CFL and Riders mourn the loss of Jayden Dalke

[LXTSN]

Rules and penalties already exist and simply don't work. MADD has been fighting this fight for 50+ years. Everyone knows it's wrong to drink/drug and drive. It still happens every weekend.

What is the existing penalty for DUI arrests?
I've looked into this but I can't find it. It seems to be handled in a case to case basis.
So far I've found 3 other cases of DUI:
Kenny Lawler - 1 game suspension (team-imposed), and then after that he struggled to cross the boarder with the criminal record. Missed 6 weeks total.
Jake Dolegala - 1 game suspension (team-imposed)
Charleston Hughes - 1 game suspension

I personally don't think this is nearly enough. The NFL has a baseline suspension of 3-games and 8-games for a second offence.
In my personal opinion, I think 8 games should be the minimum. There should be zero tolerance for this.

[theaardvark]

DUI is one thing that should never be accepted or normalized.  With rideshare programs, there is never a need to take this terrible risk.

The Cannabis Football League is famous for our tolerance of recreational THC use, and it not being a concern in random drug testing.  And as it is legal now, that's fine.

But whether it is alcohol or THC, DUI is a serious issue.  And the CFLPA and the league should make sure there are sufficient educational resources to make sure this kind of thing never happens.

Football players are human, and subject to the frailties that accompany that.  We will never eliminate this. But we have to make sure it is not accepted or tolerated.

The previous cases where there were no injuries were dealt with far too leniently.  Lawler, Hughes, Dolegala all could have ended the same as Dalke.  I have no issue with 8 games or more for first infraction, and a lifetime ban for a second.  Don't care whether its a PR player or an MVP.

The CFLPA should institute a tip line for team mates to report suspicious behaviour, so that the PA can reach out to potential problems before they happen, and offer support to prevent this from happening again.

These are young men, who feel literally invincible, who may have a decent amount of money and adoration, that gives them a bravado that makes them think they can get away with stuff.  They have to be reminded that, if anything, they have a responsibility that comes with their job in the spotlight to be extra careful not to succumb to these temptations.

[Horseman]

What is the existing penalty for DUI arrests?
I've looked into this but I can't find it. It seems to be handled in a case to case basis.
So far I've found 3 other cases of DUI:
Kenny Lawler - 1 game suspension (team-imposed), and then after that he struggled to cross the boarder with the criminal record. Missed 6 weeks total.
Jake Dolegala - 1 game suspension (team-imposed)
Charleston Hughes - 1 game suspension

I personally don't think this is nearly enough. The NFL has a baseline suspension of 3-games and 8-games for a second offence.
In my personal opinion, I think 8 games should be the minimum. There should be zero tolerance for this.

Penalties for a first-time impaired driving conviction under Canada's Criminal Code start with a mandatory $1,000 fine. Fines scale up based on blood alcohol concentration (BAC) (e.g., up to $2,000 for ≥ 0.160) and include a mandatory 1-year driving prohibition. Repeat offenses carry mandatory minimum jail terms (30 days for a second, 120 days for a third).

Key Criminal Code PenaltiesFirst Offense:
Mandatory $1,000 fine, 1-year driving prohibition, and a permanent criminal record.
Second Offense: Minimum 30 days in jail and a 2-year driving prohibition.
Third/Subsequent Offenses: Minimum 120 days in jail and a 3-year driving prohibition.
Bodily Harm: Maximum penalty of 14 years in prison.Death: Maximum penalty of life imprisonment.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

What is the existing penalty for DUI arrests?
I've looked into this but I can't find it. It seems to be handled in a case to case basis.
So far I've found 3 other cases of DUI:
Kenny Lawler - 1 game suspension (team-imposed), and then after that he struggled to cross the boarder with the criminal record. Missed 6 weeks total.
Jake Dolegala - 1 game suspension (team-imposed)
Charleston Hughes - 1 game suspension

I personally don't think this is nearly enough. The NFL has a baseline suspension of 3-games and 8-games for a second offence.
In my personal opinion, I think 8 games should be the minimum. There should be zero tolerance for this.

Wouldn't surprise me at all if it's looked at now or after the season. Player conduct has got to be one of the biggest risks that both the league and PA would recognize as a threat to business/reputation. The commissioner could probably use this situation to get buy-in for more strict rules. It would be hard to argue against.

[LXTSN]

Wouldn't surprise me at all if it's looked at now or after the season. Player conduct has got to be one of the biggest risks that both the league and PA would recognize as a threat to business/reputation. The commissioner could probably use this situation to get buy-in for more strict rules. It would be hard to argue against.

Totally agree and I really hope the CFL makes a point of this.

[TBURGESS]

Bigger penalties don't change people's behavior. Neither does advertising. Never have. Never will. 

Here's where you ask, "What can we do then?" and the answer is sadly nothing more than we are currently doing.  

[dd]

Suspending a player from playing would be a first good step, and something substantial like 3-5 games, but that will only be so effective. It comes down to the person making this a priority in amongst their off field activities, doesn't take much to get a designated driver, yet people don't and other let impaired people leave their place and drive. Its really sad it continues on to this day , but crap it does

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Bigger penalties don't change people's behavior. Neither does advertising. Never have. Never will.

Here's where you ask, "What can we do then?" and the answer is sadly nothing more than we are currently doing. 

I was coming at it from the perspective of risk mitigation for the pursuit of profit and the league and PA would be aligned on that. Obviously no one entity has a magic cure for human behaviour. Additionally, I'm sure they already have supports but alongside possible stricter rules would be additional or increased access to mental and substance supports. Even if they have the best plan and care in the world (I have no idea) an audit of those would probably be a good idea. Just because you can't totally mitigate down to zero doesn't mean it's not worth trying.

