Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Wed Aug 21, 2019 15:26

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

How many times have you been breathalysed in the past ten years?
Poll ended at Wed Apr 13, 2005 12:43
Never 72%  72%  [ 23 ]
Once 19%  19%  [ 6 ]
Twice 3%  3%  [ 1 ]
Three times 3%  3%  [ 1 ]
Four times 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Between five and nine times 3%  3%  [ 1 ]
Ten or more times 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Total votes : 32
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2005 19:46 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 14:04
Posts: 2325
Location: The interweb
diy wrote:
interesting soundbite on R4 this morning some MP was debating the 24 hour drinking legislation changes and claimed alcahol was a factor in about half of all injury road accidents.


I thought it was 75%, largely due to intoxicated pedestrians.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 09:34 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6735
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Homer wrote:
diy wrote:
interesting soundbite on R4 this morning some MP was debating the 24 hour drinking legislation changes and claimed alcahol was a factor in about half of all injury road accidents.

I thought it was 75%, largely due to intoxicated pedestrians.

AIUI about 40% of all adult pedestrian facilities are over the drink-drive limit, rising to 80% between 10 pm and 4 am.

However, as the proportion of drivers above the limit will be much less, and many injury accidents don't involve pedestrians, I would expect the overall proportion of injury accidents in which alcohol is a factor to be maybe 25%.

Even this stat is misleading if people take it to apply solely to drivers rather than all road users.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 00:19 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9260
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
Never been stopped/tested, now any alcohol in system( at any time) means legal requirement to report to firm - so being very careful.

Interesting bit in times recently -

http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/articl ... 14,00.html

Bears out my attitude to drink driving( BW had his on speed, mine is drink driving) and the facts bear me out.

As far as i'm concerned , having seen the problems at work; only safe limit is 0%

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 01:11 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member

Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 10:47
Posts: 920
Location: South Bucks
botach wrote:
Bears out my attitude to drink driving( BW had his on speed, mine is drink driving) and the facts bear me out.


What 'facts', exactly?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 08:21 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6735
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
botach wrote:
As far as i'm concerned , having seen the problems at work; only safe limit is 0%

Of course, and 1 mph over the speed limit is really, really dangerous.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 10:07 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 21:17
Posts: 3734
Location: Dorset/Somerset border
0%?

So no cough sweets/mouthwash etc that can give a trace reading?

Hard to enforce...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 15:06 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 18:39
Posts: 346
What's just as bad are the self righteous plonkers that won't even have a red/white wine sauce with a meal - "Oh, no. It's alcoholic, must not 'drink' & drive"

What a load of :censored:!!! All the 'active content' :roll: evaporated in the first couple of seconds of adding it to a hot pan. Numpties.

ps. quickest known way to get wasted (beside injecting it) - inhaling the vapourised alcohol - whew, instant head rush! Note to self: Don't do it again......

Oh, yeh. Been asked to give a breath sample once, following a tug by BiB for "erratic driving" on the back roads - unmarked (trying to keep up), pursuit & 'meat wagon'. Given producer etc. Why? I hadn't broken one law.... and they admitted as much when I responded it was not erratic but enthusiastic. I was against trafpol after that - tw :censored: ts, but they have since redeemed themselves :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 15:55 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 15:43
Posts: 2416
hobbes wrote:
ps. quickest known way to get wasted (beside injecting it) - inhaling the vapourised alcohol - whew, instant head rush! Note to self: Don't do it again......

Rolling tobacco and Stolichnaya vodka in a bong. Holy spinning living rooms Batman! : :puke: Better to just drink and smoke the stuff normally.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 01:32 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9260
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
PeterE wrote:
botach wrote:
As far as i'm concerned , having seen the problems at work; only safe limit is 0%

Of course, and 1 mph over the speed limit is really, really dangerous.


