Trudeau’s pot law makes it open season on all drivers

Discussion in 'Canadian Patients' started by gb123, Apr 19, 2017.


    gb123 Well-Known Member

    Irony, hypocrisy and cops. Nothing good can come from this trio when all three are put in play.

    On Monday morning, for example, with no reference to his late father being the moving force behind it, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau released a statement celebrating the 35th anniversary of Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

    “I remind Canadians that we have no task greater than to stand on guard for another’s liberties,” said Trudeau.

    “The words enshrined in the Charter are our rights, freedoms, and — above all — our collective responsibility.”

    Too bad the irony of this has eluded him.

    While his father Pierre famously proclaimed the state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation, his son now apparently sees no hypocrisy in allowing police to stick their noses into our vehicles and haul us out without the need for that invasion to be preceded by suspicious behaviour or suspected wrongdoing.

    It’s a rights breaker that would have Pierre Trudeau rolling in his grave at the family plot in rural Saint-Remi-de-Napierville.

    For hidden in the folds of the new Cannabis Act, tabled in the Commons last week to begin the process of legalizing the recreational use of marijuana, the Liberals bragged that the legislation would also include the toughest laws against impaired driving in the world.

    In doing so, the new law, if adopted, would drop the requirement that police need reasonable suspicion that a driver has been drinking before demanding a breath sample.

    This is unquestionably a violation of our constitutional right to be free from unwarranted searches and detainment.

    A cop sticks head into your car, smells nothing, observes no glassy eyes, hears no slurred speech, and yet still demands you step out of your car to take a roadside breath test?

    You complain, and then what? He’s now searching your vehicle, hauling stuff out of your trunk—all for being sober?

    Oddly, however, the same legislation says “suspicion” is still needed to perform roadside tests for those suspected of driving with marijuana or any other drug in the system, no doubt to kowtow to millennial progressives, but that requirement is negated by the proposed hardline approach on alcohol where no suspicion is needed.

    It covers off the coppers.

    It means they can virtually stop you at any time, for no reason, and administer a roadside breath test, all which gives them ample time to ramp up suspicions about drug use if the breathalyzer doesn’t produce what they want.

    Now, once upon a time, I believed you had nothing to fear from cops if you had done nothing wrong.

    Spare me the wrath of the “thin, blue line,” but years in the news game have since taught me differently.

    First, there is this thing called “quotas,” that supposedly do not exist, but do. Quotas for speeding tickets, quotas for arrests.

    And then there are the younger cops of today, many who have to go to a dictionary to look up the meaning of the word “discretion.”

    While you cannot judge a book by its cover, you can cops.

    If you are pulled over by a cop with bulging biceps, his head shaved down to the nubs, wearing wraparound sunglasses, and with his hands protected by reinforced gloves that would be banned in mixed martial arts, you can be certain beyond a reasonable doubt you are not going to get a break.

    You are screwed from the moment he says his first word.

    If the Liberals' Cannabis Act is allowed to pass as it stands, it will become an open season on all drivers.

    There are no two ways about it—for any or all of the reasons just stated.
    GroErr, WHATFG and GrowRock like this.

    cannadan Well-Known Member

    yes as med patients...some of us are basically being thrown to the wolves, and will definitely be lumped in as impaired drivers
    regardless of tolerance,and experience.
    For most there will be little to no difference, at a road side stop...but will that still now be true...?
    Swabbing drivers for cannabis or other drug use, based on little or no suspicion requirement,is basically the same thing as trolling a fishing line with hundreds of hooks behind a boat....the thing that is for sure is that you will hook up with a good percentage of the hooks on that line, and you will definitely catch way more that your intended target,also that line will ,indiscriminately ,hook up on a regular basis, with anyone or everyone,anything or everything.

    gb123 Well-Known Member

    its a much bigger line of hooks than youve said...
    it enables them to take all your rights away at their convenience with just a sneaky suspicion.
    Same old same old BS ...

    legalization means the incarceration of sick people for trying to stay alive.

    sleepless_canuck Well-Known Member

    Where are you getting the idea they will house a swab test?

    A Swab just confirms usage within 4 days.

