Drink Drive Limit

[Deleted member 15344]

But you have no proof that a lower level would be reducing the risk! The statistics show that most people caught over the limit, are over by a significant amount. They know the limit and have ignored it. They would just as easily ignore a lower limit. Make more effort to catch the serial offenders (even though several on here would then complain that the Police were persecuting motorists).

I haven't researched this, but how does the UK DD accident rate compare to countries who have a lower or even zero limit? Are the UK roads so much more unsafe than other countries?

A quick google has found these graphs.. I haven't checked their validity though... http://www.abd.org.uk/safest_roads.htm

Why are you against reducing the level ?

It's easy to implement

Does it effect you that much ?

The less alcohol in a person's body whilst behind the wheel of car imo will reduce the risk of something going wrong - even down to the persons reactions which have been proven slow down due to alcohol intake

So what is the problem with reducing the level to what is being suggested ( which is still above most countries in Europe )

 

[bluewolf]

Why are you against reducing the level ?

It's easy to implement

Does it effect you that much ?

The less alcohol in a person's body whilst behind the wheel of car imo will reduce the risk of something going wrong - even down to the persons reactions which have been proven slow down due to alcohol intake

So what is the problem with reducing the level to what is being suggested ( which is still above most countries in Europe )

It doesn't affect me in the slightest. I don't drink at all when I'm driving. The reason I'm against it is that you cannot prove that it will make any difference whatsoever.. We have some of the safest roads in the World. That is a fact..

I would argue that one of the biggest factors in the reduction of accidents involving Drink Driving is the fact that our punishments are harsh (compared to other countries). Another contributing factor is that we as a society are now programmed to demonise anyone caught Drunk Driving..

Can you prove that a reduced limit would make any difference at all to the accident rate? If not, then you are advocating change for the sake of change. It doesn't help...

 

[c1973]

It's a money making scheme and a headline grabber. No more and no less.
I've already shown the figures were dropping in the long-term anyway.
No evidence whatsoever to show that this reduction will reduce accidents.
Hypocrisy of the highest order.
Did I mention its no more than a money making scheme?
Oh, and its hypocrisy of the highest order......did I mention that?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

It doesn't affect me in the slightest. I don't drink at all when I'm driving. The reason I'm against it is that you cannot prove that it will make any difference whatsoever.. We have some of the safest roads in the World. That is a fact..

I would argue that one of the biggest factors in the reduction of accidents involving Drink Driving is the fact that our punishments are harsh (compared to other countries). Another contributing factor is that we as a society are now programmed to demonise anyone caught Drunk Driving..

Can you prove that a reduced limit would make any difference at all to the accident rate? If not, then you are advocating change for the sake of change. It doesn't help...

Sandy Allan, Rospa's Road Safety Manager in Scotland, said he believed the move would save lives and prevent injuries on Scotland's roads.
He added: "There is a considerable body of research which shows that reducing drink drive limits is effective in reducing drink-drive deaths and injuries. We would like to see the rest of the UK follow Scotland's example."


-

I'll bow to their knowledge :thup:

 

[Deleted member 15344]

It's a money making scheme and a headline grabber. No more and no less.
I've already shown the figures were dropping in the long-term anyway.
No evidence whatsoever to show that this reduction will reduce accidents.
Hypocrisy of the highest order.
Did I mention its no more than a money making scheme?
Oh, and its hypocrisy of the highest order......did I mention that?

Do you have a drink before you drive ?

 

[c1973]

However, speaking on BBC Radio Scotland, George Goldie from the Institute of Advanced Motorists, said he did not believe the change would improve road safety and he questioned the motivation behind it saying it would "increase income" gathered from fines.

He added: "We have very few statistics, if any, to show how many accidents are caused by people who are marginally over the limit. Most of the accidents are caused by people who are blatantly blitzed.

"I'm much more concerned about improving driving, as opposed to improving the one in 10. I am much, much more interested in improving the nine in 10."

 

[c1973]

Do you have a drink before you drive ?

Post 21. :thup:

 

[williamalex1]

No I don't, but there does seem to be a lot more drunken pedestrians staggering about up here, because they're not allowed to drive home . It's getting quite hard to avoid them now even when I'm sober.:rofl:

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Post 21. :thup:

So is it possible that reducing the limit will save at least one life ?

 

[SocketRocket]

So is it possible that reducing the limit will save at least one life ?

Is it possible that leaving it as it is will make no difference?

 

[PhilTheFragger]

So is it possible that reducing the limit will save at least one life ?

It's possible, but so difficult to quantify.

Same as the argument to increase speed limits from 30 to 40 on the basis that the accident that happened at 30 mph wouldn't have happened at 40 mph as the car would be well past the point on the timeline .