Pete - please stop being silly - if youre speeding ( going too fast for the conditions) solution is simple - you're in full control and can slow down.
After a drink - Are you capable of making that rational decision

Observer - been several experiments on national TV with reporters trying simulators after one pintpwhich shows up deficiencies in their driving.

Be safe , be sensible - drink at home, drive in the car - don't mix the two -
Of course - JJ and friends would love to see you say that, to ridicule the site as a road safety site.

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 11:02 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 19:50
Posts: 3369
Location: Lost in the Wilderness
botach wrote:
Are you capable of making that rational decision.


Yes. It depends on how much you have been drinking, and other factors.

I don’t agree with you at all, and everybody here can stick the knife in if they want to, but there is a difference between driving after having a drink, and driving while drunk.

botach wrote:
Observer - been several experiments on national TV with reporters trying simulators after one pintpwhich shows up deficiencies in their driving.


I remember reading an article once where a person had been accused of being drunk driving, so this person challenged the police to a race on a racetrack to prove he could drive in full control after a certain amount of alcohol in his blood. He won the race and was let off with drink driving.

I was stopped not to long ago at 10.50pm and given the breath test, I asked why I was stopped and was told it was because they knew there were 3 pubs in the area (guilty before innocence), I had done nothing wrong. As I work away from home I quite frequently visit the local pub as it’s the only place around where I can go for something to eat. The night I was stopped I had been in the pub from 8 – 10.50pm, I’m not usually this late but I got talking to someone. I drank 3 pints and had a meal during that time. When I left the pub I felt, and was quite capable of driving the 2 miles home. When I was breathalysed the light stayed green indicating that I was perfectly OK to drive and was allowed to continue home.

So you tell me where the line should be drawn? and are you saying I'm a drunk driver and irresponsible?

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 24, 2005 03:56 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 18:42
Posts: 1283
Location: Essex
There was an experiment that the RAF tried amongst aircrew when it was suggested scrapping the 12 hour rule for flying/aircrew duties, alcohol was given in small measured quantities up to a point alcohol actually increased reaction times, then rapidly tailed off and reduced them, of limted value for the use of the RAF who still actively enforce it - have never been breath tested by the police but have been in the RAF and have also had blood and alcohol checks by both the RAF and LUL.

As for the zero blood alcohol argument, can't remember the chemistry but the body produces alcohol/voc's as by-products certain medical conditions enhance that - remember the problems with diabetics being tested positive, body produced ketones, not enough to impair driving but enough to trigger breath tester.

_________________
Gordon Brown saying I got the country into it's current economic mess so I'll get us out of it is the same as Bomber Harris nipping over to Dresden and offering to repair a few windows.

Chaos, panic and disorder - my work here is done.

http://www.wildcrafts.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 21:34 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9260
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
OK- my attitude to driving after a drink has been questioned--


try this--http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22749-1916414,00.html




[/b]Particularly P2

And ask a traffic cop to verify it.


In the 70s, i used to have a few(and more) and feel ok driving.

Coming up the A74 from the south ,one evening , i witnessed the result of a bloke thinking he was ok.

The central reservation was mangled - a HGV was straddling both lanes of the south bound carriageway and wedged in the barriers.
Under him was a morris minor pickup ---facing the wrong way -drunk- don't know how many - had gone the wrong way and met a HGV - the driver of the hgv probably had many months of rehab - the driver of the pickup was scraped out.

After that - i resolved - the limit is ZERO -


That is why i preach the message - one sip is too many - the link helps to prove that.

Think most BIB on here will testify to that. Not bothered about numbers , just safety.

Ask Safety Eng what LUL/Rail limits are --
and why

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 00:45 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 18:42
Posts: 1283
Location: Essex
Dixie: " ...I had been in the pub from 8 – 10.50pm, I’m not usually this late but I got talking to someone. I drank 3 pints and had a meal during that time."

Ok assuming a regular strength beer thats about 6.6 units, the meal will slow down the absorbtion of the alcohol, so yes you could pass the breath test maybe even blood alcohol test in a pinch but without the meal slowing down absorption you would fail both the above tests.

