use this as a starter if you want to.
Responsible department: Department for Transport
The new drug driving laws that which came into effect on March 2nd are not fit for use.
-Except they are. Their aim is to catch people driving stoned. Since the limit is so low they most definitely will.
Drivers are being penalised for being sober when tested but testing positive for previous use,. Which can relate to any time from the day before to over a fortnight ago.
-pretty crap sentences here. Something more along the lines of:
The drug driving laws should be parallel to the drink driving ones, if you are impared impaired and under the influence you lose your licence. In a court of law there would need to be sufficient evidence to prove the driver was impared impaired as with alcohol related cases so why is it now a different story for illicit and prescription drugs.
-Fucking spelling mistakes man. Has the author even thought for a second about how this will look?! Chrome has it built into the browser for fucks sake!
-Why should drug driving laws be parallel to alcohol? At least for now it's fucking illegal. End of. You'd do far better to draw attention to the fact that the stated limits of prescription pain killers will leave you MUCH more impaired than 2ug/L in blood of THC. Back this up with credible evidence.
-What's being stated about drunk driving is just factually incorrect. There is no need to prove impairment. Just that the driver is over the legal blood alcohol content. Same as is being done with the new laws.
Please rethink and repeal this new law and make amendments before a lot of time and resources is poured into a sprawling pit for the outcome to be disastrous.