Law Canadian police can now give you a breathalyzer test at home or in a bar or anywhere without reason.

[superpunch]

Don't get drunk and you have nothing to worry about. Getting drunk is bad for you anyways, so I don't see what the big stink is about.

 

[hillelslovak87]

Canada is weird. Here in WA, it's only drunk driving if beer cans encompass the entirety of your vehicle's floor. Odd laws we have......

 

[trac209]

I would absolutely love to see the police try and get a breathalyzer from me in my living room... Trudeau won’t stop until we’re asking the government if we can take a shit...

 

[IDL]

I read about it in my morning newspaper, it's not a stormfront hoax lmao. How's the weather in self-delusion land?

There is comedy in the guy declaring it a debunked hoax and then pulling out the ol stormfront tagline to put the icing on the cake.

I mean, he must have read about it being a hoax on some fake news site he visits and is the one who fell for the hoax. Oops.

 

[IDL]

As for the law, it sounds like overstepping for sure. Poorly thought out.

 

[Grenz]

And @Sano

I'm feeling kind of silly and annoyed. I read over the whole thing at that link. I can't find anywhere that it doesn't say, "If an officer has reasonable grounds to suspect", in relation to what action he may take. I leave it to you to prove me wrong and show me where it says they can disregard normal due process and require a test without reasonable grounds to suspect.

It's under 'Investigations':

Mandatory alcohol screening
Police officers can demand that any lawfully-stopped driver provide a preliminary breath sample to test for alcohol without reasonable suspicion that the driver has alcohol in their body.

The cost/benefit ratio in this thing is way off. Will this curb the kind of drunk driving that kills 4 people everyday? I would wager that a good percentage of the people who kill others while driving drunk wasn't very concerned with the possible consequences in the first place. Now, because the cops can test without reasonable suspicion, those same type of people are now going to think twice about this? No, the same 'fucked out of their minds, swerving all over the road' idiots will still get behind the wheel, because they never took into account the possibility of encountering a cop to begin with. I'm willing to bet that the only effect of this law is an increase in impaired driving charges coupled with zero effect on drunk driving deaths.

In return we're letting the government take one big step forward into our lives by letting a police officer gather evidence without any suspicion of a crime.

 

[ultramanhyata]

Are you serious?

You must be joking..?

I was, indeed, joking.

 

[Andy Capp]

It's under 'Investigations':

Thanks. Now we just need the legal definition of "lawfully stopped" to eliminate any further ambiguity.

In any case, my earlier post comes back to the fore. Not requiring suspicion is bullshit.

 

[Grenz]

Thanks. Now we just need the legal definition of "lawfully stopped" to eliminate any further ambiguity.

In any case, my earlier post comes back to the fore. Not requiring suspicion is bullshit.

Agreed. I'm guessing lawfully stopped can mean anything from being stopped in a roadblock to being pulled over for speeding, but I'm not a lawyer.

 

[Andy Capp]

Agreed. I'm guessing lawfully stopped can mean anything from being stopped in a roadblock to being pulled over for speeding, but I'm not a lawyer.

I'm still a candidate for most pedantic on here so I would love to have the correct definition.

Without that, there's still uncertainty about how this will be applied. Depending upon the definition, it may only apply when you're actually driving, for example. Then I would be a little less concerned.

It doesn't do a thing about other concerns over the legislation.

 

[superpunch]

As for the law, it sounds like overstepping for sure. Poorly thought out.

Granted, I'm an American (USA). However, from my point of view, Canada has a public healthcare system. That means that every individual's lifestyle choices is more than just their own business. It's also their fellow citizens' business. If you're getting drunk, that's bad for your health and you're increasing your fellow citizen's tax liability. That can and should be justly regulated against. You shouldn't be getting drunk, you shouldn't be fat, etc.

 

[trac209]

Granted, I'm an American (USA). However, from my point of view, Canada has a public healthcare system. That means that every individual's lifestyle choices is more than just their own business. It's also their fellow citizens' business. If you're getting drunk, that's bad for your health and you're increasing your fellow citizen's tax liability. That can and should be justly regulated against. You shouldn't be getting drunk, you shouldn't be fat, etc.

That’s why our alcohol and cigarettes and anything else bad is taxed to death.

