Re: Rugby twat banned for drink-driving



"didgerman" <didgerman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:gk733r$d7m$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Charles wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 08:22:22 -0800 (PST), johnmhill
<john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jan 8, 3:56 pm, Charles <j...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 14:27:52 -0000, "Simon S-B" <baitt...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:





<bjlong...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:a8042bfe-afc8-4ccb-9c60-45b27ff2505d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 8 Jan, 12:11, Jean Le Hookeur <michaelnewp...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20090108/tuk-rugby-star-banned-for-drink-...
I'm not condoning drink driving - but reading this it seems to me like
he's been treated quite harshly given that the reports say he was just
10% over the limit, and it was the morning after. 3 years seems like a
lot. The sentencing guidelines are 12 months for a similar offence.
When you think that Liam Plunkett (the cricketer) got 20 months for
being more than double the limit or that a Polish chef who was double
the limit and smacked his car into a house got just 22 months.
Unless the news organisations are reporting it wrong, of course, and
mixing up results from a breath (limit 35mg) and a blood test (80mg)
when they're saying what his alcohol reading was (91mg). If they are -
and if any lawyers are reading then I should emphasise this is
hypothetical - then he would be 3 times over the limit.
Holding my hands up - I am currently banned. I got two years and I was
substantially more over the limit than Tindall. They're making an example of
him, as they do with anyone who isn't pond scum. I was moving my car from an
expensive area of the car park to a cheap one, and didn't think that a car
park counted as public roads (how very wrong).
Anyone that wants to get pious on me can *** right off as like everyone
else I've been punished enough. I like most lost my job, then lost the one I
got to replace it as you can't rely on public transport. On the rehab course
I went on (knocks 25% off), nearly 40% of the people there had lost their
home as a result, and quite a few their partner as well. A lot of them were
morning after breathtests, and I'm sure most of you would have failed one of
them at one time or another.
I'm fortunate in that some loyal customers gave me their business, and I set
up a company which is doing well. I work from home and I employ a driver
when I need one. Not everyone has the skills or financial backing to do
that, and for them it must be an extremely difficult time. There are far
more serious crimes going on that are given far less painful sentences for
sure.
As you so rightly say, there but for the grace of God go any number of
us. However, gone are the days when to be breathalysed was considered
unlucky. The liberal-left hardliners have no sympathy and would
cheerfully have 'drink-drivers' put up against a wall and shot - so
much for cuddly woolly liberalism.

I wouldn't give the bastards the satisfaction and in our family for
the past 15 years or so, it's been strictly no booze on the day if
you're driving, and no driving the day after a piss-up.

That's not being holier than thou Simon, it's just reluctant
resignation to the forces that control all our lives, because there is
no alternative - particularly politically. You will know that I give
the bastards that want to control our every thought word and deed, as
much stick as I can at every opportunity.

Concerning Tindall, this is his second offence so you could say he was
asking for trouble, particularly as he more than most has countless
other alternatives to 'taking a chance'!!

I'm pleased you managed to overcome your potential problems, as ruin
for life is too severe a punishment for a first offence, particularly
when you consider the tame penalties for much more serious offences.
Charles I am anything but a wooly liberal and I despise the PC spoil
our fun brigade.But alcohol is a drug. There is no "grace of god",
just don't drink and drive.


The "grace of God" reference was because throughout the 70's and 80's,
everyone I knew and socialised with, didn't give a stuff about the
breathalyser and drank and drove regardless. Thus we all stood a very
good chance of being caught and convicted.

I know a number of people who have been caught, mostly from the rugby
club environment, where excessive drinking is part of the culture.
However, I know of no friend or relation who has died or been injured
as the result of drinking and driving, or from alcohol related illness
consequences.

With the high moral ground now taken by the judgemental do-gooders on
so many lifestyle choices, it is hard to condone any of them without
being jumped upon from a great height from any number of 'holier than
thou' merchants. I do know that over-regulation has taken much of the
joy out of the life I knew, when such things were acceptable to all of
us.

If it was all okay in the view of all respectable people then, why is
it so heinous now?

And no, I don't condone drinking and driving, but that is mainly due
to the savage consequences. And yes, I am aware that there is so much
more traffic on the roads now. But the nanny state should let us be
more responsible for our own lives and stop legislating to control us
from cradle to grave.

And yes, I would hate anyone I care for being knocked down and injured
or worse by a drunk driver, but *** happens and there are so many
other ways to end up terminally fucked!! You see, life is a bizarre
aberration and we're all going nowhere very fast to eternal oblivion
anyway - so let's all just get on with doing the very best we can and
enjoy it while it lasts!!

;o)

Yes Charles, there are far worse things than having your family taken out by a drunk driver, why do the PC Liberal Left Do-Gooders who control our every thought bother, eh?

Cmon Didge, you know the score. The government wants to control these monkeys, and the leftier they are, the easier it is. If the government wanted safer roads, they'd be focused on tyre pressures. As it is they can't do that, because who do these fecking liberals have to fume about when it's just a slightly flat tyre? It's the same ones who screamed for the smoking ban, when obesity is a far bigger killer. Now they're wondering why all the pubs are shut because nobody told them that would happen. They can't join the dots that the vouchers the government are currently handing out for healthy food are just stage 1, and stage 2 will be an extra tax on unhealthy food. They think it's fine that they're filmed everywhere they walk, because it's for their own safety. All in all, they're a bunch of ***-whipped spineless tools, who should perhaps learn more about the things they are commenting on, rather than just spouting what the government wants them to.

.

Loading