Age discrimination

- August 5th, 2010

A recently passed Ontario law now shows zero tolerance toward drunk driving among young people, but it is the wrong message to send out about drinking and driving.

It should be zero tolerance toward all motorists.

driving after drinking

Shutterstock image

For perspective, I come from a generation of drivers who did not grow up with the stringent drunk driving laws we have today. I don’t ever remember my parents driving drunk with me in the car, but then my parents were never heavy drinkers at social events anyway. I, on the other hand, drove far too drunk far too many times and was lucky to never get caught or cause any damage to myself or others. I now don’t drink when I go out to social events.

I know; I’ve heard it many times: “One isn’t going to make you blow positive” but sometimes that first one tastes so good, you just have to have another … it’s best not to start.

I do it not because I’m afraid of getting caught, though, but rather because it’s the common sense thing to do.

Today’s driving generation has grown up with the anti-drinking and driving message driven home both in advertisements and in practice (through the use of the roadside RIDE programs running pretty much year-round instead of just around holidays) and despite the exponential rise in vehicles and drivers on the road, the strict enforcement and education is working.

Roadside check

Shutterstock image

According to U.S. statistics, the message is getting home, with the decline in drinking and driving offences declining across all age groups decade by decade (the tell tale sign is that the number of deaths related to drinking and driving has declined some 40 percent from the early ’80s and 25 percent since 1990; the sad reality is that 35 percent of road fatalities still relate to alcohol).

But the age of drivers cited for drinking and driving violations has remained steady in comparison to statistics dating back to 2000, with between 85 and 90% of infractions coming between the ages of 21 and 44.

Now, in all fairness, the U.S. statistics (I’d love to quote Canadian statistics but even MADD only “estimates” the numbers) show a marked rise in offences from age 21-24 (the legal drinking age in most States is 21), which probably means many adults are obeying the legal age for drinking.

Blurred night view

Shutterstock image

Breaking it down, around 35% of all infractions come in the 21-24 group, around 30% in the 25-34 group, and a steady 25% are aged 35-44. Again, that figure has come down about five percent in the past decade but it’s still way too high.

So, targeting the young generation may not necessarily be the right solution. Although there is the hope that behaviour learned at the younger age may carry on, statistics show that drivers probably work around the law and don’t really apply common sense until their middle ages.

And, the statistics we do hear about how much one can consume and still expect to come in under the limit don’t help with common sense because rationale starts to decline during that first drink

Tags: ,

23 comments

  1. Garey says:

    All drivers should be required to maintain a zero percent alcohol level. Records show that everyone reacts differently to alcohol and with the introduction of new drug prescriptions, etc, no one can be assurred of being completely and 100% lucid. Why take a chance? There are too many people killed or maimed each year. If you drink and drive, expect to be treated to the fullest extent of the law. Unfortunatly, Canadian laws are very wishy washy but hopefully this will change to be on the side of the victim.

  2. Gary Cook says:

    This should also be true for all prescription (and non-prescription) drugs. Let’s make sure everyone is alert.

  3. Paul says:

    TO HELL WITH DRUNK DRIVERS……SHOOT EM

  4. Dan says:

    Let’s go one step farther and just ban driving altogether. Drunk drivers only account for a small percentage of automobile fatalities, if we banned ALL driving we could save thousands of lives.

  5. Randy Abson says:

    Well Joe, as you don’t feel you have the self control to stop at one drink, the rest of the world should not have to give up on their pleasure. Perhaps you should seek help.

    I agree with the phased out restrictions for driving, including blood alcohol limits. The catch here with the alcohol is that a young driver has not learned the affect alcohol has on their body the same as someone who has been drinking for years likely would, so this restirction does not make sense to a 35 year old new driver. Certainly there will always be exceptions and if you think making zero tolerance will change those statistics, you are more of an optimist than I.

  6. Good Driver says:

    I think there should be licenses based on how capable you are of driving with different levels of alcohol. I know I am a safer driver after a few drinks as I don’t dpped as much. Has there ever been any studies to see how different people react to drinking and driving. Like anything else there surely isn’t one constant level of influence for everyone.

  7. Craig C says:

    Its a complete no-brainer… zero tolerance should be for all.. absolutely no drinking and driving whatsoever and on top of that, sentence perpetrators very severely. If you kill someone drinking and driving it should be no different than if you shoot them with a handgun. Allowing even a drop of alcohol is completely unacceptable and ridiculous catering to the big business alcohol lobbyists.

  8. Karen says:

    No matter what the law there will always be someone to break it. Don’t punish the rest of us with it. I’m over 50 and know my limits….I enjoy a glass of wine with a good meal. I used to enjoy a cigarette too.

