Saturday, March 08, 2014

Now That's a Crackdown

Colombia has introduced a draconian new drink-drive law that can lead to fines from $880 to nearly $15000, along with a ban of up to 25 years for the worst repeat offenders. Beer sales (on which SAB Miller have a near-monopoly) have unsurprisingly plummeted. 

11 comments:

  1. What drugs will replace the alcohol do you think?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As my Colombian wife says, when faced once again with the obvious comments, "we make it but you're the ones that buy it". I can't imagine the ban would do much for the standard of driving though; in Bogota you can barely do more than 5mph most of the day and for those in the countryside the tight mountain curves (barriers? what barriers?) are lethal enough even for the sober.

      Graham

      Delete
  2. I'm not sure I necessarily agree that such a law is excessive.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not sure I necessarily agree with you.

      Delete
  3. And who suggested that the law was excessive? Without knowing the scale of the problem, the efforts already taken to attempt to address it, and the details of the proposed measures, it is hard indeed to form a meaningful opinion.

    However, I woud agree with Bystander that it does seem pretty draconian. Courts in this country tend not to go to the full extent of their powers in terms of the length of the bans they impose, because the evidence suggests that very long bans are more likely to be flouted.

    We need an intrepid reporter on the spot to tell us how it really is (it would be rather tame for him, but it would be wonderful to hear the analysis of the extraordinary young British journalist who penetrated the world of cocaine production in Colombia and produced a compelling set of films on his experiences: oddly enough, his dad was a JP!).

    I shall believe the measures are really working when I see that shares in SAB Miller have plummeted, rather than experiencing a temporary blip in sales...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Courts in this country tend not to go to the full extent of their powers in terms of the length of the bans they impose, because the evidence suggests that very long bans are more likely to be flouted."

      That is an interesting conclusion to draw. Its never been a consideration of mine - if you break the ban you face an even more serious charge, which *I* would hope will result in serious consideration of a custodial sentence. I sentence what I think is appropriate for the offence and offender before me - not because he may not comply. I do sometimes temper my initial thinking with "will the appeal court quash this".

      Delete
    2. "I shall believe the measures are really working when I see that shares in SAB Miller have plummeted, rather than experiencing a temporary blip in sales...". SAB Miller is a large international corporation; this comment is naïve.

      Delete
  4. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-24/colombian-drunk-driving-crackdown-slows-sabmiller-growth.html

    ReplyDelete
  5. There is always a tension between the desire to make the punishment appropriate to the crime, and the drive to make the penalty (the expected value of punishment, taking into account the likelihood of being convicted of the offense) a sufficient deterrent. Which direction is preferable depends on one's economic views.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Is that crackdown or crack down in Colombia ?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sales at local beer monopoly go down, value of roadside bribes of police officers go up... This measure alone is not going to solve persistently weak rule of law and low standards of driving.

    ReplyDelete

Posts are pre-moderated. Please bear with us if this takes a little time, but the number of bores and obsessives was getting out of hand, as were the fake comments advertising rubbish.