Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Driving/Incidents/Roadrage' started by jasonyw, Mar 14, 2010.
Drivers face ban if they drink a pint - Times Online
Looking at the effect "just one pint" has on all drivers reaction times, judgement and reasoning, I would have no problem with this.
That it brings us into line with the rest of Europe is a sideline issue.
This isn't a "zero" limit, its still more than an airline pilot or train driver is allowed to consume (consider just what limit you'd be happy with a school bus driver working with - and ask why any other road user should be any different).
It would send a clear message that "1 pint is too many" if you want to drive, which should address the majority of the folks who kill themselves and others having come to the conclusion that "its other people" who drink too much and drive.
YouTube - TAC 2009 Campaign TV ad - 20 Anniversary retrospective montage "Everybody Hurts" music by REM
If it inconveniences you, if you feel you deserve the right to drink a pint then go for a drive, it is fine by me that your liberties are being restricted in balance that the rest of the population can be safer.
I've spent too long picking up body parts, listening to wet excuses and too long walking up the garden path, knocking on the door and telling (usually wife and kids) that daddy won't be coming home.
Sometimes real life stinks, and a move like this is absolutely spot on.
You'll have gathered I support it.
It will not affect me, SWMBO does the driving while I do the drinking.
It's more likely another sound bite in the run up to the election as there just aren't enough traffic cars to police the myriad of rules in place already.
I've never seen a police car on my journey to and from my favourite country pub, a distance of 30 miles on B roads.
Wow the video is powerful stuff. You can't urgue with that can you.
While I personally won't be affected by a change of this nature, this is just political grandstanding. The absence of an automated method to catch those who do choose to drive while under the influence and the woefully small number of traffic patrols will see to it that it will make no difference to road safety whatsoever.
Would people support the placement of garden gnomes at our roadsides "to save up to 65 lives a year"? After all, it'd have precisely the same effect...
My view is that they should indeed be voted off; not because of the actual policy itself, but for spending so much time and money on dreaming up such pointless, wasteful, ineffective and useless schemes such as this.
As is rightly said above, the police can't keep up with the laws they are employed to uphold already, so why government can't see this is beyond me, and most of the rest of us I reckon.
As soon as the 'no phones whilst driving' law came into effect, that immediately stopped the problem. Right?
You make a fair point, but this isn't just simply about enforcement, it is about decent folks knowing that if they have a pint they will be over the limit and so choosing not to.
There will always be the numpties who drink and drive, and indeed without greater enforcement they will require Darwin to do his stuff before they are dealt with, but the sooner, you know that a single pint is too much, the better.
And this means the Cops who stop tens of thousands of drivers who are "just under the limit" can be dealt with - the offence of Driving whilst unfit still needs more work too.
I couldn't give a stuff for the politics, this is about doing something about the drivers we all get to share the road with.
One consequence of lowering the limit is that a much greater number of "morning after the night before" drivers will find themselves over the limit due to slow alcohol blood clearance if breathalysed the next day. Very powerful advert which derives its impact for its relentless nature. Doubt if it would ever be broadcast here in its entirety which is a pity.
You echo my sentiments exactly my friend, If you need to drive don't drink. SIMPLE !!!!!!!!!
Seems ludicrous that you'd lose your license for a year for drinking one pint of beer.
Not as ludicrous as losing your daughter for ever because someone else drank a pint.
No doubt, but as someone said earlier this is zero risk political posturing aimed straight at knee jerk reaction Daily Mail types.
65 lives a year?
Lets save hundreds by banning anyone under 21 from driving. I guarantee more sons & daughters die at the hands of new, inexperienced driver's than 65 p.a.
Let's ban scooters & motorcycles. They're not known as organ donor machines for nothing. Just banning under 21s from them would probably save multiples of 65 lives.
Let's ban any car that doesn't have front, side, roof & floor airbags as they are clearly less safe than those so equipped.
Sh1t, why stop there? How many thousands of sons & daughters, mothers & fathers, aunts & uncles step fathers & step mothers, cousins & second cousins & on & on would we save by never leaving our houses?
Life is full of risks & you cannot & should not try to legislate every one of them out of the equation.
This will have virtually no effect on me or the vast majority and therefore as already stated it will just be another senseless piece of "controlling" legislation from a busted flush of a regime.
The most unfortunate aspect of this is that whilst "they" are debating "this" life is going on and things that could and should be done to benefit so many will remain undone.
I know for the victims of tragedy caused by drink drivers this will be emotive but with all thats currently effecting us this should not even be on the list of priorities,let alone high up.
Something like 7% of accidents are caused by drink drivers!
Ban everyone else they are causing 93%.
On a similar vein (and I can't find the stats at present) a very high proportion of car/pedestrian accidents involve drink on behalf of the pedestrian. So could we save yet more lives by banning walking after having more than one pint?
There are some flaws in that, but generally on this and a lot of other legisation this government comes up with I'm in the "enforce the current legisation fully and properly" before talking about lower and lower limits, increased penalties etc.
Each to their own.
I don't think "controlling" the "right" to have a pint and then drive is disproportionate to the impact it has further down the line.
The freedom to ride a scooter or drive a car under 21yrs is a debate for society, the freedom to drink and drive should be a no-brainer.
I accept I am biased though.
I haven't read all the posts but here's my view, I don't just drink one pint, if I'm going to be drinking it's because I want to be drunk and if I'm going to be drunk then I'm not driving. Yes, I am one of the 90% (or so) that drink to be drunk. Personally I do not think alcohol tastes nice, as Al Murray says, we need to drink so much to find a nice pint .
If I go to the pub with the car I'll just drink Irn Bru or Coke, call me a lightweight, but one pint of Stella starts to have an effect on me, even if it's mild.
i agree, you shouldn't drink a drop if your driving. sometimes if i'm hungry and tired and i have a pint i feel it.
This is not about getting caught , getting a fine , getting points , getting banned ........
This IS about doing what is right ; not doing what is wrong - not risking your own or other peoples' lives .
Fact is - ANY amount of alcohol in your system impairs your abilities when driving .
Another fact - the vast majority of people are basically law abiding : if the govt. tells them that the current limit is 'legal' , many will assume that it is 'safe' and may well 'drink up to the limit' imagining they will be fine . Being within the law is one thing , being safe may be quite another - a bit like driving past a primary school at the 30mph limit when the youngsters are spilling out of the playground - legal - perhaps ; safe or even sensible - what do you think ??
Much as a lower DD limit will help those law-abiding-citizens who perhaps cannot decide for themselves to be more sensible ; the 20mph limits introduced outside many schools HAS reduced speeds in those critical areas when it is most needed .
A reduction in DD limits WILL cause a lot of people who might currently 'have a pint' then drive to not have that pint and the roads will be safer as a result .
Personally , I think the limit should be zero .
I understand the sentements, but the evidence is that this is not practical - some folks produce a proportion of alcohol in their breath as a consequence of their digestion and diet.
This shouldn't be about criminalising anyone who does not present any risk to themselves or others.