I agree with the 8 months prison time, due to this man's prior driving record, that a more restrictive sanction is warranted. I also agree with the probation but feel that the conditions are not helpful. He should be required to attend substance abuse counseling as well, in a more intensive program. I would also like to know more about this man's background and mitigating factors.
This article is biased in that it makes it appear to the uneducated reader, that this sentence is too lenient, when really, it is appropriate, considering the circumstances. This man has never killed or harmed anybody and a more serious sanction would be unjust and inappropriate.
I also completely disagree with mandatory minimum sentences, such as those imposed for impaired driving. They do not deter, prevent or reduce crime. They cause further prison overcrowding and often individuals are sentenced too harshly because of them. They also leave judges with no discretion in considering all circumstances of an offender and their crime, but instead implying that all crimes are equal, when they are not.
Do we even have alcohol-detecting ankle bracelets in Manitoba?
It's a bad situation. You can't sentence the guy based on what he might do in the future. But, as the judge said, he's a walking time bomb. I wonder what sentences he received previously? Then again, maybe I don't want to know.