Kat Stevens said:Seems like a vehicular version of stop and frisk to me.
No, because it doesn't grant any new authority to stop anyone. It still has to be a legal vehicle stop.
PuckChaser said:Just to play Devil's advocate, how's random breath screening without reasonable grounds any different than the "carding" that's been so vilified in the media?
'Vilified' is right. Carding is basically talking with people, and subsequently writing down who they were, where and when, and things like vehicle description. Hugely useful tool for establishing pattern of life and association networks for gangs and organized crime. However in the case of 'carding', street checks, or what have you, they're free to just flip you the bird and walk away. Walking in a public place is not a regulated activity. Operating a motor vehicle on a public road is. Same logic applies to the 'stop and frisk' comparison above.
Anyway- we'll see if the law passes in current form, and what survives legal challenge. Even if compulsory ASD doesn't survive, the closure of loophole defenses will be a big deal. Other options could include giving police statute authority to administer a roadside test to any driver involved in an accident, or observed in a 'rules of the road' moving traffic violation, to eliminate random license/insurance checks (a power under provincial law) as an opening move in a fishing expedition.
As ExRCDCpl says, we don't have time to go making everyone blow and won't waste our time with same. We definitely need the ability to have people more readily blow after accidents or in the face of poor driving but where we lack a distinct smell of alcohol.