"it has always seemed harsh to potentially lose your livelihood, home etc for what could have been a slight transgression."
I'm sure that as anyone who works within the criminal justice system can tell you, people who are caught drink-driving have usually got away with it for years before being caught.
My profession was well known for its liquid lunches once upon a time and it was tolerated. Anybody working for me who came in now morning or afternoon having been sniffing the barmaid's apron would soon be looking for new employment.
I hate people who drink and drive - any amount.
|
I hate people who drink and drive - any amount.
>>
there are some PU, that when they blow 39 and you explain they're over the limit, but still won't be prosecuted (does Hants do the same?.. I know some don't)... that you think to yourself, it's a just result really, due to the individual and the circumstances
many however i'd agree you're disappointed as they've 'got away with it'
Edited by Westpig on 29/03/2008 at 11:53
|
Why lower it? Simply set the limit to zero and the problem's solved. Mr Smith no longer has the opportunity to have a couple of pints at the pub and drive home just under the limit, but with his abilities impaired.
A zero limit is unlikely to cause problems the next morning - if people think they might be over the limit, they shouldn't be driving. Far too many people seem to think that driving is a right, and that the drink-driving limit infringes on that right.
If something like mouthwash did skew the result (would only be temporary unless you'd actually been drinking it), a re-test at the station would show a zero level of alcohol.
|
I really don't think that having 2 pints of beer in a pub and driving home causes any accidents. You could just as easily have a accident with no drink. It is the careless drivers who cause the problem, like the driver of a new looking Range Rover who drove past me this morning, narrowly missing another car, doing about 90mph on a B road. We get many idiots driving past my place going far too fast because there are speed cameras on the main road, so they use the B road.
I assume that the people who want a zero limit either don't drink or live within walking distance of a pub.
It says in my paper that a zero ban would save 65 lives, I presume this comes from the ministry of guesses. On the next page there is an article on "superbugs". It seems that Clostridium Difficile kills 4,000 people a year in hospitals. Perhaps the government should do more about this if they care so much for us.
I do not believe in drinking too much and driving. I think the present limit should stay.
If a new law comes in, it will close many country pubs, which are already struggling after the budget. After closing many post offices, village schools and now pubs I am sure that this government hate the countryside.
|
|
If I had a quid for every time I've heard comments along those lines from clients before an impending drink driving case. Not unique is the claim (rarer now though) along the lines of "a couple of beers makes me drive more carefully" which is delusional rubbish. I'd be happy with a zero limit. Yes I do enjoy a beer by the way (and may well indulge tonight), but the car keys will be in someone else's pocket or handbag.
|
And who's keys will be in your pocket or handbag?? Hey Hey ;-)
|
|
Mrs P has just said she's going to drive.....so I guess I'll leave my bag at home.
|
|
|
|
Simply set the limit to zero and the problem's solved. Mr Smith no longer has the opportunity to have a couple of pints at the pub and drive home just under the limit, but with his abilities impaired.
And I don't have the opportunity to have one pint of modest strength bitter with my pub sunday lunch and another little pleasure disappears.
I can't walk through the city centre for drunken yobs on a Saturday night, there are drug dealers in the local park, a girl is kicked to death because of the way she looks, an 85 year old woman is raped in Yarmouth but lets target and punish anyone with the slightest trace of alcohol in their bloodstream (heroin is OK though )
that all makes perfect sense
|
|
For the record I hate all of the above as well ! (apart from the Sunday afternoon pint !)
|
|
I think driving after drinking should be banned - Handguns should be banned and carrying knives should be banned - we would have no drink related accidents - no gun crime and no stabbings - I would feel much safer.
|
A little social observation.
I live in rural Northamptonshire.
In my youth the character full rural pubs were heaving on weekends and most drivers were over the limit.
Anyone done for drink driving was viewed as a victim.
Massive enforcement plus changes in social attitudes to drunk drivers reduced drink driving to virtually nil and the rural pubs went in to terminal decline.
Lately their trade and the number of over the limit drivers is increasing as the middle aged and middle class avoid town centre chav pits like the plaque and road policing has virtually disappeared especially on weekends when as a serving officer told me 'we police the town centres only and even there we are massively overstretched'.
