Official review of Section 65 of the Land Transport Act 1998

[BIHB@0610]

Well it's all so complicated - I've not followed much of the last few posts!

Basically I don't have time to digest the stats, and I don't have the education to do it properly. Unless one is properly educated in this kind of thing, one is just reading and re-reading some expert's opinion - an opinion that is often tainted with politics or funding. It's easy to get carried away.

In the past I've tried to figure out how much I could safely drink if I was driving - now I won't drink at all if I'm driving. I'm starting to hate seeing people drinking anything when they're going to get on a bike or in a car, especially with passengers.

We can all make our lives much simpler by cutting out the complicated stuff and taking personal responsibility.

And for those that can't do that, bring on the IIDs!!!

[candor]

The Land Transport Act actually says now that those who are medically unfit through addictions / alcoholism etc should be reported by their Dr to Ltnz so suitability of licensing can be reviewed. Land Transport staffs answer to this is that it can not remove licenses based on opinions because it could be liable for lost wages!!

There is one country wherer regardless of cause if you stack up too many driving convictions you lose license because doesn't matter why you are obviously too useles to drive. I quite like that idea.

Now ifthis review is to look at making treatment available to first or secoind time offenders that would be in line with new antisocial laws enacted in the UK where mandatory treatment has become possible - the P epidemic and associated crime stimulated this. Yet impaired driving surely is off the scale versus P for causing chaos.

The reason compulsory treatment was earlier removed from the LTA was human rights guff. But... it defineately used to help a lot of people - a nice stay at Hamners Queen Mary hospital. Just seems like Govt wants to step out of social service provision. As Holmes says (whose daughter crashed while full on doing P) there are places to go.. but only for the rich. hate to say it but it IS going to take for one of the pollies or their families to get killed by DUI before resolute action is not just a whiff in the wind. Easy to make promises when you're on the way out.

If they don't at the least bring on IIDs I think they're buying into a big shitfight. It could be the straw that breaks the camels back.