You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Oh just saw the extra 60 deaths guesstimate from TJ above - again I wouldn't dispute this it sounds like the best number we have. And in terms of my personal experience and my brother's, I think the limit may be too high - both of us independently have breathalysed ourselves after several pints (over the course of an afternoon or long evening) and found that we're under the limit. In my case it was on a cheapo self test kit, which might have not worked properly, however his was on one used by his social worker partner for clients that might have alcohol problems, and pretty reliable. There's no way I would have considered either of us fit to drive, in both cases we must have had 6+ pints, but we would have shockingly passed a breath test.
Maybe we're outliers in terms of our "well trained" livers mopping up the alcohol quickly, but neither of us drink unusually heavily these days. In any case, as I said, neither of us would've considered ourselves fit to drive despite the breath test saying otherwise, so I can easily see that the 60 could be an under-estimate. I would perhaps rather see drink drive based on a sobriety test though, which would thus remove the "oh but I'm not tired so I can have an extra drink" type excuses.
Errr! You’ve posted about police reduction not evidence there’s been an increase in the use of mobiles used while driving.
Ehhh . . but you were trying to say that because less people had been caught recently, this meant that less people were using mobiles, and I'm pointing out that less people have been caught because there are 30% less police on the roads.
Funny also how the numbers of people being caught using mobile phones at the wheel has dropped at a similar time to the recent cuts to police budgets over the last few years, and at the same time as the proliferation of speed cameras and increasing reliance on technology and cameras to police the roads.
Errr! You’ve posted about police reduction not evidence there’s been an increase in the use of mobiles used while driving.
Funny how the reduction in numbers being caught and convicted has also coincided with a drop in traffic police numbers, a recent large cut in police funding and an increasing reliance on cameras to police the roads?
Ehhh . . but you were trying to say that because less people had been caught recently, this meant that less people were using mobiles, and I’m pointing out that less people have been caught because there are 30% less police on the roads.
Over 10 years there is a 30% reduction. Yes I know that but is that real the reason that there was a 50% reduction in FPN following the change in law in the space of one year, of course not.
Colleagues at work in Glasgow are pretty worried about over-doing it the night before & still being above the (Scottish) limit. I must admit I bought myself an alco-tester gizmo, for when I drive in Scotland 'the morning after'. It's calibrated so I rely on it. I'm surprised after several pints the night before how low the alcohol levels are, well below the Scottish limits. It's a non-issue I suspect, unless the boat is pushed well out beyond the surf-line and into deep water
On another tack. I often stop off for two or three pints near home after a regular evening ride (20 mile MTB or so) I do with friends. Out of curiosity I've tested myself once I've cycled home & been surprised that I'm still under the English limit - must be the exercise I suppose?
My youngest is learning to drive; it's reassuring to hear him say that it's strictly taboo for his mates to drink & drive - I think I even believe him.
Have you know thought about reporting him?
Read my post Drac, I've never seen him driving away. Short of calling the cops and saying there's a guy that might be drunk driving, I'm not sure what else you'd expect me to do.
Read my post Drac, I’ve never seen him driving away.
Errrr! Ok I see.
When I used to ride motorbikes if I had one pint I could really notice the difference it made to my riding ability, you don’t notice the difference as much sat in a nice warm car but you’re just as impaired, you just don’t realise it.
Funny because I was once at a track school in France. One day, I popped into the local village at lunch time and had the daily menu - which came with a carafe of wine. I decided to just have a sip but the three courses were so good I drained the whole jug - maybe 500ml or 2/3rds of a bottle.
Anyway, back for the afternoon track session on my 180mph superbike my instructor said "That's the best session you've done all week!"
At the time, I drank a fair bit and had a pretty high tolerance - I guess. I'm sure your average alcoholic wouldn't be too affected by an amount equal to the DD limit.
I never drink/drive on the road btw although I don't mind cycling after a few. I've got one friend (an ex pro MTBer) who cycles to most social occasions even 20-30 miles away so he can have a booze.
So after the non-existent traffic officers have nabbed you for drink driving you then get sent into our fabulously well-funded and efficient prison system, well known for its present overcapacity and ruthless reduction of re-offending rates?
