martini Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 I typically drink soft drinks after work unless actually going out for a meal and so on - in which case I wont have the car. Hell, I won't even cycle back home after a "session" - not worth the risk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kslb Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 I think you are being the fool being unrealistic in your expectations. Good luck expecting a crowd of 300+ to either book an extra £40+ night in the hotel to sober up or have one designated driver per car to remain sober the night of the wedding. Foolish expectations. Really stupid. Really stupid is drinking and driving not having the expectation that individuals will drink sensibly if driving the next day. I have been to many weddings, as I am sure you have, and I have always managed to have a good time and drive the same day or the next day legally. Unfortunately it is individuals like yourself who think it is to be expected that people will drive over the limit when there is a wedding or other similar occassion that contribute to the problem. Making out it is socially acceptable is the same as condoning it and only compounds the problem. I believe the expectation that others should be legally able to drive before getting behind the wheel is far from foolish and your response to my post only confirms my position, you are indeed a fool! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martini Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 Breathalysers connected directly to the ignition? (I mean to test for sobriety, not to start the car on alcohol fumes ). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnny g Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 Current news articles are talking about the proposed ban significantly reducing Pubs' (etc) trade. A lot of people probably wouldn't go for that one drink after work. True - and if you're going out for a session, a cost of a cab isn't prohibitive on the cost of the booze really. The social after-work-quick-drink is the one that will catch most people out I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt H Posted June 17, 2010 Author Share Posted June 17, 2010 Breathalysers in cars would be an expensive waste of money. There would be countless ways of getting around that. The threat of loosing your licence over potentially less than a pint would be enough to deter most people. The ones that drive p!ssed out of their tree will drive p!ssed out of their regardless of what the law says. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt H Posted June 17, 2010 Author Share Posted June 17, 2010 True - and if you're going out for a session, a cost of a cab isn't prohibitive on the cost of the booze really. The social after-work-quick-drink is the one that will catch most people out I think. Totally, which is the edge some news papers are taking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supra_aero Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 Really stupid is drinking and driving not having the expectation that individuals will drink sensibly if driving the next day. I have been to many weddings, as I am sure you have, and I have always managed to have a good time and drive the same day or the next day legally. Unfortunately it is individuals like yourself who think it is to be expected that people will drive over the limit when there is a wedding or other similar occassion that contribute to the problem. Making out it is socially acceptable is the same as condoning it and only compounds the problem. I believe the expectation that others should be legally able to drive before getting behind the wheel is far from foolish and your response to my post only confirms my position, you are indeed a fool! You're an idiot - this'll be my last post to you as you clearly took 1 hour + to respond to my last response and the response you made wasn't that coherent or impressive. "Making out it is socially acceptable is the same as condoning it and only compounds the problem. " So I don't smoke, but I can see why some do. That's the same as condoning it is it? "I have been to many weddings, as I am sure you have, and I have always managed to have a good time and drive the same day or the next day legally. " I agree you may be fine with it. And many others - afterall many Muslims don't drink! But not every wedding in boozy uk will be like that. You are forgetting that although drinking in Czech may not play so big a part of their culture, here it does. Thus this zero ban proposition is unrealistic - at least in the immediate short term. "I believe the expectation that others should be legally able to drive before getting behind the wheel is far from foolish and your response to my post only confirms my position, you are indeed a fool!" And your last point makes no sense. The irony of calling me a fool. http://triptronix.net/ishbadiddle/images/THINK.gif FOOL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martini Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 Breathalysers in cars would be an expensive waste of money. There would be countless ways of getting around that. I wasn't being serious. http://img.skitch.com/20100617-1xrbb92h1ar8qd5ktpjua6qm6e.jpg People need to take responsibility for their actions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt H Posted June 17, 2010 Author Share Posted June 17, 2010 I wasn't being serious. http://img.skitch.com/20100617-1xrbb92h1ar8qd5ktpjua6qm6e.jpg People need to take responsibility for their actions. It's hard to tell with clowns when they are and are not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animal Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 Except assclowns. They're always assclowns Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martini Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 It's hard to tell with clowns when they are and are not Yes, you our write their. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt H Posted June 17, 2010 Author Share Posted June 17, 2010 32 in favour vs 5 against so far - a pretty convincing opinion on mkiv.net Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supra_aero Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 32 in favour vs 5 against so far. Despite all the positives I still can't see it being passed. It might do though who knows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martini Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 32 in favour vs 5 against so far - a pretty convincing opinion on mkiv.net I am the only one that voted in more than one category? