"Yet the government drones on and on about reducing the number of accidents, when really its a non problem"
I agreed with you up to there.
|
Well for every
"my best friend.....left a family of kids... ...drunken driver..."
I can provide you with 10 "dies of cancer......" "lost a leg due to MRSA in hospital......" "going blind due to NHS post code lottery"
Much more deserving and more significant and current issues than drunken driving.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
|
Well TVM, I'm surprised more of them haven't come at you yet. Very good posts, of the type that make many in the back room go rigid and bloodshot and start snarling over the fence....
|
Lud,
I have no argument with him ! I just despise drink drivers, doesn't make me a bad person any more than it makes RF a bad person to disagree. :-(
|
Actually I dont necessarily disagree with TVM. The point I was making was that perhaps a drink driving crackdown would contribute more to road safety than the current taxation system imposed on motorists that is administered via speed cameras. A targeted campaign of the sort around holiday times as suggested by Expat above could well be beneficial. My other point was that over 1% of drivers stopped were over the limit, an interesting statistic but one which I would not be surprised is exceeded in my local town at chucking out time. Comparing the road safety apple with the domestic accident pear and saying that it doesnt really matter leads me to think that we neednt worry about air traffic control systems, seeing as the vast majority of planes dont crash. And when one does, well its still less than the number of people who die by choking on their food (please insert your own meaningless comparison here :-) )
MGs
|
|
The benefit to MGspaetc's view is that real Officers would be stopping these cars and bagging (if you excuse the pun) criminals who speed with impunity through Gatsos and the such like
|
this country does have impressive accident stats compared to many others.... but there is still a hard core of people who continue to drink/drive and there is a group who have generally been left alone which is the drug driver
it's like everything isn't it.......they're generally ok (spot the sweeping statement) until it becomes an emergency or out of the ordinary and then they don't have the capacity to react properly, which dramtically increases the risks to themselves and others
it's not helped by the reduction in traffic cops and targets issued to general cops who now don't have a great deal of time to concentrate on things like this
TVM is probably right in that other deaths are greater in numbers, but IMHO that doesn't mean we should stop focussing on the subject matter
|
I don't think TVM was complaining about drunken drivers being caught. He was complaining about the government 'going on and on about a problem that doesn't exist': trying to make out that drunken drivers are a major threat to life in this country when really they're a very minor one.
If that was what he meant, I agree.
I don't think motorists should be stopped or breathalysed unless they are seen driving dangerously. I dislike roadblocks where everyone is breathalysed, and then everyone over a certain level is run in, and the others released. It addresses the problem of 'drink driving', to the extent that it's a problem, but not the much more serious problem - the real problem actually - of dangerous driving. That can only be done by observation, which the state chooses not to afford.
|
|
Pretty much agree with all that post Lud.
|
Indeed Lud. The ability of the state to interfere in the lives of the greater majority of the law abiding population whilst attempting to criminalise and at the same time alienate them is impressive. I may get get done when inadvertently doing 45 mph in a 40 limit, whilst actually posing minimal risk to other road users, but at the same time a wide variety of criminals ranging from insider traders to burglars and feckless youths remain not just unapprehended but ignored. My main point is that if we are to be indiscriminate them perhaps just maybe targeting drink drivers could have more real effect, other than on revenue, compared to speeding. I dont know, but just suggest that could be the case.
MGs
|
I too believe that, given a choice between more crackdowns on DD or speeding, In this current climate I would choose DD.
My reasoning is simple.
Speeding by sober driver is often (not always) an event that occurs some time into the journey as the driver is in not impared by alcohole when he gets into the vehicle. In most cases the driver concerned has not made the choice to get behind the wheel when he is drunk, but has subsequently exceeded the speed limit, through a lapse of concentration, lack of awareness of the speed limit or conditions etc. Hence this offence is not a DELIBERATE ACT.
However a drunk driver has almost always made the decision to get behind the wheel knowing that he or she could be over the limit. Thus I see DD as a DELIBERATE ACT in most cases. The driver had a number of options available to him or her and has chosen the one that poses a huge danger to him/her and others.
However do we need a crackdown on either?
As Westpig states, there is a hardcore of idiots out there. These are the same people who probably consider themselves exempt from life's responabilities in general. I would invite any habitual drink driver to argue with me that they don't.
