Common sense at last [Scottish Drink Drive Limit]

[Arthurgray50@blu]

http://news.sky.com/story/1295867/sc...nk-drive-limit

This law should be propsosed in the whole country, not just Scotland.

I have a strict rule, even if l have a shandy, l won't drive. Its about time that pubs or shops that sell alcohol to consumers should get done, IF they know they are drink drivers, or under the influence.

I have seen quite a few results of accidents and deaths caused by drink drivers.

And any rule that comes out that will deter this, if common sense come to life. Its no good having adverts saying how much is the legal limit.

Its a question that, if a pub for example knows the driver is over the limit and still sells the booze, then he goes and drive home - he should be prosecuted.

I know of a pub in London, where the manager keeps the keys of drivers until the following day.

What's drivers dont know is that IF you are involved in an accident - you will be breathalysed, even if it is just a bump.

Common sense at last.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

What's drivers dont know is that IF you are involved in an accident - you will be breathalysed, even if it is just a

I knew that.

only if the old bill are called to the scene. How many bumps end up with Police involvement not many I would guess

[heero_yuy]

As I understand it you're only obliged to involve the police in an accident if personal injury is involved. Otherwise it's just exchanging details.

Alcohol affects different people differently, for a teetotaller 1/2 a glass of wine might render them totally unfit to drive yet be well within the "limit" whereas a hardened functional alcoholic could well be quite safe* but be over the limit.

I favour the USA sobriety tests that test for actual impairment rather than some artificial limit.

*Safe as in responding in the same way as a legal driver of say 75.

I generally think it's better not to drink at all if you intend on driving. Too hard to measure if you're going to be near the limit.

[rogerdraig]

i agree better not to drink when driving but i don't agree with lowering the limit. it would be far better to make soft drinks cheaper and enforce the current limits if we extend anything it should be in better ways to detect drugs now more than alcohol

[Russ]

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

As I understand it you're only obliged to involve the police in an accident if personal injury is involved.

Also if the vehicles are causing an obstruction or if a law looks like it's been broken such as one of those involved being drunk, driving like a div etc

I'm a teetotaller so it's easy for me to say this but I'd have no problem with the alcohol limit being lowered. Some people process alcohol better than others but that gives too much opportunity for someone to have a drink, be involved in an accident and say "But I felt fine". When I worked for the police 20+ years ago SWP did this publicity stunt where they offered a few members of the public to test their skills on the force's driving simulator before and after having alcohol.

Of the people who took part some went back on after having 2 pints and apparently "felt fine". Their reaction times dropped dramatically and were comparable to that of an 80 year old driver.

[Derek]

Originally Posted by rogerdraig

it would be far better to make soft drinks cheaper and enforce the current limits

Just how is the current system of mandatory bans in 99.9% of cases not enforcing the system?

The Police conduct thousands of breath tests every week and if your over the limit your pretty much sure of relying on buses for 12 months plus.

[tweetiepooh]

Trouble is that if the limit is very low even eating food with alcohol still in it can take you over the limit without you being "aware". (I use quotes as you should be aware but it may not register.)

Maybe the levels need to be more "flexible". Your level could vary upto a fixed maximum depending on age, experience, convictions, driving conditions. In the later case the penalty could be discretionary too as things can change. I hope you get the idea. So while learning, within 2 years of passing your test, within n years of getting it back your limit is zero.

Generally though I don't drink and drive at all. Especially on long journeys, at night, poor conditions.

[rogerdraig]

Originally Posted by Derek

Just how is the current system of mandatory bans in 99.9% of cases not enforcing the system?

The Police conduct thousands of breath tests every week and if your over the limit your pretty much sure of relying on buses for 12 months plus.

maybe i didn't make myself clear it maybe in your area as it is in mine Gwent that driving while over the limit is likely to get you a ban as the police stop people at the drop of a hat but other near by areas were never as good at enforcing it. also a huge number aew still over the limit the morning after but are very rarely stopped.

i didn't mean that when caught they were left off

[weenie]

Common sense would be if you a having a drink leave the car IMO.

[jamiefrost]

I agree it should be no drinking if you want to drive. Heavier fines for repeat offenders as well,.

How about being banned from traveling in a car for serial offenders, only allowed to use public transport. That would focus a few minds thinking of having a drink before diving.

J

[Mr K]

What is a double standard is that you can have an unlimited amount to drink and then wobble all over the road on a bycycle (plus go through red lights, have no insurance etc). If a motorist does hit you they are always deemed to be at fault.

It is illegal to ride a bicycle on a road or other public place while unfit through alcohol or drugs, i.e. being so wasted that you don’t have proper control of the bike. It is also an offence to be drunk in charge of a bicycle.

Linky

[Derek]

Originally Posted by Mr K

What is a double standard is that you can have an unlimited amount to drink and then wobble all over the road on a bycycle (plus go through red lights, have no insurance etc). If a motorist does hit you they are always deemed to be at fault.

Well apart from there being no strict liability law for bike crashes yet and being drunk in charge of a bike being illegal, as well as going through red lights your post is spot on.