Drug Driving Prosecution Failures
Discussion
article said:
The 386 cases that could not be pursued by prosecutors had reached the current statutory 12-month time limit.
They were primarily low risk cases with no fatality. Three of them involved an injury.
Doesn't seem that frightening tbh as they have prioritised the cases on the basis of severity.They were primarily low risk cases with no fatality. Three of them involved an injury.
The field test kit in my opinion isn't fit for purpose and is a waste of lab/police resources as unlike a breathalyser which shows the concentration of alcohol in the breath at the current time the drug wipe only shows that someone has come into contact with drugs within the past week.
Lots of the time the positive result of the field test won't be backed up in the lab as it will be under the prescribed limits, may be worth doing a FOI request to see how effective they actually are.
untakenname said:
Doesn't seem that frightening tbh as they have prioritised the cases on the basis of severity.
The field test kit in my opinion isn't fit for purpose and is a waste of lab/police resources as unlike a breathalyser which shows the concentration of alcohol in the breath at the current time the drug wipe only shows that someone has come into contact with drugs within the past week.
Lots of the time the positive result of the field test won't be backed up in the lab as it will be under the prescribed limits, may be worth doing a FOI request to see how effective they actually are.
The early breathalysers were also very basic and only really showed that some alcohol was present. Hopefully the roadside drug testing kit will be improved.The field test kit in my opinion isn't fit for purpose and is a waste of lab/police resources as unlike a breathalyser which shows the concentration of alcohol in the breath at the current time the drug wipe only shows that someone has come into contact with drugs within the past week.
Lots of the time the positive result of the field test won't be backed up in the lab as it will be under the prescribed limits, may be worth doing a FOI request to see how effective they actually are.
We as a country have cracked down on recreational use of alcohol before/during driving, hence the money spent of drink drive campaigns.
Too many innocent people have died as a result of drunk drivers.
Recreational drug use has become far more prevalent recently, and while the jury may be out on the risks, I for one am pleased to see the police trying to look after my interests and those of my kids and grand-kids with the tech available to them. Anything that sends a message to drug users that the police have the tools to hand to inconvenience drug users tat drive while under the influence, and give police a right to search vehicles and people under the Misuse of Drugs Act, with possible prosecutions for possession etc, would seem to me to be a good thing.
The "don't do it again, or do even worse" warning it gives should have a deterrent effect. I don't necessarily want to see more people go to jail for minor offences, as we all know that jail time tends to end with more crime being committed and more drug addiction. But doing something to stop the increase in drugged driving would seem to me to be a good thing that i would want our police forces to be doing. If the formal blood sample comes back negative or below the proscribed limit, that's fine by me.
Too many innocent people have died as a result of drunk drivers.
Recreational drug use has become far more prevalent recently, and while the jury may be out on the risks, I for one am pleased to see the police trying to look after my interests and those of my kids and grand-kids with the tech available to them. Anything that sends a message to drug users that the police have the tools to hand to inconvenience drug users tat drive while under the influence, and give police a right to search vehicles and people under the Misuse of Drugs Act, with possible prosecutions for possession etc, would seem to me to be a good thing.
The "don't do it again, or do even worse" warning it gives should have a deterrent effect. I don't necessarily want to see more people go to jail for minor offences, as we all know that jail time tends to end with more crime being committed and more drug addiction. But doing something to stop the increase in drugged driving would seem to me to be a good thing that i would want our police forces to be doing. If the formal blood sample comes back negative or below the proscribed limit, that's fine by me.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff