Drink driving? No comprehensive cover! (1 Viewer)

[chaser]

Havnt read all posts so it might have been said, but I would have driving anywhere when doing something illegal with the car or driver would automatically stop insurance.

 

[Garfields]

I don't want to get into another drink driving thread, but do you have any evidence that people who are under the limit are causing accidents due to being drunk?

Certainly evidence that any amount of alcohol in your system impairs your reaction time etc
I don't know if there are details regarding incidents where people had an alcohol reading but were under the limits

 

[thebriars]

Certainly evidence that any amount of alcohol in your system impairs your reaction time etc
I don't know if there are details regarding incidents where people had an alcohol reading but were under the limits

In some European countries that have reduced alcohol limits for drivers, they have seen a reduction in alcohol-related road accidents, however this effect has not yet been seen in Scotland.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Yorick]

I never have more than 3 or 4 pints if I'm driving. But may have a couple 'for the road' if it's a nice afternoon in a nice beer garden

 

[Odd job]

The drink driving laws in England have, in my opinion, many faults, however nobody can dispute it has saved a lot of lives and changed attitudes to drunken driving. I would like to see changes to the law although I doubt there will any for any years, if ever, but for now it is all we have and it's better than nothing.

 

[Yorick]

The drink driving laws in England have, in my opinion, many faults, however nobody can dispute it has saved a lot of lives and changed attitudes to drunken driving. I would like to see changes to the law although I doubt there will any for any years, if ever, but for now it is all we have and it's better than nothing.

The limit here is half that of the UK. What improvements do you see possible for the UK?

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Garfields]

In some European countries that have reduced alcohol limits for drivers, they have seen a reduction in alcohol-related road accidents, however this effect has not yet been seen in Scotland.

There has been a downward trend in fatality's but that was happening already before the limits were reduced
There was a jump in 2018 but alcohol may not have been a factor
Unfortunately motorcyclist feature high

 

[Odd job]

The limit here is half that of the UK. What improvements do you see possible for the UK?

Firstly the cliff edge, the difference between slightly under and slightly over is very little but the penalty it huge. I would like to see a scale depending on the offence and the amount of drink consumed, also I think it is wrong that someone can be prosecuted for not driving, if they are sleeping it off in a pub car park. If I had had a drink and thought I may be slightly over the limit, I have a greater chance of being prosecuted if I sleep it off, than if I risk driving home. That can't be right.

 

[John Barrett]

Firstly the cliff edge, the difference between slightly under and slightly over is very little but the penalty it huge. I would like to see a scale depending on the offence and the amount of drink consumed, also I think it is wrong that someone can be prosecuted for not driving, if they are sleeping it off in a pub car park. If I had had a drink and thought I may be slightly over the limit, I have a greater chance of being prosecuted if I sleep it off, than if I risk driving home. That can't be right.

Whilst I agree with you in principle, there are just too many variables which if considered, would increase the chances of getting off! Firstly, individuals differ in their tolerance to alcohol; secondly, a driver asleep in his/her car is still 'in charge' of it, and could wake up at any time and drive off while still over the limit.
You can't win!
John

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[gus-lopez]

n some countries if you are a non-resident you are automatically to blame as if you hadn't been there there would not have been an accident.

That'll be most of the arab countries.

Firstly the cliff edge, the difference between slightly under and slightly over is very little but the penalty it huge. I would like to see a scale depending on the offence and the amount of drink consumed, also I think it is wrong that someone can be prosecuted for not driving, if they are sleeping it off in a pub car park. If I had had a drink and thought I may be slightly over the limit, I have a greater chance of being prosecuted if I sleep it off, than if I risk driving home. That can't be right.

Personally I've always believed that some arbitrary limit that is affected by individuals metabolism is the wrong way to proceed.It should be a straight forward zero.

 

[Nirvanauk]

Hmmm? Missed that one!. Cannot find any similar reference on either of my current policies?.


I think I have seen somewhere that they are UN-reliable?

You can get police quality ones that are spot on.

 

[Emmit]

I never have more than 3 or 4 pints if I'm driving. But may have a couple 'for the road' if it's a nice afternoon in a nice beer garden

Se comporter!

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Emmit]

That'll be most of the arab countries.