My view on this law. Likely Brussels have told UK to do it and UK government is talking it up to try to pretend they still run UK. There will be a few high profile road blocks and then everyone will forget it all and the trend I refer to above will continue unabated.
|
|
John Prescott used to be "minded" to do things - that was quite scary at the time.
|
|
I don't think that you can technically have a zero limit due to the fact that the body can naturally produce small amounts of alcohol (might be wrong but think I read that somewhere) So what you have is a low limit which really just equates to a zero level ie what has been sugested.
|
|
As always the government criminalises the generally law abiding by lowering a limit (a bit like speed limits really) so it catches more low level 'offenders' who wouldn't have been offending under the old rules, instead of cracking down on the serious offenders.
|
I've always thought the UK limit was slightly high. Most people seem under the impression that it equates to about two pints - personally I can't even control my own mouth after two pints. Once two pints is in the subconcious, you get those who set it as a target, next it's two strong lagers are ok, then it's - ooh the first pint will have worn off after an hour so I'm ok to have a third.
I think 50 mg is the way to go, which is really like saying you can't drink n drive but we won't lock you up if you should happen to have a tipple. It's 50 mg where I live and nobody I know will drink anything at all with the intention of driving. However on Easter Sunday we all met up at wife's Aunt's house and everyone had a glass of bubbly to toast her cousin's birthday. That's ok in my book.
|
|
Drink or drugged driving is intolerable. There is no excuse........at all....ever.
|
A friend of mine blew 81 (limit of 80) the following morning on her way to work. Licence gone. She had never "drunk and drove" in the traditional sense in her life. She'd had three glasses of wine the night before, and felt perfectly OK.
I do feel there is a world of difference between people like this and those morons who stagger out of a pub and drive home after 8-10 pints. Both in terms of attitude and in terms of danger to life and limb.
Of course, the law has to draw a line somewhere, and I'm not saying "morning after" drivers should not be punished, but to be treated the same as the idiots who knowingly drive when completely hammered doesn't make a lot of sense.
How many of us can honestly say we have never driven the day after a heavy drinking session? I certainly can't.
Cheers
DP
|
I've been breathalysed five times over the years. Once or twice it has been a close thing. I haven't driven 'impaired by drink' for many years now, and with advancing age 'impairment' sets in earlier. Of course, people 'impaired by drink' shouldn't drive, and should be sanctioned if they do.
What matters of course is not what chemicals people have inside them but whether their driving is dangerous. Unfortunately, without a catastrophe to analyse, dangerous driving is difficult to establish and prove, such proof depending heavily on the assertions or allegations of police or other witnesses. Nevertheless dangerous driving is far, far commoner than drunk driving. So it goes against the grain for a person who drinks in some sort of moderation and still drives to see fidgeting monkey politicians, supported by anxious citizens, proposing to lower a blood alcohol limit that is already quite low enough for a normal person. One can't help being aware that this tinkering with the drink driving laws is going to do absolutely nothing to reduce the disgraceful prevalence of jittery, dangerous, aggressive driving on the roads. Apparently we will just have to live with that, even after the monkeys have imposed a blanket 20mph speed limit.
|
|
Two distinct subjects in my view Lud. I agree with your concerns over dangerous driving. As far as chemically impaired driving goes.....just don't. I am not qualified to judge what the limit should be and as is well documented the the effects of alcohol and other drugs vary widely from person to person and indeed within an individual at different times. The safest and indeed only sensible course of action is just don't do it if you plan to drive during the potentially affected period..
|
Yes, safest perhaps, but really no safer than driving after a non-impairing drink. Can't disagree though shoespy.
The thing that really sets one's teeth on edge though is that dangerous, sometimes very dangerous, and pointlessly obstructive driving are everywhere. Yet a person randomly breathalysed can be banned from driving without doing anything remotely resembling dangerous driving, while countless wallies continue to go about getting in the way and causing moronic crashes.
|
Lud, I agree with everything you say.
When they have stopped driving after any drink, they will stop driving altogether. I think everone should go on public transport and if there isn't any, hard luck, move somewhere else.
Of course this does not apply to politicians, they can use chauffeur driven cars of any size whenever they want. Also their families.
Derby County just religated, it's enough to turn me to drink.
|
|
|
|
