Interesting points of view from all. In this discussion we wrestle with a number of issues, such as presumed innocence and the mandatory roadblock, the type of penalty that should be assessed when one is determined to be drunk or impaired.
I would like to see statistical evidence that roadblocks are effective, however, I doubt that having everyone stop to prove their innocence is either ethical or effective. I may make good press. More to the point, officers should concentrate on any type of distracted or erratic driving, whatever the cause.
Given that driving at some level of blood alcohol is unacceptable, legally or ethically, I would like to see that percentage defined and adopted across the board. When infactions occur, my opinion is that the vehicle should be confiscated and the driver jailed, if found guilty, under the same laws governing the intent to commit manslaughter. If found guilty, the confiscated vehicles go to public auction with no remuneration to the owner or the driver.
While I appreciate BC Brian's love for the RCMP, my experience with them has been far less than professional or courteous. About what I would expect with any national police force regardless of country.
Allowing mandatory roadblocks could lead to other actions that impinge upon individual liberty, such as prohibiting cell phones, requiring helmets for bicyclists and motorcycle riders, mandatory seat belts, etc -- all in the name of public welfare and public good. That is something most Nazis would approve.
