Is It Snowing In Your Neck Of The Woods?
ChatterBank1 min ago
Zero drink drive limit?
http://news.sky.com/s...C_MPs_Report_Suggests
Personally I don't want to get nicked for using mouthwash so I'd go with a trace amount but generally I think it's a good idea. You can currently drink a surprising amount and still be legal which i clearlt wrong.
Personally I don't want to get nicked for using mouthwash so I'd go with a trace amount but generally I think it's a good idea. You can currently drink a surprising amount and still be legal which i clearlt wrong.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by R1Geezer. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
No government who wanted to consider re-election would even suggest the notion of a zero drink-drive limit - such is the embedded cultural attitudes of our society towards alcohol.
Instead they pussyfoot around with limits, and encourage people to get as near to them as posible, without going over - which seems to be the alcohol consumption equivalent of Russian roulette.
The concept of a set level for all is a nonsense. I am tee-total, therefore a glass of strong lagar would probably leave me legally able to drive, but seriously unfit so to do.
I feel strongly that a zero tolerence coupled with a life ban for offenders would wipe out the thousands of deaths and injuries caused by alcohol every year.
Yes, people bleat about 'responsible' drinking - but that's a contradcition in terms - you might as well introduce 'responsible' glue sniffing or heroin ingestion. There is always an argument for anyone to indulge in something they like, even if it is potentially dangerous and / or fatal.
The government are now wringing their hands over the branding and display of cigarettes - the only legally available commodity which, if used for its designed purpose, will kill you.
Until we develop cultural changes in our attitude to alcohol - starting with the destruction of the myth that drinking yourself insensible constitutes a 'good night out' - we will have to live with the consenquences of our failure to address this most insidious and dangerous drug.
I would ban it tomorrow, but then, I don't want to be Prime Minister.
Instead they pussyfoot around with limits, and encourage people to get as near to them as posible, without going over - which seems to be the alcohol consumption equivalent of Russian roulette.
The concept of a set level for all is a nonsense. I am tee-total, therefore a glass of strong lagar would probably leave me legally able to drive, but seriously unfit so to do.
I feel strongly that a zero tolerence coupled with a life ban for offenders would wipe out the thousands of deaths and injuries caused by alcohol every year.
Yes, people bleat about 'responsible' drinking - but that's a contradcition in terms - you might as well introduce 'responsible' glue sniffing or heroin ingestion. There is always an argument for anyone to indulge in something they like, even if it is potentially dangerous and / or fatal.
The government are now wringing their hands over the branding and display of cigarettes - the only legally available commodity which, if used for its designed purpose, will kill you.
Until we develop cultural changes in our attitude to alcohol - starting with the destruction of the myth that drinking yourself insensible constitutes a 'good night out' - we will have to live with the consenquences of our failure to address this most insidious and dangerous drug.
I would ban it tomorrow, but then, I don't want to be Prime Minister.
It's all about popularity ... nothing to do with road safety.
More accidents are caused by mobile phone users than drink drivers.
So the penalty for driving on the phone should be increased from £30, to a 1 year ban.
That would reduce accidents more than changing the alcohol limit.
But it won't happen.
Why not?
Because changing the drink drive limit is nothing to do with road safety ...
... it's about conspicuous legislation.
More accidents are caused by mobile phone users than drink drivers.
So the penalty for driving on the phone should be increased from £30, to a 1 year ban.
That would reduce accidents more than changing the alcohol limit.
But it won't happen.
Why not?
Because changing the drink drive limit is nothing to do with road safety ...
... it's about conspicuous legislation.
