Zero Alcohol

[cehyoopers]

I repeat,,,,,,,,,my generation fought hard to not give in but age has made some of us wiser,,,,and a lot of us were lucky,,,,

Maybe I should change it to "our generation",,,,,

this is from another forum,,,,yesterday,,

please help prayers needed, 20 year old son killed yesturday,,,

yesterday he and a friend were coming home from town, a drunk driver crossed the line and hit them head on.The piece of crap lived, my son and best friend died.Please help, his mom and me are having a real hard time

story

[Wildbill]

I repeat,,,,,,,,,my generation fought hard to not give in but age has made some of us wiser,,,,and a lot of us were lucky,,,,

Maybe I should change it to "our generation",,,,,

this is from another forum,,,,yesterday,,

please help prayers needed, 20 year old son killed yesturday,,,

yesterday he and a friend were coming home from town, a drunk driver crossed the line and hit them head on.The piece of crap lived, my son and best friend died.Please help, his mom and me are having a real hard time

story

Very sad very horrible. Existing laws prohibit drunk driveing. New laws won't help Education through programs like Party Sound might.

[Moosifer]

I just turned 19 this summer and no joke about 2 weeks later I'm not aloud to have a beer at 2 in the afternoon and drive home at 8 or 9 in the evening because there would still be alcohol in my system. I have to say that there are less people under the age of 21 drinking and driving then people over the age of 21. That is just from personal experience and people I see walking out of bars and into their cars.

I don't agree with this law simply because of the focus on the age but I am against getting drunk and driving. Having one beer won't affect a kid under the age of 21 or 22 more or less than a middle aged man in my opinion.

that means laws work.When you are say,50,there will be even less drinking by the younger group and your group as well.I take a moment to remember all the people I knew that died at the hands of a drunk driver,,,,when I myself was drinking and driving,,,,and the people before that.It takes a generation or 2,but the change does come.I salute you for being responsible at your age,but from exp the law is a good thing.Forget the booze till you put the sled away for the day,,,,,my generation fought hard to not give in but age has made some of us wiser,,,,and a lot of us were lucky,,,,myself at the top of that list.

no responsible or irresponsible government will ever back down on the drinking and driving campaign,,,,there is to much innocent blood spilt there now,,,,everywhere,,,not just here.

The reason young drivers are choosing not to drink and drive has very little to do with harsher laws. If that were true, wouldn't the "responsible adults" stop as well?. This also implies that the youth of today is more mature than previous generations which I don't believe to be true. The reason why drinking and driving among young drivers has decreased is the fact that it has become socially unacceptable (ie. it's not cool anymore) and you can thank the media for that not the government.

That said, I'm sure other forms of Impaired driving have not reduced by much. They still drive when impaired by drugs, lack of sleep, etc. If there was an effective roadside test for drugs, I'm sure the # of impaired driving charges against young drivers would skyrocket. Amoung youth today, it may be unacceptable to drive drunk, but stoned isn't a big deal.

As a Driving Instructor, I think this regulation should apply to all driver's with less than 5 years driving experience regardless of age which is what I believe was it's original target. Novice drivers (regardless of age) lack the necessary vision skills that only comes with experience. Combining that with alcohol just makes things worse. Without going into a lot of detail, I believe the only reason why the law was not written this way is because an older "novice" driver might take issue with the new restriction and vote accordingly at election time, whereas a young driver wouldn't bother. Keep in mind, this was not the only additional restriction placed on young/novice drivers. Effective at the same time (Aug 1/2010) the penalties for novice drivers also increased as well for any driver with a novice class license convicted of violating any of the graduated licensing conditions, or for a Highway Traffic Act (HTA) offence that results in 4 or more demerit points, or receives a court-ordered suspension for an HTA offence that would have resulted in 4 or more demerit points. This also applies to hybrid license (ex. G & M1/M2) holders.

The details and penalties can be found here:

http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/dandv/driver/gradu/index.shtml

[Moosifer]

I just turned 19 this summer and no joke about 2 weeks later I'm not aloud to have a beer at 2 in the afternoon and drive home at 8 or 9 in the evening because there would still be alcohol in my system. I have to say that there are less people under the age of 21 drinking and driving then people over the age of 21. That is just from personal experience and people I see walking out of bars and into their cars.

