maXbimmer Forums

maXbimmer Forums (
-   Off-topic (
-   -   Bruce County Ride Stop at 0800 am (

uzi577 10-11-2010 12:42 PM

Bruce County Ride Stop at 0800 am
I was coming back into the City, from Southampton, Ontario. I was on one of the regional road around 0800 am, today. while driving, on hill still in the country,I saw couple of cop cars last one was with "lights on" on the shoulders of the road. In total maybe 6 cop cars. The cops were in the middle of the road talking to each other. Speed limit was 80, I reduced it to 60. The cop stopped me.
Asked me " Did i drink anything this morning?" it is 0800 o'clock in the morning.
"or last night?" checked my sticker and send on my way. So even if I did how is it any of his concern?

But seriously drinking in the morning, wtf?

SamE30e 10-11-2010 12:56 PM

It's a ride check.. It's kind of what it's meant for. Alcohol doesn't disappear from your system once you fall asleep.

SiR 10-11-2010 03:51 PM

plenty of people wake up...and drive home, meanwhile they are still legally impaired.

bmdbley'sBro 10-17-2010 02:04 PM

madd & the war against drunk driving gave us Road blocks/ 'dui' checkpoints, in very much the same way 'car racing' fatalities (1 every 2yrs) gave us the 50 over stunting law :rolleyes:

now its getting to the point where they want the cops to be able to detain & 'test' you with no cause or reason - just cause they can! equals more road blocks & crap.


Freedom infringed

The Ottawa Citizen October 13, 2010 Comments (12)

Mothers Against Drunk Driving is one of those rare organizations that has changed society for the good*. In the 30 years since its founding, MADD has helped stigmatize drunk drinking and thereby save countless lives. (* road blocks & searches for nohting is 'for the good'? *no-no*)

However, its latest campaign is misguided. MADD Canada wants the federal government to enact legislation that would allow police to conduct random breath testing.

It seems to be a popular idea. In 2009, a parliamentary committee recommended changing the law to allow such testing. Other countries already do it. An Ipsos Reid poll earlier this year, commissioned by MADD, found 77 per cent of Canadians supported the idea. Hundreds of deaths would be prevented, thousands of injuries avoided and billions in social costs saved, MADD speculates.

With so much support and so many benefits, who could object? Well, there are a few issues that warrant consideration. Currently, police are able to stop vehicles and ask drivers if they've been drinking, but police still need reasonable suspicion -- slurred speech, unsteadiness, the smell of alcohol -- to detain drivers and compel them to take a breathalyser. MADD's proposal would eliminate the need for probable cause. Police would be able to stop and detain anyone at random, with or without cause, and force them to take a breath test -- whether they'd had a drink or showed signs of impairment.

As arbitrary detention goes, this might seem like a minor inconvenience. Besides, some might argue, don't police already stop us to ask for a driver's licence and proof of ownership and insurance? Haven't we grown used to searches at airports, borders and other venues?

Maybe we have, but that doesn't justify another extension of state authority. A good liberal society is always on the watch for creeping authoritarianism.

MADD is understandably keen to save lives, especially young lives, but obtrusive measures like MADD's serve to promote the erosion of respect for authority. People begin to resent rules and regulations. They obey, but grudgingly.

At the very least, breath tests are a psychological violation of a fundamental principle of our legal system: The presumption of innocence. Anyone who has a glass of wine with dinner, sips a beer on the patio or toasts newlyweds with a flute of champagne is suddenly a potential criminal. Arbitrary breath tests represent an even greater violation. It is a bad idea to pass laws that create conditions whereby even law-abiding citizens, drinkers and non-drinkers begin to resent the police.

Balancing public safety and state authority is always a delicate act. Usually these debates surface with regards to anti-terrorism policy, but in fact the average Canadian is more likely to be killed in a drunk driving accident than in a terrorist attack. MADD is right: Drunk driving is a scourge.

Yet we mustn't let the desire for safer roads render us insensitive to infringements of basic freedoms. Indiscriminate or random breath testing at police checkpoints, presumably set up on public roads, would represent such an infringement.

Read more:

SiR 10-17-2010 05:43 PM

thats fawked up.
i hope nothing like that goes through.

seriously this place is sinking faster than the titanic.

uzi577 10-20-2010 11:01 AM


Originally Posted by SiR (Post 1458266)
thats fawked up.
i hope nothing like that goes through.

seriously this place is sinking faster than the titanic.

That is funny you should say that, but think, everybody from a general public will support MADD no matter what, if the public behind them, then the MP's and other government institution too, because it will help them to be elected. It fact as you can see they are so blind and naive that they will be supporting them even if they will say that police can fu*k you anywhere, anytime and with no reason.
Which it can do already by the way. Welcome to police controlled state.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:33 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Maxbimmer Copyright 2001 - 2018