[Jesse]

Bigger penalties don't change people's behavior. Neither does advertising. Never have. Never will.

Here's where you ask, "What can we do then?" and the answer is sadly nothing more than we are currently doing. 

Education and awareness absolutely change people's behaviour. It's a never-ending process, but it's important to do.

[Horseman]

Let's talk about civil law and who can be held responsible, for example:Yes, a bar can be sued for overserving a patron who then causes an injury crash through impaired driving. Under commercial host liability (often called dram shop law), drinking establishments owe a legal duty of care to the public to prevent customers from becoming overly intoxicated and driving.

Key Factors in Bar LiabilityVisible Intoxication:
Staff must have ignored clear signs of impairment (such as slurred speech, stumbling, or aggressive behavior) while continuing to serve drinks.

Legal Grounds for LiabilityDuty of care:
Commercial establishments make a profit from selling alcohol, meaning the law assigns them a duty to monitor consumption and prevent foreseeable harm to third parties on the road.
Overserving: Liability usually arises when staff continue to serve a patron who is visibly intoxicated or showing obvious signs of impairment.
Failing to intervene: Staff must take positive, reasonable steps to stop an intoxicated customer from driving, such as arranging a taxi, calling a rideshare, or confiscating keys.

Same can be said for someone having a house party where they let their guest leave intoxicated and drive impaired. They open themselves up to a civil lawsuit.

[LXTSN]

Bigger penalties don't change people's behavior. Neither does advertising. Never have. Never will.

Here's where you ask, "What can we do then?" and the answer is sadly nothing more than we are currently doing. 

I agree that it's not likely to stop someone from making the decision initially, but punishments for actions are very important.
With a 1 game team issued suspension and a slap on the wrist, they are saying that this isn't really a big deal.
What can we do then? We can create a more severe punishment deterring repeat offenders and showing the rest of Canada that we take this seriously.

[TBURGESS]

Education and awareness absolutely change people's behaviour. It's a never-ending process, but it's important to do.

Does it really, though? 

The research disagrees with your opinion. 

"Research indicates that education and awareness alone are generally insufficient to drive sustained behavior change, as knowledge does not automatically translate into action. Studies show that providing general information (such as the health risks of obesity or smoking) rarely alters habits because individuals often already possess this knowledge but lack the motivation, skills, or contextual support to act on it."

Quite frankly, ads are just an expensive way of pretending to do something about problems without actually doing anything. 

If punishments worked, then no one would commit murder knowing that they themselves could be put to death. 

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Let's talk about civil law and who can be held responsible, for example:Yes, a bar can be sued for overserving a patron who then causes an injury crash through impaired driving. Under commercial host liability (often called dram shop law), drinking establishments owe a legal duty of care to the public to prevent customers from becoming overly intoxicated and driving.

Key Factors in Bar LiabilityVisible Intoxication:
Staff must have ignored clear signs of impairment (such as slurred speech, stumbling, or aggressive behavior) while continuing to serve drinks.

Legal Grounds for LiabilityDuty of care:
Commercial establishments make a profit from selling alcohol, meaning the law assigns them a duty to monitor consumption and prevent foreseeable harm to third parties on the road.
Overserving: Liability usually arises when staff continue to serve a patron who is visibly intoxicated or showing obvious signs of impairment.
Failing to intervene: Staff must take positive, reasonable steps to stop an intoxicated customer from driving, such as arranging a taxi, calling a rideshare, or confiscating keys.

Same can be said for someone having a house party where they let their guest leave intoxicated and drive impaired. They open themselves up to a civil lawsuit.

Assuming every drunk leaving a bar or party is falling down drunk and is not composed, what about the liquor store that sold him a full bottle of booze, did they advise him to moderate it's consumption??? First rule of common law should be taking responsibility for one's own actions, if anyone is getting sued it should be Dalke's estate.

[Jesse]

Does it really, though?

The research disagrees with your opinion.

"Research indicates that education and awareness alone are generally insufficient to drive sustained behavior change, as knowledge does not automatically translate into action. Studies show that providing general information (such as the health risks of obesity or smoking) rarely alters habits because individuals often already possess this knowledge but lack the motivation, skills, or contextual support to act on it."

Quite frankly, ads are just an expensive way of pretending to do something about problems without actually doing anything.

If punishments worked, then no one would commit murder knowing that they themselves could be put to death.

Your definition of the word education as an "ad" is really shortchanging the definition, imo.

I'm speaking of education in a broader sense and people obviously do learn and grow, even though learned behaviours are tough to break. I don't really put overcoming a lifelong addiction like obesity and smoking in the same conversation as learning to call a cab when you've been drinking.

[bunker]

Bigger penalties don't change people's behavior. Neither does advertising. Never have. Never will.

Here's where you ask, "What can we do then?" and the answer is sadly nothing more than we are currently doing. 

How do you explain the fact that DUI rates historically are falling?

"DUI rates are falling primarily due to the widespread availability of rideshare services, stricter traffic laws, and a cultural shift toward safer social drinking."

I'm 67

When I was in my late teens I drove home from parties drunk numerous times, as did friends. My sister lost 3 friends in her late teens due to an MVA where one of her friends was driving drunk.

The culture around drinking and the penalties for doing so, have changed enormously since then. My kids, in their early to mid 20's, wouldn't dream of doing that (or so they tell me lol, but I'm convinced it's genuine, they will arrange alternative transportation when they plan on drinking).

You're too nihilistic. Of course we won't eliminate DUI, but we can and should try to decrease it as much as possible.