And dont you forget young man use your phone and you may spill your drink
Oh and it was not using the phone it was the fact that he was not concentrating on what was around him
i think there should be a zero tolerance on drink driving period,and not because im whiter than white,because i think it would cover any “grey areas”.i have no time for people that have a drink and drive straight away,and even less time for people that drink to excess,knowing they are going to drive the next morning,and taking the risk.i personally choose not to drink at all through the week,but may on a weekend have a ■■■■ good blowout,if i dont have to drive the next day.
however,with that said,i dont believe someone should have their licence witheld because they have 2 dd"s.they have done the crime,served the time,and shouldnt be eternally punished.
I completly agree with Buck the limit should be Zero
Dafman:
And dont you forget young man use your phone and you may spill your drink
Not tried drinking but its murder smoking a ■■■ I could do with another hand to steer. 
taken from tonites local rag
Over drink-drive limit mum Alison Carroll had four children in car
8:44am Friday 31st July 2009By Press reporter »
A YORK mum had four young children in her car when police pulled her over for dangerous driving and found she was more than three-and-a-half times the drink-drive limit, a court was told.
Harrogate magistrates yesterday heard how both a North Yorkshire police officer and one from the Ministry of Defence had been worried by Alison Carroll’s antics at the wheel of her Citroen Xsara.
She had reached speeds of 60mph on winding country lanes between Ripon, Boroughbridge and Great Ouseburn, near York and had narrowly avoided colliding with oncoming cars.
Carroll, 45, of St Swithin’s Walk, York, pleaded guilty to drink-driving, dangerous driving and not having insurance.
Prosecutor Susan Kerr said was at 3.40pm on June 27 when an MoD police officer spotted the Citroen with Carroll’s three children and a friend’s child — aged between four and ten — weaving between the nearside verge and centre-line and occasionally straddling it. The officer had alerted county force colleagues while following the Citroen and a North Yorkshire patrol had joined the operation at Kirby Hill.
The Xsara had been followed through Boroughbridge town centre towards Great Ouseburn where it was pulled over after travelling at 40mph to 60mph and ‘‘bouncing’’ from its nearside to the middle of the road before, on the approach to a blind summit, suddenly swerving into the path of an oncoming car.
Mrs Kerr said this manoeuvre, the closest Carroll came to a crash, saw police car sirens activated and she was pulled over.
In mitigation, Geoffrey Rogers submitted Carroll — who the court heard had convictions for speeding in 2006 and 2008 — could be dealt with by magistrates rather than being sent before a crown court judge.
Court legal advisor Jane Hamilton said the period over which bad driving had occurred had to be considered, along with any deliberate disregard for the safety of others. And aggravating features like carrying passengers and the part played by alcohol also had to be taken into account.
Carroll was sent for sentence at York Crown Court and banned from driving in the meantime.
beggars belief 
I used to say the too drunk to realise what your doing years ago line as well but if my weans where in the car I would have realised so that arguments rubbish.
That women deserves the same treatment as a junkie who neglects her kids.
Wonder how many bored wifies are picking the weans up after a wee afternoon swally.
I like a drink, and most nights have a couple of cans, or 2/3 pints if out, but always allow 1 hr per unit + 1hr before driving, minimum, but preferably 12 hrs.
If on a good session I tend not to drive within 24 hrs.
If driving its zero alcohol.
I have to say to be caught once maybe the morning after a good drink is bad judgement, or luck, as he may have felt he was sober, but to be caught twice says the lesson has not been learned.
The TC has to take account of all the details of both casesin making the desicion as to the persons fitness to hold a vocational licence, as I am sure that if 6 months after getting his licence back he wiped out a family while under the influence there judgement would be questioned, agreed it can be seen as serving 2 sentances for 1 crime, but they have to look at any vocational licence holder who has had there licence suspended, or revoked be it for medical or offences commited and make that call, based on fitness to hold that class of licence.
to get done once is bad but twice the guy has not learnt his lesson so should he hold an lgv? with his record it could be your family he wipes out
neil46:
wake up in a fountain in Switzerland at 3 o clock in the morning why ■■?.
unless i missed it we need the story
Oh no you don´t
Its not big and its not clever, I did it in 1989 after a row with the ex, got banned and fined deserved all i got, even if meant going to jail.
Now i look back and think what a stupid idiot i was, lesson was learned beleive me.
By the way I never held my HGV untill 2007 when i passed it.
steve 