A Prince George man who was acquitted of drunk driving would probably not have been so lucky if the federal government had taken Mothers Against Drunk Driving's (MADD) advice.
Even though he blew 110 and 120 milligrams of alcohol per litre of blood following a October 2008 collision, Arnold Thomas Trenaman was acquitted last month in part because the samples were taken nearly two-and-a-half hours after police were called to the scene.
Police actually have up to four hours to get a sample under the Criminal Code but because it was taken after two hours, Trenaman's lawyer argued successfully that he took a drink shortly before he got into his truck and was not yet drunk when the accident occurred.
But if MADD had its way, the limit would be three hours before the Crown is forced to bring in an expert to determine how drunk the accused may have been.
And more to the point, there would have been a van equipped with breath sampling equipment and access to legal counsel called to the scene as a way to get Trenaman to provide a sample much sooner.
"That's how it's done in Australia," said Robert Solomon, MADD's legal director and a law professor at the University of Western Ontario.
"Now, in Australia, they're not required to give you the right to contact legal counsel whereas in Canada we would be required."
MADD is also calling for random breath testing so police no longer have to rely on reasonable suspicion to administer roadside screening.
Critics say random testing would violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms but Solomon noted 109 million people are randomly screened at Canadian airports each year and 54 million crossing the border into Canada are subject to random search and seizure and the practice is condoned in courts and legislatures.
"If random screening is justifiable to protect judges and politicians, if it's justifiable at airports, if it's justifiable at our border, much stronger case can be made for random screening in terms of driving," Solomon said. "Why? Because impaired driving is the number one cause of death in this country."
And MADD supports lowering to 50 mg from 80 mg per litre, the level of alcohol at which a driver is considered impaired under the Criminal Code. Solomon said studies dating back to 1960 show 50 mg is the highest level consistent with safe driving.
"This is not rocket science," he said. "This is recommended by every credible traffic safety organization around the world."
In B.C. the stakes have been upped from a 24-hour suspension to automatic loss of the driver's licence for three days -plus a $200 penalty and a $250 driver's licence reinstatement fee for a first-time offender.
Those who blow more than .08 face a 90-day driving ban, a $500 fine and mandatory installation of an ignition interlock device - regardless of criminal charges that may be laid.
Sanctions increase dramatically for anyone who falls in the warning range again within five years, or blows over .08.
As a secondary reason, Trenaman's case also would have been thrown out because it took 26 months from the time of the incident to closing arguments in January, which was judged a violation of his to a trial in a reasonable time.
Solomon found that odd given many cases involving serious crimes take significantly longer to argue.
"Your chances of ending up dead in an impaired driving crash are twice as great as your chances of being murdered," he said.
