excessive speed in B.C. from September to June.
 
Most helpful post: The members here have rated this post as best reply.
gerryh
+8
#2  Top Rated Post
Here's a novel idea.......DON'T BREAK THE FU CKING LAW!!!!! Then you don't have to worry about having your precious car impounded.
 
damngrumpy
#3
Some people say the new laws are working, and they are for the coffers of the BC Government.
Imagine coming for a holiday a beer or even two beers and you lose your car for most of your
holiday, Drive like you do outside of BC and lose your car. Great for tourism ain't it. Now I am
not saying tourists should get special treatment, but they should be warned in a prominent
manner. Oh that would mean spending money advertising, and if they did that they couldn't
take the car, no tax money.

216 vehicles for a reading of .05 and for speeding, more than 40km over the limit lose your car.

gerry I agree with you except that many people do not know that BC is .05 instead of .08
and the highway speed limit ruling is not known by many. For those of us who live here
I couldn't agree with you more. This is a tax grab inflicted on people who don't know not
because they are ignorant dummies.
 
gerryh
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

Here's a novel idea.......DON'T BREAK THE FU CKING LAW!!!!! Then you don't have to worry about having your precious car impounded.


bump
 
Mowich
+2
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by damngrumpyView Post

Hundreds of vacationing Albertans' cars have been impounded in B.C. under the province's tough drunk driving and speeding laws, according to statistics provided by the Ministry of Public Safety.



From last Sept. 20 to the end of June, 216 Alberta vehicles were impounded for impaired driving and another 171 were impounded for excessive speeding. Combined they make up about five per cent of total vehicles seized for drinking or speeding during that period.
Under B.C. law, drivers with blood-alcohol content between .05 and .08 can be prohibited from driving and have their vehicle impounded for three days. Drivers who blow over .08 can have their vehicle impounded for 30 days.
Premier Christy Clark defended the laws on Sunday, boasting that "the number of fatalities as a result of alcohol have been cut in half... it's pretty hard to argue with those statistics."



Those who break the posted speed limit by 40 kilometres in B.C. face a mandatory seven-day impoundment for a first offence -- but cars are only impounded in Alberta if a driver is caught disobeying a driving suspension, and seizing vehicles for speeding is uncommon throughout most of Canada.



Jack, a dispatcher at a towing business in Abbotsford, said his company is constantly dealing with out-of-province drivers who are indignant at having their vehicle impounded on the spot for speed.



"I would say surprised is generally the reaction of most people," he said. "They can be pretty aggressive. Most times we refer them to the police department that is involved because it's their decision."



"I appreciate that the idea is to get dangerous drivers off the road," Jack said, adding that "I think [drivers are] entitled to be upset."



Drivers caught speeding excessively also face a fine of $368 to $483.



Ontario has enacted a similar law impounding vehicles caught going more than 50 kilometres over the posted speed limit. The drivers also face a minimum fine of $2,000.



The Ministry of Public Safety says a total of 13,977 vehicles were impounded for impaired driving and 4,279 for excessive speed in B.C. from September to June.

You know what DG? If only one person's life was saved by these measures - it was worth it. IMHO
 
damngrumpy
#6
The problem is with the new law, the .05 they take the car no courts, not having your day in court
and no recourse. same for the speeding rule. This is a legal problem with future implications.
When government can become so heavy handed without recourse under the law as guaranteed
in a democracy or a constitutional monarchy we are losing the right to due process.
I agree that they should be able to punish those who break the law, having said that, they should
inform people from outside the process by advertising it before they come here. In addition this
could have serious implications for tourism. The other problem I have is this, if you are charged
with an offence, under the law you are innocent until proven guilty. This law circumvents that and
that is a problem. The old slippery slope.
Saving one life come on, are you saying the people who are .05 are the problem? I don't drink
anymore, but everywhere else it is .08. Those who are usually .08 drive any way. We know the
.05 is not the problem. As for speeding, yes they should be able to take the car, but only after you
have your day in court and are proven guilty, we are giving way too much power to police here,
and we have seen how the Mounties in BC behave haven't we. Ask Buddy Traveris is Kelowna,
He obeyed the officers commands to the letter, and got kicked in the face for his trouble.
Not an isolated incident in BC, we have had newspaper delivery people beaten up, by drunken
off duty officers. I am not against the law I am against how the Government instituted it and how
it is being enforced without due process that is where I have problems with it.
 