Both the RAF and LUL guidelines work on the premise that there is no safe level of blood alcohol (other than that which the body produces - roughly 0.01 of a unit) and that due to differing metabolisms, whether someone has eaten or not the body needs at least 8 hours to fully metabolise alcohol and flush it out of the system (Yes, I know about the rule of thumb 1 unit per hour, but that rule is based on not overloading the liver).

It may seem harsh but to date since the no drink rule came into force no-one in these organisations has ever had an accident due to alcohol impairment.

If I drive I don't drink and vice versa and quite frankly don't miss it, though am pissed off that many pubs sell soft drinks at a higher price or same price as alcohol, especially given the huge markup, as a student working at BK many, many moons ago was told that soft drinks were about a 600% mark up.

_________________
Gordon Brown saying I got the country into it's current economic mess so I'll get us out of it is the same as Bomber Harris nipping over to Dresden and offering to repair a few windows.

Chaos, panic and disorder - my work here is done.

http://www.wildcrafts.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 13:22 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6735
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
botach wrote:
In the 70s, i used to have a few(and more) and feel ok driving.

Coming up the A74 from the south ,one evening , i witnessed the result of a bloke thinking he was ok.

The central reservation was mangled - a HGV was straddling both lanes of the south bound carriageway and wedged in the barriers.
Under him was a morris minor pickup ---facing the wrong way -drunk- don't know how many - had gone the wrong way and met a HGV - the driver of the hgv probably had many months of rehab - the driver of the pickup was scraped out.

After that - i resolved - the limit is ZERO -

That is why i preach the message - one sip is too many - the link helps to prove that.

This is about on a par with an example where a loved one has been killed by a never-licensed twoccer doing 70 through a village, so you campaign for a strictly-enforced 20 limit.

It is one thing to advise people to drink nothing before driving - on grounds such as they may not know when to stop, they may be unsure of the strength of the drink or the size of the measure, and they may be unusually sensitive to alcohol.

But it is something else entirely to try to turn that message into law when the science (most notably the well-known Borkenstein study) shows that relatively low blood-alcohol concentrations do not increase accident risk.

One of the key messages put across by the Safe Speed campaign is that road safety policy needs to be based on science, not emotion. To my mind the message that "one drink is always dangerous" falls into the same category of simplistic, emotive crap as "one mph over the speed limit is always dangerous."

It is interesting that not so long ago, official bodies were prepared to accept (grudgingly) that it was acceptable for drivers to consume small quantities of alcohol. See this from a 1986 TRL booklet:

Image

Quote:
Sensible guidelines to follow are:

* Do not drink on an empty stomach
* Drink slowly and limit the amount you drink to no more than three units
* Eat with your drinking
* Stop drinking alcohol some time before driving

To my mind if this remained the official line, we would have both safer roads and less of a binge-drinking problem in this country.

Very often, the effect of the message that zero is the only acceptable amount when driving is over-indulgence at other times. This view is echoed by A. Tom Topper in his book "Very Advanced Driving":

A. Tom Topper wrote:
There is another insidious side to the breathalyser. Drivers (particularly the young) are now inclined to gulp down large quantities of liquor fast when, if not because, they know they are having a lift. This has turned the previously reasonable and even distribution of drinking for many youngsters - and some of their elders - upside down. The temptation for bursts of heavy drinking when it is not their turn to drive has proven irresistible. The connection I make here with increased alcoholism is hard to dispute. Since the seventies the rate of drink-related deaths, in particular those resulting from liver disease, has doubled among the general population still under 50 years old. And this doesn't include greater numbers of drunk pedestrians being killed.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 14:43 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 17:37
Posts: 702
Location: Whitby, North Yorkshire
Dixie wrote:
botach wrote:
Are you capable of making that rational decision.


Yes. It depends on how much you have been drinking, and other factors.

