Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sat Apr 04, 2020 03:52

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 03:05 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
http://news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=1896282007

[scroll down]

SCOTTISH MINISTERS MAY GO IT ALONE TO CUT LIMIT FOR DRIVERS

SCOTTISH ministers are to discuss cutting the drink-driving limit, but may attempt to go it alone if Westminster opposes the move.

Kenny MacAskill, the justice secretary, said yesterday that the Scottish Cabinet would discuss the issue in the near future after the British Medical Association (BMA) called for the blood-alcohol limit to be cut from 80mg/100ml to 50mg across Britain.

The Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland will reaffirm its backing for the move when it launches the Christmas drink-drive campaign on Friday.

Last week, the Department for Transport said it would launch a consultation early next year on drink-driving enforcement.

But a Scottish Government spokesman said: "We stand ready to take a tougher approach. Responsibility lies with Westminster, but we are working to ensure that the strength of opinion in Scotland is given serious consideration."

BMA Scotland called on Scottish ministers to lobby the UK government as Westminster "has been stalling for nearly ten years". It claimed a cut in the drink-driving limit would prevent 65 deaths a year on UK roads.

Paul Smith, of anti-speed-camera group Safe Speed, said: "We don't need to reduce the drink-drive limit - we need to catch the drunk drivers."

***

The full quote I provided was:

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign said: "Drink drive is a serious issue, but we don't need to reduce the drink drive limit. We just need to catch the drunk drivers. These suggestions
are gesture politics of the worst sort because there's no evidence whatsoever that drivers between the current limit and the proposed limit are any part of the drink drive problem."

"Such a change would make drink drive much more socially acceptable - the exact opposite of the desired effect - because people would claim that they were not actually drunk when they were caught.
Change the limit to 50mg/ml and we'd make their claim true and deserved of sympathy. Not only that but we'd be wasting precious resources enforcing against people who were not the problem in the first
place."

"Don't these people think anything through?"


I must say I was expecting a larger piece... :)

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 12:11 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 14:00
Posts: 1272
Location: Near Telford, UK / Barcelona, Spain
SafeSpeed wrote:
http://news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=1896282007

BMA Scotland called on Scottish ministers to lobby the UK government as Westminster "has been stalling for nearly ten years". It claimed a cut in the drink-driving limit would prevent 65 deaths a year on UK roads.

Hrmph! If the BMA are quoting "statistics", the case has to be nonsense!

_________________
"Politicians are the same the world over... We build bridges where there aren't any rivers." - Nikita Kruschev


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 17:04 
Offline
User

Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 14:05
Posts: 498
I really wish publications would stop defining SafeSpeed as an "anti-speed-camera group" - it really does not do the cause any good


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 17:22 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 14:26
Posts: 4364
Location: Hampshire/Wiltshire Border
mmltonge wrote:
I really wish publications would stop defining SafeSpeed as an "anti-speed-camera group" - it really does not do the cause any good

Of course, anyone looking quickly at this forum would note Paul's signature and draw the obvious conclusion. :)

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 17:28 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
malcolmw wrote:
mmltonge wrote:
I really wish publications would stop defining SafeSpeed as an "anti-speed-camera group" - it really does not do the cause any good

Of course, anyone looking quickly at this forum would note Paul's signature and draw the obvious conclusion. :)


I don't know what you mean!

[hint taken :hehe: Thanks.]

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.354s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]