No wonder they call them <removed>

[NotAllThere]

I have a small modicum of sympathy with your friend but he did ultimately break the law. If the police were performing "proactive policing" as someone else alluded to do they not have a duty to prevent a crime being committed prior to is occurring if they can reasonably predict it is about to happen? This type of policing does have a feeling (although it wouldn't legally be classed as) of a form of entrapment.

The original purpose of the police was to prevent crime. But they don't get measured on that. "Show me how I'll be measured, and I'll change my behaviour accordingly." It's like customs. They're measured on the amount of smuggling they stop. One time, due to being suspicious bastards, they foiled a kidnapping plot - but it did nothing towards their targets.

...Far too many police follow the letter of the law without first engaging their brain, using a little common sense and some pragmatism. You can't point this out to them because they're took thick to understand it...

As noted above, they're not paid to understand it. Achieving 30% sensibleness isn't one of their targets.

... I was merely questioning their attitude, that's all.

Blame the Home Office and targets.

[ilovehr]

Sorry your missing the point the increasingly tight laws are all about catching the middle class average joe's whose whole life could be ruined because he had 4 pints and not 3 and a half the night before.

Nope, YOU'RE missing the point. The increasingly tight laws are to try and stop people dying. ANY alcohol in your bloodstream impairs judgement and ability.

The limit should be zero.

[Diver]

Nope, YOU'RE missing the point. The increasingly tight laws are to try and stop people dying. ANY alcohol in your bloodstream impairs judgement and ability.

The limit should be zero.

[threaded]

Nope, YOU'RE missing the point. The increasingly tight laws are to try and stop people dying. ANY alcohol in your bloodstream impairs judgement and ability.

The limit should be zero.

Hmm, that is not strictly true.

The Caucasian type performs slightly better in all tests at a low level of alcohol. In fact a blond haired blue eyed person drives better on a single shot of whisky than sober.

Most other peoples don't fare so well though. One race from Japan are the worst, and should never drink.

IIRC there was an experiment where they selectively bred rats to tolerate alcohol, and found the same genes were involved.

[ilovehr]

But would you want to take the risk if your child was in the passenger seat of the car driven by the "better" driver who's had a drink?

[threaded]

But would you want to take the risk if your child was in the passenger seat of the car driven by the "better" driver who's had a drink?

No, of course you're correct. If someone has been drinking you don't know which side of the improvement curve they're on, or even if they have one without doing some serious blood tests.

Just thought I'd mention it. Incidentally historically in cycle racing, a shot of brandy was the first banned substance, because of the improvement in performance.

[EternalOptimist]

But would you want to take the risk if your child was in the passenger seat of the car driven by the "better" driver who's had a drink?

do you ever suffer from callouses ?, with all that hand-wringing like

[ilovehr]

Nobody has ever accused me of being a hand wringer before. I just get really p****d off with people saying that "it's ok to have a little drink cos I'm a big boned fella", or "I drive better when I've had one" and other such excuses.

When you've lost someone close to you as a result of someone making a concious decision to get into a car after they've had a drink because they felt it was ok you're opinion changes somewhat.

Don't get me wrong, I agree that there are lots of other laws in this and other countries that can and should be interpreted and have a bit of leeway on either side but as far as I'm concerned when it comes down to human lives there should be no room for interpretation.

Put it this way, if you were having a brain operation on your frontal lobes, would you rather have the sober surgeon or the surgeon who's had a little nip to steady his nerves?........

[RichardCranium]

if you were having a brain operation on your frontal lobes, would you rather have the sober surgeon or the surgeon who's had a little nip to steady his nerves?........

The latter. Definitely.

[EternalOptimist]

Nobody has ever accused me of being a hand wringer before. I just get really p****d off with people saying that "it's ok to have a little drink cos I'm a big boned fella", or "I drive better when I've had one" and other such excuses.

When you've lost someone close to you as a result of someone making a concious decision to get into a car after they've had a drink because they felt it was ok you're opinion changes somewhat.

Don't get me wrong, I agree that there are lots of other laws in this and other countries that can and should be interpreted and have a bit of leeway on either side but as far as I'm concerned when it comes down to human lives there should be no room for interpretation.

Put it this way, if you were having a brain operation on your frontal lobes, would you rather have the sober surgeon or the surgeon who's had a little nip to steady his nerves?........

I am not disagreeing with what you say, but if I want to be preached at, I go to church