Mowich
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by damngrumpyView Post

Some people say the new laws are working, and they are for the coffers of the BC Government.

Good.
Quote:

Imagine coming for a holiday a beer or even two beers and you lose your car for most of your holiday,

When I travel to another province, I kind of make it a priority to know what laws might affect me while there. I always thought it incumbent upon the person to be responsible for their behavior - no matter where they were, but especially when traveling. Good impressions and all that.

Quote:

Drive like you do outside of BC and lose your car. Great for tourism ain't it.

Were I a tourist thinking of driving in BC, I might be glad to know that there were strict drinking and driving laws and that they were enforced, especially if I were traveling with my family.

Quote:

Now I am not saying tourists should get special treatment, but they should be warned in a prominent manner.

Fine. Put up 50 foot billboards at the borders, all the borders. They don't have to be fancy, in fact the simpler the better.

Quote:

Oh that would mean spending money advertising, and if they did that they couldn't take the car, no tax money.





Quote:

216 vehicles for a reading of .05 and for speeding, more than 40km over the limit lose your car.

To put that last number in perspective - if you were traveling on the Coq which has a speed of limit of what 110(?) - and you were 40km over the speed limit, you would be traveling at 150 mph.

I still think California had the best idea of all when it came to speeding - crush convicted speeders cars.

Personally, I have always felt that 0 tolerance is the best policy of all. The word tolerance bothers me. Why should we tolerate drunk drivers at all?
 
damngrumpy
+1
#8
Zero tolerance is one thing but not having due process is another. by the way there are all
kinds of people going like hell on four lane highways. Personally I don't speed or go a little
over, usually less than ten clicks.
As for those who cruise at high speed, I say take the car make the fine heavy whatever, but
do not stray from the most important law of the land, due process, which means you go to
court to have your day there. people don't get it , slowly but surely, we are losing the basic
freedoms that are central to a democracy.
 
petros
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by damngrumpyView Post

The problem is with the new law, the .05 they take the car no courts, not having your day in court
and no recourse. same for the speeding rule. This is a legal problem with future implications.
When government can become so heavy handed without recourse under the law as guaranteed
in a democracy or a constitutional monarchy we are losing the right to due process.
I agree that they should be able to punish those who break the law, having said that, they should
inform people from outside the process by advertising it before they come here. In addition this
could have serious implications for tourism. The other problem I have is this, if you are charged
with an offence, under the law you are innocent until proven guilty. This law circumvents that and
that is a problem. The old slippery slope.
Saving one life come on, are you saying the people who are .05 are the problem? I don't drink
anymore, but everywhere else it is .08. Those who are usually .08 drive any way. We know the
.05 is not the problem. As for speeding, yes they should be able to take the car, but only after you
have your day in court and are proven guilty, we are giving way too much power to police here,
and we have seen how the Mounties in BC behave haven't we. Ask Buddy Traveris is Kelowna,
He obeyed the officers commands to the letter, and got kicked in the face for his trouble.
Not an isolated incident in BC, we have had newspaper delivery people beaten up, by drunken
off duty officers. I am not against the law I am against how the Government instituted it and how
it is being enforced without due process that is where I have problems with it.

Yuuuup 12hr (24 hrs for drugs) roadside suspension and you could be 0.1 BAC and still have your vehicle impounded for 24hrs if you fail the roadside dance.

Out of all the provinces would Alberta vehicles be the ones in the most accidents when it comes to tourists crashing? I'm willing to bet yes.

Want to see harsher laws? https://www.sgi.sk.ca/sgi_pub/road_s...spensions.html (external - login to view)

I'd like to see them even harsher.
 