Not looking at the short jail sentance for rehabilitation - just for punishment.
Oh - and plenty of traffic officers / roads patrols round here.
Yes, but you live in an oil-rich socialist utopia 😉
Not looking at the short jail sentance for rehabilitation – just for punishment.
Best punishment would be to remove license for ever. Do the same for lots of different driving offences and you would have less cars on the road, the drivers left would be the safer drivers and better public transport because of more use etc,.
Not looking at the short jail sentance for rehabilitation – just for punishment.
And studies have shown this to be ineffective for other offences, what makes you think it would be effective for this particular offence?
Edit - assuming you want to see a reduction in offending and are not simply vying for revenge against someone who hasn't actually done any harm (yet).
Have you somehow missed all the stuff in the news recently about our prison system that is presently bordering on total collapse? Awash with Spice and the resulting assaults to such a degree that prisoners are requesting to be put in solitary with the nonces just to feel a degree of safety, and prison staff are openly protesting out of desperation?
I think there are probably slightly more effective solutions than that to be had
I've had a driving ban when I was young and stupid. 6 months for a tot up of speeding points (naughty me) and I can tell you that it's a right royal PITA! When you're used to being mobile then all of a sudden you're not, everything you took for granted becomes a mammoth effort. Going shopping? Getting to work and back? All of a sudden they all become a logistical nightmare. I won't be getting bloody banned again!
The problem isn't coming up with ever more Daily Mail style punishments. The problem is enforcing the laws in the first place to issue the punishments already there. If you live in more rural areas, drink driving is endemic. When we moved out here I was genuinely shocked to a lot of peoples blase acceptance of it. Loads of people do it because they know their chances of being caught are absolutely infinitesimal
Having watched the programme last night they interviewed the guy who came up with the 0.08 level back in 1967. That level was based on a study, in Michigan IIRC, that they did analysis on and determined that the doubling of risk of accident was at the 0.08 level. He was asked if he'd apply the same limit today given the knowledge we now have and he said no.
His one counter argument was the cost of doing so in that if a traffic cop pulled someone over for a breath test and they failed then it generally meant that the cop was tied up for the rest of his shift taking the offender back to the station for the "evidential test". He did say that there were now Evidential Test Meters that could be deployed in vehicles so if you failed the first one then the cops could do the ET there and then. Of course that also involves a cost in equipping at least one such meter with each force or station.
Binners, again, spot on.
I have driven with 2 pints of normal brew normally after a ride and i can cofindently say it has no effect on my driving if anything it makes me a better driver as I am more conscious of my surroundings and other drivers.
And the more you drink the more confidently you can say it.
His one counter argument was the cost of doing so in that if a traffic cop pulled someone over for a breath test and they failed then it generally meant that the cop was tied up for the rest of his shift taking the offender back to the station for the “evidential test”.
A bit of crap argument against it.
Anyway, back for the afternoon track session on my 180mph superbike my instructor said “That’s the best session you’ve done all week!”
You did a good track session because your addled brain was suppressing your self-preservation instincts.
I think it's well established that a low level of alcohol can improve performance. However you won't find many officials shouting it from the rooftops.
I think the statistic we really need is how many deaths are caused by people under the limit that have had a drink?
I have been calibrated when I was followed from the Watermill in Ings at kickingbout time and beathalysed. Two pints of 3% ale and well under the limit.
Ebforcement is the only way to make laws effective. I think breathalysing is so rare now compared to the early 90s.
<div class="bbp-reply-author">franksinatra
<div class="bbp-author-role">
<div class="">Subscriber</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="bbp-reply-content">
The lower limit in Scotland is better as it removes the question fir me about whether you can drive on one or two pints. Now I just don’t drink at all if driving. No grey area.
Yup. And the other benefit is that it kicked away the slippery slope. Used to be people would go Pub? I've got the car... Ah well I'll just have one. And then well, you're pretty sure you're under the limit at 2. And then it's ages since the first one and you ate and go on go on go on. Lots of people don't set out to drink and drive but end up doing it, by having to make the decision of when to stop once they're already a bit drunk and their judgement is ****ed.
