Police release Bromley Christmas drink driving figures (From This Is Local London)

If the police just opened their eyes they would see people driving under the influence every day. These Christmas campaigns should last 364 days and anybody caught over the limit should automatically lose their licence and get a prison sentence.

The police should watch out for those lunch time drinkers or early evening up to 7pm types who have drunk in the lunch period then had a couple on the way home before 7pm

j.j. wrote:
If the police just opened their eyes they would see people driving under the influence every day. These Christmas campaigns should last 364 days and anybody caught over the limit should automatically lose their licence and get a prison sentence.

I think that is fair enough is someone is a lot over the limit. If they're just over, then I think the current system of a ban is fine. Somebody who has done the right thing and left the car at home before having a few the night before and gets caught the next morning, for example, doesn't deserve a prison sentence.

Anyway, I had an idea whereby it becomes law that all cars have a breathalyser system. You have to blow into it and be under the limit, otherwise the car doesn't start. That would cut it out by 100%. The technology wouldn't be that hard.

PaulErith wrote:

j.j. wrote: If the police just opened their eyes they would see people driving under the influence every day. These Christmas campaigns should last 364 days and anybody caught over the limit should automatically lose their licence and get a prison sentence.

I think that is fair enough is someone is a lot over the limit. If they're just over, then I think the current system of a ban is fine. Somebody who has done the right thing and left the car at home before having a few the night before and gets caught the next morning, for example, doesn't deserve a prison sentence. Anyway, I had an idea whereby it becomes law that all cars have a breathalyser system. You have to blow into it and be under the limit, otherwise the car doesn't start. That would cut it out by 100%. The technology wouldn't be that hard.

Until you get someone to breath into it that hasn't had a drink.

That's a fair challenge.....Must be some way of the technology knowing it's the driver (based on their breath or something). If it's not possible yet, give it a few years.

So what happens when it's a family car used by dad, mum, son and daughter? or a motorbike / company car / pool car ? What about people insured to drive any car ? Hire cars, how will it work with them ?
It's a pipe dream that will not happen.

This idea has been knocking around for 20 years, so you didn't think it up by yourself.

PaulErith wrote:

j.j. wrote:
If the police just opened their eyes they would see people driving under the influence every day. These Christmas campaigns should last 364 days and anybody caught over the limit should automatically lose their licence and get a prison sentence.

I think that is fair enough is someone is a lot over the limit. If they're just over, then I think the current system of a ban is fine. Somebody who has done the right thing and left the car at home before having a few the night before and gets caught the next morning, for example, doesn't deserve a prison sentence.

Anyway, I had an idea whereby it becomes law that all cars have a breathalyser system. You have to blow into it and be under the limit, otherwise the car doesn't start. That would cut it out by 100%. The technology wouldn't be that hard.

America already has them.

http://www.duimike.c
om/tennessee/dui-art
icles/ignition-inter
lock-device.php

the wall wrote:
So what happens when it's a family car used by dad, mum, son and daughter? or a motorbike / company car / pool car ? What about people insured to drive any car ? Hire cars, how will it work with them ? It's a pipe dream that will not happen. This idea has been knocking around for 20 years, so you didn't think it up by yourself.

As I said, it may not happen in totality yet, but give it time. Wouldn't say it's a pipe dream. 10 or 20 years it could be in all cars. If not then, it will happen in the future at some point.

PaulErith wrote:

the wall wrote: So what happens when it's a family car used by dad, mum, son and daughter? or a motorbike / company car / pool car ? What about people insured to drive any car ? Hire cars, how will it work with them ? It's a pipe dream that will not happen. This idea has been knocking around for 20 years, so you didn't think it up by yourself.

As I said, it may not happen in totality yet, but give it time. Wouldn't say it's a pipe dream. 10 or 20 years it could be in all cars. If not then, it will happen in the future at some point.

How far into the future ? Talk about edge your bets.

