This scenario suits my wife: she’s the cop, I’m the judge

Several times a year, I write a column called: “My wife wishes she was a cop.” This is one of them.

We’re driving along Hwy. 407 last Saturday and I have — as always — my cruise control set at 110 km/h, which is 10 km/h above the posted speed limit of 100.

“How come we are the slowest vehicle on this highway?” she asked after about the 1,000th car blew right on past us.

“If we are going 110, they must be going 120 or 130. I wish I was a cop. If I was a cop, I would have my quota filled by lunch time. How come we don’t see more cars pulled over?”

I said it was probably because the OPP officers who patrol the 407, and the 401out in the hinterland (that’s east of Cobourg and west of London), are regular Joes like the rest of us and think it’s ridiculous that the speed limits have not been increased on the 400-Series highways to reflect reality.

If you’re going over 120, you’re probably asking for it, but Mr. or Ms OPP would have to be in a really bad mood to pull you over for anything under that.

“So how come the provincial government hasn’t raised the limit above 100?” she asked. “Nobody is doing 100 today, including us.”

There are two reasons, I said. One, this government doesn’t like cars — unless they are electric cars and then cars are fine. But so few people own EVs that they don’t even enter into the equation. Ergo, because the government doesn’t like cars, it follows that they don’t like the people who drive cars and so they will never do anything — other than widening the odd bit of highway — that will benefit car owners.

The second reason is economic. The government doesn’t have any money and it would cost a serious amount to change all the “100” signs to “120.”

“So, how can we go about changing this?” she asked.

I replied that my colleague, Jim Kenzie, loves to boast that he won the 1995 election for Mike Harris by convincing him to kill photo radar. But that was then, I said. This is now.

The car lobby is huge and keeping speed limits unrealistically low as well as adding more tax to a litre of gasoline at just about every turn will eventually bring pushback. Any party, including the one currently in charge, can win the next election by doing something about both those things.

A little while later, we were driving north on the 404 and I pulled out to pass a BMW as we approached Elgin Mills Rd. As I drew even with the car — we own a pickup — my wife looked down and said, “I wish I was a cop. The driver is not looking at the road, he’s looking at his phone.”

Sure enough, the guy’s speed suddenly dropped off. The highway was busy last Saturday morning and when he started texting — and there was no other apparent reason for his sudden drop in speed, so that had to be it — he stacked up the line of traffic that was behind him. In turn, those drivers started trying to get out into the lane I was in to pass him and, as can be expected, there were several near-misses.

“So what can be done to really put a stop to this?” she asked, adding that distracted driving was now the No. 1 reason for fatal accidents in Ontario, but drinking and driving was making a comeback.

There should be zero tolerance, I said. The fine of $490 plus three points is not working, just like the penalties for impaired driving aren’t working any longer.

I think if you drink and drive, or text and drive, that you should lose your licence for two years, minimum. I do not understand why we beat around the bush on so many things. Drink or text while behind the wheel and you relinquish your right to drive for at least the next 730 days.

“Good idea,” she said. “I’ll be the cop, you be the judge.”

Fine with me, I said. nmcdonald@thestar.ca