Posted by: martin, Glasgow on 11:14am Fri 30 Nov 07
Zero tolerance is the only way to go.
Zero tolerance is the only way to go.
Posted by: jake1, Australia on 11:42am Fri 30 Nov 07
ANY ONE WHO DOES NOT AGREE,SHOULD GO OUT WITH A PARAMEDIC TEAM ,OR THE COPS, AND WHY NOT COMPLETE THE DAY BY KNOCKING ON A PARENTS OR RELATIVES DOOR TO TELL THEM A SON OR DAUGHTER ,OR A MUM IS DEAD THROUGH SOME USELESS PERSOM WHO HAD TO HAVE A DRINK AND THEN DRIVE, I WOULD CALL IT MURDER WITH A LETHAL WEAPON . NOTHING LESS.
ANY ONE WHO DOES NOT AGREE,SHOULD GO OUT WITH A PARAMEDIC TEAM ,OR THE COPS, AND WHY NOT COMPLETE THE DAY BY KNOCKING ON A PARENTS OR RELATIVES DOOR TO TELL THEM A SON OR DAUGHTER ,OR A MUM IS DEAD THROUGH SOME USELESS PERSOM WHO HAD TO HAVE A DRINK AND THEN DRIVE, I WOULD CALL IT MURDER WITH A LETHAL WEAPON . NOTHING LESS.
Posted by: pete, Bearsden on 11:51am Fri 30 Nov 07
Must be Zero Tolerance but as many people in "High Places" would be caught, it'll never come about.
Must be Zero Tolerance but as many people in "High Places" would be caught, it'll never come about.
Posted by: Bigal, glasgow on 12:04pm Fri 30 Nov 07
I agree with JAKE on this but also know having been in Fremantle WA that there are stricter limits AND also random breath testing(The booze bus) drink driving still occurs.Answer?Harshe
r penalties?
I agree with JAKE on this but also know having been in Fremantle WA that there are stricter limits AND also random breath testing(The booze bus) drink driving still occurs.Answer?Harshe
r penalties?
Posted by: stmonan, Glasgow on 12:21pm Fri 30 Nov 07
I agree getting in a car after a few drinks is reprehensible but there needs to be more information about morning-after drinking and self-test equipment should be more widely available. How many people truly know when their bodies are alcohol-free after a night out?
Are road accidents really caused by people with small amounts of alcohol in the system, i.e. within the current limit? Is having one glass of wine and driving really more dangerous than driving when slightly tired/ while on a phone/ when upset about something/ in adverse weather conditions? And given that everyone knows drinking and driving is out of order, are drunks really to blame for the bulk of serious accidents?
Or is it just attention-seeking politicians trying to crack down on something else to distract from their own corruption? My suspicion is the drunks in the streets would be a more worthy focus of attention.
I agree getting in a car after a few drinks is reprehensible but there needs to be more information about morning-after drinking and self-test equipment should be more widely available. How many people truly know when their bodies are alcohol-free after a night out?
Are road accidents really caused by people with small amounts of alcohol in the system, i.e. within the current limit? Is having one glass of wine and driving really more dangerous than driving when slightly tired/ while on a phone/ when upset about something/ in adverse weather conditions? And given that everyone knows drinking and driving is out of order, are drunks really to blame for the bulk of serious accidents?
Or is it just attention-seeking politicians trying to crack down on something else to distract from their own corruption? My suspicion is the drunks in the streets would be a more worthy focus of attention.
Posted by: Dark, Kent on 12:28pm Fri 30 Nov 07
And then ban driving after drinking for 24 hours to stop the morning after the night before crowd?
Rubbish. Are you really suggesting driving a couple of hours after having a half of shandy should be illegal?
The laws against careless and dangerous driving already exist. The police just don't patrol enough, having opted for more speed cameras instead (which earn them money rather than cost them).
More patrols would deter more drink drivers, plus those who insist on using their mobiles and the legion of eratic foreign hauliers who infest our roads and motorways.
And then ban driving after drinking for 24 hours to stop the morning after the night before crowd?
Rubbish. Are you really suggesting driving a couple of hours after having a half of shandy should be illegal?
The laws against careless and dangerous driving already exist. The police just don't patrol enough, having opted for more speed cameras instead (which earn them money rather than cost them).
More patrols would deter more drink drivers, plus those who insist on using their mobiles and the legion of eratic foreign hauliers who infest our roads and motorways.
