scotland to reduce Drink Drive limit
Discussion
sidicks said:
Edinburger said:
Then why bother having any limits? Make it a free for all. Let people decide for themselves if they're fit to drive.
Gee, you really are this stupid, aren't you!Edinburger said:
sidicks said:
Edinburger said:
Then why bother having any limits? Make it a free for all. Let people decide for themselves if they're fit to drive.
Gee, you really are this stupid, aren't you!For the obvious reasons outlined in the data this would be pure stupidity. But the data does not support your opinion.
(Which is presumably why you're resorting to nonsense?)
Edinburger said:
No wind up. It's your decision. Do what you like - just don't do it anywhere near my children.
Seeing you are incapable of having a pint and must have at least 6 pintsCan i request you stay off the street as i am far more likely to be stabbed to death by you then you are to be run over by me
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-pol...
95 murders in 2010 and 53% of all those murders involved drink so 50 deaths
On the road 10% of deaths related to drink and 173 deaths in scotland which is 17 deaths
sidicks said:
Edinburger said:
sidicks said:
Edinburger said:
Then why bother having any limits? Make it a free for all. Let people decide for themselves if they're fit to drive.
Gee, you really are this stupid, aren't you!For the obvious reasons outlined in the data this would be pure stupidity. But the data does not support your opinion.
(Which is presumably why you're resorting to nonsense?)
Edinburger said:
sidicks said:
Edinburger said:
"society has deemed it appropriate" - really? Technically, it's permitted legally but I think you'll find that most of sopciety dems it to be inappropriate and socially unacceptable.
Priceless!'Society' has deemed that driving while drunk is totally unacceptable.
If you think that 'society' deems it to be socially unacceptable to have a pint then drive, then you're more deluded than I thought.
Dereks piece is interesting but of course it could be applied to many other factors too. What Dereks piece doesn't go into is that people can do a good job of self-policing.
Take older drivers for instance. We all know that their reactions and faculties worsen as they get older, and everything that Derek has said could be applied to older drivers also, so does their accident rate worsen as they get older? No, it actually does the opposite and gets better and better, until a drop-off point when they get very old.
Afaiaa we simply don't know what harm those drivers who are under the limit are causing, and we have no casualty rates for them.
What I do know is this: Of all the problems the UK faces road safety isn't one of them; at that, it seems, we are the best in the world.
We are so piss poor as a nation at tackling many social and economic issues that is is bloody galling to know that there are politicians out there wasting their time and our money fiddling about with non-issues. There are so many more important issues that they should be dealing with, but chances are those issues will require some actual work and might actually represent a challenge, so these elected light-weights simply duck-out and pretend to look busy tackling something that doesn't need changing.
heebeegeetee said:
Edinburger said:
sidicks said:
Edinburger said:
"society has deemed it appropriate" - really? Technically, it's permitted legally but I think you'll find that most of sopciety dems it to be inappropriate and socially unacceptable.
Priceless!'Society' has deemed that driving while drunk is totally unacceptable.
If you think that 'society' deems it to be socially unacceptable to have a pint then drive, then you're more deluded than I thought.
Dereks piece is interesting but of course it could be applied to many other factors too. What Dereks piece doesn't go into is that people can do a good job of self-policing.
Take older drivers for instance. We all know that their reactions and faculties worsen as they get older, and everything that Derek has said could be applied to older drivers also, so does their accident rate worsen as they get older? No, it actually does the opposite and gets better and better, until a drop-off point when they get very old.
Afaiaa we simply don't know what harm those drivers who are under the limit are causing, and we have no casualty rates for them.
What I do know is this: Of all the problems the UK faces road safety isn't one of them; at that, it seems, we are the best in the world.
We are so piss poor as a nation at tackling many social and economic issues that is is bloody galling to know that there are politicians out there wasting their time and our money fiddling about with non-issues. There are so many more important issues that they should be dealing with, but chances are those issues will require some actual work and might actually represent a challenge, so these elected light-weights simply duck-out and pretend to look busy tackling something that doesn't need changing.
But in my view, alcohol and driving do not match. They're mutually exclusive in my view. Should be one or the other.
That's my view and I don't see what's wrong with that. I've been drawn into a debate around this and it seems incredible that this taking place on a motoring forum!
Edinburger said:
I've been drawn into a debate around this and it seems incredible that this taking place on a motoring forum!
I think that's why though.Had you just said that it was your view I don't think anyone would care to try and change your mind. The fact that you think it's ridiculous that such a debate be happening on a motoring forum suggests that drivers somehow ought to agree with you, and the fact that they don't as a rule is what people have challenged.
You are of course welcome to apply whatever rules to your driving to see fit, but others may not agree.
Disastrous said:
Edinburger said:
I've been drawn into a debate around this and it seems incredible that this taking place on a motoring forum!
