Written evidence from Steve Wilson (DDD
01)
IN SUMMARY
1. I am AGAINST the proposed change to the
blood/alcohol legal limit in the driving legislation.
2. I am FOR the inclusion of drug testing in
the driving legislation.
MY REASONING?
Although I have no firm evidence to support
this view (by which I mean firm statistics and figures), as a
publican running a busy high street venue I feel I am well placed
to offer a balanced view? I say this because:
(1) With regard to the first point above: my
view has nothing to do with any potential affect on my business,
simply because I don't believe it will have any effect! I firmly
believe that the current limit is about right, as it catches the
habitual drink/driver but poses no risk to the "innocent"
drink/driver? By "innocent", I mean those driving, for
example, the day-after-the-night-before who may still have a traceable
amount of alcohol in their blood but not at a level that seriously
affects their driving? Reducing the legal limit will have absolutely
no affect on the habitual drink/driver because they already, by
definition, break the law and will continue to break the law,
even if the limit was zero. In my own experience, drink/drivers
do not even consider their actions until they've either been caught
or involved in an accident (or both)? The only possible affects
of a reduction, therefore, would be to increase convictions of
people who probably don't need to be convicted? I have no idea
how you have come up with the figure of potential lives saved
of +300 but, I suspect, it is simply government doing their usual
thing of stating an over-simplistic calculation that supports
their case!
(2) With regard to the second point: this is
a very sensible measure and drug takers have been getting away
with driving under the influence for far too long. I see many
people under the affect of drugs who habitually drive, in the
mistaken belief that it's much better than drink/driving, but
I can tell you that I'd much rather get in a car with someone
who has had three pints (putting them over the legal limit) than
with someone who has had three lines of coke (and are still perfectly
legal to drive)!!
WHAT I BELIEVE
YOU SHOULD
DO?
I believe the only way to properly reduce drink/driving
is to introduce a higher limit BUT run it in conjunction with
much more serious penalties? For example, an automatic jail sentence
over a certain limit, regardless of the offender's position? I
have absolutely no doubt you would see almost all the current
habitual drink/drivers reassess their habits immediately!! Although
even the most severe punishment will not stop all offenders, arbitrary
limits and/or laws are not what prevents the law being broken,
it is the penalty that has most effect.
July 2010
|