The current laws are good enough, just because a few fools do it there is no need to treat all the law abiding public the same. No person who hasn't been convicted of drink driving should be forced to incur the expense and hassle of an interlock device. They are very expensive and need frequent calibration to work properly.

So why should people who don't drink be forced to pay for something, because of a small number of fools ?

Also like Hiper Deactive has said this is already in place in the US for people who drink drive and guess what it doesn't work to well. One man’s car breathalyser refused to start his engine after he ate ice cream. The same problems happens with cough medicines.

If you need this sort of control in your life then maybe you shouldn't be driving.

How about we go all the way and put a tracking device in every person.
You want the government to control every aspect of life don't you.

PaulErith is a product of the nanny state. Eedjut.

Jeepo 11 wrote:
PaulErith is a product of the nanny state. Eedjut.

It was just a suggestion, you pr1ck!

the wall wrote:

PaulErith wrote:

the wall wrote: So what happens when it's a family car used by dad, mum, son and daughter? or a motorbike / company car / pool car ? What about people insured to drive any car ? Hire cars, how will it work with them ? It's a pipe dream that will not happen. This idea has been knocking around for 20 years, so you didn't think it up by yourself.

As I said, it may not happen in totality yet, but give it time. Wouldn't say it's a pipe dream. 10 or 20 years it could be in all cars. If not then, it will happen in the future at some point.

How far into the future ? Talk about edge your bets. The current laws are good enough, just because a few fools do it there is no need to treat all the law abiding public the same. No person who hasn't been convicted of drink driving should be forced to incur the expense and hassle of an interlock device. They are very expensive and need frequent calibration to work properly. So why should people who don't drink be forced to pay for something, because of a small number of fools ? Also like Hiper Deactive has said this is already in place in the US for people who drink drive and guess what it doesn't work to well. One man’s car breathalyser refused to start his engine after he ate ice cream. The same problems happens with cough medicines. If you need this sort of control in your life then maybe you shouldn't be driving. How about we go all the way and put a tracking device in every person. You want the government to control every aspect of life don't you.

Actually yeah, I'm quite in favour of chipping every baby at birth. That way you can cut crime. If, as you say, you're not one of the few fools that can't live by the rules, you'd have nothing to worry about.

PaulErith wrote:

Jeepo 11 wrote:
PaulErith is a product of the nanny state. Eedjut.

It was just a suggestion, you pr1ck!

Thank you Paul, you just proved my point. Well and Erith, what more can we expect.

It is good that the Police are picking up people who are up to four times the legal limit. There is no excuse for that and it suggests a baltent disregard for the law and the safety of themselves and others.
However, some people may still be drink driving unintentionally through ignorance of the amount they can drink or how long it takes to wear off. A poll published at Christmas by an insurance company showed 51% of people still don't know the drink drive limits. Many people unintentionally and unknowingly drink drive the morning after they have been drinking for this reason.
There are personal breathalysers which are available online or at Halfords which warn you if you are near or over the drink drive limit. One good one which seems highly recommended is the AlcoSense.

PaulErith wrote:

the wall wrote:

PaulErith wrote:

the wall wrote: So what happens when it's a family car used by dad, mum, son and daughter? or a motorbike / company car / pool car ? What about people insured to drive any car ? Hire cars, how will it work with them ? It's a pipe dream that will not happen. This idea has been knocking around for 20 years, so you didn't think it up by yourself.

As I said, it may not happen in totality yet, but give it time. Wouldn't say it's a pipe dream. 10 or 20 years it could be in all cars. If not then, it will happen in the future at some point.

How far into the future ? Talk about edge your bets. The current laws are good enough, just because a few fools do it there is no need to treat all the law abiding public the same. No person who hasn't been convicted of drink driving should be forced to incur the expense and hassle of an interlock device. They are very expensive and need frequent calibration to work properly. So why should people who don't drink be forced to pay for something, because of a small number of fools ? Also like Hiper Deactive has said this is already in place in the US for people who drink drive and guess what it doesn't work to well. One man’s car breathalyser refused to start his engine after he ate ice cream. The same problems happens with cough medicines. If you need this sort of control in your life then maybe you shouldn't be driving. How about we go all the way and put a tracking device in every person. You want the government to control every aspect of life don't you.