I think that's why though.Had you just said that it was your view I don't think anyone would care to try and change your mind. The fact that you think it's ridiculous that such a debate be happening on a motoring forum suggests that drivers somehow ought to agree with you, and the fact that they don't as a rule is what people have challenged.
You are of course welcome to apply whatever rules to your driving to see fit, but others may not agree.
Perhaps if I had suggested that 'alcohol interlocks' were mandatory I'd understand the grievance! Those are the devices which disable the ignition unless the driver has passed a breath test. I saw then on the BBC's Click a while back.
Edinburger said:
McWigglebum4th said:
Edinburger said:
Do you think that Northern Ireland the rest of Europe are out of order with their 50mg limits?
What happens in france if i am caught at 60mg?This is one of the questions I asked my MSP on Friday, what will be the penalty for being 50-80mg/ml, she has not replied to me yet.
Edinburger said:
But in my view, alcohol and driving do not match. They're mutually exclusive in my view. Should be one or the other.
You are entitled to your opinion, but should recognise that (at the levels under discussion) it a) doesn't align with the evidence and b) compared to many other risks that are routinely treated as insignificant / acceptable, it barely registers on the scale.Edinburger said:
That's my view and I don't see what's wrong with that. I've been drawn into a debate around this and it seems incredible that this taking place on a motoring forum!
It seems incredible that someone who has an opinion that defies logic and evidence is surprised that that opinion is challenged...Corpulent Tosser said:
You would be fined but not banned.
Depending on the circumstances, you could be banned for up to 3 years in France at between 0.05mg/litre and 0.08mg/litre.Suggest McW does some empirical testing, kicks off in front of the French cop with the same arguments he's been using here when tested at 0.055mg/litre, and reports back.
eharding said:
Corpulent Tosser said:
You would be fined but not banned.
Depending on the circumstances, you could be banned for up to 3 years in France at between 0.05mg/litre and 0.08mg/litre.Suggest McW does some empirical testing, kicks off in front of the French cop with the same arguments he's been using here when tested at 0.055mg/litre, and reports back.
sidicks said:
Edinburger said:
But in my view, alcohol and driving do not match. They're mutually exclusive in my view. Should be one or the other.
You are entitled to your opinion, but should recognise that (at the levels under discussion) it a) doesn't align with the evidence and b) compared to many other risks that are routinely treated as insignificant / acceptable, it barely registers on the scale.Edinburger said:
That's my view and I don't see what's wrong with that. I've been drawn into a debate around this and it seems incredible that this taking place on a motoring forum!
It seems incredible that someone who has an opinion that defies logic and evidence is surprised that that opinion is challenged...Corpulent Tosser said:
Edinburger said:
McWigglebum4th said:
Edinburger said:
Do you think that Northern Ireland the rest of Europe are out of order with their 50mg limits?
What happens in france if i am caught at 60mg?This is one of the questions I asked my MSP on Friday, what will be the penalty for being 50-80mg/ml, she has not replied to me yet.
Edinburger said:
Let's be pragmatic - I agree with your post. I actually gree with everything you said.
But in my view, alcohol and driving do not match. They're mutually exclusive in my view. Should be one or the other.
That's my view and I don't see what's wrong with that. I've been drawn into a debate around this and it seems incredible that this taking place on a motoring forum!
Why? You could apply the same to so much - tiredness, health, medication, stress, and so on. Most of us will go and do a days work and then drive home knowing full well that we aren't in the same state of mind when we drove in in the morning. Indeed we have a long-working hours culture and may even boast of how long we work but we'll still drive home afterwards, and there may even be a cost to society for that (there's certainly aa cost to working needlessly long hours) but society deems it acceptable.But in my view, alcohol and driving do not match. They're mutually exclusive in my view. Should be one or the other.
That's my view and I don't see what's wrong with that. I've been drawn into a debate around this and it seems incredible that this taking place on a motoring forum!
There is nothing wrong with drinking and driving provided it's kept to a limit - which it is.
I have no idea why you would find this subject strange to see on a car forum, when it's been a part of car culture since day one.
Colonial said:
Edinburger. Care to address this?
You're talking about mph rather than mg, yeah?Colonial said:
It is more dangerous driving at 60 than 50.
You could cause harm to a pedestrian or other road user. Even if legal to do so.
You could cause harm to a pedestrian or other road user. Even if legal to do so.
Seems like a silly statement. But you knew that anyway.
eharding said:
Corpulent Tosser said:
You would be fined but not banned.
Depending on the circumstances, you could be banned for up to 3 years in France at between 0.05mg/litre and 0.08mg/litre.Suggest McW does some empirical testing, kicks off in front of the French cop with the same arguments he's been using here when tested at 0.055mg/litre, and reports back.
Serious question as my understanding is the penalty is a fine of up to 750euro.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff