• Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/

Canadians are Guilty of DUI Unless They can Provide Proof of Innocence

Bamby

New member
My Exciting Trip to the Liquor Store in Fascist Canada

As I wrote in an earlier article, new laws concerning drinking and driving came into effect in Canada on Dec. 18. As well as increased penalties, cops no longer have to have a “reasonable suspicion” that a driver has been drinking before demanding that driver provide suitable breath samples. As well, a police officer can demand someone provide breath samples if that person has driven anytime within the previous two hours. If the demand is made to a person drinking at home or in a bar and that person blows over the legal limit, he or she can be charged. It is up to them to prove that they were not impaired when they last drove.

I also wrote about Art Lightowler, a 70-year-old Ontario resident who, on Jan. 5, decided to take three cases of empties back to his local beer store to get a refund. His dastardly act of taking that many bottles back at one time caught the attention of a police officer. The officer decided Lightowler was a drinker. After the senior drove away from the store, he was stopped by the cop. The officer demanded samples of his breath; there was no evidence he had been drinking but police no longer need that. A shocked Lightowler blew into the roadside breathalyzer, passed and was allowed to go on his way. (Canada Free Press, Jan. 16)

On Friday during the early afternoon, I decided to go to the liquor store. The weather, beginning on Saturday, was expected to be bad so it was a good time to get some booze in case I wanted a drink in the next few days. I had not had a drink in about a week.

As I drove into the liquor store parking lot, I noticed a police car parked there. No one was in the car. If the officer or officers were in the liquor store, they were in the back, not visible to customers. They may have been at one of the neighbouring stores or apartments. The car was backed into the parking space indicating the driver was not responding to an emergency.

In the olden days, before the new drinking and driving laws came into effect, I wouldn’t have paid any attention to the car or looked to see where the police officers were. It simply was not a big deal. But in those pre-December days, leaving a liquor store with a bottle and driving home did not constitute a “reasonable suspicion” the driver had alcohol in his or her system. But when I left the store, I again looked to see if a police officer was around. I could have been breathalyzed for the same reason (or lack of reason) Lightowler was required to provide breath samples.

I had no intention of drinking that afternoon. But it was unsettling to realize if I drank within two hours of getting home, a cop could barge in and legally demand breath samples. And if I had been drinking the bottle I bought and had too much alcohol in my system or was impaired, I could have been charged. The onus would have been on me to adduce evidence I was not impaired at the time I drove.

I identify with Art Lightowler. We are around the same age and have the same first name. And we both apparently share the belief when returning empties it is better to make one trip than three. Obviously, having no contact with the police I didn’t go through anything like Lightowler did. But it was a real experience nonetheless.

It was one thing to read the legislation, the commentaries and hear Lightowler speak about what happened to him; it was another thing to see that parked scout car and realize I could have been detained and required to provide breath samples for doing nothing more than purchasing a bottle of alcohol from a government store while perfectly sober.

Canada Free Press
 

EastTexFrank

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
If I lived in Canada they wouldn't even needed to breathalyze me this afternoon. They would have just taken me straight to the slammer. I did my semi-annual, or there about, stocking up of the liquor cabinet. There was a lot of booze in the back of that car, boxes and boxes of it, mainly Scotch. In fact, I might make close to year this time.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
I believe most UK nations do not have the presumption of innocence we supposedly enjoy here in the States. Am I mistaken?

Or is the issue here that the police do not need probable cause to pull you over and cite you?
 

XeVfTEUtaAqJHTqq

Master of Distraction
Staff member
SUPER Site Supporter
I went through a dui check in Canada a few years ago. F'in pig tried so hard too entrap me it was scary. After about 10 attempts and 2 breathalyzer units he let me go. Still pissed about it.

The RCMP is a gang in Canada they are the local and provincial police in many areas and are also the equivalent of the FBI. No checks and balances and extreme corruption.
 

Doc

Bottoms Up
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
Sounds like a Big Brother nightmare. Horrible.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
Perhaps this is why the Canadians do not enjoy the civil rights protection of a second amendment?

Jus' throwin' that out there.

but why do we, who do, even think for a moment that they and the Europeans may have a better idea?
 
Top