you were wondering how they are going to extract even MORE cash from the motorists:

From the Telegraph.

The drink drive limit could be cut under plans being considered by the Government.

Stephen Ladyman, the roads minister, said that the Department for Transport would produce proposals for consultation later in the year.

The Government first hinted that it was ready to reduce the limit - probably from UK is 80 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood to 50 in February.

Ministers have come under mounting pressure to do so from road safety groups and also the British Medical Association to act.

Earlier this year several police forces voiced alarm that the "do not drink and drive" message was not getting through, especially to young motorists.

The Department for Transport’s own figures showed that there were 1,050 17-19 year olds involved in drink drive accidents in 2005, compared to 810 a decade ago.

Yesterday a pan-European study showed that drink driving was the cause of an increasing proportion of fatalities on the country’s roads.

Motoring groups believe the Government could act if it is convinced that its strategy of strict enforcement of existing limits was no longer working.

Last night a DfT spokesman said: “As part of our latest road safety review in February we said we would keep under review the case for a lower drink drive limit.

“The UK already has stringent penalties for drink driving, and better enforcement than many countries, but that doesn’t mean we can’t do better.

“We have said many times that we plan to explore ways of making drink driving enforcement easier for police. This will take the form of a consultation later in the year - and until that is complete it is impossible to say what measures may or may not be taken forward.”

Now if they aren't catching the little scrotes who're ALREADY drink driving and killing people before they do so, how will making the limit less assist that process??

Is there only me thinks that this is aimed at the 'next morning' drink driver who's had a few the night before and hasn't left a big enough gap?? Illegal yes, but not deliberate surely?? And another soft target for the stats builders.

I've never been drink driving, but would probably have been caught out a few times the morning after if I'd have been stopped.

I've often thought that one of the reasons that cannabis remains illegal is that there are no quick / instant and cheap methods for testing for recent use. When such a 'dopealyser' is invented this could be used as a deterrant for drug driving & thus another income stream. I'm certainly not advocating drink or drug driving. I am also sure that there will eventually be a machine that detects drivers using mobile phones and again I do not advocate using a phone whilst driving.

'Another stat for you:

Speeding is in decline generally. Everyone knows now where most cameras are. It wont be long before revenue drops, and new plans will be hatched. '

Isnt that just a statement, rather then a stat?

PS

Ever thought of jacking it all in and writing a column for the express/daily mail/right wing today?

Did you used to play at the Thurs night Nursery rock nights, Elvis?
I didn't think I'd ever seen your band, but probably did if you used to play there.
Eeee those were the days

There's a swab that has been tested so they can just mop your forehead and detect cannabis, which stays in your system for approximately 14 days. However it only reads 'yes' or 'no,' and doesn't give a level. Heroin, on the other hand, only stays in your system for 24 hours, thus the massive surge in heroin use in prison and the decline of cannabis use, since the introduction of random drugs testing in prisons. They didn't think that one through either did they?? One minute all the cons are asleep, listening to Pink Floyd or eating biscuits, the next they're climbing the walls with the shakes.

No, there is only so much one can write about Lady Diana, Princess of Hearts, The peoples princess Spencer or Stealth taxes.

[quote="Pooliekev"]

Now if they aren't catching the little scrotes who're ALREADY drink driving and killing people before they do so, how will making the limit less assist that process??

quote]

This is the bit that bothers me. Whatever problem you look at, you usually find governments not grasping the main issue, and only appearing to address things. Another instance - everyone knows now that over-testing in schools is driving kids to suicide and chronic stress. But instead of stopping the testing, they're sending psychologists into schools, to help kids 'cope'. makes you despair

But, I agree with MadJohn...I think there's a case for saying no-one should drive after any drink at all.

There possibly is but, that ISN'T what's being suggested here. Speeding fines have probably hit a zenith and people will be slowing down, however road deaths aren't decreasing. Neither are drink related accidents.