  9. RK says:

    I find this argument that it is age discrimination very, very weak.

    I don’t live in Ontario nor do I drink, ever. I do however agree with this law and do not in one little bit think this law is discriminatory. This law does target experience. Not driving experience per say, but rather life experience. A young college student goes to a party and like most of the parties drinking is the main activity. Getting drunk and not stopping after one or two is the socially accepted norm in those circles. Young people may actually be shunned and made fun of for abstaining from the revelry. Now, on the other hand you take a young father around 35, he has a lot of responsibilities and people that depend on him. His boss doesn’t look to kindly on him coming into work hung over. These factors alone may dissuade him from going on an all night bender or pub crawl. In many cases his body tells him that he should no longer live like he had in the days of his youth, but more importantly than that, his brain tells him that he needs to make wiser decisions.

    Before any young people try telling me how smart they are there is a big difference between intelligence and wisdom. Intelligence proves nothing, wisdom is the ability to make proper choices given past experiences, others experiences or just plainly being able to see the end results of said decisions and weigh the outcomes in a proper fashion. Don’t blame the young person though, it’s not their fault. The brain leaves development of the reasoning and problem solving centers until the end which is in young adulthood sometime between the ages of 21 to 25. Sure sometimes young people do make the proper choices, heck we all know the old saying that even a broken clock is right twice a day. And there are older folks that continually make the wrong and poor choices. But given as a whole, the majority of people gain the wisdom to make these choices through the experiences of life.

    Craig C – In an ideal world no one would get behind the wheel after even one drink, but we need to be reasonable and this law targets the greatest risk.

    Good Driver – I would like to see someone like you have to take yearly drivers tests. The alcohol in a blood stream impairs your judgement and motor skills even after one. To think otherwise proves to everyone else that you are in fact a danger on the highways.

    And Joe – Your own statistics that you mention prove my point. To say that 85-90% of all infractions come from the 21-44 group is deceptive. Those figures are US where the drinking age is 21. Ontario young people already have 2 years of legal drinking ahead of those figures. Given that however, the breakdown of 21-24, the smallest age range of the targeted statistic shows that fully 1 third of them take the most impaired violations. The numbers decrease as peer pressures reduce and rationalizations develop. What are the statistics though for drunk driving fatalities or accidents by the age groups?

  10. Kevin says:

    Yes Joe,

    You should seek help. If you have such a horrible addiction to alcohol that you can’t stop at one drink then you do need help. I can enjoy a single glass of wine at dinner and be perfectly content, and perfectly able to operate a motor vehicle with as much care and dilligence that I would have if I was heading to work in the morning with a cup of coffee. People that have one drink are not responsible for deaths and injuries so why would we waste the courts time and money by procecuting and/or incarcerating our friends neighbours for having one drink.

  11. Joe Duarte says:

    I find it interesting that people are quick to assume that I must have a drinking problem if I can’t stop at one, whereas what I really wrote was that I choose not to drink when I know I’m driving. I have no problem stopping at (oops, I mean enjoying) one glass of wine … at home, when I’m not going to get behind the wheel again. Unlike me, these people CAN stop at one when they’re having a nice dinner and are perfectly fine to drive (one guy is actually a better driver? What???). I have news for you – you’re not. That’s the first thing alcohol does is make you feel overly confident in your abilities – driving; dancing; attracting the opposite sex; whatever. Second of all – restaurants do not control how much wine goes into “their” glass – they pour wine by sight. Measure five ounces (that’s what the beer=wine=liquor equation means) and pour it into your typical home wine glass. Is that really as much as you enjoy with your nice dinner?

  12. DM says:

    We should ban alcohol. Problem solved. Ban prescription drugs, some people have serious side effects like dizziness, hallucinations and so on. Oh wait, why not ban sex too, you can catch HIV and transmit the virus to more people around you. Let’s contain the virus! See my point? No? Think about it..

    We are slowly losing our freedom and unfortunately, a lot of people are actually supporting it. They just don’t realize it yet. Laws, laws and more laws. Does it really help? Not at all. It’s common sense but I think a bunch of people also forgot what common sense is.

    The “real” drunk drivers will never stop even with zero tolerance. They just don’t care. Punish them, not us. Some of them don’t even have a driver’s license. Hell, we’ve seen guys getting caught for the 12th time! Don’t forget the problem isn’t alcohol alone, it’s usually alcohol+speed. Fix the problem at the root. If you just cut it, it will grow back.

    So, what’s the next step? No healthcare if you eat sugar and fat foods? Oh no, wait.. The government will choose what’s good for you, they will ban some foods. Does that sound familiar?

