View Full Version : I like N irelands thinking
N Ireland are going to get tougher on drink drivers, I am all for that, hope we adopt this law, especially to the younger drivers
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-15053560
I agree with you there....but....what I am finding is that there is more and more 'controls' on people's lives.
We recently brought in the .05/ down from.08 and learners and people with new(restricted) licences are required to have a Zero alcohol level.
We are also into the DD...Designated drvers and all sorts of fancy campaigns but we are still having problems....maybe they would be worse without the new additions.
A far cry from the Olde Dayes!
A friend recently got 'done' for over .05 and under .08....3 bottles of beer at 5% alcohol content....costly business/ loss of licence/car and Insurance rates skyrocket. Aghhhhhhhhhhh
My Personal Views.. Why Arent the Limits ZERO!!??
Because it is the Government who make the laws!
MADD...Mother's against Drunk Drivers...have had a hugh campaign to have it at Zero, but this is as far as they got.
And the fact that 'the working man/woman' should be able to have a beer after a hard days work.
There is a fine line here/ Politically the Gov't requires the money they receive from the taxes on Alcohol and Tobacco/ thus they would be cutting off their nose..you know the rest!
NickInTheNorth
26-Sep-11, 14:21
Given that alcohol is only a factor in around 20% of road deaths in the UK, is it not time that we stopped the overwhelming focus on drink driving and actually started to look at some of the other factors which are implicated in road deaths?
If we actually had our roads policed properly and clamped down on the appall8ing driving practices that are evident everyday everywhere people drive I think far more could be done to reduce the carnage on our roads.
Lets see the police taking action against excessive speed (especially in built up and residential areas), against tail gating, against dangerous driving, against smoking in cars, against driving under the influence of drugs. But we see far too little of all that. Could that possibly be because a drink driving conviction is easy for the police and the others require a little more work in terms of evidence for successful prosecution?
And no I am not advocating people drinking and driving, and yes I have in the past been prosecuted and banned for drink driving.
Rest assured, an Impaired Charge is likely the most difficult to prosecute. and obtain a conviction.
There are quite a number of parts to it, and if one is missed/a mistake made/ a word forgotten....it is lost.
Given that alcohol is only a factor in around 20% of road deaths in the UK, is it not time that we stopped the overwhelming focus on drink driving and actually started to look at some of the other factors which are implicated in road deaths?
I would agree with that.
Drink driving lies somewhere close to child porn in terms of social acceptability. It's time to focus public opinion on other dangerous crimes.
I would agree with that.
Drink driving lies somewhere close to child porn in terms of social acceptability. It's time to focus public opinion on other dangerous crimes.
Yes I would agree with that comment/ Mind you it gets 'good press'.
NickInTheNorth
26-Sep-11, 15:25
Rest assured, an Impaired Charge is likely the most difficult to prosecute. and obtain a conviction.
There are quite a number of parts to it, and if one is missed/a mistake made/ a word forgotten....it is lost.
Given that provided the normal caution has been given, that the officer has reasonable cause to suspect an offence has been given and that 2 over the limit breath samples have been provided on an evidential machine then the conviction follows as night follows day.
Drink driving and drunk in control are both absolute offences with no defence.
Given that provided the normal caution has been given, that the officer has reasonable cause to suspect an offence has been given and that 2 over the limit breath samples have been provided on an evidential machine then the conviction follows as night follows day.
Drink driving and drunk in control are both absolute offences with no defence.
Ours are a lot more difficult to prove.....we even sometimes have to call expert witneses.....and of course the defence can do the same...
weezer 316
26-Sep-11, 17:46
So....
its ok to drink a wee bit and drive a machine that can kill someone......but its not ok to be perfectly dober and drive, and then get hom and smoke a joint/drop ecstacy/snort speed in the comfort and privacy of your own home.
George Brims
26-Sep-11, 17:55
A friend recently got 'done' for over .05 and under .08....3 bottles of beer at 5% alcohol content....costly business/ loss of licence/car and Insurance rates skyrocket. Aghhhhhhhhhhh
You friend is an idiot. THREE beers before driving? Lucky to be under the .08.
My Personal Views.. Why Arent the Limits ZERO!!??
