So if we've lost people to drunk driving, seen friends and family crippled by drunk drivers, and still we disagree about punishing someone who was clearly not a threat.... what then?
Only in Saskatchewan
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
So if we've lost people to drunk driving, seen friends and family crippled by drunk drivers, and still we disagree about punishing someone who was clearly not a threat.... what then?
What sepeartes an RV from a passenger vehicle is the toilet. Pick up trucks don't have toilets
***SCENARIO***
Cops drive through a bar parking lot, find a person crashed out in a vehcile with motor running. Did they just walk out of the bar and get into the vehcile or did they just pull in?
Not true. Sleepers on your truck are enough to get around the law, as are camper vans whether they have a toilet or not.
To drink in your vehcile as mentioned by Jane Blonde you NEED a toilet. Check the laws.
Ah... JaneBlonde mentioned a lot more stuff than just drinking in a vehicle, I thought you were still discussing the sleeping issue.
First thing she mentioned was cracking a beer and sitting on the tailgate with bed ready in the box. That is fine if you are at home or have rented a spot. That spot is your temporary residence.
"residence" means
"residence" means
- (i) any building, part of a building, tent, mobile home, trailer, ship, yacht or boat where a person resides, including lands appurtenant and adjacent thereto that are essential or appropriate for the private use, occupation and enjoyment thereof, but does not include
- (A) part of a hotel or club other than a private guest room,
(B) a mobile home or trailer being operated on a highway or stopped within the highway right of way, and
(ii) such other areas, places or properties as are designated by the regulations as a residence;
- (A) part of a hotel or club other than a private guest room,
Let's face it here. The real determining factor is the cop who finds you. Some will exercise their discretion and let things go recognizing someone made a conscious decision to NOT drive drunk. Others will load up every charge they can find regardless just for their own amusement. Not all cops are d*ckheads but there are some that will ruin a person's life because they didn't get laid before going on shift that night.
The laws is the laws is the law. Cops can't use discretion in some incidences, this is one of those things. It's all in the hands of the Crown.
Sure some cops are d*ckheads. Just like some bank managers are d*ckheads, some teachers are d*ckheads, some doctors are d*ckheads, etc, etc. Set that aside for now.
What is not known is whether some drunk was intending to drive home and simply fell asleep/passed out before they got the chance to or whether it was just a situation as described where they were attempting to keep warm while waiting for a ride. Remember that those under the influence are not known for their stellar thinking capabilities. So police officer comes along and maybe his instincts/opinion tell him "this guy seems ok, I believe that he was only keeping warm until his ride got here, I'm going to give him a pass this time". This is what you're saying.
What if he was wrong? No charges, no record has been established. It happens again and again, still no record has been established as to this individual being behind the wheel in an intoxicated state. So buddy gets drunk yet again and does the same thing, only this time he doesn't pass out before he has the chance to drive away. Now he's a potential menace. Maybe he causes lots of damage, some injuries, possibly even a death. But it is a first offense because the police gave the guy a pass and assumed that he made a conscious decision not to drive drunk. Nope I'd rather see a record established on an idividual to show repeat behaviour of this nature. Now if we (meaning the court system) did more about these established patterns of behaviour I'd be much happier. As it is we do SFA about drunk drivers in this country, there is absolutely no excuse for anyone to get behind the wheel of a car in an intoxicated state. As far as I'm concerned they should have their license yanked immediately upon conviction for any offence of driving under the influence. Make the penalty real, then maybe more people would get the hint.
So I disagree completely that the police officer in this scenario is being a d*ckhead, he's doing his job. I would expect all of them to do this without exception.
Notice that the Supreme Court just upheld a Quebec guy's acquittal for doing the same thing, he called a designated driver service, and was waiting in his car to keep warm.
I can agree someone passed out over the wheel should probably be charged unless there is absolute evidence (ie corroboration from the bar as in the described case). Somebody asleep in the back seat is obviously not intending to drive and should receive the benefit of the doubt.
The bar is liable for him having a BAC of 2.2 and loses all credibility. Besides, people have a nasty habit of lying to cops.
The doubt line is clearly drawn at a BAC of .08
When it comes to driving and drivers I doubt if anything is "obvious". There was one case (in Saskatchewan I believe) where the driver (a "New Canadian") of a motor home ran it into the weeds (much to his amazement) after putting in on cruise control and skipping back for a couple of minutes to make a sandwich. :lol:
Apparently so. I have heard many versions of the reasons for leaving the wheel and it has happened in many locations over the years this tale has been around.