Drink Driving Dilema

[Butts]

As from December 5th Scotland's limit has been reduced from the 80ml per whatever that applies in England to 50ml.

This means you could be breathalysed in Carlisle and pass, carry on across the border and theoretically fail in Gretna.

Quite frankly this seems a ridiculous situation , they should both be the same.

Can you imagine Scottish drivers in the Borders area being chased to the line and crossing into possible sanctuary in England.

As a matter of interest will you still be safe with "one pint" on the new 50ml limit ?

 

[starrymarkb]

Personally I won't drink at all if driving - at least I won't have anxiety over passing or not!

 

[Bletchleyite]

As from December 5th Scotland's limit has been reduced from the 80ml per whatever that applies in England to 50ml.

This means you could be breathalysed in Carlisle and pass, carry on across the border and theoretically fail in Gretna.

Quite frankly this seems a ridiculous situation , they should both be the same.

However it is my view that England should make its own decision, NOT based on what Scotland did. If England's risk assessment says 80 is still fine, then better the discrepancy than what is felt to be a bad law.

Can you imagine Scottish drivers in the Borders area being chased to the line and crossing into possible sanctuary in England.

No sanctuary, as even if they cross the border a crime has still been committed in Scotland.

As a matter of interest will you still be safe with "one pint" on the new 50ml limit ?

Depends very much on the individual. From experimenting with breathalysers, I am, but many won't be.

Neil

 

[Butts]

However it is my view that England should make its own decision, NOT based on what Scotland did. If England's risk assessment says 80 is still fine, then better the discrepancy than what is felt to be a bad law.



No sanctuary, as even if they cross the border a crime has still been committed in Scotland.



Depends very much on the individual. From experimenting with breathalysers, I am, but many won't be.

Neil

Were you still under the limit with 2 ?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Personally I won't drink at all if driving - at least I won't have anxiety over passing or not!

This is probably the most sensible stance to adopt. When I was about 18 I woke up in the morning to find I had ridden my Motorbike from Bracknell back to Reading and I couldn't remember anything about the journey back from the Pub.

Crass stupidity :roll:

 

[Bletchleyite]

Were you still under the limit with 2 ?

If I recall rightly (ages ago) I was just (but only just, and needing to take into account breathalyser accuracy) under the *English* limit. It appears for me, one pint does next to nothing to my breath alcohol level (0.02 whatever-it-is where the limit is 0.08, at most, but often zero), but a second bumps it right up.

This tallies quite well with how intoxicated I feel. Unless heavily dehydrated (e.g. a pint straight after doing sport) I feel almost no effect from one, but noticeably intoxicated after two.

(This is assuming normal strength cider, i.e. around 4%)

Edit: Worth noting that I'm on the big side - 6' 4" and just under 18 stone, so there's a lot of me to soak it up!

Neil

 

[Greenback]

The drink drive limit should definitely be lower in England and Wales (i don't know what it is in northern Ireland). Scotland have taken a step in the right direction.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The drink drive limit should definitely be lower in England and Wales (i don't know what it is in northern Ireland). Scotland have taken a step in the right direction.

Personally I don't believe that is necessary, because the majority of people drink-driving who are actually causing issues are well over both the English and the Scottish limit, so changing it is splitting hairs. What we need, as with an awful lot of this kind of thing, is better enforcement of existing laws. A law allowing Police to do random breath tests without reasonable suspicion at the current limit would do a hell of a lot more for road safety than changing the limit would. There are plenty of country lanes where if they sat there around midnight stopping everyone, they would prosecute almost every driver.

(And I say that as someone who will only ever drive after 1, which results in my breath alcohol level being well below either country's limit, so changing it would have no actual effect on me unless it was changed to a "zero" limit i.e. 0.01 or below.)

Neil

 

[Peter Mugridge]

This means you could be breathalysed in Carlisle and pass, carry on across the border and theoretically fail in Gretna.

Quite frankly this seems a ridiculous situation , they should both be the same.