So the response seems to be, decrease speed limits and the blood alcohol limit.

No-one on here and in general supports drink driving. If you go on the piss and get arrested on the way home, tough tits, you asked for it. My point is that they aren't looking to make anything safer they've just found a new way of going for the nick. If you've been deemed safe under 80mg for the last 20 years, why is it suddenly beneficial to make it 50mg?? It's the people over 80mg that are the problem but they're looking for new victims.

Erm...that's my point too

Well, am afraid I'm going back to 1981 too. I wasn't around here in 1995 though!
Don't know Sconner but in the old days the pub used to be run by a lovely lady called Mary who used to let just about anyone play there who wanted too. I think her daughter has recently taken over the pub so that's good news

just a question if you do ket pulled over just over the limit for drink driving and you get taken to the station cant you decline the brethaliser test in the nick and ask for a blood test by which they have to get the cj doctor to come and get it in whcih time (body porcessed 1 unit per hour) you could be technically sober and therefore get off the charge, just wondering having never gotten pulled over before.

the only thing i know about is the dna mouth swabing and keeping your details on the database even if you are innocent as thats my job

The girl who has it is called Katy. She runs it along with her father.

Yeah, it was a common loophole. If you're just over and you nominate a blood test instead of a urine test, they used to go into a flat spin trying to get a doctor there before you drop below. I read somewhere that they'd decided that a second breathalyser in the station is admissible evidence now though to stop it, although I dunno if that became law.

my biggest gripe with speed limits is the lack of countdown markers to the new speed limit. If you're in a strange area and the national speed limit applies, you then don't have much time to react to any sudden changes down to a 30mph limit, especially if the limit changes around a bend or something. Lo and behold, this is where they will position a speed camera.
I would have few or no complaints about speed cameras, if there were countdown markers to each reduction in the speed limit in every locality.

I'm at a loss to see how it will save lives. Enlighten me. The present limit is saving fewer and fewer lives so how will a lower one do so?? Particularly when no-one is out there catching them and 90% of the nicks they do get come from people who've crashed or run someone over??

What WILL happen is they'll blitz the early morning traffic, not looking for lairy kids who've staggered out of the boozer with their mates, to get the nick rate up so they can boast that detection rates are up.

My point is, that even if they are over the limit and therefore guilty as charged, they've made a mistake, not flagrantly flouted the law. I lived in the drink drive obsessed Nottinghamshire Constabulary area for 20 years and this is a common tactic.

Yes, right, I remember now. They are still Mary's relatives tho, aren't they? That must have been one of the best pubs ever in its day and hopefully will be again

I can see people opting out of the rat race, because it just won't be worth going to work due to all the taxes, potential fines, etc etc.
Hmmmmm....riots............. I like riots...............

I think Mary is her Mams name yeah, but don't quote me!

I often wonder about this, but the big problem about opting out would probably be loneliness. God knows I HATE enough people but what if they weren't there......

And if you chose some people you thought you liked and took them with you they'd turn out to have dubious habits probably or nick the last tea-bag or just be terminally boring.

But I'm still thinking about it

but what about rioting? Are you a brick-type or a petrol bomb-type?

That's another thing.....am I a brick type or a petrol-bomb type? I need to get away and meditate on this

Ho ho, bad luck Dibble.

No consistancy with coppers, just like referees.

This one will really make your piss boil......

Five years ago, I moved back up here from Birmingham. When I landed, I had no job and was on the dole for about 8 weeks, whilst I seeked employment.

During this short period of layabout status, my car insurance lapsed and I did not have the money to renew it. My MOT lapsed and I did not have the money to fix the car up. The exhaust was blowing and about ready to fall off, couldn't afford a new one. The two front tyres were borderline illegal, if not actually illegal. Again, needed to get back to work before I could change those tyres. The car was still in tax though. Naturally, with no MOT, no insurance and 2 pretty much bald tyres, I stopped using the car.

