| Smoking |
| 6 |
|
Drinking |
| 10 |
|
They are both equally bad |
| 6 |
|
Neither causes any problems |
| 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Devil's Advocate
 
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Thursday, August 07, 2008 8:35 PM
Posts: 1,142,
Visits: 1,400
|
|
balor (7/10/2007)
Personally, I think anyone who gets any conviction for drink driving, speeding, dangerous driving etc should be expected to retest before allowed back on the road. Certainly for serious serial cases. After all, there is a massive reoffending rate so the current system does not work. Also, those convicted many times for those crimes are clearly forgetting all they learnt in thier lessons...That's not such a bad idea actually...
If you can't beat your computer at chess, try kickboxing.
|
|
|
|
|
Squire
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Thursday, June 26, 2008 10:16 PM
Posts: 48,
Visits: 320
|
|
Tart (7/10/2007)
You failed to address my point: IF someone has the same reaction times as a sober person after 3 pints (or whatever) why should they not be allowed to drive?Reaction time works in conjunction with common sense and judgement (when driving etc) - all affected by alcohol (and drugs, illegal or otherwise). The fact is, as you rightly point out, people are different and their reactions to alcohol are different. Even individuals react to alcohol differently under different circumstances. Since it is impossible to tell with a certainty how one will be affected by a drink, then it is best not to drink at all when driving.
**************************************************** DO NOT MEDDLE IN THE AFFAIRS OF DRAGONS FOR YOU ARE CRUNCHY AND GOOD WITH KETCHUP...
|
|
|
|
|
Devil's Advocate
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Thursday, August 07, 2008 8:35 PM
Posts: 1,142,
Visits: 1,400
|
|
Mike G (7/10/2007)
Since it is impossible to tell with a certainty how one will be affected by a drink, then it is best not to drink at all when driving.Apart from making them pass a test while at a certain blood-alcohol level, as i suggested.
If you can't beat your computer at chess, try kickboxing.
|
|
|
|
|
Squire
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Thursday, June 26, 2008 10:16 PM
Posts: 48,
Visits: 320
|
|
Well I doon't agree. However, if your idea was implemented, then every time someone had a drink they'd have to take this test - not exactly practical.
****************************************************DO NOT MEDDLE IN THE AFFAIRS OF DRAGONS FOR YOU ARE CRUNCHY AND GOOD WITH KETCHUP...
|
|
|
|
|
and Minimeister
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Sunday, April 06, 2008 8:31 AM
Posts: 960,
Visits: 1,402
|
|
Tart (7/10/2007)
Mike G (7/10/2007)
Since it is impossible to tell with a certainty how one will be affected by a drink, then it is best not to drink at all when driving.Apart from making them pass a test while at a certain blood-alcohol level, as i suggested. Interesting idea, but a touch impractical. Let's say someone drinks a bottle of wine over the course of a good hearty meal. This gives them a blood alcohol level of X. At a different time they drink a pint on an empty stomach. This gives them a blood alcohol level of X. I'm fairly certain I'd "feel" drunker in the second example and that my driving would be different. Also, how on earth would you measure your blood alcohol level? A self-sponsored testing kit? A pinprick system tied to the ignition? With respect to the testing, it is well-established that alcohol capacity is tied to physical mass. So, you take the test, but then lose a stone. Or what if you've just not been drinking for a year? Much easier to avoid all these by just having a zero limit for alcohol in the blood stream. However, I do agree completely about the need for a certain amount of sleep before you drive. Part of the reason why I won't be going to any 24 hour time in's any time soon. :-/
There is only overconfidence and terror.
|
|
|
|
|
Devil's Advocate
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Thursday, August 07, 2008 8:35 PM
Posts: 1,142,
Visits: 1,400
|
|
Mike G (7/11/2007)
Well I doon't agree. However, if your idea was implemented, then every time someone had a drink they'd have to take this test - not exactly practical.No it wouldn't. You don't have to retake your driving test every single time you want to drive, so why would you have to if there was this hypothetical "drunk drive" test? It would merely qualify you to drive up to a set blood alcohol level.
If you can't beat your computer at chess, try kickboxing.
|
|
|
|
|
Squire
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Thursday, June 26, 2008 10:16 PM
Posts: 48,
Visits: 320
|
|
Tart (7/11/2007)
Mike G (7/11/2007)
Well I doon't agree. However, if your idea was implemented, then every time someone had a drink they'd have to take this test - not exactly practical.No it wouldn't. You don't have to retake your driving test every single time you want to drive, so why would you have to if there was this hypothetical "drunk drive" test? It would merely qualify you to drive up to a set blood alcohol level. See coffmeisters post above, as well as my previous answers. Alcohol can affect the same person differently, depending on circumstances.
**************************************************** DO NOT MEDDLE IN THE AFFAIRS OF DRAGONS FOR YOU ARE CRUNCHY AND GOOD WITH KETCHUP...
|
|
|
|
|
Devil's Advocate
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Thursday, August 07, 2008 8:35 PM
Posts: 1,142,
Visits: 1,400
|
|
coffmeister (7/11/2007)
Interesting idea, but a touch impractical. Let's say someone drinks a bottle of wine over the course of a good hearty meal. This gives them a blood alcohol level of X. At a different time they drink a pint on an empty stomach. This gives them a blood alcohol level of X.Erm. it's as impractical as the current legislation, which allows you to drive legally up to 80mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood. Also, how on earth would you measure your blood alcohol level? A self-sponsored testing kit? A pinprick system tied to the ignition? why would you need that? You don't make people do that now, and they can legally drive up the limit i mentioned above. With respect to the testing, it is well-established that alcohol capacity is tied to physical mass. So, you take the test, but then lose a stone. Or what if you've just not been drinking for a year? i doubt they would. I mean, i'm not forced to retest everytime i need a new glasses perscription, or if i happen to be 65 years old and have slowed down considerably over that time. However, I do agree completely about the need for a certain amount of sleep before you drive. Part of the reason why I won't be going to any 24 hour time in's any time soon. :-/ I'm pretty sure lack of sleep is responsible for more accidents than drink driving actually, can anyone be bothered to check that? (though almost certianly that'll be due to more people driving tired than driving drunk).
If you can't beat your computer at chess, try kickboxing.
|
|
| |