  13. Adam says:

    Joe, you’re right. This IS age discrimination in its purest form. But it doesn’t, as some people have suggested, go far enough.

    The simple fact is that alcohol has different effects on different people and body types. Some people (e.g. my fiancee) get drunk off of half a glass of wine, and some people can drink six beers in an hour, prepare a resume while drinking, drive to a job interview immediately afterward, pass a skills test with a higher score than any other applicant, and land a job (and yes, I actually did once know someone who did exactly that). Most people land somewhere in the middle of these two extremes, and the truth is that there’s no way to know how a person is capable of functioning after X% of alcohol in the bloodstream.

    So why allow people to drink and drive in the first place? There are plenty of other ways to get around.

  14. Dave says:

    it is time…..people put impaired driving into perspective. Absolutely it is a problem and we have laws to deal with it. MADD Canada estimated in 2007 1230 deaths occurred due to impaired driving in Canada. Health Canada estimates that between 700-2500 people die annually from the common flu……the idea of zero tolerance is ridiculous I have no doubt over a million Canadians have a drink of alcohol per day and only 3-4 deaths? not sure what the math on that would be but its pretty insignificant. So if this stupid idea was passed lets see no wine with dinner at any restaurant, no drink after work or during business lunches, no alcohol served at house parties……kinda smacks of prohibition doesn’t it???? and we all know how well that worked…..hard to believe someone would actually write a column suggesting this….perhaps its time for some new columnists who have their feet in reality …..

  15. Randy A says:

    Joe, what you wrote is…”I’ve heard it many times: “One isn’t going to make you blow positive” but sometimes that first one tastes so good, you just have to have another”. Perhaps you were not talking of yourself, but just the same, if an individual can not stop after one drink, they have a different problem. You can take the arguement to the point where they taste salt and can’t resist having a beer to go with it. Absurd? So is saying one can’t resist a 2nd drink.

    It comes down to experience in knowing how various things affect ones body and mental judgement. I know after 10pm I don’t think as clearly, I don’t drive that late at night. My 5 year old does not realize he doesn’t think clearly after 8 pm and often makes many bad judgements like summersaulting off of the couch. I don’t think this will be a problem when he is 30. With alcohol, one does not normally start to learn the affect it has on the body until they are 16 or 17 and it takes time to realize, yea, I start getting stupid after 3 beers and there are other side affects than just a headache.

    As for the restaurant, please tell me where you go out to eat and they give you more than a standard serving! If it wasn’t for restaurants I wouldn’t know you could put so little wine in a glass and call it a serving.

  16. Cappthook says:

    WOW some of you posters are unbelievable. Just because YOU have the right to consume alcohol you believe it gives you the right to then turn a vehicle into a potential weapon??? There are plenty of Stats out there on the affects of alcohol on us. Depends on your mood, how much sleep, how much body fat, type of alcohol (Beer vs wine vs liquor). If you are an intelligent person you wouldn’t even take the risk of injuring or killing someone by driving after drinking. Just because you’re over 21 doesn’t mean you have the intelligence or experience to not drink and drive.
    To the idiot that suggests since more people die each year from a cold than drinking related reasons that we should leave drunk drivers alone – Give your head a shake! Drinking and driving related deaths are a direct result of a person making that decision to drive after drinking. I don’t recall anyone deliberately getting a cold so they can die!!
    Talk about selfish people!

  17. AllenS-67 says:

    Again the Beer and Popcorn crowd have joined the don’t run with scissors crowd and have managed to talk themselves into agreement. Just like banning a mutt in Ontario because some social misfits like a big headed dog, the MADD crowd are looking to slip prohibition through the backdoor. And why not, the Ontario Libs managed to do the same with Cigarette smoking and Provincial daycare, They demonized smoking where fat, lazy people are more likely to die of heart disease or cancer, and where the feds would Not dump the cost of a national daycare on Canadians, the Ontario Libs thought that Ontarians could afford a provincial one. So again lets have more campaigns of misinformation, derision and by all means lets ban freedom of choice and individual responsibility. Infantilizing young adults is what is now progressive, but neatly absolves parents that continue to wipe their kid’s arses and apologize for their poor choices. For young adults this is just a continuation of the over-parenting they received earlier on, maybe when your 25 your mom will still do your laundry. So the Beer and Popcorn crowd think you’re too immature to drive and need laws that limit your freedoms, more so than others. The Don’t Run with Scissors Crowd want you to have your sussey and blankey because by outlawing behaviour they will keep you safe, just like outlawing narcotics, pit-bulls, unregistered handguns, and chewing gum and walking at the same time saves lives. Better for it to be a crime to have any behaviour that is against a false dogma, than have free thinking adults making choices, paying the consequence and earning the rewards for those choices. We can outlaw all sharp and pointy things, enforce walking, and if you don’t have your hall pass you’ll get a detention. Seems some cretins live to be told and to tell others what to do and how to do it, but please, please they only do it to keep you safe! At least that’s what they want to believe.

