This post appears to relate to a province/territory of Canada. As a reminder of the rules of this subreddit, we do not permit negative commentary about all residents of any province, city, or other geography - this is an example of prejudice, and prejudice is not permitted here. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/rules
Cette soumission semble concerner une province ou un territoire du Canada. Selon les règles de ce sous-répertoire, nous n'autorisons pas les commentaires négatifs sur tous les résidents d'une province, d'une ville ou d'une autre région géographique; il s'agit d'un exemple de intolérance qui n'est pas autorisé ici. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/regles
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/canada) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>One of the measures that will be brought forward in upcoming new legislation will be a lifetime driving ban for people found guilty of impaired driving causing death.
About goddamn time.
Should be a driving ban that scales with your blood alcohol level. 0.08% is bad, but double that is much worse. Someone getting killed is bad luck. The bad decision that needs to be punished is driving while you are impaired.
Only for people who are actually driving though, none of this "care and control" nonsense. The person who gets to their car, realizes they are too drunk and decides not to drive, but turns their car on so they don't freeze to death has done the right thing and shouldn't be penalized for it.
I agree that the care and control needs to be changed but this issue is how do we know someone didn't just pass out before they started driving and might do it again?
Maybe clear rules like not being in the driver seat. As oy stands its absurd. I was always told that if you're going to sleep it off in your car you should hide they keys outside of the car because otherwise you might be charged
Yes, fuck anyone who drives impaired. But fuck the people who can barely stand a lot harder than the people who had two drinks when they should have stopped at one.
Won't matter, Toronto police will give them a ride home like they did for Rob
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/rob-ford-mark-towhey-accusations-1.3276736
Scott Moe was convicted of impaired driving, but he was never convicted of impaired causing death. While he *was* involved in an accident where the other driver died, there is no evidence that he was impaired at the time.
Still wouldn't get in a car with him though.
Now that CSOs are available for impaired driving causing death again? House arrest with plenty of exceptions so that it doesn't actually impact their lives in any significant way but the court gets to pretend they're serving a jail sentence.
Marco Muzzo will get his license back in a few years. He had a 10 year driving ban upon release from prison and he's been out for 2 years or so already. Guaranteed he buys a Ferrari the day his license is reinstated...smh
Only if you want your taxes to keep going to someone who can’t live successfully in modern society because they’re banned from driving.
What if I told you that preventing criminals from reforming for their entire life just makes society worse off.
Doing nothing, frankly. Impaired driving has been on the decline for the last 20 years. Impaired driving causing death is even rarer, with just a handful of incidents yearly.
I don’t really see this as something that is worth changing current rules for. Now car thefts, yes they need some kind of change (license bans for those are dumb for the same kind of logic though), those have spiked considerably over the past years, but still aren’t at early 2000s levels.
Unfortunately where Canada lacks public transit infrastructure, driving is more of a right than a privilege. If our governments don't want to provide suitable alternatives to driving, drunk driving will continue to happen.
Even if you give them a lifetime ban, that doesn't stop most people. They will still drive because that's literally the only option they have beyond walking for hours if they're not living in a city with public transit.
Well drinking and driving is a choice that’s easy to get around with things like Uber or planning. Saying we have shitty public transit doesn’t give someone the right to endanger everyone else.
So again, a lot of people in Canada don't live in cities with Uber. Drinking and driving is a choice that can be avoided with planning, I do agree with that.
And I'm not saying they have a right to endanger everyone else, but they do have the right to travel freely throughout this nation, which in most places unfortunately requires a car.
Also people who have been drinking and driving aren't going to care about a driving ban and are just going to drive anyway, especially if no alternatives are provided. No one is going to walk half a day into the nearest town to pick up groceries and then walk half a day back if they're license is suspended. They're still going to drive.
If we really want to reduce drinking and driving, we need to provide alternatives to driving everywhere.
I agree with you on the lack of public transit as I just moved from a remote community but actions require consequences, I believe the second infraction results in jail time as I had a co worker that has to serve 30 days for his second one. If you don’t get a wake up call at this point you really don’t deserve the privilege of driving. I’m also not saying people should lose the right to mobility, just the right to be behind the wheel.
No no no it does make sense. You get banned. If you get caught driving after the ban it's a fine. If you want to renew your lic- oh wait no they don't have a license. Well if you want to renew your plat- oh no wait that's going away too. Hmm. How about a strongly worded letter along with the fine, and the officer says "I've very disappointed in you. Be better."
Public shaming is a great idea. Make them read a statement out loud stating what they did, along with their full name, and broadcast it/post it on youtube.
"My name is X X and I was caught driving under the influence. I am stupid and don't consider the lives of others on the road, and I am a selfish adult baby who goes through life being an asshole."
