|
|
Post by Handyman on Feb 22, 2024 8:42:39 GMT
What do you think of this idea proposal ?
Police could get the power to disqualify drink or drug-drivers instantly at the roadside.
Force chiefs are in early discussions looking at the type of tests that could be used and the legal changes needed to make the move possible.
Chief Constable Jo Shiner, the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) lead for roads policing, also wants tougher punishments for drivers who kill while under the influence, including potential murder charges.
She said: “The ability for us to be able to disqualify people either for drink or drug-driving by the roadside would mean that we can immediately take that risk off the road.
“And those people haven’t got the ability to be behind the wheel, particularly if they’ve blown well over the legal limit.”
The idea of instant disqualification is supported by Ceinwen Briddon, who campaigned for tougher sentences for fatal drivers after her 21-year-old daughter Miriam was killed in a head-on collision with a drunk driver.
Gareth Entwhistle, then 34, was jailed after admitting causing death by undue care while over the prescribed drink-drive limit in 2015.
He served half of a five-year jail term and was banned from driving for five years.
Ms Briddon’s campaigning spurred on a change in the law where those found guilty of causing death by dangerous driving can face a life sentence.
IMHO it is a good idea
|
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 22, 2024 8:43:41 GMT
What do you think of this idea proposal ? Police could get the power to disqualify drink or drug-drivers instantly at the roadside. Force chiefs are in early discussions looking at the type of tests that could be used and the legal changes needed to make the move possible. Chief Constable Jo Shiner, the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) lead for roads policing, also wants tougher punishments for drivers who kill while under the influence, including potential murder charges. She said: “The ability for us to be able to disqualify people either for drink or drug-driving by the roadside would mean that we can immediately take that risk off the road. “And those people haven’t got the ability to be behind the wheel, particularly if they’ve blown well over the legal limit.” The idea of instant disqualification is supported by Ceinwen Briddon, who campaigned for tougher sentences for fatal drivers after her 21-year-old daughter Miriam was killed in a head-on collision with a drunk driver. Gareth Entwhistle, then 34, was jailed after admitting causing death by undue care while over the prescribed drink-drive limit in 2015. He served half of a five-year jail term and was banned from driving for five years. Ms Briddon’s campaigning spurred on a change in the law where those found guilty of causing death by dangerous driving can face a life sentence. IMHO it is a good idea Ditto.... |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Feb 22, 2024 8:48:48 GMT
What do you think of this idea proposal ? Police could get the power to disqualify drink or drug-drivers instantly at the roadside. Force chiefs are in early discussions looking at the type of tests that could be used and the legal changes needed to make the move possible. Chief Constable Jo Shiner, the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) lead for roads policing, also wants tougher punishments for drivers who kill while under the influence, including potential murder charges. She said: “The ability for us to be able to disqualify people either for drink or drug-driving by the roadside would mean that we can immediately take that risk off the road. “And those people haven’t got the ability to be behind the wheel, particularly if they’ve blown well over the legal limit.” The idea of instant disqualification is supported by Ceinwen Briddon, who campaigned for tougher sentences for fatal drivers after her 21-year-old daughter Miriam was killed in a head-on collision with a drunk driver. Gareth Entwhistle, then 34, was jailed after admitting causing death by undue care while over the prescribed drink-drive limit in 2015. He served half of a five-year jail term and was banned from driving for five years. Ms Briddon’s campaigning spurred on a change in the law where those found guilty of causing death by dangerous driving can face a life sentence. IMHO it is a good idea Agreed. It can take over a year for a drunk driver to get to court, a year in which they're still driving. |
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Feb 22, 2024 9:03:14 GMT
Indeed that is why I think it is a very good idea, I also agree that a life sentence could also be handed down if appropriate
|
|
|
|
Post by Dogburger on Feb 22, 2024 9:07:22 GMT
Though I would agree that drunks need taking off the road without delay we do have to take into consideration the rights of the individual and the competence of the Police force .