Posted by: Harry, Glasgow on 1:01pm Fri 30 Nov 07
[quote][bold]Dark[/bold] wrote:
And then ban driving after drinking for 24 hours to stop the morning after the night before crowd? Rubbish. Are you really suggesting driving a couple of hours after having a half of shandy should be illegal? The laws against careless and dangerous driving already exist. The police just don't patrol enough, having opted for more speed cameras instead (which earn them money rather than cost them). More patrols would deter more drink drivers, plus those who insist on using their mobiles and the legion of eratic foreign hauliers who infest our roads and motorways.[/quote] Yes, Dark, zero tolerance means exactly that. If you want to drink your half pint of shandy then don't drive for 24hours - the choice will be up to you.
Dark wrote:
And then ban driving after drinking for 24 hours to stop the morning after the night before crowd? Rubbish. Are you really suggesting driving a couple of hours after having a half of shandy should be illegal? The laws against careless and dangerous driving already exist. The police just don't patrol enough, having opted for more speed cameras instead (which earn them money rather than cost them). More patrols would deter more drink drivers, plus those who insist on using their mobiles and the legion of eratic foreign hauliers who infest our roads and motorways.
Yes, Dark, zero tolerance means exactly that. If you want to drink your half pint of shandy then don't drive for 24hours - the choice will be up to you.
Posted by: Paul, Paisley on 1:07pm Fri 30 Nov 07
It is such a shame that today's generation of lazy politicians only have one answer to every problem - ban it!
Left of centre politicians are drowning us in a sea of legislation, micro-managing every aspect of our lives. Besides the obvious practical limitations of this stupid announcement it is just another chip-chip-chip away at our liberty.
It is such a shame that today's generation of lazy politicians only have one answer to every problem - ban it!
Left of centre politicians are drowning us in a sea of legislation, micro-managing every aspect of our lives. Besides the obvious practical limitations of this stupid announcement it is just another chip-chip-chip away at our liberty.
Posted by: david on 1:10pm Fri 30 Nov 07
The link between drinking and accidents has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt.
Its the duty for of the Government to protect its people. Even if that protection from themselves.
Drink driving accidents in Scotland havd HALVED since the introduction of random breathaliser testing. Dont we deserve our loved ones and nation to be as healthy as possible?
The link between drinking and accidents has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt.
Its the duty for of the Government to protect its people. Even if that protection from themselves.
Drink driving accidents in Scotland havd HALVED since the introduction of random breathaliser testing. Dont we deserve our loved ones and nation to be as healthy as possible?
Posted by: ped the ned, scotland on 1:20pm Fri 30 Nov 07
They can put whatever drink ban they wish,, but random breath tests ?,,, do me a favour,, you get on with your life and i'll do the same, giving our police the power to random anything is a joke because they will flaunt and abuse them as always !! Where are you going and where have you been ?. i've been to fuel up, and i'm going wherever i want, now get out my face and don't blame me because you were bullied at school..
They can put whatever drink ban they wish,, but random breath tests ?,,, do me a favour,, you get on with your life and i'll do the same, giving our police the power to random anything is a joke because they will flaunt and abuse them as always !! Where are you going and where have you been ?. i've been to fuel up, and i'm going wherever i want, now get out my face and don't blame me because you were bullied at school..
Posted by: Paul, Paisley on 1:28pm Fri 30 Nov 07
No, we do not deserve our loved ones and nation to be kept as healthy as 'possible'we deserve them to be kept as healthy as what is reasonably necessary.
I'm not just being pedantic, there is a big difference. If it was as healthy as possible we would just ban drink altogether, along with smoking, fast food, big cars and generally anything which makes life a little more fun or bearable. We cant just ban everything which is unhealthy (although this government is having a good go at it) or we will end up living in a baron desert of endless monotong not unlike communist USSR.
No, we do not deserve our loved ones and nation to be kept as healthy as 'possible'we deserve them to be kept as healthy as what is reasonably necessary.
I'm not just being pedantic, there is a big difference. If it was as healthy as possible we would just ban drink altogether, along with smoking, fast food, big cars and generally anything which makes life a little more fun or bearable. We cant just ban everything which is unhealthy (although this government is having a good go at it) or we will end up living in a baron desert of endless monotong not unlike communist USSR.
Posted by: West Ender, Glasgow on 1:34pm Fri 30 Nov 07
First offence: Ten thousand pound fine, banned for one year.
Second Offence: One year in jail banned for life.
Third offence: Shoot the Ba$#*rD.