Well for a start you could forget having xmas pudding and then driving if it had brandy in it, or choc liquers etc. Mouthwash also contains a high percentage of alcohol, enough to put you well over the limit for a while. I know cos I bought a breath test machine to ensure I'm legal the next morning after a night out and mouthwash puts you well over the DD limit. I got done 7 years ago in the morning after a heavy night. Lesson learnt the hard way!
"Given that alcohol is only a factor in around 20% of road deaths in the UK" !
Only 20%? On average 3,000 people are killed or seriously injured each year in drink drive collisions, and nearly one in six of all deaths on the road involve drivers who are over the legal alcohol limit..
I'm with tootz on this one, let's have 0.. after all (for a change) we're out of step with Europe, with the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Malta, Romania, Slovakia having '0' (mouthwash and all)
Norway, Poland, Sweden having 0.2 mg per ml
Lithuania 0.4 mg per ml
Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Macedonia, Netherlands, Portugal, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey 0.5
Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, United Kingdom 0.8
Having attended quite a few crashes confirmed by 'drunk' drivers, the lower the limit, the better, I'd hate to be the copper that has to knock on the hundreds of doors to tell a mother/spouse that some drunken prat has wiped out their son's/spouses life..
"Given that alcohol is only a factor in around 20% of road deaths in the UK" !
Only 20%? On average 3,000 people are killed or seriously injured each year in drink drive collisions, and nearly one in six of all deaths on the road involve drivers who are over the legal alcohol limit..
I'm with tootz on this one, let's have 0.. after all (for a change) we're out of step with Europe, with the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Malta, Romania, Slovakia having '0' (mouthwash and all)
Norway, Poland, Sweden having 0.2 mg per ml
Lithuania 0.4 mg per ml
Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Macedonia, Netherlands, Portugal, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey 0.5
Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, United Kingdom 0.8
Having attended quite a few crashes confirmed by 'drunk' drivers, the lower the limit, the better, I'd hate to be the copper that has to knock on the hundreds of doors to tell a mother/spouse that some drunken prat has wiped out their son's/spouses life..
I take your point as I have also attended many road accidents where alcohol was a factor, however I now see the Police in some countys that have evedential roadside breath test machines which could mean that if you were say stopped after a gargle of mouthwash you would be done unfairly, also if you were 50mg or over (quite possible with mouthwash) you then have no right to a blood test.
We also hear a lot about "morning after" drivers. If the Police were really serious about ridding the road of drink drivers, why can't they offer a breath test at the cop shop for drivers who are genuinely unsure about their fitness to be driving in the morning? Now that would be a proactive aproach IMHO
You friend is an idiot. THREE beers before driving? Lucky to be under the .08.
That could very well be a matter of opinion....I don't know where you live, but in Caithness and in Inverness, I have never seen such drinking and driving!
Interesting side bar here...
In Mobile, Alabama a person who is convicted of a 'non violent offence', the traffic related ones, are now given the option of Jail or Church, every Sunday for 12 months...Whatta ya think o' that?
Interesting side bar here...
In Mobile, Alabama a person who is convicted of a 'non violent offence', the traffic related ones, are now given the option of Jail or Church, every Sunday for 12 months...Whatta ya think o' that?
Better than being off the road for 12 months as I was.
George Brims
26-Sep-11, 23:11
Interesting side bar here...
In Mobile, Alabama a person who is convicted of a 'non violent offence', the traffic related ones, are now given the option of Jail or Church, every Sunday for 12 months...Whatta ya think o' that?
I think that will be ruled unconstitutional any minute now.
oldmarine
26-Sep-11, 23:31
You friend is an idiot. THREE beers before driving? Lucky to be under the .08.
Depends on the % of alcohol in that beer before you can make such a statement. lol!!!
I think that will be ruled unconstitutional any minute now.
Pray tell me why? If the accused agrees to it, then there would not appear to be a problem/ only when it is constitutionally challenged! What say you..oh legal one!
NickInTheNorth
27-Sep-11, 08:59
"Given that alcohol is only a factor in around 20% of road deaths in the UK" !
Only 20%? On average 3,000 people are killed or seriously injured each year in drink drive collisions, and nearly one in six of all deaths on the road involve drivers who are over the legal alcohol limit..