I can't even be trusted with ebay while drunk never mind a car. And for everyone who thinks "I'm fine on X pints" or "I drive better"- even if that's true for you, do you think it's true of most people? I am pretty sure your own perception is wrong but it's not actually that important if it is or not- because it's not just about you, laws never are.
Except for that one law about having sex with tapirs, that one's all on me
tomaso - the chap in the article quoted by the OP said around 60 a year.
"...it generally meant that the cop was tied up for the rest of his shift taking the offender back to the station for the “evidential test”."
A somewhat sweeping statement. There's every reason to fast track the custody process to secure the evidence, i.e get the driver on the evidential device
The whole argument smacks of - lets punish everyone to send a message to the few who drink and drive (and will almost certainly continue to drink and drive whatever the law says because they know they can get away with it) that it's not acceptable.
I deplore anyone drinking and driving and have never personally done it, however here is no conclusive evidence that small amounts of alcohol, say a single pint effects anyone's driving for the worse since everyone's reaction to alcohol is different. For some, particularly if they rarely drink, a pint will make a bit of a difference to their perceived coordination and will of course be measurable if they were hooked up to some sort of simulator test. For others, a pint barely registers on the system. For me, sometimes I feel it, sometimes I don't. I do know that after a couple of pints though I'm a much better snooker player, and snooker, much like driving is affected by coordination, observation, decision making and mental sharpness.
This isn't an argument that we should all be having a couple of pints before driving, merely that we shouldn't be demonizing people who enjoy a single quick pint after biking, or tarring them with the same brush as those who persistently drive well over the existing drink drive limit.
however here is no conclusive evidence that small amounts of alcohol, say a single pint effects anyone’s driving for the worse since everyone’s reaction to alcohol is different.
Yes everyones response is different but even at levels just below the limit EVERYONE is impaired.
Well proven. I see if I can find the data
Ah, snooker, cool analogy bro.
Well proven. I see if I can find the data
To prove your point? Don't bother! People are obsessed with demonizing the slightest transgression of a speed limit, the slightest amount of alcohol when driving, when the real elephant in the room is basic poor driving standards.
If all those people who rant on about speed and alcohol limits had put half as much energy into improving their own driving standards, and perhaps campaigning instead for increased testing, or mandatory and periodic further training after passing the driving test then so many lives could have been saved. Are you aware that someone who has done their advanced driver training is between 30-50% less likely to be involved in an accident?
Yes everyones response is different but even at levels just below the limit EVERYONE is impaired.
What about driving when you have a cold?
What about driving when you are feeling depressed?
What about listening to Rob on The Archers?
Surely all of these will situations will result in your driving being impaired?
Should all of this be subject to a prison sentence?
or tarring them with the same brush as those who persistently drive well over the existing drink drive limit.
I find it so disappointing that attitudes like this still exist. A lot of laws exist to protect us from the lowest common denominator. Lewis Hamilton is an awesome driver but he still needs to obey speed limits. You can't legislate for different levels of ability, you therefore have to baseline.
Finally, despite various claims of driving awesomeness, I simply don't believe anyone drives better when they have been drinking.
I am in favour of a zero tolerance approach to roads policing, massively increased fines and bans, mandatory retesting every 5 years and a much tougher driving teest
However deaths from drink drivi9ng are easily dealt with and just because some other aspects of road safety are hard to pursue does not mean we can continue to allow dozens of people being killed every year because englands drink drive limit is too high.
Driving with medication or a really heavy cold would hamper my driving abilities more than 2 pints of 4% ale, I can tolerate more alcohol maybe than a normal joe! I drive for living so I know the consequences could be a pain in the ass for me. Like I say the limit is about right IMHO.
About making my better driving better its more of being the same level just more aware of my surroundings then again I ride better after a couple of pints FACT!!!!!
Like I say the limit is about right IMHO.
All that means is that the limit is about right for yourself. Sadly drink driving laws probably need to be set for puny individuals like me who would be utterly shite behind the wheel after a couple of pints!
I agree about the medication/illness point, but the only real difference between that and alcohol is the lack of any way to measure it, or set a threshold which is comprehensible to your average punter.
