FabSwingers.com > Forums > Scotland > New drink drive limit
New drink drive limit
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Comes into effect in Scotland today, I rarely drink so I have no concerns.
The problem is it should be the same all over the UK, you could have a drink in Carlisle and be legal and over the limit if you drove to Scotland, people need to be aware of the changes.
Do you think we should have a no alcohol allowed policy for driving ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oznrayCouple
over a year ago
helensburgh |
there needs to be a limit, but Canada has the right idea if you have an accident and you have alcohol in your system but under the limit then you are at fault and get charged with impaired driving.
also all the hype about this new limit has been blood alcohol limit, there has been no mention of the breath level and that's the one they use at the roadside |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Dont think that would work as they are saying, alcohol exists in chocs, puddings and even mouth wash so you could get nailed for dental hygiene if they had 0% tolerance"
but the best policy is not to add to any of the above with something from a bottle |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ndykayMan
over a year ago
Falkirk |
"Dont think that would work as they are saying, alcohol exists in chocs, puddings and even mouth wash so you could get nailed for dental hygiene if they had 0% tolerance
but the best policy is not to add to any of the above with something from a bottle"
I agree with you but a zero limit would be unworkable as you need to allow for alcohol in food etc  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Dont think that would work as they are saying, alcohol exists in chocs, puddings and even mouth wash so you could get nailed for dental hygiene if they had 0% tolerance
but the best policy is not to add to any of the above with something from a bottle
I agree with you but a zero limit would be unworkable as you need to allow for alcohol in food etc "
lol that's what I said, allowing for the booze in food etc, safest not to add anything else |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Totally agree with the new limits but unfortunately its not going to stop the absolute piss heads who drive and are miles over the limit.
It will affect the people who might have had a single beer or wine in the past who really are not d*unk but can now be over the limit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Not sure that it will make any difference either for the same reason, as I am sure the majority if not all accidents or deaths caused by drivers over the limit have been caused by those who were miles over the limit and not those who were such small fractions over like they are reducing it by. That said, I have heard many people now say they will just not bother to have the solitary beer or glass of wine at all now.
However they should be taking measures that actually target those people who don't give a toss about the limits whatsoever, or those who like I have to admit I have done myself, drive the morning after a night out thinking they are ok but are probably still well over the legal limit. I have seen relatively inexpensive devices that can be fitted to cars that require the driver to blow into and pass a breathaliser test otherwise the engine locks and will not start, which if the government really wanted to dramatically reduce d*unk driving, this would be the way to do it. It could be fitted mandatory to all cars, and while might be a pain in the arse, I have heard they are fast and accurate, and everyone would get used to it just like they did when having to put their seat-belts on when it became illegal not to. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Yes it is a good idea and obviously those who do not drink & drive have nothing to worry about
Does make you laugh though when you can take prescribed drugs such as Diazepam, Valium; MST, Oramorph and you can drive along, or should I say float along, and no checks are done
think about it, would you rather meet someone on the road that has had a pint of beer or someone who has taken their daily Diazepam
no drinking when driving but also NO drugs when driving. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Yes it is a good idea and obviously those who do not drink & drive have nothing to worry about
Does make you laugh though when you can take prescribed drugs such as Diazepam, Valium; MST, Oramorph and you can drive along, or should I say float along, and no checks are done
think about it, would you rather meet someone on the road that has had a pint of beer or someone who has taken their daily Diazepam
no drinking when driving but also NO drugs when driving."
am pretty sure intoxicated doesnt just mean drink, most drugs like that come with warnings not to drive, am pretty sure they do coz night nurse does lol |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ndykayMan
over a year ago
Falkirk |
"Yes it is a good idea and obviously those who do not drink & drive have nothing to worry about
Does make you laugh though when you can take prescribed drugs such as Diazepam, Valium; MST, Oramorph and you can drive along, or should I say float along, and no checks are done
think about it, would you rather meet someone on the road that has had a pint of beer or someone who has taken their daily Diazepam
no drinking when driving but also NO drugs when driving. am pretty sure intoxicated doesnt just mean drink, most drugs like that come with warnings not to drive, am pretty sure they do coz night nurse does lol"
Whilst you should never take drugs that may impare your ability to drive and then get behind the wheel, it can be difficult for the police to prove you were under the influence of drugs at the roadside.
But my simple advice to drinking and driving hasn't changed since yesterday - just don't do it. 
