DISQUS

If ACORN has gone beyond it's remit and begin dabbling into the promotion of home ownership, then that should be dealt with decisively. Any intervention into the free markets by Govt associations is bound to create an imbalance to the markets.

If Govt (or the tools of Govt) try to adapt free and fluid markets to their own ends it causes problems when things begin to unravel. The natural extremities of any cycle are widened, and the resulting back swing is all the more harsh.

Don't want to ruffle any feathers, but is open source really worthwhile route to go in the long term.

Yes, you do get better functionality and yes it generally produces better results than "the man" (I note I do use Firefox but then I am also full of contradictions) but these few steps ahead are soon caught up with by the more established players in the market, once the "early adopters" have effectively beta tested all the new innovations.

There are 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who do not

I know this list is a little pushed to get to 101, but it's easier to think of 101 reasons why than 101 reasons why not!

I'm fairly useless too at re-write rules. I've looked for an idiots guide on it for a while (perhaps not that actively but I have thought about it), any ideas on where to go to get the info.

In the UK, breath alcohol testing has been used for over 30 years. Traditionally, breath testing was conducted at the roadside and was backed up by a secondary urine or blood test, but more recently police stations are equipped with a more accurate breath testing machine which has been standing up in court without issue for several years.

Breath is perfectly valid as a matrix for testing, so their complaint can only be in relation specifically to the equipment itself... but what a can of worms to open - in my opinion, drinking and driving costs lives, so I hope their attempts to undermine the testing process doesn't broadcast the wrong message.

I certainly have to agree that much of this bill seems excessive - and is far more aggressive than any current UK legislation. However, in the UK we also have significant problems with both drink and drug drivers re-offending. You would have thought that one DUI is enough, but this doesn't seem to teach a clear enough lesson. I suppose it is a matter of whether this bill will be put into practice and whether the tougher penalties have a deterrent effect... I suspect it will be more of a revenue earner than a deterrent.

Not only was she drink driving, but she was also speeding. It is always a shame when authority figures fall foul of the topic of their own preaching. It undermines the whole process of deterrent and prevention. An interesting story though!