Quell Suprise...
Shitty law comes with shitty results
Quell Suprise...
Shitty law comes with shitty results
Originally posted by Thales of Miletus
If you think I have been trying to present myself as intellectually superior, then you truly are a dimwit.
Originally posted by Toma
fact.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
...
Last edited by Sugarphreak; 08-18-2019 at 04:44 PM.
Probably 90% of citizens feel an 'obligation' when it comes to the police - in that they should be done as they ask. Very few question police - unless they have experience.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
It's funny because the police forces would refuse to say on record that they wouldnt go into someone's home to force a breathalyzer and now we have the police doing just that.
The law goes too far yet we have people blindly supporting it.
This really has nothing to do with the law at all. This has more to do with a couple of cops seeing if they can bend some rules and get away with it... which they didn't. If this was more to do with the law it would be much more involved.
They thought they could find a loop hole and it failed.
The law didnt fail. This has everything to do with the new law as it gives cops the discretion to lay the charges.
It cost the ladies thousands of dollars to fight this ridiculous charge. That's not okay.
Unless they actually were plastered when they left the pub. Which is also entirely possible in this scenario. She might have been gooned when she left the pub, and then only had 3 beers at the house. The charges she got off of were from her inability to provide a breathalyzer test due to her condition, not because she proved she wasn't drunk while driving.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
It's a terrible law with the good intention of closing a loophole that people have abused for decades. "The way to hell" and all that though.
You're putting the multiple stories in the article together. She was charged for failing the test, not from not performing. Thats others.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
But I was crazy to suggest this is exactly what could/would happen.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Originally posted by SJW
Once again another useless post by JRSCOOLDUDE.
Originally posted by snowcat
Don't let the e-thugs and faggots get to you when they quote your posts and write stupid shit.^^ Fact CheckedOriginally posted by JRSC00LUDE
I say stupid shit all the time.
I think you need to give the article a re-read. It talks about two separate occasions, one with the pub lunch and breathalyzer at home, and a completely separate case where a lady was convicted for refusing to blow.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Or did they get away with it? You don't know what their intentions were. Maybe this lady had a run in with them at some point that they have bad blood over. Doesn't matter if what they did was legal or not, they costed this woman 3500$ in expenses and fucked up her day pretty good. That very well might've been their motive to begin with. That's the problem with these over reaching laws that are open to all this grey area. There is no recourse for the officers that ruined someones bank account, reputation, life, etc.
Waiting for a reply from the ignorant officers in this thread claiming we were all fucking retarded for even insinuating something like this was possible.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
I'm not, I'm waiting for replies from the other members. We get great and insightful perspectives from the likes of Phil and we're fortunate to have that conduit imo.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Originally posted by SJW
Once again another useless post by JRSCOOLDUDE.
Originally posted by snowcat
Don't let the e-thugs and faggots get to you when they quote your posts and write stupid shit.^^ Fact CheckedOriginally posted by JRSC00LUDE
I say stupid shit all the time.
I would say there is more to this story than what we’re being told. She stopped for a drink at a pub, and someone called in with concerns. Depending on what’s been said, that may give rise to RPG to believe she may be committing a criminal offense and the police are duty bound to investigate. Again, as I’ve said over and over, this power existed under old legislation and this is only making news because people think it’s new and by the sounds of it, the Mounties fucked up something they were lawfully in place to do and duty bound to investigate. I’d love to read the decision to get the ENTIRE story, as this may not have been an issue of the law, but the way the investigation was conducted.
- - - Updated - - -
Were those the words used? I thought we are all being pretty professional and addressing your concerns through our knowledge and experience, specifically saying this issue existed under old legislation before and could have happened prior to this new change of language in the CC. Seems you’re not paying attention?This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
---------------------------------------------------
Any writings in this forum are my personal view and all opinions expressed should be taken as such; there is no implied or direct opinion representative of anything but my own thoughts on various subjects.
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
They said at random. Not that they wouldn’t continue to investigate using the authorities given to them, which can include demands made within three hours of operating a conveyance that are specifically connected to suspicion of an offense being committed. Big difference.
---------------------------------------------------
Any writings in this forum are my personal view and all opinions expressed should be taken as such; there is no implied or direct opinion representative of anything but my own thoughts on various subjects.
you would think the media would be pulling the transcripts from the ruling. I agree it would be an interesting one to read. Regardless the police tricked the lady to chat with them and used the new law to lay charges hours after the fact.
.
Last edited by Rat Fink; 12-06-2020 at 01:48 PM.
Thanks for the 14 years of LOLs. Govern yourselves accordingly and avoid uppercut reactions!
^If this lady was sitting pool side when this happened she probably got charged fairly recently which makes you wonder how she had the charges thrown out so quickly.
Most would assume the evidence was lacking for that to happen.
.
Last edited by Rat Fink; 12-06-2020 at 01:48 PM.
Thanks for the 14 years of LOLs. Govern yourselves accordingly and avoid uppercut reactions!
....
Last edited by Sugarphreak; 08-18-2019 at 04:56 PM.
.
Last edited by Rat Fink; 12-06-2020 at 01:49 PM.
Thanks for the 14 years of LOLs. Govern yourselves accordingly and avoid uppercut reactions!