We've all probably driven when impaired in some form or another - it just shows that people are not so hot at self-regulation, just as they were in the pre-drink drive law era, when they happily got into cars knowing they were ****ed and more likely to kill someone.
Driving with medication or a really heavy cold would hamper my driving abilities more than 2 pints of 4% ale, I can tolerate more alcohol maybe than a normal joe!
You do realise it is illegal to drive if impared by medication?
Is there any chat of EnW lowering limits like has happened up here?.
Postie - utter bullshine. At two pints your chances of having an accident are greatly increased. Its just you do not have the self awareness to realise this.
I also very much doubt you are under the limit after two pints. Seriously dude - reassess this. All the evidence says you are wrong.
i dont understand what possible reasoning one could reasonably justify not having a just above zero limitation. other than being selfish based on the existing actual data rather than anecdotes of i felt fine and got lucky after 27 pints stories.
If you require a drink to exist dont drive. simples.
There is no one forcing you to drink alcohol in a pub and taxis exist if you must.
or tarring them with the same brush as those who persistently drive well over the existing drink drive limit.
I find it so disappointing that attitudes like this still exist. A lot of laws exist to protect us from the lowest common denominator.
Yes so all of us see our freedoms and enjoyment of the basic elements of life reduced because of a few idiots. Should we shoot all of the sharks in the ocean because a small minority of sharks choose to bite a person? Should we all be banned or restrict from cycling in cities because a couple of pedestrians have been killed by cyclists recently?
The current balance is about right I would say - we just need more enforcement of those that take the mickey, perhaps more random testing in the hills around Bolton, that's the real issue.
at times like these one must remember driving is a privilege not a basic element of life.
Folk have learnt that the hard way (binners) its a right chav when its is actually taken away.
kananga - the evidence is that Englands high limit leads to increased accidents and deaths compared to other countries with lowerlimits. 2 things. 1 even at an alcohol level below the legal limit you are significantly impaired and far more likely to have an accident and 2 people get the message like poisitie above that its OK to have a small drink and drive which may or may not take them over the limit.
I think 60 deaths a year that could be saved by lowering the limit is well worth doing. A limit that is 50 or even 20 sends the message that NO drink driving is acceptable. It kills the myth that a couple of pints is fine. It removes any ambiguity.
Do the sharks play snooker?
Only after a couple of pints. Prefer a bit of pool though.
Yes so all of us see our freedoms and enjoyment of the basic elements of life reduced because of a few idiots. Should we shoot all of the sharks in the ocean because a small minority of sharks choose to bite a person? Should we all be banned or restrict from cycling in cities because a couple of pedestrians have been killed by cyclists recently?
What a load of crap. Seriously, read that back to yourself. Drinking and driving is not a freedom or basic element of life. It is just a selfish, entirely avoidable choice which results in people dying.
The law allows me a pint, I'm happy with that. As it happens, the time I most frequently drink and drive (within that limit!) is after a club cycling event. It's an important part of our recovery.
"The law allows me a pint,"
its that kind of catch all statement that annoys me about it. its ambiguous to say the least.
it may allow you a pint of medium strength lager.
but with many folk drinking from the tap Ales and IPAs which can be twice as strong as your basic lager but its ok cause i just had the 1......
up here in scotland its now im in the pub ill have a coke theres no one - theres no guessing.
how ever there has been dramatic improvements in alcohol free beers in recent years at least if you insist.
The law does NOT allow you a pint. this is why we need a lower limit to remove this myth. You rarely get prosecuted for BAC below the limit but you can be. Even below the limit you are impaired significantly. the only safe thing is not to drink and drive
1 pint = ok to drive
2 pints = borderline
3 pints = can't drive
4 pints = "I drive better after a drink" + "it's only just up the road" so it'll be ok
0 pints removes any confusion IMO
I also very much doubt you are under the limit after two pints.
I don't.
See if you can find a breathalyser to have a play on, you'll be unpleasantly surprised.
The limit definitely needs reducing.
I have and I have seen the results. Most men 2 pints is very marginal / over the limit.