Corduroy
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by damngrumpyView Post

Premier Christy Clark defended the laws on Sunday, boasting that "the number of fatalities as a result of alcohol have been cut in half... it's pretty hard to argue with those statistics."

They would be reduced even further if alcohol was prohibited or driving restricted from 6am to 6pm. Wouldn't be able to argue with those statistics would you, Christy?
 
Ariadne
+2
#11
I hope the drunk boaters have the same stiff circumstances ... wouldn't that be something!
 
TenPenny
#12
NB and NS have .05 rules, you lose your license for 24 hrs, but I don't think your car gets impounded.

Hey, if you travel to another province, or another country, it's your job to understand the laws and to follow them.
 
taxslave
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by damngrumpyView Post

Zero tolerance is one thing but not having due process is another. by the way there are all
kinds of people going like hell on four lane highways. Personally I don't speed or go a little
over, usually less than ten clicks.
As for those who cruise at high speed, I say take the car make the fine heavy whatever, but
do not stray from the most important law of the land, due process, which means you go to
court to have your day there. people don't get it , slowly but surely, we are losing the basic
freedoms that are central to a democracy.

If you don't drink and drive the law is irrelevant . I don't see a problem. If you got a problem with this come with me next time we have to clean the mess off the highway caused by a drunk or an idiot with an N on his car doing mach 10 on the road. I guarantee it will change your perspective.
 
bluebyrd35
#14
I worked in an ED for 30 years and yes, there were road accidents, but not that many drunk drivers. They were youngsters who seemed to have no idea of the consequences of excessive speed. The worst were the bike or motorcycle accidents. .

I agree with 0 tolerance with a reasonable law. . 05 or .08 fine. But I foresee, a big drop in alcohol tax revenu and restaurant revenu, with the imposition of a .00 content. Can't collect taxes on what is not consumed and I suspect the majority of people wouldn't even bother buying it for parties at home if they end up keeping most of the party overnight in order to make sure that glass of wine with dinner is no longer in the body.

I imagine the gov't. will probably start taxing food to make up for the loss. LOL
 
petros
#15
Who here has not lost a friend or family member to alcohol?
 
winespius
-1
#16
BC is a police state..and getting worse...
 
petros
#17
The broker a government gets the more it turns to fines and user fees and the police are a source of revenue.
 
lone wolf
#18
Wire your house wrong and see what happens.
 
bluebyrd35
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Who here has not lost a friend or family member to alcohol?

Me. I lost two children in an automobile accident ......no alcohol directly involved.

About 10 days before son was driving a Toyota Tercel that was rear ended by a drunk driver. It put him in hospital with a concussion and totalled this car. He also owned a 1956 yellow buick. Since he had decided to come home before the accident, and he had been running this car as well he chose to come in this car. This antique was his pride & joy and he was a master mechanic. 3 other young people were in the car and a dog.

Nearly home (50 miles) away, something in the streering went wrong and the caddy crossed over the 401 median, struck the trailer of a semi & caught fire. A truck driver travelling behind claimed sparks were coming from under the front of the car just before it veered over. The investigation found something snapped in the steering & he had no control. One boy was thrown clear & and the dog survived.. Son, daughter & son's girlfriend died in the blaze

It would be very easy to blame that drunk driver, but there were so many other events in the week previous that contributed to the fatal crash. It became "if this or that has not happened, or that choice had not been made" that it was as if really bad luck arrived all at that one time rather than being spread out over a lifetime. This was in 1980, so while the regret remains, the pain has been replaced with great memories.

Perhaps instead of fines and impounding the cars, it would be much more effective if all new cars came equipped with the device that does not allow the car to start if the driver is intoxicated. It would probably upset a lot of people but then so did seat belts when they first became manditory.