Actually yeah, I'm quite in favour of chipping every baby at birth. That way you can cut crime. If, as you say, you're not one of the few fools that can't live by the rules, you'd have nothing to worry about.

You really are that sad that you need every part of your life controlled. Are you a commie ? You bang on about having 'proper arguments' and come up with an idea that's already in use. You have a pop at me about telling someone they are talking rubbish ( like you have in this comments section). Then result to insults. You're one of the ' Do as I say types' aren't you ? I didn't think it would take long to out you !

Jeepo 11 wrote:

PaulErith wrote:

Jeepo 11 wrote: PaulErith is a product of the nanny state. Eedjut.

It was just a suggestion, you pr1ck!

Thank you Paul, you just proved my point. Well and Erith, what more can we expect.

Not quite sure what point I've proved? I was involved in a perfectly sensible conversation on here - whether or not you agree with my points. You decide to call me an Eedjut!! Shows complete lack of intelligence.

Not sure what your point about Erith is either? What great part of the World are you from then? What qualifications have you got that make you so much better? Bet you haven't got as many letters after your name as me mate!

Whoitehouse wrote:
It is good that the Police are picking up people who are up to four times the legal limit. There is no excuse for that and it suggests a baltent disregard for the law and the safety of themselves and others. However, some people may still be drink driving unintentionally through ignorance of the amount they can drink or how long it takes to wear off. A poll published at Christmas by an insurance company showed 51% of people still don't know the drink drive limits. Many people unintentionally and unknowingly drink drive the morning after they have been drinking for this reason. There are personal breathalysers which are available online or at Halfords which warn you if you are near or over the drink drive limit. One good one which seems highly recommended is the AlcoSense.

51% out of how many ?

the wall wrote:

PaulErith wrote:

the wall wrote:

PaulErith wrote:

the wall wrote: So what happens when it's a family car used by dad, mum, son and daughter? or a motorbike / company car / pool car ? What about people insured to drive any car ? Hire cars, how will it work with them ? It's a pipe dream that will not happen. This idea has been knocking around for 20 years, so you didn't think it up by yourself.

As I said, it may not happen in totality yet, but give it time. Wouldn't say it's a pipe dream. 10 or 20 years it could be in all cars. If not then, it will happen in the future at some point.

How far into the future ? Talk about edge your bets. The current laws are good enough, just because a few fools do it there is no need to treat all the law abiding public the same. No person who hasn't been convicted of drink driving should be forced to incur the expense and hassle of an interlock device. They are very expensive and need frequent calibration to work properly. So why should people who don't drink be forced to pay for something, because of a small number of fools ? Also like Hiper Deactive has said this is already in place in the US for people who drink drive and guess what it doesn't work to well. One man’s car breathalyser refused to start his engine after he ate ice cream. The same problems happens with cough medicines. If you need this sort of control in your life then maybe you shouldn't be driving. How about we go all the way and put a tracking device in every person. You want the government to control every aspect of life don't you.

Actually yeah, I'm quite in favour of chipping every baby at birth. That way you can cut crime. If, as you say, you're not one of the few fools that can't live by the rules, you'd have nothing to worry about.

You really are that sad that you need every part of your life controlled. Are you a commie ? You bang on about having 'proper arguments' and come up with an idea that's already in use. You have a pop at me about telling someone they are talking rubbish ( like you have in this comments section). Then result to insults. You're one of the ' Do as I say types' aren't you ? I didn't think it would take long to out you !

To address your very well made points!
Firstly, no I don't need any part of my life controlled. If you read my comments properly, you'll see that my reasoning for having more control is because too many people don't abide by the law. These people need control. The rest of us can just carry on as normal - but with the benefit of less crime and less of the idiots mucking up our lives.