You are all barking up the wrong tree – if you put as much energy into protesting for improved driver training, more traffic police on the road or similar then I'd be with you.
There is a gaping hole in what could be done to improve road safety but your blinkered focus on the smaller issues like speeding and alcohol is detracting from REAL road safety improvements that could make a BIG difference.
So come on then how many of you who claim to care about road safety have been bothered to take any further driving training since passing your test? If you haven't then you're a total hypocrite and don't have any right to comment on what others can and can't do.
You do realise it is illegal to drive if impared by medication?
Yet still, you'd be surprised how many people are driving around off their tits on morphine, and thinking nothing of it. The law means very little to people until it is presented to them in a meaningful way.
Drink driving is already heavily stigmatised. The people who do it, do so because they believe the low-likelihood of getting caught is worth the risk. Better policing is required to control it further, and perhaps new means of enforcement and/or prevention. Ultimately prevention is key, and hopefully one day it will become impossible to drive a car while under the influence.
So come on then how many of you who claim to care about road safety have been bothered to take any further driving training since passing your test? If you haven’t then you’re a total hypocrite and don’t have any right to comment on what others can and can’t do.
🙄
An allowance of one pint, or one pint of shandy, I think is reasonable as it is enough to drink with a meal and spread out over the length of the meal I don't think has much of an effect, whereas being forced to drink a pint of water or coke wouldn't be that great.
What would be worse, a driver whose had a pint of shandy or a speeding/tailgating driver or a driver with defective vision, as I suspect a lot have?
Or worse, those drivers that drive round everywhere at a constant speed, so too slow a lot of the time but speeding where it most matters - I often wonder about the level of concentration such driver are applying.
Sbob Member
See if you can find a breathalyser to have a play on, you’ll be unpleasantly surprised.
I pretty much only ever drink at home; however, my concern is unintentionally being over the limit the next day - I’m often driving early (4am ish) to attend events.
After an associate was breathalysed early one morning, I bought one of these from Halfords for £60.
AlcoSense Elite 2 Breathalyser
(IIRC There is a cheaper one, but it has an inferior sensor and only reads to 1dp).
I’d recommend the product – but I’m only using it ‘the morning after…’ a couple of times a week.
Not looking at the short jail sentance for rehabilitation – just for punishment.
surprised at you TJ, you must know that this won't do anything to reduce offending; surely?
I agree with Binners it's all pretty moot until there are sufficient coppers to enforce existing laws. Anecdotally...I help run ophthalmology clinics, we have lots of folk (mostly oldsters) that come to our sessions that literally cannot see the largest sight test letters from 3m away, and yet under current DVLA rules are still "safe" to drive ie can pass a fields test. There are plenty of folk that aren't safe on the roads without the additional handicap of alcohol.
karanga
your argument is a fallacy . its unrelated to the point at hand . pursuing your points will not reduce the deaths due to alcohol.
they are separate issues.
i hear what your saying but its not relevant to this thread in the slightest because you want a drink.
if you dont like coke or water then alcohol free beer. If its not the taste you like and its the alcohol buzz then that in its self should be a pointer into why its a bad idea to drive after it.
on the jailtime argument.
Overall yes short prison sentences do nothing. However I do believe the punishment for drink driving is not enough. I am primarily aiming that at the "middle class" drink drivers who believe a couple is OK. Once one of their friends has gone to jail for drink driving then do you not think that would act as a deterrent to the rest of them?
I accept its a controversial idea and that it might have no effect and yes - its the fear of getting caught as much if not more than the fear of the punishment but I do think a short jail term for every drink driver might make a difference.
You can already get 6 months in prison. Although from what I gather from hearing stories of such things happening, I think it's usually reserved for repeat offenders? It's still a lengthy driving ban though. I think that would deter most people if they ever thought they would be caught.
"So come on then how many of you who claim to care about road safety have been bothered to take any further driving training since passing your test? If you haven’t then you’re a total hypocrite and don’t have any right to comment on what others can and can’t do."
Agree with Drac's reaction to this but seeing as I have taken extra training since passing my car test - C1 test, C1+E and I'm a qualified driving standards assessor for my workplace - then according to you I can have a say.
