Drink Drivers Named

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 15344
  • Start date Start date
louise_a said:
I don't have a problem with it although they probably shouldn't be named until they have been convicted.
Click to expand...

I agree with this - on the basis of innocent until proven guilty! But that's not the way things work in this country! Policy (and it is only policy, so isn't compulsory) is to provide non-identifiable only until charged - when the individual can be named.

Obviously, this force has decided to alter their policy in an attempt to reduce offending over this period.
 
Quite right to name and shame them. Doesn't matter if they are convicted or not, fact remains they have exceeded the limit and failed a breath test. If they get off it's only because of a fancy lawyer or a technicality.
 
But isn't this an example of selective moralising? Why not do the same to bankers who defraud, rich people who offshore their money, CEOs who cheat their employees, politicians who lie. OK, the last one would include them all, so serve little purpose.
 
Ethan said:
But isn't this an example of selective moralising? Why not do the same to bankers who defraud, rich people who offshore their money, CEOs who cheat their employees, politicians who lie. OK, the last one would include them all, so serve little purpose.
Click to expand...

Maybe because a number of people over the years have been killed by drink drivers - even more so at Xmas
 
Liverpoolphil said:
Maybe because a number of people over the years have been killed by drink drivers - even more so at Xmas
Click to expand...

Yes, I know that, but there has been a massive cultural change and the number of convictions and deaths is dramatically down. If this is really about trying to discourage drink driving (and there is no evidence that it will do so) then what about people killed by careless drivers, those driving too fast or have badly maintained cars?

Seems like name and shame is one of those popular tabloid exercises akin to the old stocks and pillories.

No apologist for drink drivers myself, I hardly drink and never before driving, but it is the selective aspect that bothers me.
 
Ethan said:
Yes, I know that, but there has been a massive cultural change and the number of convictions and deaths is dramatically down. If this is really about trying to discourage drink driving (and there is no evidence that it will do so) then what about people killed by careless drivers, those driving too fast or have badly maintained cars?

Seems like name and shame is one of those popular tabloid exercises akin to the old stocks and pillories.

No apologist for drink drivers myself, I hardly drink and never before driving, but it is the selective aspect that bothers me.
Click to expand...

Then hopefully these messages help keep driving the number of incidents down in regards drink driving -

The government etc can send out messages or replicate for other issues - no problems with that
 
I think it serves little purpose. They receive their punishment with the ban, potential loss of job and increased insurance premiums. Why should the punishment include public humiliation? Surely as a society we're better than that?

Those that deliberately flaunt the law couldn't give a toss anyway, and may well drive whilst banned. Others make an error of judgement, and some get caught out the following morning.

Our local newspaper has a section on "Court Reports," and has published them for donkey's years... never agreed with it.
 
Hobbit said:
I think it serves little purpose. They receive their punishment with the ban, potential loss of job and increased insurance premiums. Why should the punishment include public humiliation? Surely as a society we're better than that?

Those that deliberately flaunt the law couldn't give a toss anyway, and may well drive whilst banned. Others make an error of judgement, and some get caught out the following morning.

Our local newspaper has a section on "Court Reports," and has published them for donkey's years... never agreed with it.
Click to expand...

I agree. Can't see it serving any purpose and won't have any affect on DD deaths in my opinion
 
Hobbit said:
I think it serves little purpose. They receive their punishment with the ban, potential loss of job and increased insurance premiums. Why should the punishment include public humiliation? Surely as a society we're better than that?

Those that deliberately flaunt the law couldn't give a toss anyway, and may well drive whilst banned. Others make an error of judgement, and some get caught out the following morning.

Our local newspaper has a section on "Court Reports," and has published them for donkey's years... never agreed with it.
Click to expand...

What if you see someone driving whilst banned and you wouldn't have known if you hadn't seen their name in the media?
 
drive4show said:
Quite right to name and shame them. Doesn't matter if they are convicted or not, fact remains they have exceeded the limit and failed a breath test. If they get off it's only because of a fancy lawyer or a technicality.
Click to expand...

Failing a breath test/exceeding the limit isn't a crime - until it is proven that it is one!

It's also not an offence until the 2nd test proves positive (after which they are charged), but the suspect is still arrested! Would you have all those arrested but released because the 2nd test proves negative named as well?

The 'wait until charged' policy works - and, imo, is really what you are indicating! And is it 'fair' that they should be treated differently (more harshly) to suspects of other crimes?
 
Foxholer said:
Failing a breath test/exceeding the limit isn't a crime - until it is proven that it is one!

It's also not an offence until the 2nd test proves positive (after which they are charged), but the suspect is still arrested! Would you have all those arrested but released because the 2nd test proves negative named as well?

The 'wait until charged' policy works - and, imo, is really what you are indicating! And is it 'fair' that they should be treated differently (more harshly) to suspects of other crimes?
Click to expand...

Do you seriously think the police are going to name people that aren't charged and convicted?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

sjw
Went for an iron fitting yesterday, as a bit of a sceptic...
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
9K
sjw
sjw
T
Help Needed Lengthy post but please read it and support us.
2
Replies
29
Views
4K
Doon frae Troon
D
O
Obsessed With Equipment?
2
Replies
28
Views
3K
Dibby
D
D
Carnoustie Report
Replies
18
Views
4K
Crow
Crow
Lord Tyrion
Alwoodley & Moortown
Replies
16
Views
7K
Lord Tyrion
Lord Tyrion
Top