Anyway, one day, after weeks of not using the car, I jumped in it one day because I was in a rush to get somewhere. Thought I'd risk it.......just this once. And it genuinely was just that once.

So I'm blarting down St Cuthberts Way in Newton Aycliffe, foot to the floor, all of a sudden I spot a copper on the horizon with a speed gun. Banged the brakes on, but of course I was still well over 30 when I got into his range. He gesticulated for me to pull in and I did so.

I was absolutely SHYTING myself because not only had I been caught speeding, but a speeding conviction usually involves a producer, and I had no valid documents to produce. I was looking at a driving ban, because 3 points speeding, 3 points no insurance, 3 points no MOT, 6 points two bald tyres = FOOKED.

The copper approaches the car, I'm sat there bricking it, thinking what am I going to do, I wind the window down and he says "Do you know this is a 30 mile an hour road and you were doing 39?" I said "sorry didn't realise I was going that fast"

He said "while I'm here I'm going to do a spot check", I thought "I'm fooking doomed"

He looks at the tax disc, that checks out because its still in tax. He asks me "is this your car", I say "yep".......waiting for him to ask to see documents........the question never comes! " Turn your wheels left, turn your wheels right".......I do so......."The tyres look very close" he says "change them tomorrow". I say "no problem".

He says "just rev your engine a bit" (he could hear the exhaust blowing). I do so.......BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAW! BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAW! "That needs fixing" he says "do it tomorrow"

I'm fooking caking it here, he says "I'm not going to take any action over the speeding, watch your speed and make sure you get those jobs done" I can't believe my luck and am just waiting for him to give me a producer which will basically blow me out of the water, he says "off you go then". And off I fook, shaking like a leaf.

NO insurance
NO MOT
39 mph in a 30
2 bald tyres

They could have thrown the book at me and they did nothing!

And ADG got done for 34 in a 30

My mate got done going through Aycliffe Village doing 38 just a few weeks later off the same coppers with the same speed gun

To be fair, before I even spoke to the copper I was cursing my luck, because people drive around with no insurance mot or tax all the time and never get caught, and here I am, first time and I get caught, or think I'm about to be caught. Justice done in the end.

Tell you what though, I didn't get back in that car again until it was legal.

In Scotland, all 30 mph zones have a 3 stage sign countdown which is useful if you happen to be on an unfamiliar road... also the schools have a 20 mph zone outside then where the limit only applies when lights flash as the kids come out. The problem nowadays is replacing traffic police with cameras ...you have more chance of a warning than you have with a camera...one might let you off..the other definitely won't!
END OF THE DAY...YOU, the driver controls the accelerator pedal ...or the drink.

I agree Snowy, but after driving for almost 30 years, and it being acceptable that driving at 35 in a 30 zone was OK, it can sometimes be difficult to restrict yourself to that 30 limit. I find myself driving a lot of the time at 20 or less, because of the prevaling conditions, but quite often the 30 limits do not make any sense at all.

I agree to some extent, but there are some motorists who are just complete tossers and if the speed limit was Mach 2, they'd consider it their duty to drive at 10 mph over it.
Look at it this way, it can be fun, you can't race the arrogant tw@t who's tailgating you....but you can pee him off completely by keeping him at 30 mph and watching him have a rajjy....and if he wants to pull over and 'discuss' it with me...I'm agreeable to that.

After the 0-3 against Shrewsbury last season, I consoled myself a little by holding up one of the above mentioned tailgaters, and letting him go just in time to accelerate up to the speed camera after the Lodge. I do hope he received a nice little notice from the Chief Constable, chances are the camera still wasn't working though.

Nah her mams name is Anne and her dad is called Dave, they used to run the Causeway years ago

Right, I've got it now Fensy. Mary (who ran the Nursery in the 70/80s) is the mother of Anne who used to run the Causeway. Anne is the mother of Katy who currently has the Nursery with her dad.
I think that's about right