I like the idea of the Scottish level being applied to the whole of the UK, it will definitely have an effect on the 'morning after' people and will make a few of the regular 'drink with a meal' types have a second think about how long to leave it before driving and even whether that drink is worth it. Anything that impairs your ability to drive should be taken seriously as the potential for causing large amounts of damage to either property or people is grossly underestimated by most people. Medication mentioned above is another issue and I've had to get involved with people at work who are on long-term treatment who were unable to pass a simple driving assessment due to it. Combine the meds with a drink and you can have a very dangerous cocktail when behind the wheel.
I have seen first-hand the destruction one drunk driver can do. I was following a car on evening and it drifted into the path of two oncoming cars resulting in a head-on crash. The occupants of both oncoming cars were killed or died later from their injuries. The drunk driver walked away with superficial injuries and a broken arm as the fact that he was inebriated meant he didn't tense up just before impact so he 'bounced' as it were, like a child does.
For the record I will say that I am a petrolhead who likes fast cars but I will still be happy to see alcohol levels dropped, the widespread use of average speed cameras, more traffic police and regular retesting with licences revoked if you fail. If you want to drive fast do a track day, if you want a few drinks to wind down after a day's work get a taxi home or a lift with a sober friend. If I knowingly see someone get behind the wheel while over the limit I will phone the police, no qualms about it at all. Rule no.1 of life: Don't Be A Dick.
Once one of their friends has gone to jail for drink driving then do you not think that would act as a deterrent to the rest of them?
This is of course the same reasoning that lead us to the utopia of no one committing murder for these past years, right?
Seriously though, for some offences of drink driving it should be a ban, but there has to be some proportionality. To be facing a jail sentence (with all the other societal issues that may bring; possible job loss, home loss, etc etc) if you're driving home after one sherry at your auntie's and get caught by cops, is clearly nuts.
"if you’re driving home after one sherry at your auntie’s and get caught by cops, is clearly nuts."
theres an easy answer to that .
just make it socially the norm to say no I'm driving i wont have any alcohol by lowering the limit then theres no persuading someone to *cummon its just one youll be under the limit*
The law does NOT allow you a pint.
Most men 2 pints is very marginal / over the limit.
Both statements from tj, the second is correct but the first is not. Note I did not say that the law allows everyone a pint, I was talking specifically about myself and as a fairly large male I am very confident that as long as I avoid the very strongest of ales (and they all have alcohol % on the tap) I am not only legally safe but also not significantly impaired. I also don't neck it and get straight behind the wheel but will usually spend a while over it with some food.
You can try to argue that any sort of impairment is deprecated but in the real world we have probably just about all driven on occasion when slightly tired or distracted or upset for some reason and we all have different levels of skill and attentiveness in the first place so as long as I don't fall well below acceptable levels I'm not going to feel in the least bit guilty about the possibility of being just slightly less than perfect.
just make it socially the norm to say no I’m driving i wont have any alcohol by lowering the limit then theres no persuading someone to *cummon its just one youll be under the limit*
No one bats an eye now if you say I'm driving or I have work the next day, at one time it wasn't the case though. Hopefully I'm qualified enough under Kananga rules to have such an opinion.
To be facing a jail sentence (with all the other societal issues that may bring; possible job loss, home loss, etc etc) if you’re driving home after one sherry at your auntie’s and get caught by cops, is clearly nuts.
~Which is why I said rather than the usual jail sentence of " take him away and lock him up now" the two weeks in jail could be taken at a convenient time for those in work - like during their summer holidays.
There are two types of problem drink driver - the hardcore " get drunk and drive home" these folk it would make little differnce to. My intent is to go after those like postie and the captain who believe a pint or two is OK. Honstly the captain / postirich - if you thought you would go to jail for your drink driving would it change your behaviour? And the captain - you are significantly impaired even after one pint. Thats the science.
theres an easy answer to that .
T-Rat, I don't disagree with you. I would have a zero limit as well, but I think the current sanctions are about right.
The captain -0 tyhe law does not allow you a pint. there are two different offences. Driving under the influence and driving with a level of alcohol above the limit.