That should make them THINK about it, at least.
First offence: Ten thousand pound fine, banned for one year.
Second Offence: One year in jail banned for life.
Third offence: Shoot the Ba$#*rD.
That should make them THINK about it, at least.
Posted by: FrazBear, Glasgow on 2:03pm Fri 30 Nov 07
[quote][bold]West Ender[/bold] wrote:
First offence: Ten thousand pound fine, banned for one year. Second Offence: One year in jail banned for life. Third offence: Shoot the Ba$#*rD. That should make them THINK about it, at least. [/quote] Agree with 1 and 2.
But rather than shoot them, why not just let their tyres down!
West Ender wrote:
First offence: Ten thousand pound fine, banned for one year. Second Offence: One year in jail banned for life. Third offence: Shoot the Ba$#*rD. That should make them THINK about it, at least.
Agree with 1 and 2.
But rather than shoot them, why not just let their tyres down!
Posted by: GML, right here on 3:14pm Fri 30 Nov 07
Is there any evidence that persons "drinking a half pint of shandy the night before" are measurably impaired, or at any greater risk of causing an accident? I doubt it.
People well gone on drink and/or drugs (not a single half pint of shandy) are out there on the roads every night. I suspect it is those people who are the main risk to others, unless someone has decent statistics to the contrary. Extensive roadside testing to better enforce the current legislation appears to me to be a much more effective way to reduce accidents and loss of life, which is the real objective.
Is there any evidence that persons "drinking a half pint of shandy the night before" are measurably impaired, or at any greater risk of causing an accident? I doubt it.
People well gone on drink and/or drugs (not a single half pint of shandy) are out there on the roads every night. I suspect it is those people who are the main risk to others, unless someone has decent statistics to the contrary. Extensive roadside testing to better enforce the current legislation appears to me to be a much more effective way to reduce accidents and loss of life, which is the real objective.
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 3:59pm Fri 30 Nov 07
I have an excuse I'm concussed (genuinely!) But - I stand by the second part of what I say - the fact that this new law would be un-enforceable.
I have an excuse I'm concussed (genuinely!) But - I stand by the second part of what I say - the fact that this new law would be un-enforceable.
Posted by: bob, . on 4:14pm Fri 30 Nov 07
4 out of 10. So the article is slanted to say any drink and driving is wrong? The majority 6 out of 10 must have thought it okay. So why was the article not "majority in favour of some drinking and driving"? Press print what they want!!!!!
4 out of 10. So the article is slanted to say any drink and driving is wrong? The majority 6 out of 10 must have thought it okay. So why was the article not "majority in favour of some drinking and driving"? Press print what they want!!!!!
Posted by: Tennscot, Tenn. on 4:22pm Fri 30 Nov 07
I wonder if the "Breathalyzer " Equipt. that is now available to instal in Cars ,could be installed in all cars in the future. ??? Or is that just a pipe dream.
I wonder if the "Breathalyzer " Equipt. that is now available to instal in Cars ,could be installed in all cars in the future. ??? Or is that just a pipe dream.
Posted by: Tennscot, Tenn. on 4:22pm Fri 30 Nov 07
I wonder if the "Breathalyzer " Equipt. that is now available to instal in Cars ,could be installed in all cars in the future. ??? Or is that just a pipe dream.
I wonder if the "Breathalyzer " Equipt. that is now available to instal in Cars ,could be installed in all cars in the future. ??? Or is that just a pipe dream.
Posted by: charles mn, grangemouth on 4:39pm Fri 30 Nov 07
The current 80mg/ml limit was selected based on scientific evidence that that was when the accident rate started to rise. Indeed there is scientific evidence that at 40mg/ml the accident rate is less than when no alcohol is in the blood.
Lower limits also have the problem that the breathalyser equipment is unreliable at these levels picking up small amounts of naturally occurring chemicals. Off course alcohol is a naturally occurring chemical so it is possible to have alcohol in your blood without having a drink at all.
In the last 6 months two Virgin 747 pilots have been hauled off their aircraft after failing Breathalyzers. Both passed blood tests and were released. One of these pilots was tea total.
Unlike those pilots car drivers won't have the backup of the pilots union and an airline and would simply have been banned.
The current 80mg/ml limit was selected based on scientific evidence that that was when the accident rate started to rise. Indeed there is scientific evidence that at 40mg/ml the accident rate is less than when no alcohol is in the blood.
