New and Used Car Talk Reviews Hot Cars Comparison Automotive Community

The Largest Car Forum in the Philippines

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 41
  1. Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    339
    #1
    What's your opinion guys? Here's an article by James Deakin about the fear of not having an effective method of implementing rather, abusive method of it.

    Drunk driving law needs a limit | Motoring, Business Features, The Philippine Star | philstar.com
    Last week, President Benigno Aquino signed into law Republic Act 10586 or the “Anti-Drunk and Drugged Driving Act of 2013,” which is a commendable new measure that carries fines of up to P500,000 and the permanent revocation of your driver’s license for those caught driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

    Awesome stuff, sure, but as admirable as the step may be, my concern is that I have yet to see anything stipulating what exactly that legal blood alcohol limit is. The new republic act states: Driving under the influence of alcohol refers to the act of operating a motor vehicle while the driver’s blood alcohol concentration level has, after being subjected to a breath analyzer test, reached the level of intoxication, as established jointly by the Department of Health (DOH), the National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM) and the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC). Again, what is that level?

    This is absolutely crucial because, unlike drugs, which are a prohibited substance anyway, how does one define drunk? Six beers for you may be like two beers for me, or the other way around; I’ve seen ladies get all silly after a glass or two of wine and 250 pound men get a high score in Candy Crush after a bottle of scotch. It is all relative, and largely based on body weight, tolerance and even gender.

    The problem it poses later on is when ignorant, arrogant or enterprising enforcers decide to get a little creative in their apprehensions and start extorting innocent motorists who may have enjoyed a couple of bottles of beer or a harmless glass of wine over dinner with the family. They may be far from drunk, but when you consider that the new law introduces a minimum fine of P20,000 and three months in jail, you begin to see the potential for abuse.

    Don’t get me wrong, I applaud the new law — but I shiver in fear when it comes to its implementation. Because as much as I have been one of the noisiest advocates against drunk driving, even going as far as setting up the country’s first “Driver on Call” service with Lifeline ambulance precisely to give drunk drivers a safe and practical option to get themselves and their cars home in one piece, I see too much room for abuse –– both on the side of the law enforcers and the side of the offenders.

    Take two typical scenarios. The first is responsible man A coming home from a nice evening out with his family. He has had a couple of beers, a decent meal, and is now stopped by authorities for “apparent indications and manifestations, including overspeeding, weaving, lane straddling, sudden stops or swerving”–– most of which are completely subjective.

    Business ( Article MRec ), pagematch: 1, sectionmatch: 1
    The enforcer, after claiming to smell alcohol on man A’s breath, accuses him of being drunk and insists on a highly subjective field sobriety test, such as the horizontal gaze nystagmus, the walk-and-turn, the one-leg stand etc.––which, by the way, if refused, results in the immediate confiscation and automatic revocation of license –– and decides, based purely on his own opinion, that the man is indeed drunk. The enforcer then threatens Man A with a P20,000 fine and imprisonment, demand that he go to the precinct for a chemical or breathalyzer test, or to settle on the side of the road for say, P5,000?

    Then there’s the more disturbing second scenario.

    Man B is a habitual offender that regularly drives home under the influence of drugs or alcohol. The enforcer stops him for similar reasons. Man B hops out, fails the field sobriety test, contests it (which is his right) and either (a) offers to settle it on the side of the road for say, P5,000? Or (b) go to the precinct, take the breathalyzer test or chemical test, then pay a good lawyer to argue the definition of “drunk” based entirely on the absence of a pre-prescribed, published, legal blood alcohol limit.

    So this is what I would like to see happen. Introduce a legal blood alcohol level of, say, .06, which is what most countries do, and equip every police car or deputized enforcer with a breathalyzer that they can use for random breath testing at strategic points around the city, car park exits, and other known hot spots to check drivers. If they fail, they should be locked up for the night, fined, and face the possibility of extended jail time, but in turn, the absence of either should declare any such apprehension as null and void, and be grounds for extortion or harassment.

    I know I may sound cynical, but I think we can all agree that I’m being practical. Once again, it is not the law or its harsh penalties than concern me, but the holes in the implementation where corruption, extortion or abuse generally reside. If we see it happening from something as basic as a concealed traffic sign and a hungry enforcer around the corner, then all the more with something as subjective as this –– which is why it needs to be scientific, lest those penalties and fines simply end up as just another negotiating point for a handsome bribe.

    The goal should be to get drunk drivers off the roads, so please, let’s focus more on effective enforcement than harsh punishment, because as it is now, it is no different to having a hefty fine for speeding, but no posted limit or radar gun to measure it.

  2. Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    3,779
    #2
    This law is really subject to abuse knowing how our traffic enforcers, MMDA & police mind set are. The IRR should require a calibrated breath analyzer with defined alcohol level for an apprehension to be valid & legal. All this physical test are a bunch of useless exercise without a breath analyzer.