The problem is the courts are too slow , drunk drivers should be detained and in court within 24 hours .
|
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Feb 22, 2024 9:24:43 GMT
Though I would agree that drunks need taking off the road without delay we do have to take into consideration the rights of the individual and the competence of the Police force . The problem is the courts are too slow , drunk drivers should be detained and in court within 24 hours . Nobody has the right to drive whilst impaired that may result in you and I being injured, what make you think the Police are incompetent in testing a driver at the side of the road, for exceeding the alcohol limit they have been doing it since the early 70's. Now they can test for being impaired from both legal or unlawful substances at the roadside , a more accurate test is performed at the Police Station |
|
|
|
Post by Dogburger on Feb 22, 2024 10:14:23 GMT
Though I would agree that drunks need taking off the road without delay we do have to take into consideration the rights of the individual and the competence of the Police force . The problem is the courts are too slow , drunk drivers should be detained and in court within 24 hours . Nobody has the right to drive whilst impaired that may result in you and I being injured, what make you think the Police are incompetent in testing a driver at the side of the road, for exceeding the alcohol limit they have been doing it since the early 70's. Now they can test for being impaired from both legal or unlawful substances at the roadside , a more accurate test is performed at the Police Station Well they are incompetent in most things and I wouldn't trust them to be judge and jury . As I said I'm all for getting the drunk off the road but putting them in the cells for the night should be as far as the police involvement goes with the courts taking over from there . It's giving police powers that infringe on our civil rights and you know once they are gone they will be gone forever . |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 22, 2024 10:23:31 GMT
What do you think of this idea proposal ? Police could get the power to disqualify drink or drug-drivers instantly at the roadside. Force chiefs are in early discussions looking at the type of tests that could be used and the legal changes needed to make the move possible. Chief Constable Jo Shiner, the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) lead for roads policing, also wants tougher punishments for drivers who kill while under the influence, including potential murder charges. She said: “The ability for us to be able to disqualify people either for drink or drug-driving by the roadside would mean that we can immediately take that risk off the road. “And those people haven’t got the ability to be behind the wheel, particularly if they’ve blown well over the legal limit.” The idea of instant disqualification is supported by Ceinwen Briddon, who campaigned for tougher sentences for fatal drivers after her 21-year-old daughter Miriam was killed in a head-on collision with a drunk driver. Gareth Entwhistle, then 34, was jailed after admitting causing death by undue care while over the prescribed drink-drive limit in 2015. He served half of a five-year jail term and was banned from driving for five years. Ms Briddon’s campaigning spurred on a change in the law where those found guilty of causing death by dangerous driving can face a life sentence. IMHO it is a good idea Exactly mate...If a motorist is stopped for having no tax or insurance they have to use shanksy's pony to get home from where they were stopped.. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 22, 2024 10:25:23 GMT
Though I would agree that drunks need taking off the road without delay we do have to take into consideration the rights of the individual and the competence of the Police force . The problem is the courts are too slow , drunk drivers should be detained and in court within 24 hours . Nobody has the right to drive whilst impaired that may result in you and I being injured, what make you think the Police are incompetent in testing a driver at the side of the road, for exceeding the alcohol limit they have been doing it since the early 70's. Now they can test for being impaired from both legal or unlawful substances at the roadside , a more accurate test is performed at the Police Station Even motorists who have had a small bump in their car are now breathalised as par of the course if the police get involved.. |
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Feb 22, 2024 11:29:52 GMT
Nobody has the right to drive whilst impaired that may result in you and I being injured, what make you think the Police are incompetent in testing a driver at the side of the road, for exceeding the alcohol limit they have been doing it since the early 70's. Now they can test for being impaired from both legal or unlawful substances at the roadside , a more accurate test is performed at the Police Station Well they are incompetent in most things and I wouldn't trust them to be judge and jury . As I said I'm all for getting the drunk off the road but putting them in the cells for the night should be as far as the police involvement goes with the courts taking over from there . It's giving police powers that infringe on our civil rights and you know once they are gone they will be gone forever . The the Police are not Judge and Jury and never have been that is the job of the Courts, all Police do is provide the evidence to the Court the Court Judges them Police can only hold you in custody for 24 hours from the moment you are arrested and either charge you within that time or release you on bail, even if charged in that time they have to release you if there is no good reason to hold you and deny bail. As for Civil Liberties all this proposals means as I understand it if it comes into in force is that if you arrested for drink drive and charged or driving under the influence of drugs over the limit set you will not be able to drive any vehicle whilst awaiting charge or appearing at Court |
