Who came up with the idea of a "last drink" defence ["Drunk driving rap missed closing time, says Judge", March 23]?
I'm sure I'm not the only reader who was stunned and knocked (almost) speechless by this ridiculous concept.
So if a breathalizer test is not performed within a certain time period, someone can claim the "last drink" defence, saying he had a drink just before getting into a vehicle, so the alcohol was still in his stomach, not in his blood?
The very term "last drink" logically implies there were other drinks that came before, right?
Or does a law-abiding sober citizen normally down a quick drink (just the one) before hitting the road? Should it be renamed the "only drink" defence?
Give me a break. This whole thing is ludicrous beyond belief.
Thank you to the dedicated RCMP who are policing the streets and getting these inebriated, dangerous and stupid people off the roads.
Julia Whittaker
Prince George
