Silly twats

There is mounting pressure on the Government to fall into line with other European Union countries by reducing the legal limit from 80mg of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood to 50mg.

Oh, why\’s that?

\’\’Road safety has improved significantly in recent years – 1,000 fewer people now die on the roads in a year than in the mid-1990s – and Britain now has one of the safest road systems in the world.

Sounds like they should be changing to our system, doesn\’t it?

A higher limit but very much fiercer penalties for being over it, rather than the European method of lower limit and then gradations of offence.

Plus, of course, they\’re missing entirely the point that most of those deaths are caused by people who are already well over the current limit: lowering it will have no effect on them at all.

This is simply conformity for conformity\’s sake.

3 comments on “Silly twats

  1. The figure they should be looking at is the number of deaths caused by drivers who were under the current limit but over the proposed new limit. If that figure happens to be significant, then there may be reason to lower the limit.

  2. “caused by drivers who were under the current limit but over the proposed new limit.”

    But only if the cause of the deaths was the state of intoxication of the driver, something which temperance fanatics always assume but which needs to be proved.

  3. In fact nobody knows statisitically, how dangerous drinking and driving really is – to know that, one would need to be able to measure during a certain period, how many ‘over the limit’ drivers were on the road and were not involved in any accidents or deaths. It is entirely possible for such drivers to be proved statisitcally to be safer than others!

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.