Hence my reasoning is that habitual drink driving is not just about road safety, though this is the primary concern of all who use our roads. Habitual drink drivers who choose to drive whilst drunk to my mind have scant regard for others in any respect. These are some of the same people who would think nothing of committing sexual harassment in the workplace, assault arising from an arguement, domestic violence, vandalism and other anti social acts.
Not all convicted drink drivers are of this ilk but I consider that most of the hardcore ones are. Whilst the once in a lifetime offenders are generally successfully rehabilitated and usually take full responsibility for their actions, the habitual offenders are just some of those who are a menace to our society.
I say - identify the habitual repeat offenders and look much more deeply into their lives. You will see a huge raft of problems they have, problems they are creating for themselves and problems they are creating for others.
Cat firmly amongst pigeons
|
> If that was what he meant, I agree.
He did
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
|
|
I for one would be seriously annoyed if the already overworked police were dragged away from more important duties to stop every motorist trying to resolve a problem THAT DOES NOT EXIST.
Hold on, Tiger...
Very often, I read posts here complaining that there is a distinct lack of visible policing on the UK roads, because Plod is relying more and more on Cameras...
Now there's a suggestion to get Plod in uniform back 'in the public's face', and there are objections.
Ok, what is WRONG with roadblocks every now and again? Not just for D&D, but an all-over check?
Happens here - plod pulls you in, says 'just a routine check sir', wanders round the car, checks tax disc, tyres, working lights etc etc etc.
Also asks to see your license, and woe is you if you don't have it on you, OR don't have one... then he asks "have you been drinking this evening?" and has the right to do the bag-blow if he suspects you have been.
Also checks for outrstanding warrants, so you may end up in the scrubs as a scofflaw.
You'd be amazed how many OTHER motoring crimes are uncovered by this method...
Or does the Civil Rights brigade in the UK thrash out the 'reasonable cause' horsedung when Plod starts a "stop-and-check" campaign?
|
Agreed Ian
As soon as the police have the resources to
1/ Patrol the streets
2/ Respond in a timely manner to incidents, and not be the only patrol car for 100 sq miles
3/ Be available to investigate crime when called to do so and not just issue a crime number
4/ Be able to see prosecution throught to the finish with all the procedure and paerwork properly done so slippery nick freeman can be made redundant.
then yes fine, have a road block now and again.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
What you mean is to have more numerous, visible and effective police out there on the streets. I think we would all agree that would be a good thing. We need to persuade the lawless that they have a good chance of being caught and there is nothing like visible, active police to do that. I have no objection to my taxes being used for that. It makes me feel safer.
Booze buses and random stops are one means but increased highway patrols are another. Ideally we should have them all. Out here we know that there is a fair chance of getting pulled over for a routine licence check. It has happened to me several times and I am a middle aged civil servant driving a modern well maintained vehicle in a small country town. The young layabout types in beat up old vehicles get stopped often. Within reason that does them no harm.
|
Out here we know that there is a fair chance of getting pulled over for a routine licence check. It has happened to me several times and I am a middle aged civil servant driving a modern well maintained vehicle in a small country town. The young layabout types in beat up old vehicles get
stopped often. Within reason that does them no harm.
Indeed.
I often get a late-night 'pull' (Stop sniggering!) when coming home from work after deadlines.
Doesn't bother me, in fact I'm sure the reason they STILL stop me - even though they know who i am, my car, and my circumstances etc - is so they can say to the scrotes 'see, we ain't victimising you!'
|
|
|
"1/ Patrol the streets
2/ Respond in a timely manner to incidents, and not be the only patrol car for 100 sq miles"
Mutually exclusive under the current strenghts, even more so when "Ipswichs" pull in all the uniforms from miles around. They're doing a "Dover" at the moment in Kent, you can bet that routine Policing is being hammered as we speak there and will be so long after the cameras have left to film some celebrity numpty who got arrested for something.
|
|
|
|
|
>>Happens here - plod pulls you in, says 'just a routine check sir', wanders round the car,checks tax disc, tyres, working lights etc etc etc.
>>Also asks to see your license, and woe is you if you don't have it on you,
>>OR don't have one... then he asks "have you been drinking this evening?"
That is exactly what has happened to me, on various SA holidays, when traveling between Capetown and Simonstown in a hire car.
Very polite questioning then I was on my way.
Having once collected a car from one of the big two at CPT airport and later found it had an out of date tax disk and on a couple of other visits I got lemons I am now more attentive to what state the car is in that I am offered so as to avoid later problems.
|
|
|
|
|
