Drink Drive limit

[OverWyreGrower]

Having a few pints, and getting a taxi home is obviously the only sensible thing to do, but what about the next morning, when you feel fine, and are in all likelihood not impaired with regards to concentration behind the wheel? You may still have small amounts of alcohol in your blood, and this, under zero tolerance, would impose a fine/banning etc.

This is what we were discussing today in the office...

On the face of it, we can all be sensible and get taxis home etc; however, unless you are not going to drive a car for a further 12 hours (for example) the day after, then it doesn't work.

I do agree with lowering the current limit, but I think an absolute zero-tolerance would cause more trouble.

[kalimna]

Jackie - that is the sort of idea I was getting at.

Guttata - as it happens, I am an anaesthetist, and still work in the NHS. I frequently see what alcohol does when drunk in excess. I am also better placed than many (not all) to understand the physiology behind alcohols' effects. That is why my post contained the arguments that it did. And to say a lifetime ban is too lenient (in the absence of any life lost due to said over-the-limitness), is a little bit daft. Would you say the same about smokers in the presence of children? Or those who drive whilst tired? Or anyone in possession of a knife or a gun?
I understand the point you were reaching for, I just don't think the arguments are well thought out. My analogy with speed is a valid one, i think.

Cheers,
Adam

[janeyo]

I am going to be very unpopular with my next thoughts but here goes.... in general I have found that younger people and new drivers are far more aware of not drinking and driving. I have met several people of the older driving generation and by that I mean 50 and over who seem to think that as experienced drivers the rules do not apply to them. And they drink even one or two then drive. I very rarely meet young or new drivers who even have a half, a sit's been drummed into them from the start of their driving career that you should not do it.
Is this because when older driver first learnt there was no teachings or rulings on this and the campaign has not always been in place?

For example, I think it is second nature to put my seatbelt on as this is how I was taught when I learnt to drive, but remember my parents finding it hard to remember when the rule came in. They do it now of course!

Maybe in time, not drinking and driving will become the 'norm'. Let's hope so.

[piskieinboots]

You make a good point Janeyo - but where does that stand in regards to mobile phone using/driving, it is (mostly) the younger generation that does that one - so, yes, I take your point about it being a generational thing, especially as I am of the 'older' generation you refer to

My preference is for zero limit, I impose that on myself - works for me

[HeyWayne]

We'll all have teleporters soon, so it'll be moot.

[HeyWayne]

The alternative is, move to somewhere with a pub in walking distance. We did. Works a treat.

[janeyo]

can I put my order in now for a tardis please? Thanks

I cannot say I have seen a reduction at all in the use of mobile phone use since the ban was imposed. And why oh why do I always meet idiots at roundabouts talking on them??!! Get your hands on the wheel!!!

But then I probably see police around here about once a month if that.

and of COURSE piskie I am not painting all older drivers with the same brush...it was just an observation from personal experience X

[lindyloo]

i tend to agree with janeyo it does seem more an older generation thing, but the phones are just as bad, and in my opinion it is even more unsafe to stop suddely and inappropriately to answer the phone, than it was to keep driving while you speak. as regards the original post, i personally think it would be best to have an outright ban, as it sends a clearer message, and probably woud be cheaper to deal with admin for drunk driving. the thing about drinking is it can lull you into a false sense of security, whereas, if you are on medication, you can clearly tell if you are a bit fuddled.

[beefy]

Alcohol reduces your reaction time - FACT
I don't drive if I have taken a drink - even one. If I am going out for one or more I won't be driving the next day before dinnertime - or later .
I couldn't face the relatives of someone I knocked down and killed because my reaction times were slower due to the amount of alcohol in my system.
Personally speaking the limit should be zero and the penalty for drink driving 20 years in jail - no if's, buts or excuses.

[Brengirl]

I am just thinking out loud at the moment, most probably alcohol induced. I gave up driving many years ago when I realised that I was in fact using a lethal weapon. Whether the driver is 'under the influence' or not does not make it less so. As previously highlighted, tiredness, having a bad hair day, feeling sad or just being totally pissed of with life can make any of us capable of a catastrophic moment's lapse of concentration.
If like me you could not bear to be responsible t'is simple. Do not drive.

[zazen999]

I am totally against any tipple before driving; however I think having a zero limit would actually be worse than a small limit.

Mainly because I think that if people want a small amount - [and yes, I know it impairs reaction time but people do have a small amount] - then if there is a small limit they will stick at that. If there is a zero limit, and they have a small one then they may as well have a big one, or two as as soon as they have a sniff they are then out of the 'safe zone'.

Difficult making the rules innit.....who'd want to be in charge? Not me....

[bobleponge]

I have long argued that there should be a zero limit for alcohol and driving.
I still think it should be the case.
I think getting into the realms of not having a drink ever in case of possibly an overlap 10 years down the line is a bit over zealous, we all know roughly that if we've had a skinful the night before we will probably be over the limit the following morning, so do we take the risk??
Just as a point of interest (or not) several years ago as a squaddie, we had a tradition of a large beer up on a Thursday night for leavings, promotions, babies etc etc. Probably once a month. On the Friday morning, the majority of us would get up at 6am, have a good breakfast, and then be ready for a TAB (its like a yomp but twice the distance at 3 times the speed) carrying about 50lb in a bergan on our backs and a gun. We would be out for around 3 and 1/2 hours. In that time we would sweat profusely and drink gallons of water.
Once finished, all up to the squadron bar for big fat sandwiches and coke/non alcoholic tipple of choice until midday when the bar opened for those who were staying.
One particular Friday the boss decided to get the local feds in and do a pre D/D test for anyone who thought they would now be fit to drive.
Of the 68 people who took the test, and who had been on the larrggeerr the night before, nobody passed.

[Alison]

Alcohol reduces your reaction time - FACT
I don't drive if I have taken a drink - even one. If I am going out for one or more I won't be driving the next day before dinnertime - or later .
I couldn't face the relatives of someone I knocked down and killed because my reaction times were slower due to the amount of alcohol in my system.
Personally speaking the limit should be zero and the penalty for drink driving 20 years in jail - no if's, buts or excuses.

I agree what you're saying however if you get 20 years for drink driving regardless of if you have harmed anybody or not means that it doesn't matter if you have one small drink or have been on an all night bender and clearly whilst I don't agree that we should drink and drive, there is a considerable difference in how dangerous you are at the wheel under those two extremes. Also, I'd not be happy with somebody getting 20 years for having a drink but (OK maybe luckily) getting home without causing any harm getting a longer sentence than somebody who had gone out and raped somebody

[OllieMartin]

Yes, but the point is - when you say "No drinking and driving" or "I don't drink if I will be driving" or "If Im drinking, I won't drive", then unless you *never* drink or you *never* drive then there will be an overlap.
You have to be able to say "I won't drive for X amount of time after I have drunk Y amount of alcohol", and as it's difficult without expensive test equipment to get an accurate blood alcohol reading, then otherwise sensible, conscientious, and safe drivers will fall foul of a zero limit. Having a low, but definitely not zero, limit is much more sensible, as the presence of alcohol doesnt necessarily affect ones' abillity to drive safely, but *too much* alcohol certainly does. A small limit allows a common sense leeway.

Adam

This sums up exactly what I was going to say to the OP, so I'll just vote this notion +1.

We'll all have teleporters soon, so it'll be moot.

Yea, but we'll have flying cars first (as we should have done for the last 10 years) so where will that leave us with the drink-fly limit?

[HeyWayne]

So when does the ban on new parents driving come into force?