    Does not prove impairment
    Pulpit_ likes this.

    gb123 Well-Known Member

    what part about a positive test and them taking you IN FOR MORE TESTING are you failing to realize? Even if you are not impaired it is assumed that you are under the proposed law which enables them to continue their investigation no matter how long it takes..
    with an assumed guilt until proven other wise...
    its just to funny actually..(:
    GrowRock likes this.

    sleepless_canuck Well-Known Member

    That's a Human Rights issue.

    I deal with swabs daily.

    You CANNOT force a swab test without physical signs of impairment.

    I don't care what the bill says.

    My human righ5a out weigh their bill any day of the week.

    Quit being a whining conspiracy nut and look for solutions.
    mr sunshine, gb123 and Mr.Head like this.

    sleepless_canuck Well-Known Member

    What "more" testing?

    Urine is unless for first 4 days.

    I deal with this daily and to my knowledge there is NO scientific way to determine the impairment at the time of arrest or incident.

    Like I said my job revolves around the swab test.

    It's useless.
    GrowRock and gb123 like this.

    gb123 Well-Known Member

    my aren't we full today ! (:

    solutions :lol:
    I got one...

    do what you need to do...been saying that or three years now and longer actually.
    just pointing out the easy stuff for the dumb ones who cant rightfully see whats in from of their face.


    cheers :bigjoint:

    berulakide Well-Known Member

    I didnt think they could test yet? I thought the test was a volenteer thing and you can opt out as it is still being tested? I am probably behind, but I didnt think they could narrow it down time wise yet to when you injested or smoked or whatever. not within hours anyways.
    I am sure someone will straighten me out here.

    gb123 Well-Known Member

    they can say and do what ever they like
    and there's not a damn thing you can do or say against that...

    thinking other wise shows who is out in left field.

    gb123 Well-Known Member

    nothing is in as of yet...

    gb123 Well-Known Member

    unless they just arbitrarily SET ONE and make it law... sure that will add to court challenges and much work for the system
    thats the idea after all.(:

    sleepless_canuck Well-Known Member


    I've read lots of your posts so I knew your response before you even wrote it.

    I don't think you have admitted to being wrong in your life.

    Have a good day and don't forget your tinfoil hat
    itsmehigh likes this.

    sleepless_canuck Well-Known Member

    That hampers law enforcement genius.

    If there is no scientifically proven test then they cannot say well this is the best we have so you go to jail.

    Intact I fight large corporations daily for this exact issue.

    Yes they do what they want cause it's their company.

    But they pay lost wages when I'm done.

    Just like if a cop charges you with poor evidence or none then what are you worried about?

    It will be thrown out of court.

    Pulpit_ Well-Known Member

    Exactly, THC is suppose to be in our system as med patients. They will have a hell of a time with a conviction, unless they have it recorded showing your wasted. If you drive around with red or glossy eyes you're looking for trouble. I have been driving for over 30 years and I have never been asked if I was high or consumed weed when I have been pulled over. I have driven every day medicated for over 30 years.

    gb123 Well-Known Member


    ohh that makes it right does it (:

    read them all.............. PLEASE
    shows you like what I have to say
    or why would you challenge it lol


    showing your ears ;)

    walk away knowing you lost out poor sad little man

    gb123 Well-Known Member

    watch them 8)

    whats that you say about fighting them every day???

    that tells me they do this every day and are in court like I said as well..fighting .. lol

    ok and now ... what are you saying again? sounds both ways ..
    pick on will ya please.

    sleepless_canuck Well-Known Member


    Have a good day.

    I read your posts as you stumble upon many threads to expose your tunnel vision and short sighted theories.

    I guarantee your a lonely man with a house full of crap you hoard.

    Enjoy your day gb
    itsmehigh likes this.

    gb123 Well-Known Member

    yer still going to court to fight that if these changes go through

    sleepless_canuck Well-Known Member


    They no longer test without cause.

    Arbitrators shut them down along with supreme court.

    Post incident only - it was getting expensive.

    At 150,000 /yr I was getting huge settlements for their Human Rights Violations.

    Sure they moved on to something new and still do post incident testing but that is all they are now allowed to do.


Share This Page