I agree; the English and Welsh limit should be lowered to 50 to match the new Scottish limit - which is after all a much more widespread limit than the current English one is, at least within Europe.

 

[steamybrian]

Since 1992 the following scenario could occur for a railwayman-
After drinking one pint of beer you drive your car and are stopped by the Police and breatherlised- you pass maybe having 50ml.
Then arrive at the railway signing on point for duty- are breatherlised and fail because you are over the limit for railway duty.

 

[Greenback]

Personally I don't believe that is necessary, because the majority of people drink-driving who are actually causing issues are well over both the English and the Scottish limit, so changing it is splitting hairs. What we need, as with an awful lot of this kind of thing, is better enforcement of existing laws. A law allowing Police to do random breath tests without reasonable suspicion at the current limit would do a hell of a lot more for road safety than changing the limit would. There are plenty of country lanes where if they sat there around midnight stopping everyone, they would prosecute almost every driver.

(And I say that as someone who will only ever drive after 1, which results in my breath alcohol level being well below either country's limit, so changing it would have no actual effect on me unless it was changed to a "zero" limit i.e. 0.01 or below.)

Neil

I disagree. What we need is to make drinking alcohol when driving as socially unacceptable as drunken driving is. I personally don't like it when people start talking about how many drinks they can have, the only safe thing to do is not have any. That's the message we need to send out. It won't stop the serial offenders but then nothing ever will.

 

[richw]

I would be quite happy to see it dropped to 20mg

It could never be zero. I read an article explaining the reasons zero could never happen a few days ago

The main reasoning for not being able to go to zero

People can even consume alcohol without realising. Some foods, mouthwash and medication can contain alcohol.

Road safety campaign group Brake have said that 20mg is as close to an absolute ban as you can get without accidentally penalising those with trace element of alcohol in their bloodstream.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I disagree. What we need is to make drinking alcohol when driving as socially unacceptable as drunken driving is.

In that case you should be arguing for an effective-zero limit, i.e. 0.01 whatever-the-unit-is. *And*, presumably, the additional enforcement I outlined.

However I would not do it as a matter of principle as it seems you would. The only basis on which I would do this kind of thing is raw accident statistics.

As for "the only safe thing", the only safe thing is not to travel by car, as it is generally comparatively unsafe. Rail is much safer.

Neil

 

[455driver]

Personally I won't drink at all if driving - at least I won't have anxiety over passing or not!

of course you dont, you would spill it when you change gear, thats why I drive an automatic!

 

[johnnychips]

Other European countries have the 50 limit, but the penalties do not seem to be as severe as an automatic one-year ban.

 

[Aictos]

Just introduce the railway limit for the masses and make it taboo for drinking while driving - if you want a drink even a pint then don't drive as it could be stronger then you think.

I only had a few Polish beers one night and got legless, it nearly killed me hence why I believe in what I say above.

 

[deltic1989]

No sanctuary, as even if they cross the border a crime has still been committed in Scotland.

However, without the Police in Scotland being able to breathalyze the suspect. There is no way to prove that a crime has been committed in Scotland.
As far as I am aware the breath test conducted in England would not be admissible in a Scottish court. (though i stand to be corrected on that point)

For my part I think that the limit should be 0, having borne wittness to what can happen when a driver is under the limit, but not by much.
If I know I am going to be driving I will not drink, which makes me virtually tee total being a professional driver.
I find that when out with friends I can have as much of a good time on orange juice as I can on alcohol, and if I do consume alcohol, taxis and buses are there.
There is no real excuse for drink driving. I know I will open a can of worms with that statement but I have very strong views on this subject.

 

[richw]

For my part I think that the limit should be 0, having borne wittness to what can happen when a driver is under the limit, but not by much.

Whilst I agree in principle, it can never be zero due to the trace element in certain other products, such as food, mouthwash, medication. As close to zero as possible allowing a tolerance for such trace elements is my believe.
Rinse with mouthwash then do a breathalyser a few mins later and you will almost certainly register a reading of about 5mg, hence why zero couldn't be enforced.