Yes ONLY - i.e. it is not involved in 80% and it is high time we as a society addressed those 80% too. That is the other 5 in six deaths!! The vast majority are not alcohol related.
And as I already stated I am not arguing in favour of any sort of lessening of drink drive vigilance, simply suggesting we look at the much bigger sector not related to alcohol.
I was watching a cop series the other night, about the Australian Police, there was this git who was hurling along, refused to stop for the Police, they got in front of him and so he rammed the copper out of the way, then later cut across a junction, writing off three cars in the process, then rammed a tree himself, causing total chaos. He had no licence and no insurance.
What did he get for this mayhem?; a 12 month ban and 60 hours community service, oh yes and a $100 fine for not using a seatbelt. No drink involved here but seems the Aussies treat these things a wee bit more lax than we do..
So....
its ok to drink a wee bit and drive a machine that can kill someone......but its not ok to be perfectly dober and drive, and then get hom and smoke a joint/drop ecstacy/snort speed in the comfort and privacy of your own home.
Pretty much, don't expect the government or the general populace to respond to evidence. I've debated with people and shown them various studies that show salt isn't the unholy killer of society that dodgy claims from the 60s and 70s made it out to be, but these people still feel that it's bad.
On the subject of alcohol limits, why don't we just set the limit at 0, taking some allowance for trace amounts through things like mouthwash. I only wish we could test for other things (prescription medication etc) the way we do for alcohol.
It would appear that the 'mouthwash thing' is a bit of a red herring!
It would appear that the 'mouthwash thing' is a bit of a red herring!
No, I've tried gargling this stuff and then blowing into a DOT approved breath tester-it shows you way over the limit!!
Myth Busters:
Beat the Breath Test(1)
Using various substances and tricks when drunk to test to beat the breathalyser test, to include eating breath mints or an onion, drinking mouthwash, placing a penny,battery, or ice in the mouth, and wearing dentures.
Busted
None of the tested methods worked, and the MythBusters blood alcohol content was consistently over .08, verified with a field sobriety test. In addition, mouthwash actually made the breathalyzer give a higher reading than usual because of the inherent alcohol content
But nothing like "way over the limit", presume the coppers in the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Malta, Romania, and Slovakia with '0' are aware of mouthwash
But then again: http://www.independent.ie/national-news/mouthwash-could-put-motorists-over-drinkdrive-limit-1206641.html 'Although the high readings dramatically fell within minutes of using the products'
(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MythBusters_(2003_season)
It would appear that the 'mouthwash thing' is a bit of a red herring!
I thought as much, even if it was true I doubt it would put people over anyway unless they had been over drinking or dangerously close to the limit. Just wanted to mention it as someone was going to bring it up.
Depends on the % of alcohol in that beer before you can make such a statement. lol!!!
I beg to differ: It depends on alot more than just the alcoholic content of what was drunk. It depends on your sex, contitution, your health, how well hydrated you are, how long ago you ate and how long ago you drank, etc etc.
So if you are concerned about being safe, choose not to drink when you know you are going to drive. If you are willing to gamble that you are under the limit, then you really should not have a license.
Your comment Ju was what would work in a 'Perfect World'. And I am sure everyone would agree with you....but.......
This is not a perfect World!
DeHaviLand
27-Sep-11, 15:19
Given that alcohol is only a factor in around 20% of road deaths in the UK, is it not time that we stopped the overwhelming focus on drink driving and actually started to look at some of the other factors which are implicated in road deaths?
If we actually had our roads policed properly and clamped down on the appall8ing driving practices that are evident everyday everywhere people drive I think far more could be done to reduce the carnage on our roads.
Lets see the police taking action against excessive speed (especially in built up and residential areas), against tail gating, against dangerous driving, against smoking in cars, against driving under the influence of drugs. But we see far too little of all that. Could that possibly be because a drink driving conviction is easy for the police and the others require a little more work in terms of evidence for successful prosecution?
And no I am not advocating people drinking and driving, and yes I have in the past been prosecuted and banned for drink driving.
Go on, tell me when it became illegal to smoke in your car!
NickInTheNorth
27-Sep-11, 15:41
Go on, tell me when it became illegal to smoke in your car!
It is not illegal per se, however given the level of distraction it causes many drivers it can be and occasionally is prosecuted, usually as driving without due care and attention.
