Drink Drivers Named

[HomerJSimpson]

Now there's a statement backed up with fact.
You simply can't say that as even if one person goes on to change their habit or leave the car at home that one time because a relative/friend/colleague got detected and banned, then it's a potential life saver, maybe even their own.

Sorry I disagree. In the moment where there's temptation, I believe that no-one thinks "hang on a mo, I won't have that. I might get nicked and shown up in the local rag". Simply doesn't happen and so in my opinion the chances of causing a DD remain the same

 

[brendy]

Sorry I disagree. In the moment where there's temptation, I believe that no-one thinks "hang on a mo, I won't have that. I might get nicked and shown up in the local rag". Simply doesn't happen and so in my opinion the chances of causing a DD remain the same

Wind the clock back a little Homer, the decision may be made before leaving the house instead. Phone a mate, get the wife to drop you down, phone a taxi etc ie made while there us still clarity.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Wind the clock back a little Homer, the decision may be made before leaving the house instead. Phone a mate, get the wife to drop you down, phone a taxi etc ie made while there us still clarity.

In that instance I'd agree. However, my argument (or counter -point as I'm not trying to argue) would be while the intents are honest and good and getting lift/cab is good, what happens if a driver then takes advantage and has a few. Great getting home but what ensures they are safe to then drive the day after

 

[Foxholer]

Bullying ? They have broken the law
...

Not until they have been convicted!

 

[Blue in Munich]

The issue is the selectivity.

Presumably you also name and shame people who drive on tyres below the legal limit, with poor brakes, while using a mobile, reaching for the cigarette lighter, wearing headphones, who drive too slow and cause large build up of traffic behind them, who jump red lights (including cyclists) etc etc.

A further issue with the selectivity in publishing this is that there is absolutely no further detail about the circumstances of the fail; which one of these blew 81 mg and who blew 281 mg; who had their drink the previous evening when they weren't driving and was tested the following morning and found to be over, who was caught the same night; who had no intention of driving and was called out to something, who simply didn't give a monkey's and drove fully aware that they were well over? To blanketly tar everyone with the same brush for having failed a breath test without regard to the circumstances is bordering on scandalous in my opinion. Let the local rag report on them once they've been convicted and report the surrounding circumstances, and then judge people on the whole story.

 

[Norrin Radd]

A further issue with the selectivity in publishing this is that there is absolutely no further detail about the circumstances of the fail; which one of these blew 81 mg and who blew 281 mg; who had their drink the previous evening when they weren't driving and was tested the following morning and found to be over, who was caught the same night; who had no intention of driving and was called out to something, who simply didn't give a monkey's and drove fully aware that they were well over? To blanketly tar everyone with the same brush for having failed a breath test without regard to the circumstances is bordering on scandalous in my opinion. Let the local rag report on them once they've been convicted and report the surrounding circumstances, and then judge people on the whole story.

where do you draw the line then?
the ball is over the line and its a goal or the ball didnt cross the line and it isnt a goal .dosent matter how far the ball was over the line ,it might have ripped the net off it went in so hard ,or it might have been just over the line with a trickle .
the end result is 1 goal .
no difference imho you fail you get done simple as.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

Maybe we should name and shame all those who get infractions on this forum

Just sayin

Sounds good to me as long as you don't forget to mention mine :thup:

 

[Blue in Munich]

where do you draw the line then?
the ball is over the line and its a goal or the ball didnt cross the line and it isnt a goal .dosent matter how far the ball was over the line ,it might have ripped the net off it went in so hard ,or it might have been just over the line with a trickle .
the end result is 1 goal .
no difference imho you fail you get done simple as.

So the person who blows 81 the morning after after he's rear-ended by the sober but careless bloke behind, having not been anywhere near the car the night before, gets named & shamed before conviction, the person who drives past the local primary school at 8.50am at 54mph in a 30mph limit gets a fixed penalty ticket and retains their anonymity.

As I understand it the idea of this naming & shaming is to create a safer road environment. There's obviously one of these two scenarios which is blatantly more dangerous than the other one. There's also one that isn't being named and shamed. Unfortunately it is the same one, which drives a coach & horses through the claim that it is being done for road safety purposes. It is a cheap publicity stunt, no more, no less.

If in your humble opinion it makes no difference how you fail then you clearly have no understanding of the process of justice. Quite ironic considering the signature comment about common sense……..

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

Don't get it. Who exactly needs to know before you feel ashamed of doing something wrong? I'd say I'd be embarrassed that my family, friends, my work colleagues, my mates at the golf club would know. Point being that all these people would get to know anyway. Putting my name on a long list of other people for folk who couldn't give a toss what I did or didn't do wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference. Waste of time and a publicity stunt. Good headlines for the police and their annual campaign but no real point other than that.

I refer back to my point about named drivers continuing to drive (many of them do). If they do so they are automatically driving without insurance. In the early 90's, my car got written off when it was hit by an uninsured driver. It cost me a lot of money in excess premiums over the years and I never got a penny of it back! If I saw a 'named and shamed' driver continuing to drive I would have no hesitation in picking up the phone to the rozzers.

 

[PhilTheFragger]

Sounds good to me as long as you don't forget to mention mine :thup:

We won't , but thinking of introducing a new infraction offence of "boasting about ones infractions",


Anyway,
Back to the thread ...............

 

[ger147]

I refer back to my point about named drivers continuing to drive (many of them do). If they do so they are automatically driving without insurance. In the early 90's, my car got written off when it was hit by an uninsured driver. It cost me a lot of money in excess premiums over the years and I never got a penny of it back! If I saw a 'named and shamed' driver continuing to drive I would have no hesitation in picking up the phone to the rozzers.

Do you get banned from driving before your case comes to court?

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

Do you get banned from driving before your case comes to court?

Not that I'm aware of.

 

[ger147]

Not that I'm aware of.

The named and shamed drivers in the link posted in the OP have been charged but not tried or convicted so they're perfectly entitled to continue driving until their case comes to court and they have the trial they are entitled to.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

The named and shamed drivers in the link posted in the OP have been charged but not tried or convicted so they're perfectly entitled to continue driving until their case comes to court and they have the trial they are entitled to.

I didn't post the link, best you take up that point with him? But if that is the case, they will have been charged because they have driven whilst over the limit anyway.

 

[Norrin Radd]

so the link in the op says charged drivers ,meaning not yet convicted ,
how many people do you personally know that have been charged with DD ,have ever got away with it?
i have known a few people who have been charged and not gotten away with it ,never known one to be told dont do it again .

 

[ger147]

I didn't post the link, best you take up that point with him? But if that is the case, they will have been charged because they have driven whilst over the limit anyway.

So who are the named and shamed drivers you were referring to earlier that you would contact the Police about?

The Police aren't publishing lists of drivers convicted and banned, the whole thread was about naming and shaming drivers who have been charged but not yet tried or convicted?

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

so the link in the op says charged drivers ,meaning not yet convicted ,
how many people do you personally know that have been charged with DD ,have ever got away with it?
i have known a few people who have been charged and not gotten away with it ,never known one to be told dont do it again .

Exactly :thup:

 

[ger147]

so the link in the op says charged drivers ,meaning not yet convicted ,
how many people do you personally know that have been charged with DD ,have ever got away with it?
i have known a few people who have been charged and not gotten away with it ,never known one to be told dont do it again .

One.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

One.

Why wasn't he charged?

 

[ger147]

Why wasn't he charged?

She was charged but not tried, the case was dropped by the Procurator Fiscal.