scotland to reduce Drink Drive limit
Discussion
Edinburger said:
I couldn't give a monkey's chuff how I come across on this or any other thread.
I do have some emotional attachment to this topic as a very close family member was killed by a drunk driver a few years ago. The driver was a mid-50s respectable guy who worked in law and he was three times over the old Scottish limit, so not a totally pissed idiot.
But even before that happened, I never ever understood the need to drink (even or two) and drive. To me, if I'm drinking I'm drinking and not counting.
What the new drink drive limit did was tell people that actually one or two before driving isn't right and isn't acceptable. So when it was introduced it I welcomed it. Many of my friends did too. I think most people now either drink OR drive. And that seems sensible to me.
Anyway, crack on. Call me a berk or a wker or an idiot or whatever. I don't care. Just think about some of the points I posted earlier.
Sorry to hear you have personal experience. I have too - I got hit by a drunk and speeding driver as a pedestrian. Time off work etc but thankfully was able to limp away. Although I still get the fear crossing the road.I do have some emotional attachment to this topic as a very close family member was killed by a drunk driver a few years ago. The driver was a mid-50s respectable guy who worked in law and he was three times over the old Scottish limit, so not a totally pissed idiot.
But even before that happened, I never ever understood the need to drink (even or two) and drive. To me, if I'm drinking I'm drinking and not counting.
What the new drink drive limit did was tell people that actually one or two before driving isn't right and isn't acceptable. So when it was introduced it I welcomed it. Many of my friends did too. I think most people now either drink OR drive. And that seems sensible to me.
Anyway, crack on. Call me a berk or a wker or an idiot or whatever. I don't care. Just think about some of the points I posted earlier.
Would a lower limit have made a difference in our personal cases? Don’t think so.
More police and a realistic chance/genuine fear of getting caught? I think so.
Edinburger said:
NomduJour said:
Edinburger, should we also assume that you’re looking forward to car speed restrictors becoming mandatory?
No.(Playing devil's advocate here more than anything, but it's the same thing - the question is where do you draw a line on acceptable death/injury versus affecting people's "living standards".)
Edinburger said:
NomduJour said:
Edinburger said:
Would you be comfortable flying if the pilot has had a pint or two or taken some other behaviour changing drug?
Silly comparison given that it’s entirely reasonable to hold a commercial airline pilot to a higher duty of care, but don’t pretend it never happens.Set the limit to zero and, odd fluke aside, you’ll be lucky save a single life - the people drinking enough to be dangerous will still be the same ones who don’t care about the law anyway.
As I just posted, some law changes are to designed to change behaviours. It is better for everyone that no one drives a car after consuming alcohol. It really is as simple as that.
NomduJour said:
Edinburger said:
It is better for everyone that no one drives a car after consuming alcohol. It really is as simple as that.
It’s far better that no one drives a car at all, that way they can’t kill poor innocents. It really is as simple as that.Get some perspective instead of wanting to regulate and control everything.
Edinburger said:
technodup said:
Edinburger said:
Reducing alcohol limits even when proven not to work? Nothing has been proven not to work, but it brings our country into line with other countries.
Why should we fall into line with other countries with higher road deaths?Would you get on a plane if the pilot had had a few pints?
Edinburger said:
Dog Star said:
Edinburger said:
You sir, are an idiot.
And you sir, come across as a holier-than-thou idiot on this thread.Don't judge others by your pathetically low standards and tolerances.
You berk.
If I could be bothered looking for that "coffee beans" gif then I'd insert it here. But it's not worth my bother.
I do have some emotional attachment to this topic as a very close family member was killed by a drunk driver a few years ago. The driver was a mid-50s respectable guy who worked in law and he was three times over the old Scottish limit, so not a totally pissed idiot.
But even before that happened, I never ever understood the need to drink (even or two) and drive. To me, if I'm drinking I'm drinking and not counting.
What the new drink drive limit did was tell people that actually one or two before driving isn't right and isn't acceptable. So when it was introduced it I welcomed it. Many of my friends did too. I think most people now either drink OR drive. And that seems sensible to me.
Anyway, crack on. Call me a berk or a wker or an idiot or whatever. I don't care. Just think about some of the points I posted earlier.
Secondly, I don't follow the logic which says that reducing the limit as has been done is a logical reaction to the situation you describe; if you think that someone who is prepared to drink in the way he did (three times over) will modify his behavior because of the new limit then you are living in a fantasy land. A person who gives not a fk at being three times over will give the same amount of fks about being five or six times over.
None of your reasoning is logical justification for the lowering of the limit and it shows no mechanism by which it would actually work to reduce accident levels. Lots and lots of people said that from the outset and now have been proved correct.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff