Given that I’ve been living in France for the past couple of months and don’t really follow the news back home in Canada, it was a complete surprise when I came across several articles that were discussing the enacting of a new law for young drivers, ages 16 to 21, in the province of Ontario. Usually, I’m pretty gung-ho for making our streets safe (e.g. impounding of a vehicle for driving 50km/hr over the speed limit), but I have to admit that this is quite ludicrous.
Prompted after a long campaign by MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) and by Tim Mulcahy, whose son was one of three killed in a drunk driving accident on July 3 of this year, the Ontario government is enacting a new law today in which young drivers are subjected to new restrictions on their license:
- A total ban on alcohol consumption (i.e. BAC of 0 while operating a vehicle)
- Restriction on the number of passengers during the first year of holding a G2 license (i.e. no more offering rides home to a multitude of persons under the age of 19 until after a year)
- Zero tolerance for speeding (i.e. thinking of going maybe 10km/hr over? Hope that the cop isn’t grumpy then)
While I sympathize with Mulcahy’s loss, I do feel that we should look at his son’s actions on that July 3. Making his own choices, Mulcahy’s son was aware that he was driving but still made the choice to drink a whopping 31 drinks with his two friends. Considering his BAC (blood alcohol content) alone, he would not have been able to legally operate a vehicle even under the previous Ontario law.
Perhaps instead of introducing new laws that limit a young driver, we should look at the very basic element of learning to drive - driving school. The Ministry of Transportation of Ontario allows persons holding a G1 to proceed to G2 testing within eight months (as opposed to one year) provided that they have gone through an acredited driving school and obtained a certificate. What I fail to understand is that these accredited driving schools seem to be numerous, and many of them seem quite dubious in their teaching style, if you can even call it that. I’ve heard stories from friends who have gone to such driving schools (you know, the ones where you pull the tabs off at the bus stop and give them a call, and if you bring a friend, you receive a 10% discount) and I fail to see that they are learning anything, both in the classroom and in their in-car lessons.
Some persons that I have talked to have told me that they have not gone to their classes but marked present on the attendance sheet, some have told me that they have gone to classes and learned nothing but the life story of the teacher, and some have even told me that they have gone to classes and simply had a group multiple choice test on “car safety”. In-car lessons with some of these schools include picking up the next student or the instructor’s child from day care, or on some days, just a drive around the neighborhood with the occasional left and right.
I assure you that I do not mean to say that all these ~$300 schools are terrible ones, in fact there are some gems in that list. But youths seem to seek the cheapest school as a quick route to getting their license, and fail to seek quality in their education simply because they believe that they will learn how to drive after they get their license. Perhaps we should look more into which schools should be accredited and which ones should be removed from such list. While some schools, such as Young Drivers, cost a significant amount of money, I feel that the education is worth it. Structured in class and full of practice in-car, Young Drivers is by far one of the most highly acclaimed driving schools in Canada. Given that most things that we purchase can be bought a discount price, but should that include our license?
If we are not able to take the responsibility of getting an actual education with regards to driving, how are we going to be able to take up the responsibility of paying for insurance and paying for a vehicle, let alone driving safely. Why yes, it’s been reiterated many times that driving is a privilege, but how much of it is a privilege when anyone can bring in a piece of paper stating that they have completed driving school?
The problem isn’t in teenagers being reckless. The problem is in teenagers not truly understanding that not everything can be bypassed with a discount or with a shortcut. While enacting such a law would hopefully guarantee a decrease in the number of teenage driver accidents, one cannot guarantee that everyone will comply and learn these “good habits” - there will still be dangerous drivers, young and old, on the road. It is up to the individual to learn how to drive safely. This law is by no means a speech act (i.e. a declarative sentence can be used to perform a number of different speech acts) for good conduct on the road, it is merely a solution that skims the surface.
1 response so far ↓
In a phone conversation with Dalton McGuinty, Tim Mulcahy remarked that ‘with these new laws, Ontario will have the safest roads in the world.’ But if you are between the ages of 16 and 21, they will also be among the most restrictive.
My friend, CSR expert storyteller Billie Mintz, an innovator in new media production is currently filming an investigative documentary that scrutinizes the distribution of the responsible drinking message. He wants to hear what you think about McGuinty’s proposed new laws? Sound off here on the Toronto Chat Forums.
The Message in a Bottle is a 12 part web video series which examines the responsibility everyone shares regarding the advertising, sales, purchase and consumption of alcohol.
The world is changing; Ontario is becoming a safer place, but are we sacrificing freedom for safety?