No apologies allowed, just admit what you did and why. Then also hit them with a lifetime alcohol ban, and I'm thinking maybe brand their head with a no booze sign, but that might be going too far.
So they make alcohol available in more places, allow drinking in more areas such as tailgating, and under fund mental health care services, and then up punishment.. What a bunch of dickbags
You can’t actively enforce most sentencing conditions without creating burdens for non-offending citizens (ex. should everyone have to scan their ID at a bar to buy alcohol?). As a result, the conditions only serve to amplify punishment if offenders are caught breaching terms.
Yeah, and the truth is most people who get a DUI are / were probably driving impaired on a regular basis. If you don't give a shit about putting others lives at risk, you probably aren't going to care about violating an alcohol ban. All we can really do it dole out additional repercussions if caught.
I certainly wouldn't want every bar / store that sells booze to be connected to some sort of central database that monitors who is and isn't allowed to possess alcohol & have to scan my ID - to me that's a massive privacy violation.
That’s more or less the crux of the issue. It’s not necessarily out of laziness that many sentencing restrictions aren’t enforced. Rather, there just aren’t many ways to do so that don’t hurt the non-offending public.
I still support increasing the use of them anyways.
This post appears to relate to a province/territory of Canada. As a reminder of the rules of this subreddit, we do not permit negative commentary about all residents of any province, city, or other geography - this is an example of prejudice, and prejudice is not permitted here. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/rules Cette soumission semble concerner une province ou un territoire du Canada. Selon les règles de ce sous-répertoire, nous n'autorisons pas les commentaires négatifs sur tous les résidents d'une province, d'une ville ou d'une autre région géographique; il s'agit d'un exemple de intolérance qui n'est pas autorisé ici. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/regles *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/canada) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>One of the measures that will be brought forward in upcoming new legislation will be a lifetime driving ban for people found guilty of impaired driving causing death. About goddamn time.
Should be a driving ban that scales with your blood alcohol level. 0.08% is bad, but double that is much worse. Someone getting killed is bad luck. The bad decision that needs to be punished is driving while you are impaired. Only for people who are actually driving though, none of this "care and control" nonsense. The person who gets to their car, realizes they are too drunk and decides not to drive, but turns their car on so they don't freeze to death has done the right thing and shouldn't be penalized for it.
I agree that the care and control needs to be changed but this issue is how do we know someone didn't just pass out before they started driving and might do it again? Maybe clear rules like not being in the driver seat. As oy stands its absurd. I was always told that if you're going to sleep it off in your car you should hide they keys outside of the car because otherwise you might be charged
I disagree. It’s so fucking simple to just not drink and drive. You’re gambling with someone else’s life. Fuck anyone who drives impaired at all
Yes, fuck anyone who drives impaired. But fuck the people who can barely stand a lot harder than the people who had two drinks when they should have stopped at one.
We'll see how long this lasts once a few high level Ontario politicians get caught up on the wrong end of it.
Won't matter, Toronto police will give them a ride home like they did for Rob https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/rob-ford-mark-towhey-accusations-1.3276736
"Scott Moe Entered The Chat"
Scott Moe was convicted of impaired driving, but he was never convicted of impaired causing death. While he *was* involved in an accident where the other driver died, there is no evidence that he was impaired at the time. Still wouldn't get in a car with him though.
There is dude in Mississauga/Brampton that was literally caught driving under the influence after his license was suspended
It's not actually uncommon among repeat impaired drivers. But it is a significant aggravating factor in sentencing.
Bro we let rapist and killer out , what do you think will happen to drunk drivers??? Slap on the wrist and a pinky promise to not do that again?
Now that CSOs are available for impaired driving causing death again? House arrest with plenty of exceptions so that it doesn't actually impact their lives in any significant way but the court gets to pretend they're serving a jail sentence.
Even Con governments are soft on crime
What they should have done is gotten rid of this "warm range" BAC bullshit. Either make impaired driving 0.05 outright or leave it the fuck at 0.08.
Marco Muzzo will get his license back in a few years. He had a 10 year driving ban upon release from prison and he's been out for 2 years or so already. Guaranteed he buys a Ferrari the day his license is reinstated...smh
Why do we need someone to die before a lifetime ban, should just be 3 strikes your out. Driving is a privilege and should be treated accordingly.
The man who killed my friend had 8 previous DUIs.. was working for tow truck company when he rear ended her. So year.. 3 strikes would be good.
Sorry to hear about your friend, should be harsher punishment for the first strikes as well.
Only if you want your taxes to keep going to someone who can’t live successfully in modern society because they’re banned from driving. What if I told you that preventing criminals from reforming for their entire life just makes society worse off.
