November 29, 2014

Do drunk people make worse laws?

 I'm fairly sure that this relates only to testing for alcohol consumption, rather than bad breath (although politicians with bad breath really should also be fined). 

ALP leader, Daniel Andrews - who is now premier elect - has indicated that one of the most important matters for the state of Victoria is to pass laws to force politicians to take random breath tests.

Are sober policies superior to policies devised while drunk?

Do we have so many drunk politicians on the job that this warrants urgent attention?

Are Victorian judges and magistrates getting on the piss prior to arriving at the bench?  Are they daring to sentence drunks, murderers, thieves and gypsies while themselves loaded to the gills? 

Mr Andrews notably didn't suggest that random tests for drink or drugs would be imposed for surgeons, teachers, jockeys, construction workers, window cleaners, taxi drivers, welfare workers, charity collectors, IT specialists, etc. etc.
Boozy Victorian MPs would face suspension or docked a week's pay if they fail random breath tests under a new Labor plan.

Magistrates and judges would also have to submit to the on the spot checks if the Australian first powers are awarded to chief justices, judges and magistrates, the Herald Sun reports.

Opposition Leader Daniel Andrews is expected to promise today to introduce random alcohol testing at the state's court and at Parliament sittings as part of his bid for premier.

"We make laws about Victorians being .05, and judges enforce them," he said.

"I'm not having someone making laws about .05 or enforcing laws about .05 while being over .05."

 Boozy Vic MPs to face suspension as part of Labor election promise.

No comments:

Post a Comment