The law and drink driving

[keith_d]

I don't see the point in reducing the limit to zero without good medical evidence that there is significant impairment at the present level. The current system of a reasonable limit combined with harsh penalties and social pressure seems to be working well. So, even if the current limit is a solid black line through a fuzzy grey area I'd stick with it.

I heard a while back that the police were trying to remove the right to a blood test because it was almost impossible to get a qualified person to collect the sample during the times they were most needed. (Probably all pi$$ed!) Given that blood alcohol level is the final proof I'm not sure this is a good thing.

[Gazza77]

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

Meaning you'd get banned now for that glass of sherry you had on Sunday, or the mouthwash you used this morning? That's a little mental isn't it?

I'd say it is fairly clear the current system is actually working, unless you have some figures to suggest there's lots of people crashing into stuff with half the current legal limit of alcohol in them?

I tend to agree, leave it as it is.

I think you might find however Chris that that the majority of accidents involve people that haven't any alcohol in them at all.

[Bri w]

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

Meaning you'd get banned now for that glass of sherry you had on Sunday, or the mouthwash you used this morning? That's a little mental isn't it?

I'd say it is fairly clear the current system is actually working, unless you have some figures to suggest there's lots of people crashing into stuff with half the current legal limit of alcohol in them?

Originally Posted by Bri w

Okay, pick a suitably low limit that corresponds to something above what is found naturally in some people. That would also give an element of tolerance to those who'd had a couple the night before - sorted.

17% of deaths on the road are alcohol related.

Austrailia reduced its alcohol related traffic accidents by 41% by reducing the permitted limit from 80mg/ml to 50mg/ml.

Statstics are brilliant. 54% of all traffic accidents are speed related - maybe the max speed for vehicles should be 25mph

Originally Posted by keith_d

I heard a while back that the police were trying to remove the right to a blood test because it was almost impossible to get a qualified person to collect the sample during the times they were most needed. (Probably all pi$$ed!) Given that blood alcohol level is the final proof I'm not sure this is a good thing.

I personally know of somebody who got stopped by an armed police unit in central London due to the way he was driving. He was over the limit, went for the blood test, Doc didn't turn up til about 6am, and told the person straight up that they were lucky he hadn't come earlier.

[Red Herring]

Originally Posted by Bri w

......

Statstics are brilliant. 54% of all traffic accidents are speed related - maybe the max speed for vehicles should be 25mph

I think that's daft, 100% are speed related.
Two stationery vehicles will never hit each other.

[mikerj]

Originally Posted by Red Herring

I think that's daft, 100% are speed related.
Two stationery vehicles will never hit each other.

Obviously, but excessive speed may or may not be a contributory factor to the cause of an accident. If you fell unconscious at the wheel and ran someone over at 20mph, was that accident caused by speed?

[Red Herring]

Speed is just a component part of driving. If I run someone over at 120mph is it the high speed that killed them, or my failure to turn the steering wheel in order to drive around them? Inappropriate speed for the circumstance is an issue, it is an obvious sign of poor driving judgement. Driving judgement in seriously influenced by alcohol.

[yorkie_chris]

It's a bit odd about same night vs morning after. I've previously had one pint and then ridden, only a couple of times and it's not something I'll repeat. Reason being it seemed to make little gaps look bigger and rather easy to get into trouble despite probably being safely under the limit.
The morning after a heavy night, possibly way over the limit, seems to have no discernible effect on my personal perception of risk. YMMV.
Not a suggestion of a change to the law, just an observation...

(Riding with a hangover; I do not think it a good idea or condone it etc.)

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

It's a bit odd about same night vs morning after. I've previously had one pint and then ridden, only a couple of times and it's not something I'll repeat. Reason being it seemed to make little gaps look bigger and rather easy to get into trouble despite probably being safely under the limit.
The morning after a heavy night, possibly way over the limit, seems to have no discernible effect on my personal perception of risk. YMMV.
Not a suggestion of a change to the law, just an observation...

(Riding with a hangover; I do not think it a good idea or condone it etc.)

At last someone got it
This is exactly what i tried to say at the start of this thread, not on about legally, but how we feel differently even though we may have the same levels of alcohol but at different times of the day.

If i had a heavy night and got breath tested at 8am at twice legal limit, i know for a fact twice the legal limit the night before after id just had that amount i would feel impaired a bit, there is a difference just not legally.

Originally Posted by specialone

At last someone got it
This is exactly what i tried to say at the start of this thread, not on about legally, but how we feel differently even though we may have the same levels of alcohol but at different times of the day.

If i had a heavy night and got breath tested at 8am at twice legal limit, i know for a fact twice the legal limit the night before after id just had that amount i would feel impaired a bit, there is a difference just not legally.

Interesting, email mythbusters lol