Personally I've always believed that some arbitrary limit that is affected by individuals metabolism is the wrong way to proceed.It should be a straight forward zero.

The number of times I've heard, "I've only had two pints" who then proceeded to supply a 'score' of 70. Well, If I had a Pound etc.
Said this before.
On his 18th Birthday, Son No.2 had a plateful of food and two pints of Stella.
Half an hour after his drink he was sat in front of 'The Machine'
He blew 27.
I then sat down and scored 9.

Why the difference said he.
No.1 I'm bigger than you (at the time?) and No.2 (The important bit) My beer was 3.4 and not 5 like your Stella.

 

[Gellyneck]

The number of times I've heard, "I've only had two pints" who then proceeded to supply a 'score' of 70. Well, If I had a Pound etc.
Said this before.
On his 18th Birthday, Son No.2 had a plateful of food and two pints of Stella.
Half an hour after his drink he was sat in front of 'The Machine'
He blew 27.
I then sat down and scored 9.

Why the difference said he.
No.1 I'm bigger than you and No.2 (The important bit) My beer was 3.4 and not 5 like your Stella.

Oh how naive you are! You forgot No3, he was slurping yours as well when you weren't looking!

 

[Emmit]

Oh how naive you are! You forgot No3, he was slurping yours as well when you weren't looking!

No.1 He's the Son of a Dad who in turn is from Yorkshire, (with a Scottish mother). Nuff said
No.2 He doesn't drink 3.4% BEER

No. 3 He's still breathing 23yrs later (I keep a grudge!!!)

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Gellyneck]

No.1 He's the Son of a Dad who in turn is from Yorkshire, (with a Scottish mother). Nuff said
No.2 He doesn't drink 3.4% BEER

No. 3 He's still breathing 23yrs later (I keep a grudge!!!)

No1 - not a lot going for him then!
No2 - so he's a girlie lager drinker!
No3 - however you'll be reaching an age where you'll be wondering what the word grudge means never mind remembering you hold one against him!

 

[sedge]

Don't be concerned about low blood sugar if you are not diabetic using either insulin or another hypoglycaemic agent. Although we're all told 4 is the floor, actually it's less than that - 3.3. However 4 gives us a tiddly bit of wriggle room to give us a minute to grab something to stop our BG from dropping lower. 3.3 and below it absolutely affects the brain. As you drop lower, you can do less things eg I was rendered unable to move or utter any sounds ONCE in the last 48 years, but I heard every single word uttered in my presence and have NEVER forgiven the ex-colleague who when the lady on the phone to 999 relayed the instruction to the two chaps present in the room 'could you get her off her chair and lay her on the floor in the recovery position' whilst the 3rd person screeched the order 'Don't even TOUCH her (name) !'

TG said bloke ignored her completely, whilst our collective Managing Director said Oh shut up (name)! and they each took one side of me and swiftly did what 999 had told them to do, then told both names to get downstairs ready to let the 999 responders in and where to go. TG for that thought I ....... swiftly sorted by paramedic.

Know what? You know who was one of the Office First Aiders.

 

[Minxy]

Firstly the cliff edge, the difference between slightly under and slightly over is very little but the penalty it huge. I would like to see a scale depending on the offence and the amount of drink consumed, also I think it is wrong that someone can be prosecuted for not driving, if they are sleeping it off in a pub car park. If I had had a drink and thought I may be slightly over the limit, I have a greater chance of being prosecuted if I sleep it off, than if I risk driving home. That can't be right.

Whilst I agree with you in principle, there are just too many variables which if considered, would increase the chances of getting off! Firstly, individuals differ in their tolerance to alcohol; secondly, a driver asleep in his/her car is still 'in charge' of it, and could wake up at any time and drive off while still over the limit.
You can't win!
John

If you are stupid enough to drive whilst knowingly over the limit then you are a fool. How much over the limit may affect the outcome, eg whether you just get a fine / points / banning / prison or a combination of them.

The problem with someone who decides to sleep it off in their car is that when they wake up they are almost certainly going to drive and will likely still be over the limit. They may think they are doing the right thing but when they are more sober they should really be thinking more clearly and know they still shouldn't drive more so than a DD who just jumps in his/her car straight from the pub.

