Lowering the Limit

[John the Monkey]

Pointless and predictable post missed the point again!

Indeed you did.

I'm addressing your "point" that speed cameras are a revenue making exercise. If you genuinely believe this, it's spectacularly easy to avoid further enriching their operators if you can;

a) See.
Drive.

HTH, HAND.

 

[Dave Davenport]

Rearrange the following five words to get my response to this: "none", "business", "your", "of" and "damn".

Make your case on safety grounds, not on your disapproval of other peoples lifestyles.

Well said that man. It's my liver and I'll do what I bloody well like with it thank you very much!

 

[StuartG]

.. but if you put your hammered liver behind the wheel of a car, with excess alcohol in your bloodstream, then it is my business.

The question is "what is excess?". The report cannot substantiate how many lives would be saved if the level was below 80gm. Below 20mg on their hypotheses of exponential link with alcohol levels must thus be near zero.

You thus have to counter the seemingly justified criticism that you wish to restrict other people's lifestyles when it has little or no effect on you. You have moved away from a safety argument. At least in many people's eyes.

Meanwhile we have cogent reasons to restrict other lifestyles that do have a much more significant effect to the more vulnerable road and pavement users.

 

[Dan B]

Simple - and bugger all to do with 'disapproving of someone's lifestyle'...

I'd believe this more readily if you hadn't inserted the snarky parenthetical about expecting the NHS to pay. Yes - just as I expect them to pay for the consequences of eating too much, smoking too much and climbing mountains for fun then falling off them - irrespective of whether I personally enjoy these activities. But these threads on drink-drive limits always seem to attract the "you shouldn't need to get drunk to have fun" neo-Puritan crowd and it's frankly not all that pleasant to read. You shouldn't need to have sex outside marriage either, I daresay. That's no basis for legislation

 

[Dan B]

To whom is excessive alcohol or smoking harmful?

 

[Dan B]

So you believe that any expression of disapproval of something that is known to be harmful

Hang on, didn't you say earlier that it had nothing to do with disapproval?

Make your mind up. Which is it? And how do you feel about rock climbing?

 

[StuartG]

To be blunt - what bollocks!

Alcohol is a significant, causative factor in a large percentage of the deaths and serious injuries on the roads in the UK (if you google you'll find heaps of statistics around this). Cut out alcohol and you'll dramatically reduce the numbers of deaths and injuries.

I presume abuse is a substitute for facts. Please point to some evidence of the number of lives that may be saved by moving a limit from 20mg to zero. Nobody else can AFAIK.

Hence you are arguing to curb other lifestyles because you don't like them. Trying to cover that prejudice with different statistics of real known risks of people with substantially more alcohol and exponentially more risk is, frankly, disgraceful and an insult to road safety.

The evidence, such that it is, points towards enforcement being the way to reduce alcohol induced road casualties. That is difficult since we are largely addressing a portion of the driving public that currently gives a two fingered salute to existing legislation.

More cops, more stops. Except that is expensive and intrusive ... and show me that even that will match what a 20 mph residential speed limit will do.

Till then you are just blowin' in the wind if I dare be so impolite.

 

[Bruce]

Indeed you did.

I'm addressing your "point" that speed cameras are a revenue making exercise. If you genuinely believe this, it's spectacularly easy to avoid further enriching their operators if you can;

a) See.
Drive.

HTH, HAND.

Yep u did it again, I shant bother with you any further until you have had an intellect transplant

 

[wafflycat]

Its called root cause analysis, ie why are peds getting run over, because they in the area designerd for motor vehicles!

We may have greater succes if we treat the cause rather than just one conttibutory factor!

So tell me... those of who live in places where there are no separate footpaths and we wish to get somewhere, by foot, how are we supposed to do it? Levitate?
The public highway: roads are NOT designated for motor vehicles, unless they are motorways (clue in the name, there), they are 'designated' for all road users

 

[TheDoctor]

And we'll have a bit less of the abuse, Bruce.
[/Mod hat]

 

[Dave Davenport]

I don't care what you do to your liver in the privacy of your own home (although if you bugger it, I bet you'll want the NHS to provide treatment) but if you put your hammered liver behind the wheel of a car, with excess alcohol in your bloodstream, then it is my business.

If you want to hammer your liver then fine - but don't be so zarking selfish as to put my life at risk by driving.

I actually think I'm a safer driver when I've had 2 or 3 pints 'cos I'm a lot more carefull. I wouldn't have more than 3 though.

 

[John the Monkey]

I shant bother with you any further until you have had an intellect transplant

That, I find to be an entirely satisfactory state of affairs; do enjoy the rest of your evening.

 

[jonesy]

Yep u did it again, I shant bother with you any further until you have had an intellect transplant

The irony...

 

[Bruce]

And we'll have a bit less of the abuse, Bruce.
[/Mod hat]

What abuse you idiot?

I added the you idiot bit to validate your claim now if you swap the order of the posts about you wont look so silly!

 

[Bruce]

That, I find to be an entirely satisfactory state of affairs; do enjoy the rest of your evening.

AT least you understood that, must have been pitched at a lower enough level for you, continue to enjoy road policing by camera.