And if you've been drinking heavily the night before, don't drive the next morning unless you are 100% sure you are under the limit |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Got a friend who's a cop. Says they're all just waiting to catch folk out. I never drink at all when driving, but I think this is as much to do with catching folk still a bit over the next day as it is to do with stopping the real dangerous drink-drivers.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andACouple
over a year ago
glasgow |
"
And if you've been drinking heavily the night before, don't drive the next morning unless you are 100% sure you are under the limit "
The problem is, there's no way of being sure you are under the limit.
Personally I think it would be better if there was a fine for giving a reading between the new level and the old one rather than an automatic ban. I think it's more likely to catch out people who are slightly over the next day and to penalise them in the same manner as those who climb into their car pissed after leaving the pub etc seems disproportianite. Ultimately those are the people the new limits will have no effect on as they are already drink driving and will continue to do so. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
When I was a boy we used to cruise about in cars, not really drinking at all but severely stoned and I literally remember one lad who used to take 10+ exstacy tablets (yes thats right ten plus!) and drive about.
We'd be often pulled by the police but they had no way of showing anyone was impaired. One night we drove around George Square twenty times in a row just because we could!
I'm not glamourizing it, that kind of behaviour is way more dangerous than having a pint after work or even driving to work the day after a heavy session! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Pretty sure that the legislation covers impairment through drink or drugs so if you pass the roadside but still seem impaired your still going to be subject to some form of police attention , excuse my ignorance if that's wrong |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *bzguyMan
over a year ago
Aberdeen and shire |
Actually got pulled over this morning , pretty much in the middle of nowhere .seemed to be every second person/car process . I wasn't bothered and had some banter as I had a car totally full of booze (unopened obviously) they had good banter though but imagine if you got done today under the limit yesterday but above todays OUCH (my car was over the limit obviously ! Aye. The boys in blue have a sense of humour.......sometimes  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Fitting a tube to blow in to check your under the limit to a car won't work they'll get someone else to blow in it and as far as prescribed drugs are concerned these are supposed to be reported to dvla or your insurer if not your driving illegal ....zero tolerance ...how would you feel if someone just under the limit but still impaired killed your child..... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The same as if a sober driver had done it, my grief would be over the death not by whom, it wouldn't make it any better if the driver were d*unk, just under the limit or as alcohol free as it's possible to be |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *wiftieeMan
over a year ago
near Glasgow |
"Not sure that it will make any difference either for the same reason, as I am sure the majority if not all accidents or deaths caused by drivers over the limit have been caused by those who were miles over the limit and not those who were such small fractions over like they are reducing it by. That said, I have heard many people now say they will just not bother to have the solitary beer or glass of wine at all now.
However they should be taking measures that actually target those people who don't give a toss about the limits whatsoever, or those who like I have to admit I have done myself, drive the morning after a night out thinking they are ok but are probably still well over the legal limit. I have seen relatively inexpensive devices that can be fitted to cars that require the driver to blow into and pass a breathaliser test otherwise the engine locks and will not start, which if the government really wanted to dramatically reduce d*unk driving, this would be the way to do it. It could be fitted mandatory to all cars, and while might be a pain in the arse, I have heard they are fast and accurate, and everyone would get used to it just like they did when having to put their seat-belts on when it became illegal not to. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *wiftieeMan
over a year ago
near Glasgow |
"Got a friend who's a cop. Says they're all just waiting to catch folk out. I never drink at all when driving, but I think this is as much to do with catching folk still a bit over the next day as it is to do with stopping the real dangerous drink-drivers. "
Sadly, it's what's becoming the normal police attitude, an easy option that will boost their figures. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Personally I am 100 % behind this as my little cousin died as a result of a d*unk driver so everyone that gets caught that is another life saved in my opinion |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
There is already a built in tolerance when a suspected drink driver is breath tested back at the station.
Each time the machine is used, it is calibrated before use. There are two breath tests taken and the lowest reading is the one used in any prosecution. The limit on the machine is 35 but no one is charged until the reading is at least 40. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Fitting a tube to blow in to check your under the limit to a car won't work they'll get someone else to blow in it and as far as prescribed drugs are concerned these are supposed to be reported to dvla or your insurer if not your driving illegal ....zero tolerance ...how would you feel if someone just under the limit but still impaired killed your child....."
You have to blow into it periodically while your driving I beleive, and due to the way is fitted makes it impossible for someone else other than the driver to do that. I don't know the ins and outs, I just read about the device briefly, but there are other devices too that have been tested now that don't require you to breathe into anything - it picks up smells at drivers seat using extra sensitive sensors, and also using sensors on the door handles and steering wheel to measure blood alcohol.
A complete eradication of rink driving is impossible, and ike anything, people will always find a way around these type of devices if they really want to, however for the impulse drink driver, it does make it a whole lot more difficult for them to be able to do so.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