Lower limits also have the problem that the breathalyser equipment is unreliable at these levels picking up small amounts of naturally occurring chemicals. Off course alcohol is a naturally occurring chemical so it is possible to have alcohol in your blood without having a drink at all.
In the last 6 months two Virgin 747 pilots have been hauled off their aircraft after failing Breathalyzers. Both passed blood tests and were released. One of these pilots was tea total.
Unlike those pilots car drivers won't have the backup of the pilots union and an airline and would simply have been banned.
Posted by: Bear, Glasgow on 4:52pm Fri 30 Nov 07
A agree if you gonni drive you shudnt have any booze at all.
A agree if you gonni drive you shudnt have any booze at all.
Posted by: Biffo the bear, beano town on 4:57pm Fri 30 Nov 07
Totally agree, you drink? then you dont drive, where is the problem understanding that..
On the subject of cameras, recently i was flashed & i know for sure that i was not over the speed limit as i had just pulled away from the kerb & i drive a diesel..
The authorities need to patrol more, the M8 heading to Greenock is a race track where they regularly exceed 90mph, though why anyone would want to hurry up their journey to that dump is beyond me..
Totally agree, you drink? then you dont drive, where is the problem understanding that..
On the subject of cameras, recently i was flashed & i know for sure that i was not over the speed limit as i had just pulled away from the kerb & i drive a diesel..
The authorities need to patrol more, the M8 heading to Greenock is a race track where they regularly exceed 90mph, though why anyone would want to hurry up their journey to that dump is beyond me..
Posted by: bigeye, Shaws on 5:08pm Fri 30 Nov 07
The only to way to monitor the amount partaken is by self policing.
Each individual must KNOW if they are over the limit by using a personal breathiliser the type used by the police which should be available over the counter to the public.
The majority of drivers do not drive directly after drinking but the problem arises the next morning.
I would be prepared to pay for one and i'm sure they can't be more than £200 or there abouts, anyway, if the demand is there then the cost would level out.
The only to way to monitor the amount partaken is by self policing.
Each individual must KNOW if they are over the limit by using a personal breathiliser the type used by the police which should be available over the counter to the public.
The majority of drivers do not drive directly after drinking but the problem arises the next morning.
I would be prepared to pay for one and i'm sure they can't be more than £200 or there abouts, anyway, if the demand is there then the cost would level out.
Posted by: KINGMAN, glasgow on 5:55pm Fri 30 Nov 07
*TO ALL DRINK DRIVERS....AFTER READING THIS ,ASK YOURSELF 1 QUESTION . WHAT IF THAT YOUNG GIRL(I AM ABOUT TO MENTION) WAS THE PERSON I LOVE WITH ALL MY HEART? I HAVE NO ANSWER. YOU NEED TO ANSWER IT YOURSELF. on my way home after buying my kebab for dinner i turned at the traffic lights and then i heard it. at first i thought it was a bomb going off,then as i rounded the bend the bus i saw in front of me was the reason for the noise. its front had hit the passenger seat door of a car and crushed the cars side against the driver. fortunately the driver didnt get hit with the crushing side of his car , it missed him by inches. i got out my car , as did others, and released his seat belt and got him out . what a lucky escape eh. he was covered in blood and totally disorientated.he then started muttering about his girlfriend and we said we would phone her its okay. SHES IN THE CAR he said.
she was 16. i ran round to the passenger side of the car , but it had disappeared.THERE WAS NOTHING THERE. THAT YOUNG LADY WAS IN THERE. i lay on my stomach to try and get my hand through the boiling hot metal of the car. SHE WASNT THERE.HER LIFE WAS OVER. i dont need to go into detail but i will never forget stacy( as i found out her name was from the flowers that were laid the following day)... DRINK DRIVER? TIME TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION..
PS i have tears in my eyes as i type this ,its not been easy, but hey i was just a passing stranger, imagine how the family must feel
*****if only they wold listen*****
*TO ALL DRINK DRIVERS....AFTER READING THIS ,ASK YOURSELF 1 QUESTION . WHAT IF THAT YOUNG GIRL(I AM ABOUT TO MENTION) WAS THE PERSON I LOVE WITH ALL MY HEART? I HAVE NO ANSWER. YOU NEED TO ANSWER IT YOURSELF. on my way home after buying my kebab for dinner i turned at the traffic lights and then i heard it. at first i thought it was a bomb going off,then as i rounded the bend the bus i saw in front of me was the reason for the noise. its front had hit the passenger seat door of a car and crushed the cars side against the driver. fortunately the driver didnt get hit with the crushing side of his car , it missed him by inches. i got out my car , as did others, and released his seat belt and got him out . what a lucky escape eh. he was covered in blood and totally disorientated.he then started muttering about his girlfriend and we said we would phone her its okay. SHES IN THE CAR he said.