 

[muz379]

Personally I won't drink at all if driving - at least I won't have anxiety over passing or not!

This is my attitude towards it as well just zero tolerance. If im going to have a drink I then wont drive that same day . And if ive had a heavy drinking session ill leave it the following morning as well .

Since 1992 the following scenario could occur for a railwayman-
After drinking one pint of beer you drive your car and are stopped by the Police and breatherlised- you pass maybe having 50ml.
Then arrive at the railway signing on point for duty- are breatherlised and fail because you are over the limit for railway duty.

Or indeed the reverse you could have A random alcohol screening,blow a fail on the breathalyser . Get suspended with immediate effect . But still go to the car park and legally drive yourself home .

However, without the Police in Scotland being able to breathalyze the suspect. There is no way to prove that a crime has been committed in Scotland.

The roadside test is not admissible as evidence its only the test on proper calibrated equipment that is actually admissible . Or if you insist a blood or urine sample . I see no reason however why a breath test done on a machine in a police station in England would not produce results admissible in court in Scotland ? . The actual machine just produces a printout detailing the alcohol content in your breath . If this content is higher than the drink driving Limit in Scotland . And the witness testimony of the Police officers places you behind the wheel of a car in Scotland . I see no reason why a prosecution couldn't happen regardless of where the Breath test took place .

The only benefit you might gleam from "running for the border" is the length of time taken to drive that distance might bring your BAC level down to below the limit . But I imagine most people that arouse the suspicion of the police for drink driving would be over the Limit in both England and Scotland so regardless of where they are stopped they are in lots of trouble .
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I find that when out with friends I can have as much of a good time on orange juice as I can on alcohol, and if I do consume alcohol, taxis and buses are there.
There is no real excuse for drink driving. I know I will open a can of worms with that statement but I have very strong views on this subject.

I dont often go out because my mates work off shifts compared to me , and we all work completely different patterns , so when I do I just leave the car at home and get the bus or it its late share a taxi with a mate who lives round the corner ,Id rather pay £10 for a taxi to get me home than potentially loose my license

when I was at uni there where these people I used to hang about with sometimes off my course who would constantly encourage and harass people who said they weren't drinking cos they drove there . you know the sorts the "go on one can will be fine " . Needless to say I never did stay in touch with them . behavior like that doesnt make it easy for people that are driving .

I agree wholeheartedly with the no real excuse comment tbh .

 

[Butts]

Other European countries have the 50 limit, but the penalties do not seem to be as severe as an automatic one-year ban.

What are the penalties in other European Countries - I would suspect enforcement is non-existent in some of the less developed ones
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

of course you dont, you would spill it when you change gear, thats why I drive an automatic!

I like your style

 

[carriageline]

Does lowering the limit REALLY Help? Okay it may defer some people, but if people are willing to do it when it was higher, it won't stop the same people if the limit was lowered? Infact I can only see the statistics of drunk drivers being prosecuted or whatever going up, which whilst it's a good thing it doesn't mean drink driving is being solved. And the amount of 'accidentals' will rise as people generally don't know how much they are consuming.

Plus, I'm sure some people would even have the mentality of 'it's on 1 drink, I'll be fine. Or, I was fine when it was higher, I'll DEFO be fine now'


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Butts]

Does lowering the limit REALLY Help? Okay it may defer some people, but if people are willing to do it when it was higher, it won't stop the same people if the limit was lowered? Infact I can only see the statistics of drunk drivers being prosecuted or whatever going up, which whilst it's a good thing it doesn't mean drink driving is being solved. And the amount of 'accidentals' will rise as people generally don't know how much they are consuming.

Plus, I'm sure some people would even have the mentality of 'it's on 1 drink, I'll be fine. Or, I was fine when it was higher, I'll DEFO be fine now'


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The problem is I believe the penalty is now an Automatic 1 Year Ban for being over the 50ml limit.

Statistically most accidents involving Drink Driving involve people way over the previous 80ml limit. (ie 2 or 3 times in excess).