It is one of many things that can and does lead to accidents and even death on the road which does not have the same degree of hysteria attached to it that drinking and driving does.
DeHaviLand
27-Sep-11, 15:56
It is not illegal per se, however given the level of distraction it causes many drivers it can be and occasionally is prosecuted, usually as driving without due care and attention.
It is one of many things that can and does lead to accidents and even death on the road which does not have the same degree of hysteria attached to it that drinking and driving does.
Ok, can you now show me one example where the cause of death was attributed to someone smoking in a car?
NickInTheNorth
27-Sep-11, 16:13
Not off hand, but then again I'm not really interested, I've certainly seen reports of accidents blamed on smoking in cars in the past.
My point is purely and simply that smoking can distract a driver, and a distracted driver can cause accidents. Road accidents do cause deaths...
Stop feeling so hard done by, it is simply one illustration of one activity that takes place in cars which is ignored and yet does lead to accidents.
It is not recorded as a specific offence hence not easy to find actual statistics.
Perhaps you would argue that smoking never ever leads to driver distraction and therefore accidents...
NickInTheNorth
27-Sep-11, 16:17
But as I am a nice guy I took the trouble to run a very quick search on google and the top result I got was:
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/838249-dropped-cigarette-caused-kent-car-death
But surely drinking and driving is something that the person knows they are doing, there's enough publicity about it..
No one knows they are going to speed, or tailgate, surely taking a lump of metal onto a road, when the mind is not obviously clear is asking for trouble?
Of course maybe I'm biased, as I am tee-total.
oldmarine
27-Sep-11, 20:45
I beg to differ: It depends on alot more than just the alcoholic content of what was drunk. It depends on your sex, contitution, your health, how well hydrated you are, how long ago you ate and how long ago you drank, etc etc.
So if you are concerned about being safe, choose not to drink when you know you are going to drive. If you are willing to gamble that you are under the limit, then you really should not have a license.
Very well phrased.
DeHaviLand
28-Sep-11, 02:18
But as I am a nice guy I took the trouble to run a very quick search on google and the top result I got was:
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/838249-dropped-cigarette-caused-kent-car-death
Call me a pedant, but it doesnt state in that article that he was smoking! My point is that you stated that the police should be looking to prosecute people smoking while driving. Someone possibly more tolerant may have chosen their words more wisely.
Call me a pedant, but it doesnt state in that article that he was smoking! My point is that you stated that the police should be looking to prosecute people smoking while driving. Someone possibly more tolerant may have chosen their words more wisely.
"Milord, I was not using my mobile whilst driving when I had the accident. I was just holding it."
Dehaviland, whether the cigarrette was lit or not, he was distracted by it enough to kill someone. If you are lighting, holding a cigarrette, tapping the ash, worryinging when ash/ember might fall in your lap or fetching them from the floor when you drop one, then you are not concentrating on your driving, are you? What I would add is that I cannot think of anything else a person might do with a cigarrette other than smoke it.
DeHaviLand
28-Sep-11, 08:17
Actually Ju, it is an offence to have your mobile phone in your hand while driving, whether you're using it or not. Dont worry though, I was arguing semantics.
And it appears that this particular miscreant was picking his packet of cigarettes up from the floor of his car. I suppose only he knows whether he was going to smoke one of them or not.
The act of smoking while driving does not necessarily make the driver an unsafe driver, anymore so than does listening to your car stereo. Are you fully concentrated on your driving while listening to your favourite tracks? I once had a car written off by some numpty who admitted he didnt see me because he was head-dancing to his favourite CD! That doesn't mean that I'm going to call for drivers listening to music to be prosecuted, in the way that NITN has called for smokers to be prosecuted.
NickInTheNorth
28-Sep-11, 10:12
But surely drinking and driving is something that the person knows they are doing, there's enough publicity about it..
No one knows they are going to speed, or tailgate, surely taking a lump of metal onto a road, when the mind is not obviously clear is asking for trouble?
Of course maybe I'm biased, as I am tee-total.
What a load of tripe!
Of course you know when you are speeding - or going to!
Of course you know when are are tail gating - or going to!
What rubbish - perhaps you should take a drink, it might clear your mind.
What a load of tripe!