.
Last edited by bluebyrd35; Jul 20th, 2011 at 10:03 PM..Reason: missed a couple of words.
 
winespius
#20
I am very sorry for your tragedy bluebyrd, however I am both afraid and tired of the incremental nature of the loss of personal freedom and responsibility in this country in general and BC in particular. We need a big change beginning with kicking out the corrupt RCMP from the provinces
 
bluebyrd35
#21
LOL well it seems to me personal freedom should not be extended to the right to damage, cause injury or death to others. Even in the US where many are very gung-ho on the right to own and use guns, owners are prosecuted when those guns are used inappropriately; particularly if a child accidently kills or injures themselves or others, because proper safety measures were not taken.

We can and do, through our justice system try to punish or gain recompense for those injured or killed by drunk drivers, but it seems to me that prevention is a much better course to follow.

Shouldn't personal freedom extend to the right of a majority to not have to worry about contending with drunken dolts on the roads?? It is enough in my opinion, to worry about speeders, poor roads and just plain rotten drivers. Since I drive thousands of miles every year, I really do not want to have to worry about inebrieted sots as well.
Last edited by bluebyrd35; Jul 21st, 2011 at 10:58 AM..Reason: correcting spelling/grammar
 
Mowich
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by winespiusView Post

I am very sorry for your tragedy bluebyrd, however I am both afraid and tired of the incremental nature of the loss of personal freedom and responsibility in this country in general and BC in particular. We need a big change beginning with kicking out the corrupt RCMP from the provinces

I fail to see how stricter driving and drinking rules will eliminate my personal responsibility to abide by those rules.
 
bluebyrd35
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by MowichView Post

I fail to see how stricter driving and drinking rules will eliminate my personal responsibility to abide by those rules.

My point exactly. Some are incorrigible drunks and will continue to drink and drive inspite of fines or even jail. They drive without licenses and even "borrow" vehicles when impaired. Making it impossible for anyone to drive while over the limit would solve the problem. It would cost but perhaps that could be offset by a government grant when one buys a new car. It may even lighten the cost to the country's court systems, jails, payouts by car & life insurances who knows?? We may even get a break on the premiums and taxes. Well you never know
 
karrie
#24
I can't imagine whining if I were to get caught going 40 over the speed limit, and had to deal with the laws of the land as a result. Ignorance of the law is no defense.
 
grumpydigger
#25
Nail the drunk drivers hard. .08 criminal charges

But for some reason this new noncriminal .05 law in British Columbia where they confiscate your car and give you severe financial penalties is being manipulated to corrupt the statistics.

For some reason, the truly dangerous over .08 drivers who cause the bulk of the fatalities have disappeared.......simply because at .05you have lost your right to a lawyer, a judge and due process of the law.

Sounds quite suspicious to me.
 
wulfie68
#26
My only issue is with impounding the vehicles between 0.05 and 0.08 for impaired driving. That impounding is on the table for this, with no legal recourse or due process, I agree with DG. 40kph speeding? Thats a no brainer: in other provinces (such as Alberta) it can get earn a dangerous driving charge and subsequent 6 month suspension. Hell, they'd make major bucks if they set up a couple traps on the Alaska Hwy north of Ft St John... place used to be like a race track at times...
 
petros
#27
Drunks have nasty habits of doing stupid things like walking around for 20 mins then hopping back in the car that wasn't towed away.

Any questions?
 
grumpydigger
#28
At.05 Having your car towed and a 24-hour suspension is pretty standard In most Canadian provinces

In British Columbia at .05 A non-criminal law Will confiscate your car for 10 days Give you a $2000 fine And force you To put Alcohol interlock device on your car...............And you cannot Fight the decision With a lawyer and a judge in a court of law......Because the cop is the judge jury and executioner at the roadside...............And you have not Broken Any criminal law..........

The British Columbia Liberal government are collecting massive amounts of fines from people that have not technically even broken the law...............I think Joseph's stalin or the Communist China government would be very proud to be connected with this.

And don't tell me taking .05 drivers off the road is lowering the traffic fatalities. because the drivers that are blowing well over .08 are still out there laughing at this law.
Last edited by grumpydigger; Jul 21st, 2011 at 09:22 PM..
 
petros
#29
(external - login to view)
 
gerryh
+1
#30
still whining about not being able to speed or drink in drive in BC I see.
 
no new posts