What was enhanced about this one?

Did the enhancement make this one different than previous from previous such projects?

With the enhancement, is is possible to compare the outcome of this project to the outcomes of past projects on a rate basis?

So waht does this statement mean: "the good news is that although they stopped thousands of vehicles, the NUMBER OF IMPAIRED DRIVERS WAS RELATIVELY LOW"

Relative to what? Other communities based on community population? Past projects in PG based on a rate per 1,000 vehicles stopped, for instance?

Let's get some meaningful statistics in here.

Is anyone at our detachment a statistician who can tell us objectively whether we are improving or not and tell us why they can say that?

Who cares what they call it. It's a roadblock / checkstop campaign.

OK, everyone in the O250 world.

Merry Christmas and have a safe and relaxing time.

Well, actually now that you mention the name, "counter attack" implies that there was an offensive attack by someone or some group.

I did not realize I was attacking anyone when I drive nor have I ever considered other drivers to be attacking anyone.

How about a road/driver audit???? That is essentially what it is.

I managed to get into those roadside checks four times in four different locations !!

Personally, I'm happy to see them there, and know that they are getting at least some of the drunks off the road, even if its just for a short time, ( no doubt a lot of them are right back at it again - licence or not ). We'll never know how many lives they have saved because of this, because the people who would have been killed by these drinking-driving jerks are still enjoying the Christmas season with their families like we are right now, but its a virtual guarantee that there'd be a lot more drinking drivers on our roads today if there were not some way like this to catch them at their deadly game.

I would however, suggest that setting up a roadblock on the new Fraser bridge at 4pm during the BCR rush hour may not have been the best idea. That one probably rattled a few nerves, and produced a few negative vibes about the whole process.

All in all though, I'd say "well done" to those who stood out there in freezing weather trying to keep us and our roads a whole lot safer.

We appreciate your efforts.

palomino

To the RCMP: well done! The more checks, the safer the roads are. In certain circles that I travel there is a conscious effort to take taxis or use a designated driver. I think the road checks work. "Gus", some people just can't be happy with anything, at least the RCMP are communicating with the public in a positive manner and are improving.

The saddest part of this entire exercise is the fact they must still do these things every holiday season and they are still catching drivers that are impaired. With the "enhanced" part of this being the road side drug screening by the newly trained drug impairment detection officers, there is now less to get away with.

A few stories ago, a commenter said that they had gone to a private party and was astounded at the number of drinking partyers that actually planned to drive away from the party. A failure to plan is a plan to fail.

What this says to me is that the general public that enjoys intoxication has not made the needed cultural shift. It also says that our public transit is inadequate for those party times. The only time the buses run into the wee hours is new years eve, Taxi's are too expensive, And it is way too cold to 2-stroke it home when one is dressed for indoor.

Do we make the establishments liable and responsible for their patrons?
Should the penalties be enhanced?
How do we encourage the cultural shift?

Making laws is one thing, enforcement another, where most of these things fail is in the enabling of compliance. We have legislation to address a serious public safety concern. We have the holiday road checks. That is making the law and enforcing the law. Where are the efforts to aid in compliance with the law? Where is the reasonably priced and reasonably available transit?

Loki,
You have good points. The only pub in town that I'm aware of that supplies transportation is the Riverstone as I've heard them advertise it on the radio.

"Where are the efforts to aid in compliance with the law? Where is the reasonably priced and reasonably available transit?"

Where is the sense of personal responsibility to find your own way home on your own dime if necessary? Why is it someone else's responsibility to provide cheap or free transportation for those who drink too much? Should someone else see you into your home and tuck you into bed as well?

"Should someone else see you into your home and tuck you into bed as well?"

Yes.

Granted, there is the personal responsibility aspect. Surely you have noted how well this is working? If people would take that responsibility, we would not need legislation. Apparently, too many persons of the age of majority still need to be babysat.

I firmly believe that no law and no enforcement of a law is valid until and unless compliance with that law is possible.

Here we have a situation where it is traditional to intentionally get intoxicated. It is part and parcel of the season. Not everyone does it, but a significant number of people do. In an attempt at public safety, legislation was created and the police were encouraged to enforce that legislation. So far, so good.

The other side of it is twofold. First, patrons must adopt the attitude that it is not OK to drink and drive. That is the cultural shift. Second, the ones that made the law must enable the law by providing adequate transit support during the hours when the bars are open.

To do otherwise is creating a cash cow nuisance to the populace. "Oh goody, we have something else we can fine you for and infringe your freedoms!"

Create the law.
Enforce the law.
Enable compliance with the law.

This line of thinking and sense of entitlement is why governments everywhere are in trouble. We expect them to take on the responsibility that realistically should be taken on at the individual level, and that comes with huge cost.

If you're grown up enough to drink, you're grown up enough to find your own way home and unfortunately, accept the financial and emotional consequences if you get behind the wheel and injure or kill someone.

The Riverstone shuttle is a great idea and have used it twice!! I think all pubs should offer that service.

I agree the the Riverstone idea is a good one and if it brings a few more customers through the door, all the power to them.

mrPG:
I am not disagreeing with you except for your insistence that this situation does not exist. It does.

I personally have never had a DUI. I personally take responsibility for my own actions as a mature adult should. You and I and most others do the right thing.

It is the ones that insist on driving after drinking that has caused these laws to be created and enforced.

There is no "sense of entitlement" to any of my comments. I am in full realization of my own responsibilities. Now how do we as a society with a desire for safety stop people from driving while impaired? Based on your prior postings, you do not have anything to contribute to the matter except snide remarks. Do you have anything to say that is not belittling to every comment?

by the by, I noticed you also quote fictional characters. I would think that someone with so much potential would have made more effort not to do so after slamming others for that offense.

let 'er rip boyo!

