The Supreme Court Got it Right

I was very interested in hearing what the verdict would be when Canada's Supreme court rendered its decision on the issue of "is a host liable for the actions of a guest in their home who leaves drunk". You have to feel for Zoe Childs who had her life changed and for the boy who was killed in the accident but to have found the couple who hosted the party found either criminally or financially liable would have been wrong.

It is a reality that we are all subject to the laws of time and chance, it rains on the just and the unjust and no matter how carefully we try and manage our lives sometimes the dice crap out.

I think it was a case that the courts should have brought before themselves rather than leaving it to the girl and made it a directed initiative to bring clarity to the question that has been debated in various homes for years.

The problem with the ruling is that it singles out the fact that it was a BYOB gathering and didn't address the issue of what is the liability if drinks had been served by the host so we'll undoubtedly be hearing more.

What is even more significant was that to me it again pointed out to me how flawed a subjective sentencing system we have. This drunk driver had been sentenced to 10 years in what was the harshest sentence ever handed down as the result of a DUI conviction. So that tells me that the loss of this particular life demanded more to satisfy society than the lives of the thousands of others who have died as the result of drunk drivers. What a bunch of nonsense. We have a situation now on PEI where a mother and her daughter were killed by a drunk driver while going for an early morning walk. I wonder if he'll get 10.

I like the direction taken by the new Federal Conservative Government to impose mandatory minimums on crimes that fall into certain categories. It removes the reality of the situation we now have that the guy with the smartest or most creative lawyer has justice dispensed in a kinder, gentler way.