Alberta passes .05% law that was just declared unconstitutional in BC

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
You are wrong. You do not need a BAC at all in order to be charged with impaired driving

JLM is referring to alcohol for impaired. We know that there are other reasons a driver can be impaired ( Non Alcohol) and charged for it.
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
No I'm not wrong. If I am why would they use it?

Drunk driving (Canada) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Criminal Code of Canada has two distinct offences that directly addresses drinking and driving.[12]
Section 253(1)(a) makes it illegal to operate a motor vehicle or vessel or operate or assist in the operation of an aircraft or railway equipment, or to have care or control of a motor vehicle, vessel, aircraft, or railway equipment, while that person's ability to operate is impaired by the alcohol, drugs, or a combination of the two (vessel is defined to include "a machine designed to derive support in the atmosphere primarily from reactions against the earth’s surface of air expelled from the machine"[13]).
Section 253(1)(b) makes it illegal to operate a motor vehicle or vessel or operate or assist in the operation of an aircraft or railway equipment, or to have care or control of a motor vehicle, vessel, aircraft, or railway equipment, while that person's blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is in excess of 0.08 percent (representing 80 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood.
A person may be charged with one or both of the offences under section 253. Related are "refuse (or fail) to comply" offences, which are discussed in more detail below.
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
No I'm not wrong. If I am why would they use it?

Drunk driving (Canada) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Criminal Code of Canada has two distinct offences that directly addresses drinking and driving........http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drunk_driving_(Canada)#cite_note-11
A person may be charged with one or both of the offences under section 253. Related are "refuse (or fail) to comply" offences, which are discussed in more detail below.

Sounds funny coming from a guy who thinks it's OK to speed! (It's Monday morning, do you EVER work?)

Not at coffee time or lunch time
 

PoliticalNick

The Troll Bashing Troll
Mar 8, 2011
7,940
0
36
Edson, AB
Noooooope! On the spot seizure, summary conviction charges and released only if the Crown figures you're not a threat. You can be held in custody until your day in court.

Seizure can be done under certain circumstances. Street racing, cash and property in a drug bust and even these circumvent the charter rights. You cannot be convicted of anything without a court hearing period. They can only hold you for 48 hours before a bail hearing which is part of due process. You need to learn your facts about the charter and due process of law before you make such statements.
 

Retired_Can_Soldier

The End of the Dog is Coming!
Mar 19, 2006
12,394
1,367
113
60
Alberta
BULLSH*T Deaths occur at every level of the spectrum from 0.00 to 0.50.

I'm not sure where your argument applies here. Are you saying that 0.01 an individual can be impaired and cause death? If so, I'd like to see some statistics to back this up.
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
So coffee is from 8-11 and lunch is from 11-2?

Actually, some days yes. Today's been goofy. Called to work at 3:45 am and still have a few hours work to do. Took a three hour lunch today.

Yep, called momentum and directly proportional to the square, hence at 100 the damage is 1.56 times that at 80.

For the sake of the children, we should reduce the speed limit everywhere to 10 kph.

Sounds funny coming from a guy who thinks it's OK to speed!

OK to speed? Ya I guess you could say that I believe that speed has little effect as far as causing accidents and in most areas, the speed limit is too low. The number one cause of accidents by a country mile is inattentiveness. Unfortunately, our politicians are taking the easy road and banning the use of cell phones during driving. I'll give you three guesses as to why they chose to focus on that particular distraction.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
OK to speed? Ya I guess you could say that I believe that speed has little effect as far as causing accidents and in most areas, the speed limit is too low. The number one cause of accidents by a country mile is inattentiveness. Unfortunately, our politicians are taking the easy road and banning the use of cell phones during driving. I'll give you three guesses as to why they chose to focus on that particular distraction.

That is absolutely beside the point. Accidents happen at all speeds, but the ones that happen at lower speeds are less severe and more survivable- THAT is why we have speed limits.

Okay fair enough. Can you clarify what you meant by the statement I was addressing?

I was taking issue with Cannuck's statement that deaths only occurred at high levels of intoxication.
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
That is absolutely beside the point. Accidents happen at all speeds, but the ones that happen at lower speeds are less severe and more survivable- THAT is why we have speed limits.

Nonsense.

German autobahns - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The overall road traffic safety of German autobahns is comparable to and in some cases better than that of other European highways. According to the statistics collected by the International Traffic Safety Data and Analysis Group,[9] there were 2.2 road user fatalities per billion vehicle kilometers on German autobahns in 2008. Neighboring countries with available data include Belgium (4.2 in 2007), the Netherlands (2.1 in 2009), Denmark (2.5), Austria (4.2), Switzerland (1.2), and France (1.8). Using the same statistic, 4.5 fatalities have occurred in the United States on motorways.


I was taking issue with Cannuck's statement that deaths only occurred at high levels of intoxication.

That's not what I said. Nice try though.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
Cannuck;1518589 That's not what I said. Nice try though.[/QUOTE said:
" Drunk driving deaths invariably involve those that are significantly over the legal limit."

Is our Alzheimers acting up a bit today? :lol:
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Ya, that would be nonsense if this wasn't in your link...

A hard limit is imposed on some vehicles:
60 km/h
  • Buses carrying standing passengers
  • Motorcycles pulling trailers
80 km/h
  • Vehicles with maximum allowed weight exceeding 3.5 t (except passenger cars)
  • Passenger cars and trucks with trailers
  • Buses
100 km/h
  • Passenger cars pulling trailers certified for 100 km/h
  • Buses certified for 100 km/h not pulling trailers
Not to mention all the other restrictions and limits, that actually support JLM's position.
 

miniboss

Electoral Member
Jan 4, 2007
108
1
18
I agree, that if someone is getting their license suspended and vehicle towed, at your expense at .05, they're basically saying your guilty, so then they should just change the legal limit from .08 to .05. But I think the real moral of this law is, if you have consumed ANY alcohol, don't drive. With the way things are going, it just isn't worth the hassle getting busted. It's pretty simple, it's a choice to consume alcohol, one should just plan ahead.