O O Ø O O O O
Dear MADD
On the conviction required to make the impaired driving laws work.
Kathie MacmillanChairperson, MADD Canada 6507C Mississauga Road
Mississauga, Ontario
L5N 1A6
Dear Ms. Macmillan;
Recently I was out shopping at my local grocery store and came across a MADD Canada kiosk soliciting funds at its front entrance. The kiosk—well, it was more like a table—was staffed by two volunteers who were friendly, good natured, and about as far away from overbearing as any group of fundraisers I've seen. The red ribbons that have come to represent MADD were prominently displayed, as was the collection container.
I think you folks do some fine work, and it's high time I start donating again.
I have always been a fan of MADD and what they stand for, but have not made a donation in some time because I have the wholly biased view—thank you, American Cancer Society—that the large majority of donations collected go to administrative overhead. That said, the MADD brand is a strong one, and I can recall several awareness and ad campaigns that have been funded by MADD through the years which have made me think. I see the red ribbon on a number of cruisers around town, and I know people benefit from your efforts. In short, I think you folks do some fine work, and it's high time I start donating again.
I stopped at the kiosk with the intent of making a donation, and decided to talk with your representatives for a little while. I asked them what my money would be used for, and got a fairly standard reply of public awareness campaigns, or words to that effect. This answer was not satisfactory to me, so I took a different approach. I asked what forms of research and lobbying were being carried out to ensure that those people arrested for drunk driving are convicted, to which I received a quizzical look and the “public awareness campaign” response for a second time. I decided not to donate. Allow me to explain.
There are several people I know with law enforcement who have mentioned that it is getting more and more difficult to convict those caught driving drunk. Cases are being dismissed because “expert” testimony is being brought in to explain how the accused had four drinks right before they got in their car, so would not have been drunk at the time they were caught driving due to the rate of absorption into the bloodstream. The Charter of Rights is being used frequently as a defence by those accused of impaired driving, where even if officers do everything by the book, their subject still has a good chance of getting off if there is even a suggestion they did not understand their rights or any part of the arrest and testing process. Judges are dismissing cases that have a chance, no matter how slim, of being overturned on appeal to protect their reputation and spare the province additional expense. To top it all off, organizations such as Ex-copper use their knowledge of the system to get impaired drivers off. It's upsetting, to say the least.
Laws aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on if they are not used the way they were intended, and that means convicting those caught breaking them.
I have since done a little more research on what programs MADD Canada sponsors, and can find nothing on efforts to ensure that impaired drivers are convicted once they've been caught. The focus seems to be on making the public aware that driving drunk is a bad thing, and to change the laws that deal with impaired driving. I believe the awareness campaign continues to be a big success, and I think your organisation has been a large factor in the laws being changed as much as they have. I am a big supporter of the legal limit being reduced to 0.05%, and believe the penalties handed out for breaking this law should be harsher. That said, laws aren't worth the paper they're printed on if they are not used the way they were intended, and that means convicting those caught breaking them, not just arresting them for it.
I would like to get some insight into what MADD Canada has done to research the “why” behind dropped charges, cases that are thrown out on procedural errors, and trending of impaired cases and their final results. I would dearly love to see this information integrated into your public awareness campaigns, as I think a significant percentage of the population would be surprised at what happens in our legal system. Does MADD lobby the judiciary bodies directly, or have plans to do so, to better uphold the laws we have, and to have the courage to convict those who are guilty of the crime no matter what an appellate court may do? In short, what are MADD’s plans to ensure those that are caught doing the crime are punished for it, which makes our streets safer and serves as an effective deterrent?
That means fixing a broken process so that when a person is caught driving drunk, they will be convicted
I think the changes MADD—and organisations like it—have helped to make to our legal system are amazing. The public awareness programs have helped change the laws such that impaired driving is a serious crime. The laws are on the books, they just need to be applied at all points of the process.
You make note on your site in a number of places that we need better enforcement of these laws, and the message I get from reading that information is you feel the police need to do more. I think we would see better enforcement numbers if the police felt they had a better chance of getting a conviction than they do now. That means fixing a broken process so that when a person is caught driving drunk, they will be convicted. The technology available and in use today makes determining whether a person is impaired or not pretty much black and white. We need our judges to see it that way, too.
Please consider making the public a little more aware of what I perceive to be a broken process. With luck, the pressures that brought the changes to the laws can be brought to bear on the people that interpret the application of those laws, and our streets will be a little safer.
Enclosed, please find my donation to (hopefully) get things started.
Yours very truly,
Tuesday, March 25, 2003
PD DXCII
cc: pintday.org