  18. Carol B. says:

    The bars are open far to long, get back to the at least the Midnight hour and don’t open so early in the day. Bring back the 21 years of age limit for drinking also. That was good enough for most of us. ( Also raise the voting age, from what I see of alot of 18 year olds, their to young for most to make a decision, acting like 5 year olds.) Oh yes, and all the Illegal drugs, they are even worse. I see so often, so called Adults, racing down the residential streets thinking they are out on a race track showing off, this also kills. Have you ever had to call 911 for someone laying dying on the road, I have it is not a pretty site. Drugs or Alchol or neither, just Plain Stupidity trying to show off.

  19. HK says:

    DM and Dave hit the nail on the head so to speak; more laws and even more laws…. Our personal liberties are slowly being eroded and the majority seems to applaud it. I recall when we were all fighting communism, being told that we don’t need Big Brother telling us what’s good for us and what is not. Here we are today with ever more restricting, choking laws and we welcome them with open arms in the name of safety and security. Whatever happened to freedom and people being held accountable for their own actions? More laws are not going to solve anything.

    Think about this:
    The cell phone law; improper use of cell phones could have been covered under the existing careless driving law. What’s next? Banning tuning the radio in our cars, or speaking to a passenger while driving?
    The seat belt law; seat belts may save the majority of people but you may be one of the ones to survive due to not wearing one. In a free society the choice should be yours.
    The racing law; is unconstitutional as it makes the officer judge, jury and executioner right then and there — for mere speeding, not racing. In a free society we should at least have the right to be tried in a court of law rather than leaving someone standing on the side of the road for merely speeding.
    The smoking ban everywhere; in a free society we should have the right to choose whether or not to frequent a smoking facility or not. I respect the right of non-smokers but what about the rights of smokers?

    There are more examples. I could go on and on but perhaps you get the idea.

  20. Brian says:

    Stats be damned. I witness wreckless drivers (speed, weaving in and out of traffic, speed, tailgaiting, speed, etc) and it’s ALWAYS young males. Yes, I was that age once before and I DID drive like that at times. But times have changed as well. I agree with the ‘age targeted’ laws.

  21. John Steele says:

    All ages

  22. alex says:

    This is age discrimination period. Violates canadian charter of rights and freedoms. regardless of how good or fair or correct people think it is, it violates our rights. Might as well ban makeup because i see women putting it on while driving or banning radios in cars because it distracts people. Or ban women completely because they suck at driving(i kid i kid).

    But seriously so many mixed opinions …whether or not this law will actually work or not is the real issue. Is it worth giving up our rights for a law that might not change anything? Its amazing how there are so many mixed feelings among us yet this law has been force upon all of us. Again, it only affects people my age (i am 20) and so it makes sense that the majority of drivers would agree with it because the majority of drivers are over 21.

    I personally dont like this law because there are better alternatives out there like…education maybe? People here have been talking about intelligence wisdom experience etc…. well you have to start somewhere.

    I wasnt taught anything about drinking and driving until i took drivers ed when i was 16. They should make drivers ed a mandatory highschool class in grade 9 or 10 where you not only cover rules of the road but the knowledge and experience can be passed down by the teacher. By educating ourselves we can gain the intelligence needed. Rather than banning this and that until we are all cozy in our beds waiting for the government to read us a story. Its a slippery slope when someone realizes they can push us around.

    Another alternative is the access of breathalizers (probably spelt that wrong). But if young people want to know just how intoxicated they are its easy to find out. Because alcohol treats everyone differently, the only way to find out is by figuring it out. Wisdom is gained through experience so if you pamper people and say they cant do this and that then you are left with people who have no common sense who follow rules blindly not knowing why. A kid who has never been burned doesnt realize how dangerous fire is.

  23. France says:

    I think this law is completely ridiculous. Being a mom of two kids who are under the age of 21, I can tell you that they are much more aware of the consequence of drinking and driving than most adults, well over 40 years old. I do not agree with the idea of punishing everybody, why not reward on good judgment and good behaviour. How about addressing the facts that there are alot of drivers under the influence of drugs… when are they going to do something about that. And I don’t mean only the young adults. We allow kids over 18 to vote, we let them have babies with no restrictions at any age, they have the right to drink at 19 BUT the government doesn’t trust that they can make a right decision when it comes to taking the wheel. I truly find this hypocrite, if they believe this will fix the problem.

Leave a comment

 characters available