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geo Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 This is so simple. Drink + driving = Jail!! End Of!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewOW Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 Despite all the positives I still can't see it being passed. It might do though who knows. And I also spoilt my ballot paper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supra_aero Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 This is so simple. Drink + driving = Jail!! End Of!!!! If there was space in jail. And who is going to pay for these jail sentences? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 I am the only one that voted in more than one category? Nope. FWIW, I think the drink drive laws are fine as they are. I certainly don't see the need for random stops. That's an invasion of my privacy and will be met with hostility, especially if I'm hammered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt H Posted June 17, 2010 Author Share Posted June 17, 2010 That's an invasion of my privacy and will be met with hostility, especially if I'm hammered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edge Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 I agree, but if you get done with alcohol in you from night before I think it would be harsh if there was a zero tolerance and you had a tiny amount in you, say 5mg. Yeah i do agree. The other half said a high percentage of drink drivers she arrests are people who have been drinking a fair bit the evening before Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supra_aero Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 Yeah i do agree. The other half said a high percentage of drink drivers she arrests are people who have been drinking a fair bit the evening before Thank you. At last someone sees reasoning. I just fail to see in a country where alcohol and pub culture plays such a massive part of life, you'll be able to realistically uphold a zero tolerence legislation with people having 0% alcohol in their blood the next morning (Sunday mornings especially). Regardless of wedding, leaving do, birthday or whatever the party occassion. I can see police officers lining the A406/M25/M4 on Sunday mornings banning drivers left, right and centre. I've known many people to be tested positive in the morning, after a relatively late but light night out the day before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt H Posted June 17, 2010 Author Share Posted June 17, 2010 Thank you. At last someone sees reasoning. I just fail to see in a country where alcohol and pub culture plays such a massive part of life, you'll be able to realistically uphold a zero tolerence legislation with people having 0% alcohol in their blood the next morning (Sunday mornings especially). Regardless of wedding, leaving do, birthday or whatever the party occassion. I can see police officers lining the A406/M25/M4 on Sunday mornings banning drivers left, right and centre. I've known many people to be tested positive in the morning, after a relatively late but light night out the day before. I think the point is just because it's the morning after, it doesn't mean that the alcohol in your blood isn't having have the same effect on your senses as it would if it was fresh in. ‘X’mgs is ‘X’mgs, regardless of when it went in. Not changing the legislation simply to allow people to drive p!ssed the following day probably wouldn't cut it! What you're basically saying, is you don't agree with a harsher limit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLicense Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 Every Friday lunchtime, everyone here in the office takes a stroll down to the local pub for a drink and something to eat. I for one will pretty much always have a pint with some food. If I left on time, about 4 hours later, there would still be some small amount of alcohol in my system, so all those who think the tolerance should be zero are saying that I should go straight to jail? Have some sense! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt H Posted June 17, 2010 Author Share Posted June 17, 2010 This thread seems to have gone from discussing a lower limit to discussing a zero tolerance regime Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supra Size Me Posted June 17, 2010 Share Posted June 17, 2010 Drinking and driving is a bad thing, people usually end up dead as a result and the act cannot be frowned on enough. However.. (you knew it was coming ) lowering the amount to the point where 1 pint is enough to put you over the limit then as normal Joe Bloggs will rightly think "I can have a pint as it's only 7/8 o'clock" I'll be ok by 11:30 to drive home. However depending on if anything has been eaten before the alcohol and also body mass indexes etc taken into account he'll have just enough to put him over at half eleven given the right set of circumstances. This will be the equivalent of doing 33 in a 30, which while is still wrong gives the police the ability to fine you and point you. This can be done on the entrance to dual carriageways which have no residential housing even in sight but are still a 30 when technically identical roads elsewhere (even nearby) are a 40 limit (guess which one the coppers are sat behind a bush on......) The same will happen with the drink driving and a new "ooh you were just naghty enough sir" drink driving fine and points system will be introduced, which won't have you banned but will charge you a few hundred or thousand pound fine and maybe 6-9 points avoiding a ban, as they don't want you to stop paying fuel duty unless you're a real kn*b head who drives around after walking back to his car in a zig zag.... It'll be the same as the cameras just another method of robbing you out of a few grand for having 1 pint hours earlier. SHANDY DRINKING WENDIES OF BRITAIN UNITE !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.