I'm surprised this hasn't been commented on yet ...

Yes, it should be discouraged - but I don't think this is the reason why
it's being considered.

Well, it will be a very easy way to raise cash - especially if the
'minor' offence becomes a fixed penalty notice.

 

This one hasn't:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en...d=0u_zC-zTn1Kb9MfaUF-Zmg&cbp=12,207.75,,0,8.6

 

Heh. I came *this* close to repeating my story of being pissed on cider
(on a regular basis) and at the end of the evening helping each other
onto our mopeds with a push down the hill to get moving. Once the cold
air hit our faces we were *fine*.

Of course, that was thirty years ago. The world's changed. Clearly.

 

The current limit hardly encourages it.

"The government believes the tougher law on alcohol would prevent up
to 65 deaths a year and a further 230 serious injuries in car
accidents linked to drink driving"

If they were worried about 65 unnecessary deaths, they've only got to
shut down one hospital in Staffordshire.

"Most countries with lower limits fine drivers and give them penalty
points for minor breaches. North is considering recommending shorter
bans for breaches of between 50mg and 79mg."

So, more draconian than elsewhere, then. Quelle surprise.

"The drink-drive changes - which would not require new legislation..."

WTF?

 

This is an interesting read:

http://www.80mg.org.uk/index.html

 

wrote in

Actually, that was me too, although in the seventies, not the eighties.
It might still work on a PC50. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't on the RT.

 

Existing legislation allows the relevant Minister to alter the limit using
Executive Powers.

 

ok: in your opinion, what is?

The fact that you consider this to be a significant factor...etc

 

It's a positive advantage to have had a long lunch with red wine when
driving in Italy.

I have never seen anyone stopped.

'Have you had a drink with your lunch sir'
'Yes, like 99.5 of the rest of the adult population ...'

Paul.

 

Probably to meet an EU quota.

But this is bollocks.

So you think that just because a law comes onto the statute that :

a) the populace have to obey it
b) the law enforcers have to enforce it

Paul.

 

Eating mince pies on Christmas day, being a prime example.

 

I don't believe that Belgium even does points.

 

wessie wrote:

Last time we crossed, I watch an old boy spend about £1.5k on cigarettes
without batting an eyelid.

 

Anecdotal alert!

Talking to a regular in my old pub at the turn of the millennium, a high
up in what was called Customs and Excise. He reckoned the most popular
rolling tobacco in England was Drum.
Which at that time was not for sale in the UK.

 

Same here, both within walking distance. Half mile and a mile, one is
more a gasto pub the other serves traditional pub food. Both serve two
real ales.

One has a better smoker's area which is the pub that most of the smokers
frequent.

 

Is all "drink-driving" equal?

Yes, there's quite a few road deaths in the UK each year attributed to
drink-driving.

But how many of those are relatively close to the current 80mg level? I'd
suspect not many.

How many road deaths are caused by drivers between 50-80mg? I'd suspect
almost none.

So all that lowering the limit is going to do is criminalise something
that's relatively harmless and soften the public attitude towards drink-
driving, whilst hammering an already stressed sector of businesses.

What's the point?

 

Http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts

It would appear that the current lot like new laws.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Acts_of_Parliament_in_the_United_Kingdom

 

I see a lot of hand-rolling types around here. Golden Virginia seems
ubiquitous. Second most-popular is probably green.

 

Then read the context;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7061148.ece