I've been serious all the way through.
IMO part of the problem here is using a criminal justice model to determine a matter of public health and safety.
Using the blood/alcohol reading reported by the media, this defendant - had she been convicted - was a tad below the dangerous offender level ie before her licence could be returned after the disqualification she would have had to take medical tests to prove she wasn't alcohol dependent. (My words.) Now, unconvicted, the regulations assume she's risk-free driving a car.
Drink-drive get-out?
Re: Drink-drive get-out?
Yes.thirdcrank wrote: ↑13 Oct 2021, 2:41pmIMO part of the problem here is using a criminal justice model to determine a matter of public health and safety.
Using the blood/alcohol reading reported by the media, this defendant - had she been convicted - was a tad below the dangerous offender level ie before her licence could be returned after the disqualification she would have had to take medical tests to prove she wasn't alcohol dependent. (My words.) Now, unconvicted, the regulations assume she's risk-free driving a car.
Whether there was a conviction or not a smart response would be referral to assessment to establish whether the continued privilege of driving on public roads was appropriate.
Jonathan
-
- Posts: 126
- Joined: 24 Dec 2020, 8:03pm
Re: Drink-drive get-out?
Justice is blind drunk.
-
- Posts: 36781
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Drink-drive get-out?
AIUI, following the shooting murders earlier this year carried out by a man whose shotgun certificate had been returned to him by the police, disciplinary proceedings are pending against two people involved. Purely supposition on my part, but I suspect this revolves round using a criminal justice model to make the decision ie a version of "can we prove (beyond reasonable doubt) that he represents a danger to the public?" rather than something along the lines of "can we be sure he doesn't represent a danger to the public?" My reason for thinking this is that most police work is based on the former
Now, the right to hold a driving licence isn't to very much different from the right to hold a firearms licence
Now, the right to hold a driving licence isn't to very much different from the right to hold a firearms licence
-
- Posts: 36781
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Drink-drive get-out?
I mentioned high-risk offenders above and I didn't give much explanation.
Amongst all the offers from the learned friends to get-out-of-jail-free I found this explanation (admittedly from an interested source.)
https://www.drinkdriving.org/dvla-medical.php
It seems to me that it would be possible - if not politically feasible - to incorporate some of this in to a safety policy to keep problem drinkers off the road but based on a civil standard.
Amongst all the offers from the learned friends to get-out-of-jail-free I found this explanation (admittedly from an interested source.)
https://www.drinkdriving.org/dvla-medical.php
It seems to me that it would be possible - if not politically feasible - to incorporate some of this in to a safety policy to keep problem drinkers off the road but based on a civil standard.
Re: Drink-drive get-out?
New excuse I've not heard before "cashflow". Not that you can't afford a £100 fine, just that it will affect your "cashflow"
Poor thing, but I doubt she's suffering from the £20 UC cut ...
Radical suggestion but if she can't afford the fine, don't commit the offence. And I wonder how much a tank of petrol costs for her car and if that causes her "cashflow issues".
Ian
(my bold and colour)https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/oct/29/dukes-daughter-cites-cashflow-issues-to-get-speeding-fine-halved-to-50 wrote:Duke’s daughter cites ‘cashflow issues’ to get speeding fine halved to £50
The socialite daughter of the Duke of Rutland was fined just £50 for speeding – half the normal minimum – after she claimed paying a penalty would cause her “cashflow issues”.
In a question about financial hardship, she responded “yes”, and, asked if paying a fine would pose financial difficulties, reportedly wrote: “It would cause me cashflow issues.”
...
The youngest daughter of David Manners, the 11th Duke of Rutland, Lady Manners reportedly lives in a £700,000 apartment in Notting Hill...
Poor thing, but I doubt she's suffering from the £20 UC cut ...
Radical suggestion but if she can't afford the fine, don't commit the offence. And I wonder how much a tank of petrol costs for her car and if that causes her "cashflow issues".
Ian
-
- Posts: 11043
- Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
- Location: Near Bicester Oxon
Re: Drink-drive get-out?
Just noticed this comment.
For clarity, my quip about '...being serious for a moment...' was self-referential, and it was coincidental that it followed a post of yours. Your posts have been nothing other than serious throughout, and self-evidently so.
-
- Posts: 36781
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Drink-drive get-out?
1 Eliza Manners was apparently fine for a speeding offence - not a drink-driving offence
2 Re "Being serious" probably me being touchy.
2 Re "Being serious" probably me being touchy.
Re: Drink-drive get-out?
I appreciate that (£100 fine and 3 points would never be drink driving) - just I saw it as another daft avoiding penalty for driving offence (and didn't seem worth starting another thread when it was in some ways related ...)thirdcrank wrote: ↑29 Oct 2021, 5:09pm 1 Eliza Manners was apparently fine for a speeding offence - not a drink-driving offence
...
Ian