Drinking and driving
Sir: Mr Vinson's rejoinder (27 October) does sot seem very convincing. 'Social conduct' is surely already 'subject to prescribed limits' under various generalised heads which do not require special par- liamentary action for their detailed working. You cannot set up a sewing-machine in Trafalgar Square and do your dressmaking there, nor remove all your clothes in the middle of Oxford Circus, but no specific Act of Parliament names these offences as fat as I know. Similarly, one would suppose that 'drunk in charge of a car' or 'driving ,,. to the public danger' would adequately cover extra regulations ordering the use of breathalysers. Indeed, breathalysers could also be a protection for the driver, requiring the reporting constable to substantiate his charge with visible evidence.
As for that 'only 2 per cent' drop in road casualties, why not add up exactly how many actual human beings this represents? How many children, mothers of young families, fathers and breadwinners? Statistics, particularly pFrcentage statistics, are often a form of placebo, reassur- ingly impersonal.
D. E. Estcourt
5a Campden Street London W8
Previous page
