I Already Googled It

Responding to this:

The callous disregard Eileen Nattrass shows for our constitutional democracy serves to illustrate the irrational paranoia which grips people regarding drunk driving, and is – it seems – our parallel to the American “War on Terror”.

The Constitution Act of 1982, which patriated our constitution and made us – not the British – masters of our country’s destiny, proclaims that “[it] is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with [it] is […] of no force or effect”.  Pierre Elliott Trudeau being prescient and knowing that there would always be busy-bodies and do-gooders who would not hesitate to use the power of the state to oppress those with whom they disagree, placed as Section 1 the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees to all the people of Canada – drunk driver or not – certain rights and freedoms.

It establishes beyond question – as “supreme law” – certain rights which are not to be violated.  It protects us from oppression.  It establishes that everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security of the person and that we shall not be denied those except as per fundamental justice.  It establishes that when charged with an offense – such as drunk driving – we have the right to a trial, and that until such trial finds us guilty, we are innocent.

You wouldn’t take an innocent person’s car and charge them to get it back.

“They who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” —Benjamin Franklin