And for the record a pint of lager shandy does me when out and driving

 

[bluewolf]

Sandy Allan, Rospa's Road Safety Manager in Scotland, said he believed the move would save lives and prevent injuries on Scotland's roads.
He added: "There is a considerable body of research which shows that reducing drink drive limits is effective in reducing drink-drive deaths and injuries. We would like to see the rest of the UK follow Scotland's example."


-

I'll bow to their knowledge :thup:

And yet the Institute of Advanced Motorists have not come out in support of this change yet? Possibly because they understand that the recent rise in Alcohol related accidents is most likely related to the recent budget cuts applied to the Police Service. And, if the rise is linked to a lack of Police on the roads, then you can lower the limit all you want.. No one will be there to catch them. You'll have the exact same accident rate, but more people convicted after the fact.

Make roads safer
Make punishment more stringent
Put more Police on the roads (not popular with the regular speeders I suppose).

 

[c1973]

So is it possible that reducing the limit will save at least one life ?

Of course.

It's also possible that you could increase it and less accidents would occur.

Remember, as has been shown with my links, the accident rate has dropped year on year in the long term.
That's with more cars on the road year on year as well.

It's nothing but a money making scheme and headline grabber.

Anyway, I'm off to me bed, driving in the morning and wouldn't want to be tired.........plenty of evidence that shows its just as dangerous as alcohol when behind the wheel.

 

[Fish]

I want to see a mandatory retest done at age 60 and then every 5yrs thereafter, older people on the road are a pain and much more dangerous than someone after a sherry or couple of pints, it takes them 10 minutes to get into the car so their a danger to themselves as they'd never be able to get out in an accident, they can't keep up or understand the new road markings, signs etc and are all over the shop, I'd like to see more of a campaign to get old people off the road and put on public transport

 

[Imurg]

So is it possible that reducing the limit will save at least one life ?

Yes

Is it possible that leaving it as it is will make no difference?

Yes

Who knows....? Reducing the limit as a vote winner is not the reason to be reducing it.
Prove that reducing it will save lives and there's a case for it.

I think its safe to assume that the current limit is in place as that level of alcohol in the system has a minimal effect on ones ability to drive.
Lowering it, therefore, will have a negligible effect in lowering the number of crashes.
The vast majority of crashes involving alcohol are, I believe, caused by those significantly over the limit.
Lowering the limit will not change that.

If you really want to save lives, reduce the speed limit to 20 mph around town, 30 on rural roads and 40 on motorways.....

 

[PhilTheFragger]

Or maybe we should stop driving totally and go back to Horses, as driving is so dangerous.
As nobody ever fell off one or got trampled or bitten by a horse

Have they?

 

[Slime]

Sorry is it that hard to get picked up ?

I drive my two fc to golf each weekend - that allows them a couple of pints

See plenty get lifts with mates to enable them to have a drink

Have a few that drink then drive home - I would like to see coppers to sit outside golf clubs - would certainly catch their fair share amount of drink drivers

And certainly discourage golfers from spending money in the bar too! Lose ............. lose!


Slime.

 

[HDID Kenny]

It took 2 years for this law to be brought in due to the time (no doubt money) involved in re-calibrating breath kits etc. Like Robin has just said, older people unregulated cause a risk on the road, smoking whilst driving is the same, have you been sat at traffic lights and hear the boom boom beat from the car pulled up beside you even with window closed?

All dangers to themselves and others but not addressed. As for aligning with Europe they have some of the worse driving in the world hardly a benchmark to set.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

And certainly discourage golfers from spending money in the bar too! Lose ............. lose!


Slime.

Surely a wind up ?

Is bar profits more important than people drink driving ?

 

[Ethan]

Wow, a lot of interesting and bizarre arguments being made.

As stated by many above, UK drink driving limits are pretty high by civilised country standards. 50mg is a reasonable limit and I think it should apply across the UK. If it has the effect of making some people reluctantly stop drinking at all before driving, good. That is the wise course of action anyway.

As to the suggestion that the current limit is fine, and that it represents some sort of safe level of alcohol, that is simply false. Driving performance is impaired at 50-80 mg in many drivers. They may or may not be aware that it is, but it is. Reaction times, in particular, as well as an enhanced sense of bravado.

The argument that most accidents are caused by bad driving sober drivers is certainly true, but beside the point. The same logic would say that we should allow people to carry guns because most murders are currently with knives. A nonsensical argument.

Of course individual responses to alcohol vary, and base driving skill levels also vary. There is no way around this, except to make the clear clear and specific, and that is what the drink driving laws do. Some of us are old enough to remember the days before, when stories would be told about someone having a skinful and driving a car home from the golf club only for the car to end up in a bunker near the club gates and the drunk slept the night there.