Of course you know when you are speeding - or going to!
Of course you know when are are tail gating - or going to!
What rubbish - perhaps you should take a drink, it might clear your mind.
Well, I suppose you would say that; "and yes I have in the past been prosecuted and banned for drink driving."
Drink clearing the mind'? hmm not heard of that one..
NickInTheNorth
28-Sep-11, 11:42
Well, I suppose you would say that; "and yes I have in the past been prosecuted and banned for drink driving."
Drink clearing the mind'? hmm not heard of that one..
I only suggest that because anyone that believes "No one knows they are going to speed, or tailgate" is clearly delusional and needs to do something to alter their state of mind.
Every time someone breaks a speed limit, or otherwise drives faster than the conditions indicates has taken a concious decision to do so. Likewise when a driver drives too close to the car in front, a concious decision has been taken to do so.
There are no excuses for drink driving, it is wrong, but there is a clear need to address the 80% of road deaths and accidents that are not attributable to alcohol.
You holier than thou idiots that don't want to address the issues are the biggest danger on the roads.
tonkatojo
28-Sep-11, 12:05
So....
its ok to drink a wee bit and drive a machine that can kill someone......but its not ok to be perfectly dober and drive, and then get hom and smoke a joint/drop ecstacy/snort speed in the comfort and privacy of your own home.
You got it right, its the law of the land.
I only suggest that because anyone that believes "No one knows they are going to speed, or tailgate" is clearly delusional and needs to do something to alter their state of mind.
Every time someone breaks a speed limit, or otherwise drives faster than the conditions indicates has taken a concious decision to do so. Likewise when a driver drives too close to the car in front, a concious decision has been taken to do so.
There are no excuses for drink driving, it is wrong, but there is a clear need to address the 80% of road deaths and accidents that are not attributable to alcohol.
You holier than thou idiots that don't want to address the issues are the biggest danger on the roads.
Calm down Nick
Well having been a driver for a great many years, including over a decade being a fire appliance driver in the Midlands, have quite a lot of experience, hopefully you'll give me that without veiled abuse..
I did actually underline; no one knows they are 'going' to speed/tailgate, which emphasises the fact that no one can really predict they will do these things (maybe you can?) but drinking enough alcohol to be over the limit and then banned is surely something that a person would be aware of, unless of course they were not very bright or got carried away with the joviality or were slipped - what is it - a Mickey Finn?
Please forgive me I'm not sure of these things as I've led a rather sheltered life..
So really Nick, saying I'm 'clearly delusional' and I need 'something' to alter my state of mind, and I'm a 'holier than thou idiot' is rather naughty.. Sorry don't take drugs either, and I'm afraid I don't smoke, and don't use caffeine either.
What's this poor old chap to do?
NickInTheNorth
28-Sep-11, 12:19
[SIZE=2]What's this poor old chap to do?
You could start by addressing the real issue that I brought up in my first post in this thread.
How do we tackle the other 80% of RTA's and deaths?
You could start by addressing the real issue that I brought up in my first post in this thread.
How do we tackle the other 80% of RTA's and deaths?As far as I am aware this tread was started by Golach; "N Ireland are going to get tougher on drink drivers, I am all for that, hope we adopt this law, especially to the younger drivers"
This was a topical news item.
If you want to start a thread dealing with actions that can be taken against those who do not drink and drive and cause RTA's; go ahead.
oldmarine
29-Sep-11, 16:05
I beg to differ: It depends on alot more than just the alcoholic content of what was drunk. It depends on your sex, contitution, your health, how well hydrated you are, how long ago you ate and how long ago you drank, etc etc.
So if you are concerned about being safe, choose not to drink when you know you are going to drive. If you are willing to gamble that you are under the limit, then you really should not have a license.
Wow! You covered a lot here with your comment. Your best comment was "choose not to drink when you know you are going to drive." That should apply for everyone who wants to mix alcohol or drugs with driving.