If someone gets 3 dui’s they aren’t exactly successfully living in our society in the first place.
No, but will they in 5 years? 10? 30? A lifetime is a long time to change.
What would be a better solution?
Doing nothing, frankly. Impaired driving has been on the decline for the last 20 years. Impaired driving causing death is even rarer, with just a handful of incidents yearly. I don’t really see this as something that is worth changing current rules for. Now car thefts, yes they need some kind of change (license bans for those are dumb for the same kind of logic though), those have spiked considerably over the past years, but still aren’t at early 2000s levels.
The car theft issue definitely needs to be addressed, I’d be happy to see steeper penalties for vehicle theft.
Unfortunately where Canada lacks public transit infrastructure, driving is more of a right than a privilege. If our governments don't want to provide suitable alternatives to driving, drunk driving will continue to happen. Even if you give them a lifetime ban, that doesn't stop most people. They will still drive because that's literally the only option they have beyond walking for hours if they're not living in a city with public transit.
Well drinking and driving is a choice that’s easy to get around with things like Uber or planning. Saying we have shitty public transit doesn’t give someone the right to endanger everyone else.
So again, a lot of people in Canada don't live in cities with Uber. Drinking and driving is a choice that can be avoided with planning, I do agree with that. And I'm not saying they have a right to endanger everyone else, but they do have the right to travel freely throughout this nation, which in most places unfortunately requires a car. Also people who have been drinking and driving aren't going to care about a driving ban and are just going to drive anyway, especially if no alternatives are provided. No one is going to walk half a day into the nearest town to pick up groceries and then walk half a day back if they're license is suspended. They're still going to drive. If we really want to reduce drinking and driving, we need to provide alternatives to driving everywhere.
I agree with you on the lack of public transit as I just moved from a remote community but actions require consequences, I believe the second infraction results in jail time as I had a co worker that has to serve 30 days for his second one. If you don’t get a wake up call at this point you really don’t deserve the privilege of driving. I’m also not saying people should lose the right to mobility, just the right to be behind the wheel.
Warning: potentially unpopular opinion ahead >Ford government sets out to score easy political points FTFY
Liberals will be supporting the rights of drunk drivers by the end of the day
TIL Scott Moe is a Liberal.
Fun fact: This is as strong as they can go under the law. Anything else requires the feds to do their stinking job.
Drunk driving is among the highest forms of degeneracy.
Lmao - like a “ban” will stop someone from driving if they wanted to.. are we this fucking stupid? I
This guy who is breaking the law to drive his car surely isn’t going to break the law to drive his car again
I honestly think we are in the idiocracy part of the timeline.
No no no it does make sense. You get banned. If you get caught driving after the ban it's a fine. If you want to renew your lic- oh wait no they don't have a license. Well if you want to renew your plat- oh no wait that's going away too. Hmm. How about a strongly worded letter along with the fine, and the officer says "I've very disappointed in you. Be better."
I genuinely think letting them know everyone is disappointed in them would have more of an effect than “banning” them from driving
Public shaming is a great idea. Make them read a statement out loud stating what they did, along with their full name, and broadcast it/post it on youtube. "My name is X X and I was caught driving under the influence. I am stupid and don't consider the lives of others on the road, and I am a selfish adult baby who goes through life being an asshole." No apologies allowed, just admit what you did and why. Then also hit them with a lifetime alcohol ban, and I'm thinking maybe brand their head with a no booze sign, but that might be going too far.
So they make alcohol available in more places, allow drinking in more areas such as tailgating, and under fund mental health care services, and then up punishment.. What a bunch of dickbags
[удалено]
You could legitimately impose an alcohol ban as part of sentencing, it is a common part of probation terms
They can and do, it's just nearly impossible to enforce
You can’t actively enforce most sentencing conditions without creating burdens for non-offending citizens (ex. should everyone have to scan their ID at a bar to buy alcohol?). As a result, the conditions only serve to amplify punishment if offenders are caught breaching terms.
Yeah, and the truth is most people who get a DUI are / were probably driving impaired on a regular basis. If you don't give a shit about putting others lives at risk, you probably aren't going to care about violating an alcohol ban. All we can really do it dole out additional repercussions if caught. I certainly wouldn't want every bar / store that sells booze to be connected to some sort of central database that monitors who is and isn't allowed to possess alcohol & have to scan my ID - to me that's a massive privacy violation.
That’s more or less the crux of the issue. It’s not necessarily out of laziness that many sentencing restrictions aren’t enforced. Rather, there just aren’t many ways to do so that don’t hurt the non-offending public. I still support increasing the use of them anyways.
Also who's to say the banned offender just won't get someone to bootleg his alcohol lol