Why do any 'other important changes that should be done first' have to concern us when this (sensible) precaution can be/has been implemented immediately. It's only done for entertainment, I'm sure many off us can cope without the extra 'thrill'.
This precaution is just during the investigation, and may only be for this season which usually ends in October. My post was in response to the chorus of 'wise after the event' comments that have been echoing on the media since it happened. There is no such thing as a risk-free life. Other risks are available, it didn't have to be drink driving but that is a worthy example of one of the worst needless activities that results in unacceptable loss of life yet is not taken seriously, compared to infinitesimaly small risk of flying displays (on land).
If it is 'one death too many' then it is definitely 200+ deaths too many, - all of them are tragic losses. It is also likely that we are more likely to personally know of somebody killed by irresponsible drinking than somebody taken in a very unusual set of circumstances like in Shoreham last week.
Anyway, even though drinking alcohol is generally fine when not mixed with being in control of a motor vehicle, it is
'only done for entertainment' and hardly a necessity. Drink driving though is a criminal offence and should carry penalties that actually deter it.
Drink driving is already better controlled than ever before and lower limits (as in Scotland) are being considered.
Whilst Scotland 'considers' it, a few more will die needlessly, both there and many more here. Incidentally,
all licensed pilots and train drivers have zero limits, so why not motorists. Just look at the figures and answer that.