Nowhere in the statute does it say " a pint is fine" You are not "allowed a pint"
Zero limit is pretty much impossible - that would put you over 12 hours after a single pint. there needs to be a low limit.
I am not convinced by the jail arguement BTW - just a discussion point. We need something to stop those " pint or two" types
Zero limit is impossible as it's possible to naturally produce alcohol in the body.
Nowhere in the statute does it say ” a pint is fine” You are not “allowed a pint”
No where does it say you are not allowed a pint either - your readings if tested must simply be below the limit - which a pint (unless it's a pint of something like special brew or you're a midget) would not put you over.
We need something to stop those ” pint or two” types
Isn't the Law in some US states that as a barman/waiter you bear some criminal responsibility (and can go to jail) if you serve alcohol to some-one to the point of drunkenness and that person goes onto drink drive and there's a 3rd person injury/death.? I think that's the case in Texas for instance.
Kananga - two points. 1 alcohol metabolism is unpredictable. One pint could easily put you over one day even if most days it does not and 2 - even after one pint with a alcohol level well below even the scottish limit you are still significantly impaired and could be prosecuted for " driving under the influence" Ulikely but possible - it has been done..
Kananga – two points. 1 alcohol metabolism is unpredictable. One pint could easily put you over one day even if most days it does not and 2 – even after one pint with a alcohol level well below even the scottish limit you are still significantly impaired and could be prosecuted for ” driving under the influence” Ulikely but possible – it has been done..
I would say to your first point that based on simple body size v's alcohol amount consumed is almost impossible unless you are incredibly small, or drink a pint of some sort of rocket juice.
To your second, to be classed as 'driving under the influence' with regard to alcohol then you would need to fail a roadside breath test and also a subsequent breath/blood/urine tests back at the station which showed that you were over the drink drive limit. A low to average strength pint would not do this. Drugs are a different story. Please feel free to post your evidence that shows I'm wrong though and I'll stand to be corrected.
tj, it's a basically a free country and I can do what I like so long as I'm not breaking any laws. One pint of ordinary beer leaves me well under the limit (no I've not done any testing but I confidently believe it to be true). The law allows me to drive after a pint because there is nothing in the law to prevent or criminalise such behaviour.
tj, it’s a basically a free country and I can do what I like so long as I’m not breaking any laws. One pint of ordinary beer leaves me well under the limit (no I’ve not done any testing but I confidently believe it to be true). The law allows me to drive after a pint because there is nothing in the law to prevent or criminalise such behaviour.
I think some on here think we should all be under constant strict regulation as to what we can and can't do down to the smallest details, anything with any level of risk is banned, no room for leniency, camera enforcement used to secure evidence and harsh punishments for even minor transgressions. Personal responsibility and decision making would be replaced by the judgement of the state. What a horrible society that would be - remind you of anywhere just north of South Korea?
Far fetched, perhaps but I'm free enough to see the thin end of the wedge - just look at the proliferation of dash cams to see how paranoid we're becoming.
Personal responsibility and decision making would be replaced by the judgement of the state.
Or if your a member of the school of advanced motorists.
"just look at the proliferation of dash cams to see how paranoid we’re becoming."
just look at the number of ME ME MEs who will lie through the skin of their teeth to avoid spending a penny in a situation they have caused to work out why thats happened.
remind you of anywhere ?
seems to be the modern attitude.
Having just checked it seems that the Scottish limit is not as stringent as I'd thought and I'd probably be safely under the limit there after a pint too.
Re Random checks - police here (Basque Country) set up roadblocks and breathalyse drivers on popular routes on Sat/Sun mornings, after lunch etc. I'm all in favour, but there are too many ways around:
I know people who are in whatsapp groups which warn of breathtests, radars etc.
People warn of police checks on Waze.
Out of town clubs close at 8am or so - kids will sleep in their cars for a couple of hours and drive home long after the police have packed up.
It's better than nothing but the last horrific DUI I read about (hit-and-run on a family out on bikes, killed parents and left their 12yo to watch them die in the road) was on a weekday morning when you never see the roadblocks. Driver caught shortly afterwards, blew four times over.