I'm enhanced right now!!!!!!!!

I dont drink, but I do go out on the town, I have never failed to be a designated driver. Usually when I leave a pub or bar I have more than one passenger with me.

The moral of the story, make a plan before you go. If you cant afford a taxi how in the hell do you afford to go drinking????????

Going back 10 or 15 years ago (maybe more?) I remember a media campaign for designated drivers, if you were one and went to a bar or pub you wore a button and all non-alcohol beverages were on the house. I still think its a good idea, it may promp some of those who are on the fence about drinking to stay sober. It also took away peer pressure from the designated drivers when the drunks kept pushing drinks on them.

Can anyone tell me why police are not stationed at random at pubs all year round? Four pubs, each Friday and Saturday night.

The number of people prevented from being killed as a direct result of such road blocks?

Tell me how many people get killed inside the City as a result of drunk driving in the City every year? A four night blitz is just over 1% of the number of nights a year. The number of cars stopped per night as the percentage of the number of cars driving over the night might be what? 10%, even 20%?

So that would make it 0.2%. That is the percentage of cars they stop.

So close to 80 were drunk drivers.

Taking those sample numbers further, the number of people they would catch if they were to do intensive enforcement 365 days of the year should be around 40,000.

Or, if were to say it in another way, at the intensity that they found drunk drivers there might around 40,000 drunk drivers throughout the year. And that is in the evenings only!

How many people in PG get killed as a result of drunk drivers each year? 10? 20?
--------------------

I keep scrathing my head wondering why tere are no police cars parked outside of drinking establishments throughout the City, at least on weekends. Would that not be the obvious thing to do?

Make a project out of it and give it a code name so it does not become a fishing trip.

The sad thing gus is if the RCMP parked outside of pubs, people would either a) not go to that establishment or b) wait until the police left. They probably wouldn't 'catch' too many people trying to drive drunk, but it might be preventative.

And sorry Loki for having the temerity to question your posts. I agree with what was posted above, if you're planning on drinking, make appropriate plans to get yourself back safely. If you can afford to drink in a bar, you can afford a taxi.

I will bet that now that the Riverstone Pub has a shuttle service some of the other ones in the city will do it also. The hotels all do it and it helps their business, so why shouldn't the pubs?

i have a charge account at one of the taxi companies for all my employees and my family. If they are out on the town there is no reason to drive if they are drinking and they know it. Most of my employees and my 3 children have used this many times even after having only one or two drinks. I keep stressing to them that a $25.00 cab ride is a lot cheaper than a $1500.00 DUI fine. Thankfully they have listened so far.

Thanks duffer, that is a good company policy, kudos for you. and a merry christmas.

"The sad thing gus is if the RCMP parked outside of pubs, people would either a) not go to that establishment......"

So be it. Remember, it is the pub and the servers in the bar have a responsibility to make sure that no one leaves the pub drunk if they are about to step into a car and drive.

The responsibility rests with them or the home owner who might be serving someone who is drunk.

The Riverstone sounds like they are taking their repsonsibility seriously.

I think this is another one of those cases where the drunk person has lost some of the ability to determine whether they should drive, yet there are people around them who still have the capacity to think straight and they simply watch it happen.

The effort to keep drunk people from driving should be a societal effort, not just the effort of the police. It cannot be an effort of the drunk person, because they have lost the capacity to think in an objective fashion about their ability or lack thereof.

Worth reading. Riverstone got the message, it seems like.

http://www.extremebartending.com/drinking_and_driving.html

From that site:
"I was talking to a police officer a few years ago about the seriousness of the topic of drunk driving in the nigtclub & bar industry. He told me three things that stuck with me and convinced me that, as a bartender and by being an active part of this industry, I am also an active part of the problem of drinking and driving.

40-50% of all drivers killed on Canadian roads were impaired at the time of the accident. (These people would probably be alive if they hadn’t been drinking and driving.)
Half of all alcohol related traffic accidents occur between 11 pm and 3 am. (Last call)
In North America it is estimated that 1-5 drivers has been drinking and 1 in 10 is legally impaired on any Friday or Saturday night. (Our biggest nights...next time you’re driving on a Friday or Saturday night, start counting cars and do the math.)"

I am trying to go past all this rah rah rcmp sis boom bah ...... I am trying to get to where something actually changes.

So, if you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem.

1. Stop sending people from a home get together away drunk.

2. Stop watching someone at a pub with your group, take off in their care after they have had too much to drink. Intervene.

A woman I know was stopped and when she said she had a drink prior to driving,she was given a breath test. She scored .05. Then came the lecture all about impaired driving-blah,blah blah. They did not give her a roadside but warned her that they could. What is the use of a .08 level if they can give a roadside for .05? The 'no drinking at all' for new drivers is discrimination and should be revoked. They can impound your car if you say you've had a drink and have an 'N' on your car. I'm surprized a judge has not ruled the "N" discrimination as well.

Loki, quit slamming the cost of a taxi. You can go out and spend upwards of $200.00 for a night out, and you think my fare to take you home safely is expensive??
Get a real grip on what you want out of life. I don't work for free. I spend the whole Christmas season transporting you drunks around. Did you ever think I would like to have some enjoyment with my family at Christmas time? No, it is all about you Loki.

Most nights I barely make minimum wage, don't tell me I charge to much!

If you can't afford a taxi (safe ride home), you should stay home!!

Merry Christmas everyone.