Why is Canadian court system so Light on impaired drivers?
546430
Hell you'd need to lock up everyone in Canada.
829131
Causes can be: \n1. Drinking\n2. Not paying attention\n3. Not stopping at stop signs\n4. Poor driving skill.\n5. Too dim to see\nEffects are: \n1. Death\n2. Severe injury\n3. Ticket\n4. Go to court house (jail)\n5. Pay large amount of money
703737
Similar systems are used on other countries as well.\n\nWhere there a multiple possible interpretations, the court should choose the one that makes sense given other laws. This could be to avoid absurdity, or to avoid conflict with other higher laws.
910192
It's not the reaction times -- it's the crime itself you're punished for.\n\nDriving while intoxicated is a special case because there are special laws regulating alcholol and other intoxicant. But while it's easy to test for drug/alcohol use in an objective blood test, it's almost impossible to test for emotional or situational impairments.\n\nSo, driving while intoxicated can be punished by itself, separately, because there can be objective standards. But anything else can only be punished based on the objective results.
496794
It is Nation wide .08, and that was figured by the amount of impairment of drunk drivers. The law also has the right to convict a detain for levels starting at .05 with the arresting officers discretion. Most States video tape all arrests anymore, and it's almost impossible to beat. One beer can get you arrested in America anymore.
910342
Here in Ontario, the fine for driving no licence is around $300 and the fine for careless driving is 265.  You can't have a licence suspended if you don't have one, but you won't be able to get a licence until you pay the fines off.
995399
because it is a huge revenue source for law enforcement. it is also an aid to justify taking away more of your rights. the highway patrol is trying to get a law passed in which they may stop you and swab your mouth to see if you are supposedly under the influence.
29678
I never realized that.  Perhaps blind people should not drive.  Then again, blind people might be better than some people that can see.
512063
Absolutely.  Chief Justice McLachlin's reasons were clear and sensible.  It is worth noting that the whole issue of social host liability was only raised in an attempt to aid recovery of the monetary damages.\n\nThere was a wrongdoer (Desmond Desormeaux).  He drove drunk and hit another car, killing one person and paralyzing another (Zoe Childs).  He was convicted in criminal court and went to jail for it, and was found liable in the personal injury lawsuit.\n\nUnfortunately, Desormeaux had no auto insurance, and no assets to enforce judgement.  That doesn't leave Ms. Childs SOL.  Under Ontario law, she can, and probably did, recover monies from her own auto insurer, and the provincial fund, under the uninsured and underinsured provisions.  However, there are policy limits.  So Childs' personal injury lawyer added this issue of social host liability to bring in defendants with insurance coverage and no statutory deductible.  That is why this claim was pursued, so that deeper pockets could be added, not to hold the party hosts accountable for any actual wrongdoing or negligence.  If Mr. Desormeaux had been insured, it is highly unlikely that social host liability would been an issue.\n\nI have the deepest sympathy for Ms. Childs, but the fact that Mr. Desormeaux was uninsured is not a good reason to extend tort liability beyond reasonable limits.
923922
This is NOT a question, by the way.\n\nAND the police are not the ones who put people in jail it is the judges.  Judges are the only ones who decide if someone goes to jail.  The police have absolutely NOTHING to do with deciding if someone goes to jail.  They enforce laws that have been put in place by a democratically elected government.  Police arrest people and  bring people who have violated these laws before a judge.  You run your country, when you get involved in changing laws that you think are not just.  People are free to choose whether or not to break laws that are in place. \n \nThe problem is that if the statistics showed that the incarceration rates were going down, you would be complaining that police weren't doing their job (even though once again police are involved in sentencing).  We can't win.\n\nActually, come to think about it...Judges are elected in the US aren't they? (here in Canada they are appointed based on qualifications not popularity)\nJudges will continue to put people in jail because that is the will of the people.
424793
You don't. So far Canada still has some sense. They don't open their offenders to the possibility of vigilanteism.
582674
I know that it's true because my brother wasn't allowed to enter Canada from the U.S. because he has a DUI record.
1127685
Depends if the judge had his toast burnt that morning or not and how much can you afford for a good lawyer. Generally,  its a loss of your license for a year, your car insurance goes up 400%,   you have to pay for classes to teach you not to drink a drive, then it costs you about 10,000 dollars when its all over. Lesson to be learned DONT DRINK AND DRIVE.  Second time is worst.
1173700
It is up to the court to decide, but it is wise to get a lawyer in the state the DUI happend in becuase they know the judges and the loop holes so they can get you farther than an out of state lawyer can.
362203
Yep. Its kinda like pot-lite, so there may be some issues with driving and such. But thats about it. Also, companies don't test for it cuz it's legal. Have fun!
523747
Cause not everyone drinks and drives.  Most people drink beer legaly in their own homes.  Maybe you just need to mind your own business.
1002097
Some people might say its because judges are incorrectly interpreting the law or that they place too much emphasis on the fact thats some please guilty therefore making the whole process quicker (and cheaper).\nSome people may say that certain judges have certain tendencies and look after their own.\nIts wrong whatever it is. That baby rape thing made me sick for days. one hour with me in a soundproof cell. I would happily dispense some justice.