Possible plans to reduce the drink-drive limit

fadetoblack said:
Well it is simple reduce the amount you drink the night before? I use my car 7 days a week and I love whisky but I know when to stop.
Click to expand...

Yeah I sort of said that in my first post it will depend on how much you drink but your body doesnt always process drink the same way each night. Having a few is fine and you should be ok. But what happens if you register just by a tiny bit with the "zero/no tolerance" policy your in trouble. If they turn around and say oh no a little bit is ok then its not zero or no tolerance.

I'm not defending people that drink lots the night before but just could see a lot of people that arent aware getting caught short for testing levels well under the current allowed level. I'm not that good at explaining points :p
 
Duggan said:
Yeah I sort of said that in my first post it will depend on how much you drink but your body doesnt always process drink the same way each night. Having a few is fine and you should be ok. But what happens if you register just by a tiny bit with the "zero/no tolerance" policy your in trouble. If they turn around and say oh no a little bit is ok then its not zero or no tolerance.

I'm not defending people that drink lots the night before but just could see a lot of people that arent aware getting caught short for testing levels well under the current allowed level. I'm not that good at explaining points :p
Click to expand...

That's ok
mate that's why I got the wife she drive I drink ; )
 
I don't think a total ban would work because, as has been mentioned, it would be ridiculous to ban someone who has just eaten coq au vin or something.
I'm not keen on the random stops either, I think stops if your driving is suspicious but not pulling over x number of people per day 'just to be sure'.

I do think reducing from 80mg to 50mg is a good idea though.
 
Panzerbjorn said:
I don't think a total ban would work because, as has been mentioned, it would be ridiculous to ban someone who has just eaten coq au vin or something.
I'm not keen on the random stops either, I think stops if your driving is suspicious but not pulling over x number of people per day 'just to be sure'.

I do think reducing from 80mg to 50mg is a good idea though.
Click to expand...

God my figures are wrong I thought the limit was 35mg for some reason
 
starfighter said:
You can only have 1 drink as it is, if you crash after 1 drink it probably isn't the alcohol. Nazi Germany is that way.
Click to expand...
The effects of 1 drink on your reaction time, visual perception and judgement are quite surprising. There's just no excuse for drinking one drink then driving immediately afterwards.
 
Jokester said:
The effects of 1 drink on your reaction time, visual perception and judgement are quite surprising. There's just no excuse for drinking one drink then driving immediately afterwards.
Click to expand...


Agreed but so can some prescription and even non-prescription medication. I have taken some pain killers in the past and have decided to avoid driving even though the packet said it was ok.
 
Completely pointless.

The problem is not people who have one or two drinks then drive, it is the people who have several drinks and then drive, these people have done this for years and still get away with it.

The limit is fine where it is.
 
Sounds like a good thing to me. If I'm driving I wont drink. Sure I'll most likely be fine with one or two, but why take the risk?
 
Spike_UK said:
Sounds like a good thing to me. If I'm driving I wont drink. Sure I'll most likely be fine with one or two, but why take the risk?
Click to expand...

Why reduce the risk, of that below perfectly normal situations. like being slightly tiered, it affects your reaction times much more. But you wouldn't expect people to not drive when slightly tiered.

The limit should be set at these risks that are acceptable. You can not have a zero policy as the body can produce some naturally.

There's no way that the 2nd test should be removed.
 
Agreed.

Handset technology has advanced in recent years and if that is calibrated and certified accurate and a reading can be obtained that is admissable then why repeat the process at the station on CAMIC or other machine ?

If the reading is within certain boundaries, there will still be the option of blood or urine.
 
I understand that the roadside ones are as good as the station machine but I think 2 tests via 2 machines should happen. One on the road and one at the station regardless of what the kit is used just to back up the results. Saves any crap with people claiming the results are wrong.
 
Good. The limit in the UK is too high.
Only the UK, Ireland and Malta have 0.08, every other country in Europe has a lower limit.

And it should be zero for those with provisional licences and within the first year or so.
 
It would be far better IMO to leave the level as it is, but impose harsher penalties for higher alcohol levels. It seems that people that are smashed out of their mind are put in the same category as someone who has had one pint, a couple of cokes afterwards, waited a good while but is 0.01mg or whatever above the limit.
 
All for the random testing and the lower limits for new drivers.

Not sure what the lower limit in general will do, but I wont object to it.

Am a new driver (month and a half) and I wont touch alcohol if I know I'm driving and wont drive if I've drank.
Why take the risk?
 
jellybeard999 said:
It would be far better IMO to leave the level as it is, but impose harsher penalties for higher alcohol levels. It seems that people that are smashed out of their mind are put in the same category as someone who has had one pint, a couple of cokes afterwards, waited a good while but is 0.01mg or whatever above the limit.
Click to expand...

This.
 
I don't ssee a need to be honest... They should just increase the minimum penalty for drink driving, I see it as a form of attempted murder (you pre-plan it, you can easily kill someone while doing it, so why not?)
 
This is great, im all for it, whatever makes our roads safer :)

K.C. Leblanc said:
1. No evidence is ever produced to support the hypothesis that there are a significant number of accidents caused by drivers who have been drinking, but not enough to put them over the limit.
Click to expand...

Evidence has been produced many times over the years, also aeroplane pilots are not allowed to consume any alcohol for 18 hours before flying because it will slow their reaction times, the same would happen to a car driver, however road safety isn't taken as seriously as air safety

Third Opinion said:
Just smoke loads of dope instead. Judging by what I have seen on those Road War programs the Police always let drive away even if they can smell it and our caught in possession.
Click to expand...

•A new offence of driving with an illegal substance in the bloodstream at levels deemed impairing
 
To be honest, whenever I have a weak ale or a couple of shandys down the pub I wait a couple of hours before driving anyway.
Any effects are going to be negligable, driving whilst tired or ill is worse than driving after a pint.

The main problem is people who actually go out, have a few or a lot and then think it's fine to drive home. These are the people who cause the accidents. And these are also the people who are going to ignore the new drink driving laws.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom