Subject:
|
One for the road sir? (Re: US supreme court strikes down...)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:14:39 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
279 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> A small bit of good news. However when one reads the article one discovers
> that the court considers drunk driving checkpoints constitutional,
Here in the UK random alchhol test are not strictly legal. However, they do
sort of occur. However, for 10-20 yaers now drink driving has been
effectivly stigmatised to the point where even drinking within the legal
limit (80 mg/l) is frowned upon socially. Having a drink driving conviction
in the UK, is a sure way to become a social pariah. Because of this climate,
I have never heard of anyone complain of being stopped and tested (we do
have the right to a refuse test if stopped).
This situation is at complete odds what was happening ~20 years ago. Back
then, macho types would brag of how much they could drink and still drive
home. People would joke about how they were so inebriated they could not
walk home - so thay had to drive.
In summary, I don't think random testing 20 years ago would ever have
reduced DD as much as stigmatisation has. However, here in the UK, we are
left with a "hard core" who will continue to DD until caught - and random
tests may be the way to get them.
Let's just hope none of us here fall victim to a drunk driver over Xmas/New
Year.
Scott A
> and sees
> no problem in detaining someone outside their home for hours while a warrant
> is obtained.
>
> http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20001128/pl/scotus_roadblocks.html
>
> Scalia's dissenting opinion is particularly scary to liberarians of all
> stripes as the media labels him as such, clearly he's not.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | US supreme court strikes down drug checkpoints
|
| A small bit of good news. However when one reads the article one discovers that the court considers drunk driving checkpoints constitutional, and sees no problem in detaining someone outside their home for hours while a warrant is obtained. (URL) (...) (24 years ago, 29-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
11 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