Therefore the penalty seems a bit severe for offences at the bottom end of the scale.

 

[yorksrob]

Eventually this will all be academic as the car will be able to drive you home!

 

[ainsworth74]

You are Zoe and I claim my £10!

 

[yorksrob]

You are Zoe and I claim my £10!

As long as I'm not paying

 

[Oswyntail]

When I was at university, I had a bad experience with a spiked drink, since which I have highly variable reactions to alcohol - I can become totally blotto on a half of weak shandy one day, unaffected by anything the next. Because of this I never drink before driving, and never drive after a drink. What troubles me about the current "limit" is that it almost encourages people to "know" what they can take. How often I hear things like "I am quite safe up to about 'n' pints" - rather like the prats who say their car can stop quickly, so they are quite safe driving at 90 on a motorway. Talking about "units" is just as bad. No, the safest approach is to make any drink before driving unacceptable, have a near-zero limit (to allow for mouthwash, etc), and enforce properly

 

[starrymarkb]

The problem is I believe the penalty is now an Automatic 1 Year Ban for being over the 50ml limit.

Statistically most accidents involving Drink Driving involve people way over the previous 80ml limit. (ie 2 or 3 times in excess).

Therefore the penalty seems a bit severe for offences at the bottom end of the scale.

it's to discourage people from taking the risk - though I know a few that do and will not get in a car with them if they've been drinking!

 

[Haydn1971]

Plus, I'm sure some people would even have the mentality of 'it's on 1 drink, I'll be fine. Or, I was fine when it was higher, I'll DEFO be fine now'

Some people might retain that view, I currently have a view of one is fine, however I'm 6ft 4 and built like a brick outhouse ! This new ruling in Scotland will change my view to zero is my lawful limit.

Over the last 25 years, I've had dealings of varying degrees with collision data, casualty reduction, road safety and the aftermath of serious/fatal collisions as an "official" of the organisation/client I was working for. Alcohol has been a reducing factor over the years, but still one of the significant factors of collisions. I've been aware of fatals where the surviving party involved had some alcohol in their system but not enough to be an offence.

I'm aware that my driving is slightly affected by 1 drink, not significantly, but enough to be aware, I've driven on two after a meal and felt aware, years ago in the late 80's, early 90's my friends and I had a "Des" but Des typically had 3 pints and still drove - a sign of how attitudes have changed in my circle of friends - but then I feel a social responsibility for my actions, especially so with my work, however, others have a different level of responsibility - higher and lower !
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
To add, the more people you encourage to not take the risks, the lower the overall risks are across the board and the easier it becomes for the police to spot the really excessive drink drivers.

 

[yorksrob]

It will certainly be a good opportunity to directly study what effect this approach has (in comparison to England).

 

[Greenback]

When I was at university, I had a bad experience with a spiked drink, since which I have highly variable reactions to alcohol - I can become totally blotto on a half of weak shandy one day, unaffected by anything the next. Because of this I never drink before driving, and never drive after a drink. What troubles me about the current "limit" is that it almost encourages people to "know" what they can take. How often I hear things like "I am quite safe up to about 'n' pints" - rather like the prats who say their car can stop quickly, so they are quite safe driving at 90 on a motorway. Talking about "units" is just as bad. No, the safest approach is to make any drink before driving unacceptable, have a near-zero limit (to allow for mouthwash, etc), and enforce properly

Exactly right. This is an essential move in order to get away from this type of thinking. There are still too many people who think they will be fine having x amount of drinks, and we need to have a more of a sensible mindset as stated by quite a few people in this thread, of it not being OK to have an alcoholic drink at all if you have a vehicle with you.

That's why I'd like to see the limit come down further, though a zero limit is impractical.

 

[radamfi]

I don't drink alcohol as I don't like the taste but there is the risk of someone spiking your drink, intentionally or not, so I am thinking of getting a breathalyser to check that I'm not over the limit. I've already got disposable ones for driving in France.