Man being charged for the 24th time for a DUI.

[jesseps]

An elderly man pleaded guilty today to his 24th charge of drunk driving in nearly a half-century.

 

Yvon Gingras also pleaded guilty to violating a court order forbidding him from driving a car.

 

Gingras' record for driving under the influence goes back to his first arrest for the crime in 1965.

 

The 67-year-old resident of St-Ubald, near Quebec City, asked to be released on bail in the current incident but he was refused.

 

The judge cited his lengthy record of driving while intoxicated.

 

Sentencing arguments will begin on Nov. 28.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2011/10/19/yvon-gingras-quebec-drunk-driving_n_1020885.html

 

When will the idiots in Quebec change the law? Are they waiting for one of them or one of their family members to be run over

 

[Cyrus]

Well, what kind of law could you make to stop it? He was already banned from driving.

 

----

 

Doesn't seem so bad either, 24 times but since '65! There's some guys who get caught like 15 times in a year

[jesseps]

Well, what kind of law could you make to stop it? He was already banned from driving.

 

----

 

Doesn't seem so bad either, 24 times but since '65! There's some guys who get caught like 15 times in a year

 

If he was banned for driving and keeps doing it. Time for Quebec to have a 3 strikes law. Lock him up for life. Seeing this idiot doesn't want to listen, take his life away.

[Cyrus]

That's a little much though, he just drove around drunk and didn't kill anyone...

[jesseps]

That's a little much though, he just drove around drunk and didn't kill anyone...

 

His next time, he might not be so lucky. Someone will be paying for his alcoholism and the government slap on the wrist, like all the other drunk driving cases.

[ToxiK]

That's a little much though, he just drove around drunk and didn't kill anyone...

 

So what? Driving drunk is dangerous (an illegal, by the way). We should not wait until a drunk driver kills someone before arresting him.

 

It is not like it was his first time, and that was just a one time mistake. He obviously doesn't get it and should be put away.

[Cyrus]

I know, but you can't put a penalty before the actual crime. What kind of penalty would he get if he was addicted to say, firing a gun off randomly in public areas?

[ToxiK]

I know, but you can't put a penalty before the actual crime. What kind of penalty would he get if he was addicted to say, firing a gun off randomly in public areas?

 

Driving drunk is the crime, hurting or killing someone is to aggravate that crime. If he can't stop drinking and driving, then for the protection of others (and not just to punish that man) we have to lock him up (unless we can find a way to keep him outside and stop him from drinking and driving).

[Cyrus]

Is it really? I know over 160mg/dL is a Criminal Code offense, so I guess rex-based it is a crime. But prima facie, a crime should be obvious to anyone, as for example theft or murder is. Someone who has never read a codex of laws should be quite clear on the crime or not. Drunk driving is just... perhaps a poor driving practice but little else.

 

I think we need to find a new way to deal with the issue. The penalties have already gone beyond ridiculous and the problem has subsided to quite a significant degree, but the end issue - you're hammered to some extent you don't know but you feel fine, your car is there, you are far from home. What do you do?

 

Perhaps instead of making unconstitutional road-blocks and prowling the streets for drunks, the police should offer free breathalyzer tests to passers-by on the sidewalk on weekend nights? Certainly it isn't obvious when you cross 0.08 or not, well within certain limits. Certainly I've had the times after a party has wound down and I was wondering if I was around that or not. Probably I was well under and certainly I never had an issue but it isn't a pleasant feeling.

[Dirt_Devil]

Someone who has never read a codex of laws should be quite clear on the crime or not.

 

Perhaps instead of making unconstitutional road-blocks and prowling the streets for drunks, the police should offer free breathalyzer tests to passers-by on the sidewalk on weekend nights?

 

1) Il est le devoir des citoyens de connaître les lois.

 

2) La police n'a vraiment pas l'effectif pour maintenir le niveau de service actuel et d'envoyer des policiers sur les trottoirs et offrir des "breathanalyzer" gratuit. Surtout la nuit / fermeture des bars.