 

[superpunch]

That’s why our alcohol and cigarettes and anything else bad is taxed to death.

Do you think that limits Canada's HW MMA and boxing potential?

 

[Scheme]

The only way to stop drunk driving is to make it legal

 

[Renard]

Granted, I'm an American (USA). However, from my point of view, Canada has a public healthcare system. That means that every individual's lifestyle choices is more than just their own business. It's also their fellow citizens' business. If you're getting drunk, that's bad for your health and you're increasing your fellow citizen's tax liability. That can and should be justly regulated against. You shouldn't be getting drunk, you shouldn't be fat, etc.

I'd be in favour of a sugar tax. Not because I care that much but I've love to see the fatties lose their shit over it. Hands shaking from sugar withdrawal "WHAT DO YOU MEAN MY SODA AND DONUTS COST 50 CENTS MORE?! THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A FREE COUNTRY!" Lefties like "This HIGHLY PROBLEMATIC tax DISPROPORTIONATELY affects the poor [feeding their kids with awful food choices devoid of nutrition and who would probably make better choices if financially punished for their bad ones but let's gloss over that]. Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!"

 

[IDL]

Granted, I'm an American (USA). However, from my point of view, Canada has a public healthcare system. That means that every individual's lifestyle choices is more than just their own business. It's also their fellow citizens' business. If you're getting drunk, that's bad for your health and you're increasing your fellow citizen's tax liability. That can and should be justly regulated against. You shouldn't be getting drunk, you shouldn't be fat, etc.

Not sure if you're serious (I'm assuming not), but I would certainly support general promotion of good health (diet and exercise).

As stated, liquor and smokes are taxed quite heavily already. Government makes money when people smoke and drink.

The Canadian government is all aboard the anti-smoking campaign (advertising/visibility laws, anti smoking commercials, etc) as well which seems to be working.

Diet and exercise though.. Crickets..

 

[Wet Blanket]

@Hunter Simpson @Sano

Little follow up with a lawyer's comments

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toro...ving-even-if-not-drunk-lawyers-warn-1.4975008

 

[IDL]

@Hunter Simpson @Sano

Little follow up with a lawyer's comments

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toro...ving-even-if-not-drunk-lawyers-warn-1.4975008

In the article
-----
When introducing the bill, federal Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould said the law would help crack down on people who consume large quantities of alcohol in a short period, then drive or boat, hoping to get home before the alcohol is fully absorbed into their systems.
...
"Its primary purpose is to eliminate risky behaviour associated with bolus drinking, sometimes referred to as drinking and dashing" Wilson-Raybould told Parliament.
-------


Is this even a thing? It makes no sense. I've never heard of anyone ever doing that.

to pass such a far reaching law with that as the primary reason smells like a load of BS and a poor excuse.

 

[TJH Exitium]

For the record I don't drive intoxicated and I hope everyone who does gets caught and punished harshly.. but even being clean sober there is zero chance the police would be able to test me if they came to my home without a warrant

Unless they catch a person in their driveway before they get inside there is no way to prove alcohol/cannabis wasn't consumed after they got inside the home. The government can say they will "assume" they were intoxicated but people will be fighting this in court and judges will be throwing many cases out.

Trudeau and his authoritarian party will lose in a landslide at the polls this year and hopefully be remembered as nothing but the failed rainbow communist party. Hopefully the new government will handle things better.

 

[TJH Exitium]

In the article
-----
When introducing the bill, federal Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould said the law would help crack down on people who consume large quantities of alcohol in a short period, then drive or boat, hoping to get home before the alcohol is fully absorbed into their systems.
...
"Its primary purpose is to eliminate risky behaviour associated with bolus drinking, sometimes referred to as drinking and dashing" Wilson-Raybould told Parliament.
-------


Is this even a thing? It makes no sense. I've never heard of anyone ever doing that.

to pass such a far reaching law with that as the primary reason smells like a load of BS and a poor excuse.

LMAO you're right that's complete BS made up to sound pretty in front of parliament
"drinking and dashing" means drinking your booze quickly and leaving the bar without paying your tab

not many people are slamming booze then rushing home before they get drunk. they are at the bar to get drunk and socialize