Subject:
|
Re: One for the road sir? (Re: US supreme court strikes down...)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 29 Nov 2000 16:28:59 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
501 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > 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...
>
> (I think you omitted "and then driving" as I have seen no evidence that
> there is any stigma attached to being drunk, per se, in the UK. :-)
It all depends on who you live with I suppose.
> Indeed I
> have been the beneficiary(?) of public drunkenness, having been soundly
> kissed (in the West End) by a rather good looking bride-to-be who clearly
> was drunk enough to overlook my distinct lack of the hunk nature.)
What! She randomly stopped you and demanded a kiss! How unconstitutional.
The supreme court must pass a judgement on this!
(The fact the we have neither a constitution or a supreme court could hamper
things a little).
Scott A
>
> > Let's just hope none of us here fall victim to a drunk driver over Xmas/New
> > Year.
>
> I think this is a sentiment we all can get behind with no reservations.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
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
|
|
|
|
