I have finally bought myself a breathalyser. I'd become alarmed that I may not be drinking enough, and the worry of it was keeping me awake at nights.
Yes, I'm being perverse. But the reason decent people - that is, oicks like you and me - buy breathalysers has little to do with drinking less. It is entirely about drinking more.
Let me explain this revolutionary concept. While we may feel as sober as a salad, we are scared of being breath tested. So we say ''no'' to an extra glass of riesling that would probably do no harm.
But still, the good time Charlie in our brain whispers that we'd have been fine with only one more drink. Our personal breathalyser's job is to tell young Charles when he's absolutely right.
I gather any expression of such ''one more glass'' thinking is both non PC and disgraceful. I should be pilloried for even considering it. But why is it impossible to discuss drinking and driving reasonably?
It's not all black and white. And for some reason debate won't admit that when the drink driving level was reduced from 0.08, the law made driving in the band down to 0.05 a far more minor offence?
The penalty is $200, 50 demerit points, and a 12 hour loss of licence. And there is no, repeat ''no'', criminal conviction.
Nevertheless, such offenders are now to be hectored by shaming, too. Witness NZ Transport's latest drink driving commercial where the main fear of a wife, who has failed her breathalyser test by a fraction, is that her parents will find out.
There is no mention of road safety - the advertisement suggests the woman, who has stepped in to drive as her husband has been drinking, has disgraced herself.
Yes, she's broken the new legal limit, but disgraced herself? Honestly? This advertising approach, and its emotional blackmail, is actually crass wowserism that would do the Temperance Union proud.
It's the same thinking that now dishonestly calls slightly immoderate drinking ''bingeing''. Anyway. There'd been a run on breathalysers at the Repco shop, but I snagged the last and took it home for pre testing.
How many glasses would take me to 0.05? Could we handle extra with fish and chips? Downing two glasses of water? A huff and a puff before blowing? Raise your hand if you, too, haven't discussed these ins and outs of passing a breathalyser test? (I see none raised - because the subject is universal).
Now fully trained, I took both my breathalyser and the Duchess out to dinner. We had a glass of white and then splashed out on a particularly nice bottle of red. With the red half finished, and me eyeing another glass, I decided I'd best test myself.
I found a corner, and puffed my contraption. Its lights flickered, the numbers swirled, and up came the reading - only a touch under the limit.
''Damn, we can't finish our wine,'' I told the waiter.
''Could you put the cap back on, so we can take it home?''He looked at me as if I'd farted.
''You can't take away wine you've bought in a restaurant,'' he announced. ''It's against the law.''
''But it's an expensive bottle and I'll be over the limit if we finish it. Surely you make exceptions,'' I pleaded.
''I'm afraid we've been caught out before,'' the waiter said firmly.
''But it's not a wine one should waste. Why don't you just finish it?''
I looked helplessly at the Duchess. One law says if we drink a glass too many we fail the test. The next penalises us if we don't down the whole bottle on the spot.
Might NZ Transport pause for a moment and have a thoughtful word with the Licensing people about such contradictory regulations?
But that would require diligence, consideration for people who drink, and co-ordinating more than one government department. I doubt it can happen.
John Lapsley is an Arrowtown writer.
