PUNISHED FOR NOT DRIVING Re "Couple taken for a ride" (Mark Bonokoski, Dec. 6): A couple was fined $130 for public intoxication while waiting for designated driver service? Seriously? If I choose not to drive home drunk, I'll get charged for waiting for my ride? And the pompous fools at the police station think there is nothing wrong with this? Unbelievable. Way to go Insp. Charlie Green, punish those lousy drunks who don't want to drive.
NATALIE WELLS
(We're having trouble understanding the police logic here as well)
ABUSE OF AUTHORITY?
There seems to be a frightening irony in the different ways the police determine illegal intoxication for drivers as compared to pedestrians. If you have to stop your car for a spot check, you speak to an officer who has not seen you on the road. He has no clue how you've been driving -- recklessly or safely. If the officer thinks the driver has been drinking, or the driver admits to it, then he/she is tested. The test has a standard, a set percentage of alcohol in one's system, and the driver is either within the prescribed limits, or not -- and if not, is charged, regardless of his or her driving. As for the two people charged by Durham Regional police for "intoxication in a public place," admittedly the officers can see the people in question, how they're behaving, and so on. But what is the standard for making the charge? Is there a test? The decision is arbitrary. Are citizens protected against abuse of this authority? Perhaps we should all stay home until Christmas is over.
ROBERT LONG
(Let's see: The police charged a couple with public intoxication while they were standing beside their car, waiting for the designated driver service they'd hired to drive them and their car home, safely. Sounds to us like, if anything, they should have congratulated them for being responsible)
No comments:
Post a Comment