As for 'not taking long to out me' - I only insulted Jippo 11 because he resulted to calling me an Eejid. Once again, someone who disagrees with one's opinion, and results to insults. You'll notice that the start of this conversation, I didn't agree with you, but wrote back politely and constructively, as did you. I totally respect your opinion on the drink driving things.

the wall wrote:

Whoitehouse wrote: It is good that the Police are picking up people who are up to four times the legal limit. There is no excuse for that and it suggests a baltent disregard for the law and the safety of themselves and others. However, some people may still be drink driving unintentionally through ignorance of the amount they can drink or how long it takes to wear off. A poll published at Christmas by an insurance company showed 51% of people still don't know the drink drive limits. Many people unintentionally and unknowingly drink drive the morning after they have been drinking for this reason. There are personal breathalysers which are available online or at Halfords which warn you if you are near or over the drink drive limit. One good one which seems highly recommended is the AlcoSense.

51% out of how many ?

Even if one knows the limit, other factors can take effect. How much one eats, etc. Therefore, safer just to have no alcohol. I always leave the car at home or in the pub car park. It's the only way to be sure.

PaulErith wrote:

the wall wrote:

PaulErith wrote:

the wall wrote:

PaulErith wrote:

the wall wrote: So what happens when it's a family car used by dad, mum, son and daughter? or a motorbike / company car / pool car ? What about people insured to drive any car ? Hire cars, how will it work with them ? It's a pipe dream that will not happen. This idea has been knocking around for 20 years, so you didn't think it up by yourself.

As I said, it may not happen in totality yet, but give it time. Wouldn't say it's a pipe dream. 10 or 20 years it could be in all cars. If not then, it will happen in the future at some point.

How far into the future ? Talk about edge your bets. The current laws are good enough, just because a few fools do it there is no need to treat all the law abiding public the same. No person who hasn't been convicted of drink driving should be forced to incur the expense and hassle of an interlock device. They are very expensive and need frequent calibration to work properly. So why should people who don't drink be forced to pay for something, because of a small number of fools ? Also like Hiper Deactive has said this is already in place in the US for people who drink drive and guess what it doesn't work to well. One man’s car breathalyser refused to start his engine after he ate ice cream. The same problems happens with cough medicines. If you need this sort of control in your life then maybe you shouldn't be driving. How about we go all the way and put a tracking device in every person. You want the government to control every aspect of life don't you.

Actually yeah, I'm quite in favour of chipping every baby at birth. That way you can cut crime. If, as you say, you're not one of the few fools that can't live by the rules, you'd have nothing to worry about.

You really are that sad that you need every part of your life controlled. Are you a commie ? You bang on about having 'proper arguments' and come up with an idea that's already in use. You have a pop at me about telling someone they are talking rubbish ( like you have in this comments section). Then result to insults. You're one of the ' Do as I say types' aren't you ? I didn't think it would take long to out you !

To address your very well made points! Firstly, no I don't need any part of my life controlled. If you read my comments properly, you'll see that my reasoning for having more control is because too many people don't abide by the law. These people need control. The rest of us can just carry on as normal - but with the benefit of less crime and less of the idiots mucking up our lives. As for 'not taking long to out me' - I only insulted Jippo 11 because he resulted to calling me an Eejid. Once again, someone who disagrees with one's opinion, and results to insults. You'll notice that the start of this conversation, I didn't agree with you, but wrote back politely and constructively, as did you. I totally respect your opinion on the drink driving things.

Your comment has more holes than swiss cheese. Jippo 11 calls it how he see it and I tend to agree with them.

all valid points about technology folks but it would be a lot simpler to just have a complete ban on drink driving as in a zero amount is acceptable.

The public want zero tolerance on domestic violence, racism, knife crime, guns, a simple zero amount in the system is much easier than the current one. Where people try to calculate what's in this drink and when did I eat.

how hard is it. If your driving. Don't drink. All this "one to be sociable" is pathetic. if you disagree....

Imagine knowing someone that's involved in a collision and the driver blows 1 point under the limit. Tell me how hard would that be to stomach. Because they weren't drunk according to law.