    On another note, our law makers should start defining & identifying all the details of the law they are to author and not leave it to agencies to do the rest. It's your law, you take full responsibility of it. It show's how lazy & dumb our lawmakers are, sayang lang mga sweldo & kick back nila. Walang nahihita ang bayan.

  3. Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    52,514
    #3
    yes, the chemistry-based alcohol level test is a must for this law. there are medical conditions whose manifestations may look like those of alcohol intoxication.
    the "smell of alcohol breath" test is highly subjective.. some persons simply do not have the ability to smell alcohol, while others can "smell it by just looking at the person of interest from 20 yards away"..
    Last edited by dr. d; June 6th, 2013 at 09:55 AM.

  4. Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,736
    #4
    I remember reading somewhere that the government is planning on purchasing breathalyzers for this exercise. Well, aside from what has been pointed put, the other thing that scares me is hygiene. I wouldn't want to blow on a breathalyzer that was just wiped down by the police officer's handkerchief. I can imagine how dirty these devices can get with so many drunks blowing on them. What would happen if you refuse to blow on a dirty breathalyzer because you're afraid you might contract some disease? Would the police force you or threaten you with confiscating your license?

  5. Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    12,358
    #5
    Let's wait for the IRR.

    I do hope and very hopeful na rational and just ang pag construct nito.

    Still andyan yun takot ko, most probably sa gabi mainit ang hulihan nito

    at alam naman natin ang nangyayari sa gabi andaming milagro ng mga kapulisan at TE.

  6. Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    12,358
    #6
    Quote Originally Posted by K.I.L.L. View Post
    I remember reading somewhere that the government is planning on purchasing breathalyzers for this exercise. Well, aside from what has been pointed put, the other thing that scares me is hygiene. I wouldn't want to blow on a breathalyzer that was just wiped down by the police officer's handkerchief. I can imagine how dirty these devices can get with so many drunks blowing on them. What would happen if you refuse to blow on a dirty breathalyzer because you're afraid you might contract some disease? Would the police force you or threaten you with confiscating your license?
    Sa IRR magkakaalaman yan.

    lahat stated dun.

  7. Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    29,354
    #7
    Quote Originally Posted by K.I.L.L. View Post
    I remember reading somewhere that the government is planning on purchasing breathalyzers for this exercise. Well, aside from what has been pointed put, the other thing that scares me is hygiene. I wouldn't want to blow on a breathalyzer that was just wiped down by the police officer's handkerchief. I can imagine how dirty these devices can get with so many drunks blowing on them. What would happen if you refuse to blow on a dirty breathalyzer because you're afraid you might contract some disease? Would the police force you or threaten you with confiscating your license?

    In normal use, the blow straw on the breathalyzer is replaced before use with a suspected DUI driver.

    I dont know if they will be doing the same here though...

  8. Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    339
    #8
    How about responsible drunks out there, like me. Marami dyan ang pag nakainom eh mas nagiging maingat magdrive. Sana wala nalang random apprehensions. Dapat siguro yun mga nagkakaroon ng violation like beating the red light, swerving, overspeeding etc. ang itest nila for being drunk or drugged or yung mga involved sa minor/major accidents. Siguro mas magiging maingat ang mga motorists pag nalaman nila na once nainvolve sila sa accidents or nagkaroon ng violation under the influence of alcohol eh mahigpit ang batas sa kanila. Some won't drive nalang kasi alam nilang hindi nila kaya, some will be more cautious at magiging maingat ng sobra. Ang problema dito sa atin, pagdating ng gabi, nawawala na yun mga TE at yung mga pulis naman, wala na sa kalsada, nakatambay nalang sila sa mga patrol cars nila. Just my opinion guys. First concern ko talaga dito sa law nato eh yung mga responsible ones. Pero gusto ko din naman mapasa tong law nato para mawala yun mga goons na pag nakainom eh akala mo kung sinong pagkayayabang na wala ng pakelam sa kapwa motorists.

  9. Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,736
    #9
    Quote Originally Posted by ghosthunter View Post
    In normal use, the blow straw on the breathalyzer is replaced before use with a suspected DUI driver.

    I dont know if they will be doing the same here though...
    Yup I've done this before overseas. I always passed! I'm just worried about how they would do this here. I hope they do and won't make excuses like, "sorry but we've run out so we'll just wipe it down for you."

  10. Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,938
    #10
    Who in the world would be driving drunk at day time? Wala namang enforcers sa gabi eh. Wala namang mga kotse yung mga lasinggero / mga siga ng barangay. Pangiinom na lang nila kesa pambili ng kotse!

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Anti-Drunk and Drugged Driving Act of 2013