I don't condone either ... the best course of action is not to get in the car at all and instead take a taxi!

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Odd job]

The problem with someone who decides to sleep it off in their car is that when they wake up they are almost certainly going to drive and will likely still be over the limit.

My objection to that is you are convicting someone because you think they may commit a crime, based on what you think they may do, not on what they actually do, it's worse than the thought police.

 

[thebriars]

My objection to that is you are convicting someone because you think they may commit a crime, based on what you think they may do, not on what they actually do, it's worse than the thought police.

Lets just suppose the police just ignored a driver sleeping it off in a pub car park, then later he/she drove off and whilst still drunk he/she had an accident and killed or injured someone. Which is worse? Is it any different to stopping someone with a knife in case he stabs someone, or do we let people openly brandish knives and only stop them when they injure or kill someone.

 

[John Barrett]

My objection to that is you are convicting someone because you think they may commit a crime, based on what you think they may do, not on what they actually do, it's worse than the thought police.

I've quoted this before...
In 1829 Sir Richard Mayne, the joint commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, wrote: “The primary object of an efficient police is the prevention of crime: the next that of detection and punishment of offenders if crime is committed. To these ends all the efforts of police must be directed.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Odd job]

Lets just suppose the police just ignored a driver sleeping it off in a pub car park, then later he/she drove off and whilst still drunk he/she had an accident and killed or injured someone. Which is worse? Is it any different to stopping someone with a knife in case he stabs someone, or do we let people openly brandish knives and only stop them when they injure or kill someone.

Let's suppose the guy sleeping in his car waited until the pub opened in the morning and went in for coffee and breakfast.
I am indoors now with a glass of wine, I have the opportunity to go outside and drive off, should I be arrested?

 

[John Barrett]

Let's suppose the guy sleeping in his car waited until the pub opened in the morning and went in for coffee and breakfast.
I am indoors now with a glass of wine, I have the opportunity to go outside and drive off, should I be arrested?

Only if you fail the test!

 

[Minxy]

My objection to that is you are convicting someone because you think they may commit a crime, based on what you think they may do, not on what they actually do, it's worse than the thought police.

Obviously you wouldn't just 'do' them without asking them questions first ... if they indicated they were going to drive off then it would be necessary to ask more and/or do a test, obviously it would be an ideal opportunity to 'educate' them on the consequences of their actions.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[bigwood]

Meany years ago whilst I was stationed in Germany we had a talk from the German Police regarding drinking and driving.
This was done on Monday at lunch time and they offered to check some us to prove the point of morning after. They found four of us were still over the limit and had driven into work that morning. It must have been a weekend party, all weekend.

 

[Odd job]

Obviously you wouldn't just 'do' them without asking them questions first ... if they indicated they were going to drive off then it would be necessary to ask more and/or do a test, obviously it would be an ideal opportunity to 'educate' them on the consequences of their actions.

I wish it was like this, but unfortunately it is not, it is wrong. If the person finds a shed to sleep in, that's ok,but the back of the car will result in a ban, whatever the intention.

 

[Odd job]

Meany years ago whilst I was stationed in Germany we had a talk from the German Police regarding drinking and driving.
This was done on Monday at lunch time and they offered to check some us to prove the point of morning after. They found four of us were still over the limit and had driven into work that morning. It must have been a weekend party, all weekend.

It is scary, I am always careful if I have to drive the next day, to be honest I don't drink a lot these days anyway.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Minxy]

I wish it was like this, but unfortunately it is not, it is wrong. If the person finds a shed to sleep in, that's ok,but the back of the car will result in a ban, whatever the intention.

Will it? Are you trying to tell me that the police don't ask ANY questions at all and just do the occupant regardless ... I don't think we live in a police state do we?

 

[Odd job]

It is the same if wild camping, I always put the key in the gas locker if I have a drink, they don't have to prove the intention, only the opportunity.
It is easier now I don't have a MoHo

 

[joka250]

Will it? Are you trying to tell me that the police don't ask ANY questions at all and just do the occupant regardless ... I don't think we live in a police state do we?

If they have even the remotest suspicion then you are tested, no leeway if over the limit that's it. Can be stopped and tested for any infringement, brake light out, whatever.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}