Hmmm squabbles galore. As I see it people have to make a conscious decision to drive after they have been drinking. You can speed or tailgate without thining too hard about it.... indeed you can drift into both without a conscious decision. Society's attitude to drink driving has changed over the last thirty years. whilst being illegal it was not quite so socially frowned upon when i was a kid and i have seen my dad drive after having a drink a few times - usually Christmas! These days it is completely unacceptable and rightly so. I dont drink and drive ever today but i have seen the days when I would have chanced my arm and driven home even knowing i was over the limit. Times change and thats a good thing. You cannot however legislate for everything and surely smoking a cigarette or having a sweetie or singing along with the radio is the sort of stuff that we have to allow people to decide for themselves. How do you legislate against people having a smoke? Dont we have better things for our police to do?
We have to take responsibility for our own behaviour. When we get into a car we have to make judgements about our safety and the others on the road. If we get it wrong then we have to pay the price, however we cannot avoid all accidents. We can accept the legislation for drink driving and mobile phone use but we have to accept that accidents DO happen and that people make mistakes, errors of judgements or do stupid things which cause them. Beleiving we can legislate that away is daft. EVERY single driver will have done something stupid and been lucky to get away without an accident in their driving career. If you say you havent then I think you must be lying. We learn from that and become better drivers as a result. Maturity helps in many cases to make better drivers. So it might make sense to limit the power of cars for young people in much the same way as we do with Motorbikes. That would be better i think than messing about over cigarettes, sweeties and music. Or kids for that matter - they can be a huge distraction.
We have to take responsibility for our own behaviour.
Problem is all too often, the ones that pay the most for badly behaving drivers are not the drivers themselves.
George Brims
29-Sep-11, 22:06
Depends on the % of alcohol in that beer before you can make such a statement. lol!!!
The poster stated it was 5%. The table from the CA DMV that came with my truck registration the other day says that at my weight, 190 pounds, after three 5% beers (and those are American 12 oz beers, Brit ones likely to be larger) I would be at around .14.
George Brims
29-Sep-11, 22:08
Pray tell me why? If the accused agrees to it, then there would not appear to be a problem/ only when it is constitutionally challenged! What say you..oh legal one!
We have plenty of people in the US ready to challenge any infringement of the separation of Church and State. And if I lived in such an area and they were planning to let idiots loose on that basis, I might challenge it myself. Well, if I could find a lawyer willing to do it for free...
George Brims
29-Sep-11, 22:17
The act of smoking while driving does not necessarily make the driver an unsafe driver
That's not the way my insurance company sees it. I get a discount on my car insurance for being a non-smoker. I have a good friend who damn near wiped herself out by choosing to light up just as she came to a bend after a really long stretch of straight road. First her lighter wouldn't work, then she fiddled with book matches from the pub the night before. Then she ran out of straight road and rolled her car several times.
The poster stated it was 5%. The table from the CA DMV that came with my truck registration the other day says that at my weight, 190 pounds, after three 5% beers (and those are American 12 oz beers, Brit ones likely to be larger) I would be at around .14.
Methinks there is something wrong there GB....
Some years I did a test, as other people had to do, and I am 185lbs, 6' in height and I blew under .08 with 3 X 12 oz beers..
All people are different but 3 shots X 1 and 1/4 oz gave the same reading...(approx).
So this man I know drank 3 beeers, had a few fries and then got stopped 60 mins after the last beer. Just over .05.....
And Yes, I am sure that someone will find a challenge to anything, but it is the recipient that has to challenge it...
This is not set in Law/ this is a Judge exercising her judgement and allowing for an alternate sentence...
Personally we have gone 'over the top' with the Drinking and Driving thing/ yes it is an offence, a serious offence, but the our Provincial Gov't gives the Muicipalities extra money to do the 'Ride Programs'. Thus they get money for tying a bunch of Officers up on a specific offence, whereas there should be some balance in the enforcement of laws.
To say that Impaired Driving has increased, simply means that there has been more enforcement. More arrests/more charges!
teddybear1873
29-Sep-11, 22:57
Drink driving, I wouldn't think twice of doing it here. Police are everywhere on a good day, even more numbers on a bad day. They scour the pubs at night just waiting for the idiot who is over the limit.
I often have to pick up my step daughter at the weekends, around 100am. Regular as clockwork, the cops are just sitting around the corner from the pub, not waiting for trouble, but for the drivers.
It boggles my mind why people drink and drive.
Think of it another way....
Laws were made to be broken/ and of course huge revenue from said fines/ keeps our Gov't well fuelled.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.