I don’t agree with you at all, and everybody here can stick the knife in if they want to, but there is a difference between driving after having a drink, and driving while drunk.

botach wrote:
Observer - been several experiments on national TV with reporters trying simulators after one pintpwhich shows up deficiencies in their driving.


I remember reading an article once where a person had been accused of being drunk driving, so this person challenged the police to a race on a racetrack to prove he could drive in full control after a certain amount of alcohol in his blood. He won the race and was let off with drink driving.

I was stopped not to long ago at 10.50pm and given the breath test, I asked why I was stopped and was told it was because they knew there were 3 pubs in the area (guilty before innocence), I had done nothing wrong. As I work away from home I quite frequently visit the local pub as it’s the only place around where I can go for something to eat. The night I was stopped I had been in the pub from 8 – 10.50pm, I’m not usually this late but I got talking to someone. I drank 3 pints and had a meal during that time. When I left the pub I felt, and was quite capable of driving the 2 miles home. When I was breathalysed the light stayed green indicating that I was perfectly OK to drive and was allowed to continue home.

So you tell me where the line should be drawn? and are you saying I'm a drunk driver and irresponsible?


I must say I'm largely in agreement with you Dixie.

A few days ago I involved myself in this sort of topic on uk.rec.driving, and found myself up against a lot of condemnation. That was understandable up to a point but some people seem to want to reach firm conclusions about particular situations without having firm evidence to support them. That is what I object to.

Best wishes all,
Dave.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 15:41 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6735
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Safety Engineer wrote:
Dixie: " ...I had been in the pub from 8 – 10.50pm, I’m not usually this late but I got talking to someone. I drank 3 pints and had a meal during that time."

Ok assuming a regular strength beer thats about 6.6 units, the meal will slow down the absorbtion of the alcohol, so yes you could pass the breath test maybe even blood alcohol test in a pinch but without the meal slowing down absorption you would fail both the above tests.

You can't say that with certainty, particularly as you don't know what he was drinking, nor how heavy he is. If he had not had anything to eat he might have metabolised at least 2 units during his 3-hour stay in the pub and therefore still be below the limit. All that can be said is that he was perhaps sailing rather close to the wind.

Quote:
though am pissed off that many pubs sell soft drinks at a higher price or same price as alcohol, especially given the huge markup, as a student working at BK many, many moons ago was told that soft drinks were about a 600% mark up.

Pubs and bars are not charitable institutions and they should not be expected to impose very low mark-ups on all soft drinks just because they are sometimes consumed by drivers. Most people consuming soft drinks in pubs are not driving on that occasion.

On average, taking into account the quantities normally consumed, soft drinks are considerably cheaper than alcoholic ones, and someone drinking Coke is not going to match someone drinking lager pint-for-pint throughout an evening anyway.

And I fail to see that 20p extra on a Coke in practice encourages people to offend who otherwise wouldn't, especially given that drinks are usually bought in rounds. It's just not a credible scenario. Even if some soft drinks were routinely provided free of charge in licensed premises it would make very little difference to the overall level of drink-drive offending.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 19:01 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 18:42
Posts: 1283
Location: Essex
PeterE: "You can't say that with certainty, particularly as you don't know what he was drinking, nor how heavy he is. If he had not had anything to eat he might have metabolised at least 2 units during his 3-hour stay in the pub and therefore still be below the limit. All that can be said is that he was perhaps sailing rather close to the wind. "

Fair point, I was working on the someone of average height weight and metabolism.

PeterE: "Pubs and bars are not charitable institutions and they should not be expected to impose very low mark-ups on all soft drinks just because they are sometimes consumed by drivers. Most people consuming soft drinks in pubs are not driving on that occasion.

On average, taking into account the quantities normally consumed, soft drinks are considerably cheaper than alcoholic ones, and someone drinking Coke is not going to match someone drinking lager pint-for-pint throughout an evening anyway.