she was 16. i ran round to the passenger side of the car , but it had disappeared.THERE WAS NOTHING THERE. THAT YOUNG LADY WAS IN THERE. i lay on my stomach to try and get my hand through the boiling hot metal of the car. SHE WASNT THERE.HER LIFE WAS OVER. i dont need to go into detail but i will never forget stacy( as i found out her name was from the flowers that were laid the following day)... DRINK DRIVER? TIME TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION..
PS i have tears in my eyes as i type this ,its not been easy, but hey i was just a passing stranger, imagine how the family must feel
*****if only they wold listen*****
Posted by: thistlemad, Ayrshire on 6:59pm Fri 30 Nov 07
KINGSMAN,
I fail to see what this has to do with drinking and driving since you make no mention of anyone who was drunk.
NOW, lets, JUST FOR A MOMENT tune into sanity fm.
I DO NOT condone driving whilst over the limit. However, as has been pointed out, there IS evidence that around the 40mg mark there is a significant improvement in the average drivers reaction time and general driving skill.
I can recall an experiment done (maybe some off the 40+ age group will recall) where a driving simulator was set up in a studio.
People were then tested while no alchohol, 40mg,80mg, 100mg etc.
Driving was "reasonable" at zero, "improved" at 40 after which it went downhill.
I believe it was Tomorrows World or some such other scientific programme, unsure really.
ZERO alchohol will be unworkable in reality. Look how hard it is to prosecute a "stoned" driver!!!!
EVERYONE knows someone who is unfit to drive through drink or drugs, but how many actually bother reporting it for fear of reprisals?????
The answer is in much tougher sentencing.
However consider this ........ you GENUINELY feel your child is dying. You call an ambulance but are told it will be at least an hour because there are none available ..... you have had ONE SMALL glass of wine and are entirely sober.There is no one else around available to drive
HOW MANY OF YOU WILL SIT AND WATCH YOUR CHILD DIE BECAUSE OF THE ZERO TOLERANCE?????
NOT ME!!!!!!!!
KINGSMAN,
I fail to see what this has to do with drinking and driving since you make no mention of anyone who was drunk.
NOW, lets, JUST FOR A MOMENT tune into sanity fm.
I DO NOT condone driving whilst over the limit. However, as has been pointed out, there IS evidence that around the 40mg mark there is a significant improvement in the average drivers reaction time and general driving skill.
I can recall an experiment done (maybe some off the 40+ age group will recall) where a driving simulator was set up in a studio.
People were then tested while no alchohol, 40mg,80mg, 100mg etc.
Driving was "reasonable" at zero, "improved" at 40 after which it went downhill.
I believe it was Tomorrows World or some such other scientific programme, unsure really.
ZERO alchohol will be unworkable in reality. Look how hard it is to prosecute a "stoned" driver!!!!
EVERYONE knows someone who is unfit to drive through drink or drugs, but how many actually bother reporting it for fear of reprisals?????
The answer is in much tougher sentencing.
However consider this ........ you GENUINELY feel your child is dying. You call an ambulance but are told it will be at least an hour because there are none available ..... you have had ONE SMALL glass of wine and are entirely sober.There is no one else around available to drive
HOW MANY OF YOU WILL SIT AND WATCH YOUR CHILD DIE BECAUSE OF THE ZERO TOLERANCE?????
NOT ME!!!!!!!!
Posted by: weegie, here on 8:35pm Fri 30 Nov 07
"HOW MANY OF YOU WILL SIT AND WATCH YOUR CHILD DIE BECAUSE OF THE ZERO TOLERANCE?????
NOT ME!!!!!!!!" Thistlemad.....
This reason is why you should pay for a taxi..
You are concerned about an ill child!! wouldn't you be more concerned about a dead child killed because a parent decided to play russian roulette with a drink driving risk?
"HOW MANY OF YOU WILL SIT AND WATCH YOUR CHILD DIE BECAUSE OF THE ZERO TOLERANCE?????
NOT ME!!!!!!!!" Thistlemad.....
This reason is why you should pay for a taxi..
You are concerned about an ill child!! wouldn't you be more concerned about a dead child killed because a parent decided to play russian roulette with a drink driving risk?
