He probably knew he was drunk, the cops were busy so - if he refuses no test is required, he can go home and the cops can get on with their night. Good for him, and hopefully his punishment reflects his leadership role.
Guilty until proven innocent? He had a track record on the issue apparently.
From the OP article:
It is safe to say everyone is opposed to drunk driving – but there are civil liberty issues involved," the message read. "There is the presumption of innocence and the right to not self incriminate...With the members of MADD, I am in favour of making our streets safer. However, I think this proposed legislation goes too far."
"the right to not self incriminate" Seeing the US 5th amendment here.
The man is a hypocrite, he's worried about "civil liberties" when he voted in favour of peoplle have more access to automatic weapons, voted to deny gay and lesbians the right to marry, voted to restrict the rights of wmen to choose.
So much for the "law and order" party, or rather they want the law to apply to everyone else, not them.
"HyperionTheEvil" said The man is a hypocrite, he's worried about "civil liberties" when he voted in favour of peoplle have more access to automatic weapons, voted to deny gay and lesbians the right to marry, voted to restrict the rights of wmen to choose.
So much for the "law and order" party, or rather they want the law to apply to everyone else, not them.
Don't worry. The law will apply to him too. By the way, how could he have voted in favour of people having more access to automatic weapons while they are prohibited weapons ? You can't have MORE access since there is NO access since the 70s except for people with 'grand-fathered' permit. What was that bill to give more access to automatic weapons he voted for ? And what does that have to do with restricing civil liberties ? It's quite the contrary.
Give the fat bastard a break.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/201 ... ml?cmp=rss
He probably knew he was drunk, the cops were busy so - if he refuses no test is required, he can go home and the cops can get on with their night. Good for him, and hopefully his punishment reflects his leadership role.
From the OP article:
"the right to not self incriminate" Seeing the US 5th amendment here.
So much for the "law and order" party, or rather they want the law to apply to everyone else, not them.
The man is a hypocrite, he's worried about "civil liberties" when he voted in favour of peoplle have more access to automatic weapons, voted to deny gay and lesbians the right to marry, voted to restrict the rights of wmen to choose.
So much for the "law and order" party, or rather they want the law to apply to everyone else, not them.
Don't worry. The law will apply to him too. By the way, how could he have voted in favour of people having more access to automatic weapons while they are prohibited weapons ? You can't have MORE access since there is NO access since the 70s except for people with 'grand-fathered' permit. What was that bill to give more access to automatic weapons he voted for ? And what does that have to do with restricing civil liberties ? It's quite the contrary.