And I fail to see that 20p extra on a Coke in practice encourages people to offend who otherwise wouldn't, especially given that drinks are usually bought in rounds. It's just not a credible scenario. Even if some soft drinks were routinely provided free of charge in licensed premises it would make very little difference to the overall level of drink-drive offending."

Maybe it's my age group, but I do come across a lot of people who's argument is that given soft drinks are often dearer than alcoholic drinks why not have a drink. It's flawed thinking but it's an argument people cling to.

As for making a profit 600% mark up on post mix soft drinks is taking the piss - dropping it to ONLY a 300% mark up makes a real difference in price. As for soft drinks being cheaper, most of the pubs I frequent in the Essex area soft drinks are on par with alcoholic drinks for price.

As for the price not making a difference, I would disagree, I lived in NZ and they had a bg problem with drink driving (part of the Kiwi culture - beach barbie and booze), part of the method of dealing with this problem including education, and enforcement was the Designated Driver scheme that many bars signed up to it ran thus, if a group of customers came in and one was a driver then the driver had free or half price soft drinks all night.

Not only did it work but some bars reported that business went up.

Ok it might not work in the UK nut it can't hurt ??

_________________
Gordon Brown saying I got the country into it's current economic mess so I'll get us out of it is the same as Bomber Harris nipping over to Dresden and offering to repair a few windows.

Chaos, panic and disorder - my work here is done.

http://www.wildcrafts.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 15:50 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6735
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Safety Engineer wrote:
Maybe it's my age group, but I do come across a lot of people who's argument is that given soft drinks are often dearer than alcoholic drinks why not have a drink. It's flawed thinking but it's an argument people cling to.

Do you think this leads them to exceed the current legal limit? I'd be surprised if it did. Even if this is the case, I would say it is only a rationalisation of people's behaviour and not the real underlying reason. They would probably do the same even if the soft drinks were half the price.

Quote:
As for making a profit 600% mark up on post mix soft drinks is taking the piss - dropping it to ONLY a 300% mark up makes a real difference in price. As for soft drinks being cheaper, most of the pubs I frequent in the Essex area soft drinks are on par with alcoholic drinks for price.

I did a quick survey in my local pub this lunchtime.

Post-mix Coke etc (14 oz glass): £1.25
Pint of Hydes Bitter: £1.80
Pint of Harp lager: £2.18
Pint of Guinness: £2.54
Pint of Stella: £2.56
175ml glass of house wine: £2.10
330ml bottle of Bud: £2.55

So in this instance it certainly can't be said that soft drinks are as dear as, or dearer than, alcoholic ones.

This is the North, of course - some of you Southerners might be a bit envious :P

Quote:
As for the price not making a difference, I would disagree, I lived in NZ and they had a bg problem with drink driving (part of the Kiwi culture - beach barbie and booze), part of the method of dealing with this problem including education, and enforcement was the Designated Driver scheme that many bars signed up to it ran thus, if a group of customers came in and one was a driver then the driver had free or half price soft drinks all night.

Not only did it work but some bars reported that business went up.

Ok it might not work in the UK nut it can't hurt ??

I've come across a fair number of UK pubs that offer free soft drinks for the designated driver in a party of four or more.

I agree it's a good idea, not least from the point of view of pubs being seen to be socially responsible.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 15:55 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 16:51
Posts: 1323
Location: Stafford - a short distance past hope
PeterE wrote:
Post-mix Coke etc (14 oz glass): £1.25
Pint of Hydes Bitter: £1.80

This is the North, of course - some of you Southerners might be a bit envious :P



Sorry to introduce a further note of levity, but I though Hydes Bitter WAS a soft drink ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 15:58 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6735
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
prof beard wrote:
Sorry to introduce a further note of levity, but I though Hydes Bitter WAS a soft drink ;)

After 3 or more pints I suspect your friendly local traffic copper might not agree :o

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

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:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.794s | 12 Queries | GZIP : Off ]