Getting drunk drivers off the roads
Re End this scourge, Editorial March 30 Kudos to the Star for calling for an end to the scourge of drunk driving. Unfortunately, stiffer sentences alone will not do anything to make this happen.
Drinking drivers do not perceive a strong likelihood of being caught. Until they do, nothing will change. A real fear of being caught, along with harsh penalties and public shaming, would change drinking drivers’ behaviour overnight.
So will zero tolerance. It is blatantly obvious that current drinking and driving laws are an ineffective deterrent and need to be changed. No one who has been drinking any amount of alcohol should be permitted to make a decision about their ability to drive safely.
Where is the political leadership on this life-and-death issue? What are they afraid of? The alcohol industry, restaurants and bars will survive zero tolerance. People will not stop consuming alcohol. They will quickly adapt and find workarounds rather than risk severe consequences.
The Star is right: the time to end the scourge of drunk driving is now before the next Neville-Lake tragedy happens. Keith Noble, Toronto When I heard this verdict I felt sick to my stomach. I sat in my car and cried for the parents of those children and their grandfather. My heart feels heavy and sick that this man got 10 years less time already served and may be released from prison within three years. The picture of the two children holding hands before life support was removed will remain in my eyes, head and heart for eternity. I am crying now as I think of it.
The family of these little ones will be living and grieving a lifetime sentence, and their killer gets to live his life and return to society in a few years. This is total injustice. These killers need to be in jail for life with no parole.
Our hearts and tears and prayers are with the grieving family. Shirley Kovacs, Port Dover This sentence for what is essentially the murder of four innocent people and the destruction of one family is proof that the Canadian drunk driving laws need immediate upgrading. It’s inconceivable that a reasonable person would consider a10-year prison term — that in reality will end up being only a three-year prison term — a deterrent to society for these continuing horrible crimes.
Superior Court Justice Michelle Fuerst did her best within the constraints of the law but we must do more to eliminate the kind of tragedy inflicted upon the innocent Neville-Lake family. Charles Campisi, Oakville If a drunk Marco Muzzo had taken a gun, chosen any house on any street, burst in and randomly shot a clutch of children playing with their grandfather, taking four lives, the charge would be murder and the sentence would be “life” (literally). What’s the difference?
In 1981, a drunk driver going the wrong way on Hwy. 400 killed my son. His sentence was two years less a day, most of which was spent in a halfway house. Only a little has changed since then. Helen P. Stauffer, Thornhill A heavier sentence is not the answer, though it would serve to satisfy public anger and possibly soothe the victims’ grief to a small degree. If draconian sentencing was the answer, our neighbour to the south would be a crime-free paradise. What is needed is a social paradigm shift, where drinking while having access to your car is strictly a “non-starter.” Public shaming could help, but we are not likely to reintroduce the pillory box. Why not a device disabling a car if it detects alcohol? Sigmund Roseth, Mississauga What a disastrous way to learn a lesson. But many of us have driven while under the influence (of alcohol or drugs) with, through luck, no lessons learned. Seatbelts and airbags are mandatory for all vehicles, but they are for the protection of the vehicle occupants. We also need to mandate an ignition interlock in every vehicle, to protect the vehicle occupants and others on the occasions when we get behind the wheel impaired. William Lynn, Toronto