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Feb 22, 2024 11:31:38 GMT
Nobody has the right to drive whilst impaired that may result in you and I being injured, what make you think the Police are incompetent in testing a driver at the side of the road, for exceeding the alcohol limit they have been doing it since the early 70's. Now they can test for being impaired from both legal or unlawful substances at the roadside , a more accurate test is performed at the Police Station Even motorists who have had a small bump in their car are now breathalised as par of the course if the police get involved.. That as I understand it does happen , and IMO rightly so |
|
|
|
Post by Dogburger on Feb 23, 2024 7:57:53 GMT
Well they are incompetent in most things and I wouldn't trust them to be judge and jury . As I said I'm all for getting the drunk off the road but putting them in the cells for the night should be as far as the police involvement goes with the courts taking over from there . It's giving police powers that infringe on our civil rights and you know once they are gone they will be gone forever . The the Police are not Judge and Jury and never have been that is the job of the Courts, all Police do is provide the evidence to the Court the Court Judges them Police can only hold you in custody for 24 hours from the moment you are arrested and either charge you within that time or release you on bail, even if charged in that time they have to release you if there is no good reason to hold you and deny bail. As for Civil Liberties all this proposals means as I understand it if it comes into in force is that if you arrested for drink drive and charged or driving under the influence of drugs over the limit set you will not be able to drive any vehicle whilst awaiting charge or appearing at Court You say the police wont become judge and jury but then say they would remove your right to drive until you appear in court . You have also mentioned it could be some time before the court case . In effect the police will ban you for maybe a year when you have a perfectly good reason or excuse as to why you may have driven whilst over the limit . I don't like it ,I can see this moving into other areas giving the police more powers over the people . |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 23, 2024 12:22:10 GMT
UK police are fascist bastards and no doubt the chief fascist is some bitch trying to get paid more for less work.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2024 14:31:15 GMT
It all sounds a bit dystopian Judge Dredd to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Feb 23, 2024 15:20:06 GMT
The the Police are not Judge and Jury and never have been that is the job of the Courts, all Police do is provide the evidence to the Court the Court Judges them Police can only hold you in custody for 24 hours from the moment you are arrested and either charge you within that time or release you on bail, even if charged in that time they have to release you if there is no good reason to hold you and deny bail. As for Civil Liberties all this proposals means as I understand it if it comes into in force is that if you arrested for drink drive and charged or driving under the influence of drugs over the limit set you will not be able to drive any vehicle whilst awaiting charge or appearing at Court You say the police wont become judge and jury but then say they would remove your right to drive until you appear in court . You have also mentioned it could be some time before the court case . In effect the police will ban you for maybe a year when you have a perfectly good reason or excuse as to why you may have driven whilst over the limit . I don't like it ,I can see this moving into other areas giving the police more powers over the people . This is a suggestion a proposal it may not come to fruition at the end of the day, if this proposal is adopted and is passed by the Government of the day it will be the Police that have to carry out their instruction, which means if over the drink drive limit by either drink and or drugs they will have to choice. If tested at the roadside and the driver is over the limit they are arrested on the spot taken to the Police Station and if over the alcohol limit charged there and then, if the driver is not suitable for bail they will be kept in custody and taken to Court the following day, if suitable for Bail they will given a date to attend Court which usually is withing a week or maybe a bit longer. Not sure but I think if impaired by drugs a toxicology test has to carried out by a Laboratory If this does come in and they are banned from driving until the first Court Hearing IMHO it is highly likely if they plead Not Guilty they maybe allowed to ask the Court to remove the ban until their trial date, if they plead guilty at the first hearing the Court can then decide if the disqualification stands and how long for. If the accused driver asks that his case be dealt with by a Crown Court yes that may take a long time to come about. Its all academic at this stage , it all depends if it come about or not, the only power Police have is what the Government gives them |
|
