December 10, 2013

Dear Sir,

I cannot help but think that what Dr Sanntucci had to say about drink-driving and our deaths on the road are true ….. as far as they go. Liquor is a very profitable item for makers, sellers and the tax office too, but …..

But none of those people or offices are responsible for the choice individuals make when they drive after drinking alcohol. It might be fair to say that in every road death that can be attributed to alcohol, the driver was not forced into driving while under the influence.

This problem reminds me of those who insist on smoking cigarettes. We are all told and taught extensively that smoking is dangerous and can and does cause death – but people still continue to take up the habit. That is their choice.

So while it is not against the law to buy and smoke cigarettes and booze, it is up to the individual to make the sensible choice – and some don’t.

To me, what is the terrible tragedy in these two vices are the innocent people who die; from second hand smoke or being on the road at the wrong place and at the wrong time to meet up with a driver under the influence.

Certainly I think Mr Santucci’s recommendations as listed on the front page of today’s The Royal Gazette: taking blood samples from crash victims, reducing legal drink-drive limit and introducing police sobriety checkpoints, are very valid and should be considered ASAP. I do notice though that nowhere amongst these excellent suggestions, are there any made that involve the Booze Industry or the money being made. All his suggestions target the potential victims and the bad choices they are responsible for making.

Sincerely,

Mark Emmerson