Only in Saskatchewan

[DaSleeper]

Logic, Cannuck!!! Total strangers! :lol:

With logic like that, he would be perfect for political office...;-)

 

[CDNBear]

Obviously passing out behind the wheel is not a clear enough gesture, but climbing into the back seat seems reasonable to me.

I agree. I'd go so far as to say being behind the wheel should get a pass, so long as the keys are in your pocket.

 

[SLM]

With logic like that, he would be perfect for political office...;-)

Jimmy?

 

[CDNBear]

With logic like that, he would be perfect for political office...;-)

He tried, didn't go so well.

 

[petros]

No wonder we need lawyers...

 

[SLM]

So, we've been able to establish that the use of a car can be viewed as similar to a motorhome, even if the car is illegally camped in a bar parking lot. Imo, all that we need to prove a drunk's innocence is an action that give us reason to believe that he had every intent to sleep it off, and no intent of driving. Obviously passing out behind the wheel is not a clear enough gesture, but climbing into the back seat seems reasonable to me.

Personally I have to say that these 'scenarios' are getting way, way too detailed and specific and I think it goes back to what I was saying before about not being able to legislate for every conceivable situation. And thus, again, I say where I'd like the error go to the side of caution, where the least harm can be done and that's keeping anyone who is in an intoxicated state far, far away from the vehicle.

Again, just my opinion.

 

[JLM]

Personally I have to say that these 'scenarios' are getting way, way too detailed and specific and I think it goes back to what I was saying before about not being able to legislate for every conceivable situation. And thus, again, I say where I'd like the error go to the side of caution, where the least harm can be done and that's keeping anyone who is in an intoxicated state far, far away from the vehicle.

Again, just my opinion.

Yep, what's wrong with drinkers, cops and judges just using common sense?

 

[JamesBondo]

Personally I have to say that these 'scenarios' are getting way, way too detailed and specific and I think it goes back to what I was saying before about not being able to legislate for every conceivable situation. And thus, again, I say where I'd like the error go to the side of caution, where the least harm can be done and that's keeping anyone who is in an intoxicated state far, far away from the vehicle.

Again, just my opinion.

You shouldn't have to legislate reasonable doubt.

 

[Cannuck]

You shouldn't have to legislate reasonable doubt.

Judging from some of the responses on this thread....ya we do.

 

[JLM]

Judging from some of the responses on this thread....ya we do.

Well, you could just stop responding and THAT would solve that problem!

Well, you could just stop responding and THAT would solve that problem!

When you are giving out "reds" you are STILL responding or is that too much for you to absorb all at once?

 

[SLM]

Supreme Court rules accused drunk drivers must prove breathalyzer defective - Canada - Canoe.ca

 

[petros]

Supreme Court rules accused drunk drivers must prove breathalyzer defective - Canada - Canoe.ca

Don't be surprisd when somebody gets arrested twice for Impared Driving with the second time being to disprove the first.