I don't agree with this law simply because of the focus on the age but I am against getting drunk and driving. Having one beer won't affect a kid under the age of 21 or 22 more or less than a middle aged man in my opinion.

that means laws work.When you are say,50,there will be even less drinking by the younger group and your group as well.I take a moment to remember all the people I knew that died at the hands of a drunk driver,,,,when I myself was drinking and driving,,,,and the people before that.It takes a generation or 2,but the change does come.I salute you for being responsible at your age,but from exp the law is a good thing.Forget the booze till you put the sled away for the day,,,,,my generation fought hard to not give in but age has made some of us wiser,,,,and a lot of us were lucky,,,,myself at the top of that list.

no responsible or irresponsible government will ever back down on the drinking and driving campaign,,,,there is to much innocent blood spilt there now,,,,everywhere,,,not just here.

So then have Zero Tolerance for EVERYONE!!! Oh wait, people that are over 22 probably are starting to make money, therefore buy more and pricier alcohol from LCBO (= $$$$$$$ in taxes) and have political clout.  No let's just pick on the 'defenseless' younger people.

Zero Tolerance for Everyone is useless, the older (voting) public don't drink and drive only young stupid kids under 22 do that.

[Wildbill]

17 years I have been an active firefighter on hwy 69. Thank god for the four laning. During this time I have dealt with so many fatal collisions that I have no ability to even try to count the dead. Some of those accidents absolutly involved alchohol beyond the limits of existing laws. And yes ceyhoopers you and I are guilty of having broken them too. My point is that toughening the laws won't help imo. Education helps. It does create a public dislike of drinking and driving. This helps.

Today Racer 12 went to a program called Party Sound. This program teaches how to be safe and educates the students on the results. It even introduces them to great young people through family films etc. and after them beginning to like them shows them how a bad decision ruined or ended thier life. Add to this the D.A.R.E. program and the world is changing. This over the top nanny law won't help. The basis for it is the youth that died at the Joe river near Rosseau because of the driver being extremely drunk. Way beyond existing laws. The parents even made it possible for the kids to charge thier bing to thier accounts I have been told. Now out of grief and possibly guilt the parents have lobbied to create this law.

Distracted driving is an issue all learning drivers would accept a reception fairly but age profiling is wrong. .05% maximum would be reasonable and no cell phones or drive through food in the possesion of the driver.

If you have seen what I have seen you would not allow a drunk to drive. But still I believe that there is worse than booze out there. Drugs kill and are not easily tested for. Sleep depravation kills as well as how well sealed todays vehicles are is causing oxegen depravation impairment.

Please drive safe everyone

Cost of taxi $20-$40

Cost of impaired ticet after insurance hikes and fines and the drive safe breathalizer around $30,000.00

Value of lost life = Priceless

[yamahas]

Moosifer is completely right. the laws have nothing to do with why most kids do not drink and drive, it its the fact that everyone knows that its stupid to get hammered and drive. It's education that's saving lives not laws. Also got to give credit to parents out there ( from the ones I've seen.)

Even before this law came into effect kids nowadays don't even think about drinking and grabbing the keys and driving anywhere.

Its just the whole 0% thing I dont like. for example if I was to go over to say an uncle's house and help him build a deck. He gives be a beer since I am now 19 at 2 in the afternoon. I stay till after dinner and drive home. I feel like this is safe as I would not be under the influence but it would still show up on a breath test. I think it would make more sense to say if you are between 19 and 21 must be 0.03 and under then when the government decides that your mature enough to bring it up to 0.05 like the rest of Ontario. although I don't know what the intoxication level vs the blood alcohol %.

[Domino]

I agree with most of the opinion here. Although the laws help to a point, socially the responsibility of driving safe has done more for the reduction in impaired driving.

For many many years I volunteered with a Search & Rescue team in the western GTA and I was finding impaired drivers every week. Some I found before they crashed! I don't see as many impaired drivers now, instead I see young & old people texting...still!