Posted by: thistlemad, Ayrshire on 9:18pm Fri 30 Nov 07
"HOW MANY OF YOU WILL SIT AND WATCH YOUR CHILD DIE BECAUSE OF THE ZERO TOLERANCE?????
NOT ME!!!!!!!!" Thistlemad.....
This reason is why you should pay for a taxi.."
WHY ARE SOME PEOPLE SO FECKIN THICK????????
IF YOUR CHILD WAS IN DANGER AND THERE WERE NO AMBULANCES, WHY THE FECK WOULD YOU WAIT ON A TAXI?????????
AND PLEASE READ THE WHOLE POST !!!!!! ONE SMALL GLASS OF WINE!!!!!!!!
"HOW MANY OF YOU WILL SIT AND WATCH YOUR CHILD DIE BECAUSE OF THE ZERO TOLERANCE?????
NOT ME!!!!!!!!" Thistlemad.....
This reason is why you should pay for a taxi.."
WHY ARE SOME PEOPLE SO FECKIN THICK????????
IF YOUR CHILD WAS IN DANGER AND THERE WERE NO AMBULANCES, WHY THE FECK WOULD YOU WAIT ON A TAXI?????????
AND PLEASE READ THE WHOLE POST !!!!!! ONE SMALL GLASS OF WINE!!!!!!!!
Posted by: robert, glasgow on 10:56pm Fri 30 Nov 07
[quote][bold]Biffo the bear[/bold] wrote:
Totally agree, you drink? then you dont drive, where is the problem understanding that.. On the subject of cameras, recently i was flashed & i know for sure that i was not over the speed limit as i had just pulled away from the kerb & i drive a diesel.. The authorities need to patrol more, the M8 heading to Greenock is a race track where they regularly exceed 90mph, though why anyone would want to hurry up their journey to that dump is beyond me..[/quote] im glad you got flashed ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
Biffo the bear wrote:
Totally agree, you drink? then you dont drive, where is the problem understanding that.. On the subject of cameras, recently i was flashed & i know for sure that i was not over the speed limit as i had just pulled away from the kerb & i drive a diesel.. The authorities need to patrol more, the M8 heading to Greenock is a race track where they regularly exceed 90mph, though why anyone would want to hurry up their journey to that dump is beyond me..
im glad you got flashed ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
Posted by: whiskyjack, Tyne and Wear on 1:29am Sat 1 Dec 07
Okay then, DON'T eat Xmas cake or Xmas pud because of the alcohol in them just incase you MIGHT be over the limit. Sick to death of the moaning minies trying to tell the rest of us how to behave! Govt has banned smoking... tell us not to binge drink.. put up the petrol prices.. now they tell us don't drink and drive... do they actually think that will work? I'm not condoning it as there are still people who will do it!
Okay then, DON'T eat Xmas cake or Xmas pud because of the alcohol in them just incase you MIGHT be over the limit. Sick to death of the moaning minies trying to tell the rest of us how to behave! Govt has banned smoking... tell us not to binge drink.. put up the petrol prices.. now they tell us don't drink and drive... do they actually think that will work? I'm not condoning it as there are still people who will do it!
Posted by: ped the ned, scotland on 2:28am Sat 1 Dec 07
if only police were not the people to police the drink driving rules,, they are more drunk than us,, so sod off !!!....
if only police were not the people to police the drink driving rules,, they are more drunk than us,, so sod off !!!....
Posted by: bAzTNM, Glasgow on 1:21pm Sat 1 Dec 07
[quote][bold]martin[/bold] wrote:
Zero tolerance is the only way to go.[/quote] I agree with this post.
martin wrote:
Zero tolerance is the only way to go.
I agree with this post.
Posted by: billnews, airdrie on 2:07pm Sat 1 Dec 07
anybody advise how to log out of this site.. have tried several times but error appears.. means my details are on screne for everyone to see.. tried clicking on contact evening times but box says 'mail prog unable to send mail' HELP please
anybody advise how to log out of this site.. have tried several times but error appears.. means my details are on screne for everyone to see.. tried clicking on contact evening times but box says 'mail prog unable to send mail' HELP please
Posted by: Southsider, South side on 9:06pm Sat 1 Dec 07
I had the same problem, billnews,but in the end I re-registered with a different email address. Good luck.
I had the same problem, billnews,but in the end I re-registered with a different email address. Good luck.
Comment | Read Comments (32)
